The Fisheries Estimate this year is somewhat different from the Estimate for Fisheries put before us in past years, particularly in regard to the new departure which the Minister proposes to make in reference to the reorganisation of the fishing industry. One thing that strikes me in looking through the book of Estimates is that £47,270 is the amount which the Minister asks the Dáil to vote for his Department. We hear here from year to year, and at public meetings throughout the country, that the fishing industry, if it were reorganised, could be made the second most important industry of the State. It is taken for granted generally by every public speaker I have heard, that second to the agricultural industry, the fishing industry could be made the staple industry of this State. Yet for an industry which has within it such possibilities of development, if proper attention and if the proper initiative were shown by the Government to put it on a business footing and to save it from the absolute decay and death which at the moment appear to face it, we have the Minister coming before the Dáil asking for a paltry sum of £47,270, whilst, on the other hand, the Minister for External Affairs, for a Department which does not in reality give any return in pounds, shillings and pence to the State, secures an Estimate of £59,822. The difference between the Estimate for Fisheries and the Estimate for the Department of External Affairs is £12,552. On the one hand, a Department which is merely a sort of show Department, a sort of display Department for a status which this State does not possess, will secure in the course of a few days £12,552 more than a Department which is in charge of an industry that everybody appears to recognise has the possibility of being made the greatest and the most productive industry in this State. I think the efforts of the Department of Fisheries will be nullified because of the fact that no serious effort has yet been made to tackle the fishing problem as it should be tackled.
Undoubtedly we welcome the introduction of the Sea Fisheries Co-operative Association as outlined by the Minister in his speech, but, like other Deputies, I am sceptical about it until I see it in actual operation. The unfortunate part, so far as I can understand from the Minister's speech, is that the Association will not be in a position to get into full working order before about the middle of June. That means that half of the present fishing season would be past before any boats, loans or gear could be availed of by the fishermen. Undoubtedly it is the first serious constructive effort that has been made since the establishment of the Free State in 1922 to deal with the fishing problem. In my opinion this effort may lead to good things if the proper grit, initiative and determination are put behind it and if the Department of Fisheries and the Minister who is in charge, not alone of Fisheries but of the Gaeltacht services, is given in that respect a free hand. We understand, and anyone who has any acquaintance with the problem understands, that it is a very difficult job, and a job that can be solved only by an absolute determination to get there whatever the cost. I think it was last year, in the course of a discussion on this Estimate, that I asked the Minister whether he would candidly say in his reply if the Government, having considered the possibilities of the fishing industry, thought that the fishery problem was worthy of an attempt of solution. I think, in winding up, the Minister should give us a reply to that, because if this Sea Fisheries Co-operative Association is going to come to anything, it means that the Estimate that we have before us is not going to cover the actual extent of its operation. It means that the Minister may have to come before the House for a Supplementary Estimate, and it means that the House must have sufficient confidence in the Sea Fisheries Co-operative Association and give the Minister sufficient support to ensure, if he desires further money, that he will get it without any further delay.
Another thing in connection with that problem is the omission from the Estimates this year of the usual grant for piers and harbour development. It is unfortunate that in this attempt to revive the fishing industry along our coasts no mention has been made and no apparent action taken with regard to the facilities of which the fishermen stand in dire need, particularly along the coast I am acquainted with, the south-west coast of Ireland. Last year the Minister stated that the grants which were voted by his Department year after year were not fully availed of. Applications came in and evidently his Inspectors thought that there was no real necessity for the utilisation of the moneys in the places from which the applications came. The fact remains and the Minister himself should be well aware of it that along the coast slips or piers must be constructed. They are vital things if the operations of this Sea Fisheries Co-operative Association are to come to any success. If he provides fishermen with boats, nets and gear and if at the same time they have no facilities for landing their catches his efforts will be nullified at one end. I think he should endeavour to right that and to work it in with his Sea Fisheries Co-operative Association when that Board begins to function.
In connection with that there was a grant made by his Department for the dredging of Kinsale Harbour about 18 months ago. No action has since been taken and despite repeated attempts on all sides to secure a dredger in order to utilise that grant the efforts of the Harbour Board of Kinsale and of myself failed on every occasion. I do not know why, because from what I can understand from the Department of Public Works they have three dredgers. On every occasion on which we applied to them for the use of the dredger they failed.
I want to suggest to the Minister that if he gives a grant for the dredging or development of a harbour and leaves it to the local authorities to secure the dredger in order to utilise the money put at the disposal of the local council by his Department that some effort should be made by his Department to ensure closer co-operation between the Board of Works and the Department of Fisheries in the utilisation of the dredgers they have under their control. After all dredgers that must be secured from other public bodies or from cross-Channel firms for the dredging of harbours can be secured only at an exorbitant cost. Public bodies will not undertake the work, whereas if there was closer co-operation between the Fishery Department and the Department of Public Works where grants are given to public authorities by his Department some means should be taken to ensure that those grants would be utilised and availed of by the provision of a dredger. I would like to know what is the exact position at the moment with regard to the question of the dredging of Kinsale Harbour.
In the course of the introduction of the Estimate the Minister dealt with the question of fishery loans and stated that 700 up to the present had been dealt with. I was very glad to know that he had that pleasing statement to make to the Dáil. I would ask him to go a step further. With Deputy Wolfe I would appeal to him to wipe completely off the State loans that were incurred by fishermen prior to 1922. Undoubtedly the fishing industry is in a parlous condition at the moment. Fishermen find it hard enough to make ends meet. I would wish the Minister to respond to the appeals made in this House last year, this year and in other years. He knows that there is no use in trying to get blood out of a turnip. Fishermen in many parts of the country who incurred those loans are, at the moment, down and out. They are not in a position to repay them, and it would be better for his Department to wipe the slate clean and to give those people a chance if they are to secure further assistance to start without this milestone being tied around their neck.
With regard to item G of the Estimate, concerning herring branding, I see a sum of £50 down for that. £50 strikes me as being a farcical sum to vote in connection with a matter of this nature. I do not think that the Minister touched on that in introducing the Estimate last week. I would like to know exactly what does that mean, and for what purpose that £50 will be spent, because, if I remember rightly, last year, in the course of the debate on the Fishery Estimate, the Minister discussed the possibilities of a Bill for the branding of mackerel for export. In the course of his statement he said:—
"I think I mentioned, in connection with the Gaeltacht Report, that in compliance with that Report, and with the recommendation of the Fishery Conference, I will be introducing a Bill for the compulsory branding of mackerel for export. That will possibly come on before the Recess."
That was the 9th May, 1928. That Bill has not yet arrived. You see here £50 for herring branding. I would like him to state, in the course of his reply, whether that herring branding business includes mackerel regulation as promised, or whether the Mackerel Bill will materialise before next Recess, and for what purpose that £50 will be spent. I cannot see what £50 is to do for herring branding, and I am sure the House will be glad to know in what respect it will be spent.
There was some talk in the course of this debate with regard to territorial limits. On the last occasion on which this Vote was before the House I expressed doubt as to whether there was any really recognised international three-mile limit. The Minister is quite aware that in other countries where an industry was threatened by foreign competition or otherwise an attempt was made to secure that the recognised English three-mile limit should be abolished. The Minister is aware that countries such as Norway, Russia and the United States have not and do not recognise the three-mile limit for purposes such as this. If they do not do it when their industry is threatened there is no reason in the world why this State would not attempt something on similar lines. At the present moment, so far as we can understand, there is sitting at the Hague a Conference to deal with territorial waters. We have a delegation from our Department of Foreign Affairs assisting at that Conference. I think if the Minister would send along a memorandum to the Department of External Affairs asking that the delegation at that Conference bring this question of territorial waters up and get a definite decision as regards the waters of the Irish coast, the Department of External Affairs would be doing something to justify its existence, and the Minister would be doing a very good day's work for the fishing industry and for our fishermen.
Deputy Cassidy, I think, quoted something from the "Independent" with regard to the French commander of a gunboat sent by the French Government to Irish waters. There is one very important point in it that I would recommend to the Minister's attention. Commander Duval stated that his Government would be willing to enter into any agreement regarding the fixing of definite prohibition limits as regards the Irish Free State coast. The French, Dutch and British are the chief offenders in connection with our territorial waters, and if at that Conference at the Hague our delegation from Foreign Affairs reminded these people that we have as much right to the use of the sea within certain strictly defined limits as they have to the use of the seas around their coasts within certain strictly defined limits an agreement might be come to. I think the Minister should recommend that to the Department of External Affairs, particularly when the French appear to be, in connection with the lobster fishing, the chief offenders.
Last year I appealed for a close season on the south coast. The Minister evidently did not consider it worth while to take any further action on it. If he could bring under the notice also of that Foreign Affairs delegation at the Hague the question of an internationally agreed close season on the Irish coast, I think he would be doing a good day's work for the fishing industry, and the Department of External Affairs would have yet another reason to justify its existence. Last year and the year before Stettin and Danzic buvers stated definitely that they would not purchase any further herring caught off the Irish coast before a certain date. The herrings were left in the hands of the buyers and were unsaleable. An attempt was made from certain seaports in the south coast to secure a close season but, unfortunately, the close season arranged by the Government of the Free State and its Department of Fisheries would be of no value if it could only be enforced against Irish fishermen. International agreement is obviously necessary if these Scotch, Dutch and French poachers are to be kept off our coast, and it would be well if some action were taken in that respect and some attempt made by negotiation to secure it. After all, we are told that negotiation can secure anything in this century, and that the gun can secure nothing. We have not got the guns to do it, and since we are sending delegations to all parts of the world, I would suggest to the Minister that he would give some attention to that matter in the course of his reply.
The question of fines, touched on by Deputy Wolfe, is one also that the Minister has not given the consideration it deserves. These people come within our territorial waters. They poach our fish, and by reason of better equipped and faster ships and by more determination obviously than our own fishermen have they are able to get away with their catches, and no effective action appears to be taken to put terror, so to speak, into their hearts and prevent them breaking our fishery laws. Deputy Wolfe made an eloquent plea in favour of action being taken. I want to support the case he made. I believe that unless that is done the actions and activities of the Sea Fisheries Co-operative Association will be rendered useless.
Much talk has been made about protection of fisheries. That is another point upon which the Sea Fisheries Association is going to come to grief unless before it is formally launched and its loans become effective action is taken in regard to outstanding loans. Last year a sum of £8,000 was voted for fishery protection services. The year before a similar sum was voted. The year before that a similar amount was also voted. We find in connection with fishery protection that the Minister, introducing the Estimate on the 9th May, 1928, stated:
At the same time, it is quite possible, owing to the vessel now becoming old—that is the "Muirchú"—that heavier overhaul charges may be expected. I had hoped to be in a position to come before the House—this is a matter I mentioned in my speech on the Estimates for 1926-27—with a request for a Vote for a second fishery cruiser.
The Minister himself admitted in 1926, 1927, 1928 and 1929 that further protection was needed. This year no application is made for any further protection in that respect. The House, I am sure, will be glad to know why. In that connection I am very glad to notice that the most eloquent defender of the Government of the Irish Free State that we have in the South of Ireland has made a call for protection. In the course of a leading article in the "Evening Echo" on March 22nd he called for the same thing that Deputies have been calling for in this House for the last five or six years. I make no apology for quoting the article extensively, because, coming from such an authority on international and constitutional law, and such a strong supporter of the Government as Mr. Crosbie is, I think it might have more weight than many of the speeches that we may have to make in this House. Evidently the power of the Press is wonderful and should be obeyed. The article is headed:
Call for Protection.
It reads:—
The debate in the Dáil on the Vote of £28,270 for the Department of Fisheries revealed nothing with which the public are not already acquainted. All that was said may be legitimately placed in the category of ancient history. At all events, it seems so to many of us, and when the day and necessity for its reiteration cease, we shall be very glad. Time and again the plight of the fisher-folk has been spoken of in the Press and on the platform, but it is regrettable to think that all the advocacy has been, indeed, far from fruitful. However, as the Dáil has once again tackled the topic, let us hope that something practical and advantageous will follow. In the course of yesterday's discussion the inadequacy of the protection of our fisheries against the piracies of foreign trawlers was emphasised, and it was pointed out that the existing patrol system was unable to deal with them. How true this is can be gauged from the fact that only one boat is employed on the work. As well might it be suggested that one policeman is sufficient guarantee for the protection of life and property of an entire city as to say that this one-boat arrangement is all that the safeguarding of our fisheries requires. Year after year, indeed month after month, we have evidence furnished of how what should be the harvest of our poor fishermen is stolen by foreign trawlers. And, of course, the operations of these raiders are encouraged and facilitated by the lamentable circumstance that for the entire coast marking the Free State there is only one patrol boat available. The position is absurd, and would, indeed, be laughable if it did not represent such a grave measure of injustice to our fishermen, who, under the most favourable conditions, would, we should think, find it hard enough to make ends meet—however humble that same may be.
We observe that in the course of the debate the employment of motor patrol boats was urged, and this at least would represent one step in the right direction. It is abundantly evident that one boat cannot do the work with any degree of satisfaction, and, consequently, it is perfectly plain that further and more complete protective action is needed. A patrol boat cannot be in a dozen different places at the same time, and nobody knows this better, and avails of it more fully, than the foreign raider. Like the burglar, he watches his opportunity and turns it to good account at the expense of our poor fishermen. This is surely a situation that cannot be tolerated much longer. Considerable damage and much injustice have been already done, and there is nothing more certain than their continuing until such time as our Government employ methods that will render the despicable game stale, flat and unprofitable. To know that foreigners reap the harvest that rightly belongs to our fellow-countrymen is bitter; but that it should be made so by our own lack of action in the direction that the fact dictates intensifies the feeling. We are quite prepared to believe that our Government is anxious to cope adequately with the situation, but let us suggest that we have had too many delays and we want no more of them.
The "Cork Examiner" warns the Government that there have been too many delays and that they will not stand any more. How many people in the South of Ireland who support the Government are represented by the "Cork Examiner"? I hope the Minister will take notice of that fact. Last year I advocated small motor patrol boats such as are employed by the United States Government in chasing rum runners should be employed here for the protection of our sea fisheries. If a fleet of half a dozen such boats, which are capable of weathering pretty heavy seas and going out a distance of from ten to fifteen miles off the coast, were utilised, I am sure that, even though the initial cost might be pretty heavy, they would repay in the end any expenditure involved. Unless that is done, or unless the alternative method also advocated here, namely, the utilisation of seaplanes is adopted, I do not see any possibility of even four boats like the "Muirchu," with the very small speed which she possesses, and lacking effective gunnery appliances, doing any good in driving off poachers.
If the Minister adopts our suggestion as to consulting with the Department of External Affairs, he might also consult the Department of Defence and see whether it would not be more advantageous to secure one or two seaplanes for experimental purposes instead of the Bristol fighters which they have at present in the Air Force. Who they are going to fight nobody knows. That would be better than having an Air Force which, like the Department of External Affairs, is being used for show purposes. I suggest that he should take these suggestions into consideration. They are meant seriously and are given in all good faith, in the hope that some effort may be made, either along these lines, or other lines which may be found to be more suitable, in order to save what is left of the fishing industry off our coast. I do not see any use in the revival of the industry along the lines of the Sea Fisheries Co-operative Association if every effort of the Minister is to be nullified by foreign trawlers and poachers. Both ends of the problem must be tackled together; the Department must march forward not along one narrow road, but along every road on which there is a tentacle of that problem. If the Minister tackles them all simultaneously, it should be possible, even though progress is slow at the beginning, within a short time to put the industry on its feet, if there is determination behind it. Pending the active operation of the Sea Fisheries Co-operative Association, there is one thing to which the Minister ought to give serious consideration. The fishing season is at hand and there are many fishermen anxious to secure loans for boats or gear or nets. No provision appears to be made for that, except on the production of two solvent securities. I think discretionary power should be given to grant a loan where fishermen are prepared to put up an equivalent in the matter of hard material security to the amount of cash that they require. For instance, some time back there was a case in Kinsale where a fisherman showed intelligence and determination to better himself and to endeavour to bring back to Kinsale some of the lost glory it once had. He built a boat himself and went to tremendous trouble to make it seaworthy. He sunk the last cent. of his capital and produced an excellent boat in every respect, which was valued for at least £150. The boat was fitted out in every respect except the engine, and he applied to the Department of Fisheries for a loan to secure an engine.
At that time he was in a position to secure a practically new engine for £100. He applied for a loan of £100 to the Department, but he did not want to ask people to go security for him, because he believed that, as he had sufficient material value for the amount he was asking for, the Department should show appreciation of his initiative by granting a loan pending the formation of the Association. He wrote to the Department on several occasions, but was informed that under existing regulations two solvent and acceptable securities who were willing to undertake the responsibility for the repayment of the loan were essential. I think that in cases of that kind—and there may be other cases of the same type —there should be powers to enable the Minister, acting on his discretion, and on the advice of his fishery officers, to issue a loan where a sincere attempt is being made by the fishermen concerned to earn an honest livelihood and to assist the Department in re-establishing the industry in places where it is practically dead. I would ask the Minister to give some information on that point and in that particular case, because it appears to be a scandal that no loan should be available for that man before next June, unless he secures two solvent securities, when he himself has security to the value of at least £150.
I do not intend to delay the House except to welcome the establishment of the Sea Fisheries Co-operative Association. It appears to me to be an honest attempt, even though it is on a small scale, and I am certain that every Deputy will give all the assistance in his power to the Department in making it a success. When the Association is established and its rules laid upon the Table of the House, if we could allow a period of four or six months to see how it will work, then I think it would be time enough to state whether it is or is not a failure. Meantime, I think all good wishes should go out to it, and every assistance that can be rendered to it ought to be rendered by Deputies on every side of the House.