When I was speaking on this amendment last night, I said it was not correct for the Minister to say that teachers themselves had agreed to a reduction in their salaries in 1931. I said that their agreement involved the acceptance by the Government of full responsibility for making good the insolvency of the Pensions Fund. The cuts now proposed are greater than those proposed in 1931, at any rate, for teachers of £275 or upwards, because it is from there you start the 6¼ per cent. There is no provision in this Bill, or by agreement with the teachers, as far as we know, for dealing with the insolvency on the Government side, of the Pension Fund. It was, if you like, the sugar coating of the cut of 1931, that when the teachers felt that their time came to retire they would be paid pensions out of the fund provided for such pensions. The position is now, that the teachers' salaries are cut, and that a young teacher has to pay into this fund, which is insolvent, without any guarantee when it comes to his time to retire that there will be any money in the fund to pay him the pension to which he is entitled. Deputy Breathnach made a last appeal to the Minister to modify the cuts as far as the national teachers were concerned. I would join in that appeal if I thought it was any use. I am afraid, however, after the line the Minister has taken towards national teachers, especially, it would be very little use indeed. I doubt if an appeal to the Centre Party would have any better results. I would like, however, to appeal to the Centre Party to support this amendment. They should surely understand that the policy of wage cutting is not going to benefit the farmers of the country.
The policy of the Government in depriving the farmer of his only market has thrown him back on the powers of the people at home to absorb his agricultural produce. Helping the Government to reduce the purchasing power at home will only injure the farmer. The economies proposed in this Bill will not bring one penny into the pockets of the agricultural community. On the contrary they will only provide funds for the Government coffers for carrying on the economic war, and, therefore, there is good reason for stating that they are inimical to the interests of the farmers. Apart from what one might call the self-interest end, I think the farmers should not allow themselves to be carried away with the rather foolish cry about the big salaries that the teachers enjoy. That cry is of course absolute rubbish. Nor should they be led away by what some of them referred to in their speeches, namely, that the majority of the teachers supported Fianna Fáil at the last election. If it was true that the majority of the national teachers supported Fianna Fáil at the last election on the strength of the promises made by the Fianna Fáil Party, if they were short sighted enough to believe these promises, still I would not consider that any justification, or any reason for acting unjustly in this matter. I think it would be a very poor reason for seeking to take revenge upon the teachers because they were opposed to one in the political arena. The 1933 election will—at least some of us hope—not be the last election in this country, and one can assume that the national teachers, like many other electors, will be better able to appraise the promises of Fianna Fáil at the next General Election. I appeal, therefore, to the Centre Party to go into the Lobby in support of this amendment, to save the national teachers from these very unfair cuts.
