Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 29 May 1934

Vol. 52 No. 15

Estimates for Public Services. - Vote 57—Industry and Commerce (Resumed).

Before the interval I was anxious that no misunderstanding should arise about the charges levelled in this House against certain people in the City of Dublin. I said it was not made clear whom these charges were made against and that the language used was so exaggerated that somebody should enter into the debate from a different angle than that of mere Party politics. I should have thought that if employers in Dublin were carrying out industry under Eastern conditions and with foreign ideas the names would be announced in the House publicly and if any of the speakers who referred to these individuals or companies were unable to produce evidence, or felt that their evidence was not strong enough, then these accusations should not be made. If Deputies are afraid to mention the names, if they give them to me I shall mention them, because I think it is an outrage on the Irish people as a whole to make these accusations without being able to prove them. I was referring to the conditions under which industry was developing in this State and said that the country towns were being left uncared for and in a state of hardship owing to the fact that our overseas trade was dwindling so much and that ordinary business tended to come to the cities. I asked if some special inquiry or commission could not be set up to investigate the position of our country towns and to give people who want to establish industry here under the protection of the tariffs every guidance and encouragement to start in the country towns. In these towns federations of unemployed are springing up and committees are being formed by different parties to try to find some way of bringing industry into these towns. My experience is that they are not making any progress in starting industries in our country towns. These federations of unemployed have a real grievance and they are quite right in coming together to endeavour to find some means of living besides the dole and other methods of assistance.

It is very hard to discuss business in an institution like this, because politics and business can never be mixed. Although these Estimates can be criticised by Parliamentarians, yet in view of the attempts being made to establish industry, they should not be opposed with any bitterness and any criticism offered should be of a constructive kind. I would be interested to hear more elaborately expounded the progress that is being made and the advantages that this money will bring about. There is no question but that to bring about industrial revival in this country is a tremendous task. It requires constant attention and a good deal of courage. In view of the economic chaos that exists in our foreign trade, the development of home industry requires getting away from the old economic road and seeking short-cuts which are full of hidden obstacles. I am sure that when the Minister changed over from being one of the leading Opposition Deputies and took up the responsibilities of a Minister he discovered what a tremendous difference it made to be the caretaker and the guardian of the industrial revival of the country and that instead of an easy passage he found it was full of repercussions and reactions when he set out to change from the old hard road of experience.

It requires every effort on the part of our people, irrespective of political views, to bring about industrial revival, and where they can co-operate they should do so. The capital is here, I know. Although a large number of the community has suffered through the economic war, at the same time there are many who can and will co-operate in endeavouring to solve the unemployment problem and establish national industries under proper conditions with decent working hours and decent wages.

For that reason I would hate to get up in this House to add to any of the accusations that were hurled at the Minister this afternoon or on the last day, or on whatever day it was that Deputy Norton made his speech in this House. I was not present on that occasion but I hold that it was an insincere speech. I hold that that speech was calculated to fit in with the local elections that are about to be held, that his imagination was playing with the ticker as the votes were being counted and the results were coming through. He, of course, hoped that his speech would be read down in his constituency. It was a speech full of hypocrisy; it had no constructive thought whatever. It was simply a general attack launched at the Minister for Industry and Commerce because he thought it was time to dissociate himself from Fianna Fáil. He has been travelling, however, in the Fianna Fáil omnibus all the time in the form of a very good strap-hanger. Down in his own constituency he is fond of referring to what he is doing in fighting the national cause, but, apparently, he thought the time had come when he should do something that would show him in some different light than merely the complete tail of the Fianna Fáil Party. Thus it was that his criticisms were not worth anything by reason of their insincerity. Deputy Norton might have got up here to fight for the towns in his constituency and to make some suggestion as to how we might establish some industries in them, but instead he launched a general attack just like a soap-box orator, a demagogue——

The Deputy knows he is not here to defend himself now.

He gave expression to the claptrap that we are used to hear from him in Kildare and the Minister would be wasting the time of the House in replying to it.

You waited until he was at home with his dying child to attack him.

The Minister in his opening statement referred to certain increases that have occurred in the Estimate, the principal increase being that in connection with the operation of the Unemployment Assistance Bill. As that will be discussed on a later Vote, I do not propose to delay the House in referring to it now. I presume that the increased Estimate is due to the fact that so many extra clerks have had to be employed. Whilst I quite admit that everything in connection with the examination for these clerkships was carried out according to rule and whilst I have no complaint to make in regard to the people selected, I should like to ask the Minister whether it is a fact that certain appointments made prior to the introduction of the Unemployment Assistance Act were made otherwise than through the labour exchange. I have reason to believe that several appointments in the local labour exchange in Dundalk were made from Dublin and that the applicants did not apply through the local labour exchange as I believe they should have, according to rule. Some of those who applied through the labour exchange were turned down. In fact, I will go so far as to say that in one of these cases the individual concerned said that he never made application, that it was on the recommendation of a member of the Party he was appointed. I do not know what truth there is in that statement. I should like the Minister to bear in mind that as far as I am concerned I am very sorry to have to make any charges against the Government in the making of appointments, because I know that frequently people criticise the Government for the mere sake of criticising it. I have, however, reason to believe that the facts as given to me are correct. I hope and trust that as far as appointments in future are concerned we have heard the last of favouritism for any particular job that comes within the purview of the Minister for Industry and Commerce.

In his opening statement the Minister dealt with very many phases of his activities during the past year. No doubt the Minister has been very active in doing all he possibly could to set up factories and to create employment. Certainly he has worked very hard in that direction and I congratulate him on the fact that he has succeeded in having very many new industries started all over the Twenty-Six Counties. My criticism of the Department's work will come under various heads. One has relation to the question of building costs. I would suggest to the Minister that he should move very slowly in the imposition of any tariffs whatever upon materials that are used in building and which cannot be produced here, especially materials which are used in the erection of working-class houses. It is a fact that some of the tariffs which have been imposed have considerably increased the cost of building in this country as compared with Great Britain. I know for a fact that certain types of houses which can be built in Great Britain at anything from £550 to £600 cost £750 to £800 here. My experience of building costs, prior to the Great War, was that the cost of building was much greater in Britain than it was in Ireland. The reverse is now the position. There is no doubt that many of the materials used in building that were tariffed cannot be produced here or, as far as I know, will not be produced here for a considerable time. I do not think it wise on the part of the Government to impose tariffs simply for the reason that we are engaged in an economic war with Great Britain. Some little consideration should be given to that aspect of the situation, especially when the Government at the present time is so anxious to erect houses for the working classes at a cost which will enable the tenants to pay the rents proportionate to the cost. Every sixpence added to the cost naturally means an increased rent to the tenant.

The Minister mentioned the question of the railways and I think that he stated he had a few applications from the Great Southern Railways and one from the Great Northern relative to the proposed closing down of certain branch lines. I think the application which came from the Great Northern line refers to Ardee branch. I should like to inform the Minister that Ardee is a very prosperous little town, the inhabitants of which have done very much during the past 25 or 30 years to improve the trade of the town. I hope the Minister will do his utmost to induce the Great Northern Railway Company to keep that line going.

On the occasion of the last Estimate I felt called upon to speak to the Minister relative to the question of unemployment benefit for railway workers who were out of work as a result of the late strike. On that occasion, I think the Minister promised that he would introduce a Bill to amend the Unemployment Act, with a view to enabling men who are out of work under the same conditions as these men were out of work to receive unemployment benefit.

The Deputy might refer to that question on Vote No. 61—Unemployment Insurance and Unemployment Assistance.

I will postpone that reference if you wish, Sir, but I think this is merely a question of the administration of the Act, as it stands. I would like to know from the Minister if he has given the matter any consideration since October 4th when it was brought to his notice. If not, when will he be in a position to state if he will introduce the necessary provision in the Act, to enable men placed in a similar position in future to receive unemployment benefit? If I remember aright the Minister on that occasion admitted that these men were entitled to receive unemployment benefit, because they were out of work against their own will, and were no party to a strike that took place at the time.

I saw by the Budget statement that the imports of boots are on the increase, rather than decreasing. That is an extraordinary state of affairs, in view of the fact that we had so many new boot factories started during the past year or two. In answer to a question by Deputy Mulcahy, the Minister for Finance stated that the items under which increased revenue had been derived were mainly on boots and wearing apparel. I do not know what is the cause of that; whether it is that we have certain people who still believe that the foreign article is superior to the home-made article, or who, perhaps, to use the words of the Minister for Finance, might like to crow over the neighbours by having articles made in London or Paris. Whatever the cause, the fact remains that there has been increased imports of boots. I want to inform the Minister that there are, as far as my knowledge goes, certain boot factories which are not fully occupied. They have had occasion recently to suspend some of their workers for a few weeks. I would like the Minister to give that aspect of the situation serious consideration, to see whether it would not be possible to have these factories working at high pressure. I do not suggest what means could be adopted, but I think the Minister took certain means in other directions, for the restriction of imports. It may be that he will have to adopt that course if, as he intended, our factories are to be kept at high pressure, and to expand as quickly as possible, and thereby give employment.

The Minister referred to the erection of a factory for the manufacture of industrial alcohol. This question might be raised, partly on this Vote, and partly on the Vote for the Department of Agriculture. As far as I know, these factories will have to use potatoes for the manufacture of industrial spirit. I presume the Minister has in mind the position as it affects the people of Cooley. I do not know if the Minister intends to have a factory erected in that area, but certainly something should be done quickly to ease the situation there. It is a well-known fact that last season unfortunate farmers in that area, which is nearest to Dundalk, which was formerly their chief market town, were forced to dispose of their potatoes at 25/- a ton, the irony of the situation being that at present they can hardly sell them at all, while they have to look on helplessly and see potatoes selling from 3/6 to 4/- a cwt., or from £3 to £4 a ton in Dundalk. I hope the Minister will push on as speedily as possible the erection of a factory for the manufacture of industrial spirit, and thereby ease the position of the people in the Cooley area. I am not going into the question whether it will be a paying proposition or not. That is a scientific question, and demands knowledge that, I am sure, the Minister will be able to get from experts. Whatever their opinion is, I trust that as a result of the efforts of the Government the position of farmers in Cooley area will be met. I will not labour the question because it has now been before the House for the last seven or eight years. It is sufficient to say that better types of farmers could not be found anywhere. They have had to put up with severe losses for some years. I impress on the Minister the necessity of coming to their help as soon as possible.

Much has been said about the policy of the Minister in regard to conditions prevailing in factories. Owing to the atmosphere here, this would be the last place to discuss such a question. It is only right and proper, however, that reference should be made to some of the statements made by the leader of the Labour Party on this Estimate. While it may be possible to agree with a great deal said by Deputy Norton and by Deputy Davin, at the same time, any man who has given any little thought to our resources, and to the condition of our people generally, must come to the conclusion that this is only a little country, and that we are not possessed of the vast resources of other countries. In my opinion, it would be much better, if, instead of unduly and unfairly criticising the Minister, all Parties co-operated with him in his endeavours to make a success of his industrial policy. We heard a great deal about the wages paid to juveniles in factories, and we heard it stated that juveniles should not be employed there, and there was talk about continuation schools. There is an old saying that the child must creep before it walks. After all, the juvenile wants to make a start sometime.

I would like those people who criticise the conditions in factories to endeavour properly to understand the position. I want to make myself clear that, so far as I am personally concerned, I am out for the best conditions possible in every class of work and industry. So far as the employment of juveniles is concerned, one must have some little thought for the thousands of families here. One must consider especially the parents who have large families, possibly three or four boys and three or four girls. They are not in a position to keep their children at school until they are 16 or 18 years of age. In a great many cases it is a God-send to the parents to have their children at work.

Reference has been made to the wages paid. We all know that in factories, just the same as in trades when a boy comes to serve his time, he cannot expect to get a big wage when he starts to work; but as the years go on and that particular boy improves in his work I presume his wages increases. The same would apply to the young girl starting work. In that way I think that there is not a great deal of substance in many of the charges that have been made, not alone against the Minister, but also against those who are engaged in these industries. The industries are only in their infancy. We are not by any means an industrial country; we are fighting older concerns than ours, and the least we all might do is to display a little sympathy and give a little more consideration to those who, at the moment, in very trying circumstances, are endeavouring to increase employment by setting up new factories. This is not perhaps the proper place to discuss such a question. I would much rather discuss it around a table where people could approach it in a calm way, and possibly better results would accrue from such discussions.

It was stated by Deputy Davin that the Minister was not doing his duty with regard to the work of the Prices Commission. Of course Deputy Davin, with his usual political adroitness, made use of the words "the unfortunate farmer" and instanced him selling his beef at 1¾d. per lb. and the butcher charging the poor man 8d. or 9d. a lb. There does not seem to be any qualms of conscience on the part of Deputy Davin because the farmer sells his beef at 1¾d. per lb. His only concern seems to be that if the beef were sold at 4d. per lb. there was no point in the farmer getting 1¾d. I do not think that is honestly playing the game. So far as I know the workers in this country, they are prepared to pay a fair price for their beef in order to give a fair return to the farmer for the labour he bestows on raising his cattle.

On the whole, I think the Minister has done very well. So far as I am personally concerned, I am aware that much has been done in the constituency I represent in increasing employment through the setting up of new industries. I will ask the Minister to hasten very slowly in regard to the imposition of any further tariffs that would place an undue burden upon the people, especially tariffs that would raise the cost of building, in view of the fact that large numbers of houses are being erected and will, I am sure, be erected in the future, to accommodate the working-class people in our cities and towns. I would like also to know if it is his intention to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act so that the men to whom I have referred who were entitled to benefit, and other people who may in future be placed in a similar position, will be treated satisfactorily.

With the exception of the last two speeches and perhaps one other speech, the criticism of the activities of the Department of Industry and Commerce voiced from the benches opposite was somewhat different to what I had anticipated. I should have thought that the Party opposite would have considered it good policy to have based their main attack against the Department on the delay which has occurred in the establishment of certain industries which were in contemplation or the development of other industries to the point at which they would be supplying all the requirements of the country. I feel that any Party in Opposition that was genuinely anxious to fulfil its duty as an Opposition and to ginger up the Government to do good and carry out its programme would have taken that line. I think it would have been wise to have taken that line even if no other consideration except the very narrow one of Party advantage was borne in mind.

Quite a number of the speeches which were delivered from the opposite benches gave evidence of the existence in that Party still of the mentality which regards Irish industry as something degraded and unclean and the policy of developing Irish industry as wrong, something to be impeded and obstructed and, if possible, defeated. The main subject upon which members of the Opposition and certain members of the Labour Party spoke was the conditions which they allege exist in Irish factories. I can easily understand the resentment which some of the speeches made must have created in the minds of those who are associated with Irish industry, a resentment which found expression in the speech of Deputy Minch. Whereas it is quite possible that in some Irish factories conditions are not what they should be, any attack upon these conditions should be directed against the individual firms concerned and not against Irish industry as a whole. Unfortunately the attack was on Irish industry as a whole. The speeches made by Deputy Norton, Deputy Mulcahy, and other Deputies opposite were all directed towards creating the idea that all Irish industry was a matter of baby farms, sweat-shops, and the like.

These speeches have been reported, and very widely reported, not merely in the Press of this country, but the Press of other countries. These speeches got considerable publicity in the Press of other countries. Deputies forget that there are a number of industries connected with the export trade; and the general description of industry which they gave in their speeches was applied to the entire industry in this country. It has gone abroad throughout the world that Irish industry as a whole is based on child labour, wretched wages, factories conducted under insanitary and unhealthy conditions. I asked Deputies what were the firms to which they were referring and with one exception they refused to answer. That is bad policy; and it is bad policy for several reasons. The statements made are obviously not true when applied to industry as a whole. Secondly, even if they are true, they should not be made except in such a manner as to leave no ambiguity and doubt in anyone's mind as to the firms and the industries to which they related.

Deputy MacDermot said that Deputy Norton's speech was reported upon a back page of the Irish Press. He will have noted it was reported in a front page of the Irish Times and of the Irish Independent. Both of them gave Deputy Norton's statements about sweated workshops employing young children at low wages great publicity. They wrote leading articles about them. I have these leading articles here. He is quoted as having said that the conditions existing

"were undermining decent rates of wages, and were a menace to well-established firms which paid trade union rates of wages"

and again:

"It is a misuse of language to describe these places as factories. It is not fair to people who have invested real capital in enterprises to permit operations of the kind."

These statements should not be made in the manner they were made by Deputies or newspapers unless they are prepared to relate them to particular firms or industries. The Irish Independent and the Irish Times black-leaded these phrases. They did not attempt to relate them to any individual firms or industries, no doubt thinking that they would lose advertisement revenue if they did so. They do not refuse to accept advertisements from any firms that offer them.

There is another consideration. Many of the people associated with the ownership of these newspapers are also associated with the control of a number of these industries. There are very few industries in the Free State as a whole in which, for example, the rate of wages paid to adult workers—the lowest rate of wages paid to adult workers—is lower than the lowest rate paid to a number of employees in the railway. On the board of each of these newspapers there are railway directors. There are, at the present time, negotiations proceeding between the boards of the railway companies and the members of the union of railway employees concerning these rates of wages. I trust that we can take it from these leading articles that these directors of these newspapers will show that in the course of these negotiations they are prepared to stand, for the first time, for a policy of rising wages. I am all for a policy of rising wages. I think it was a very disastrous mistake for this country ever to embark upon a policy of general reduction in wages. I think it was a mistake for any country to embark upon that policy.

What about the Economics Bill?

My views, in that regard, are very similar to those embodied in the report of the Director of the International Labour Conference in a statement to be put before that body next week. He said:—

"Reliance on wage reduction as a sovereign remedy for unemployment has certainly been rudely shaken by the experience of the present depression. Though it is never possible to isolate the wages factor from the many other factors which influence the flow of business, there is evidence to show that wage cutting, so far from being a stimulus to employment, may possibly have worked in the opposite sense.

I am delighted to hear Deputies on the opposite benches standing up against a policy of low wages.

We always did.

I do not think that is true; in fact, I think it is quite a new development in their Party. It was indeed by the Party opposite and the Government that preceded this one that the general wage reduction campaign was initiated. Not only did they deliberately set out to reduce the general wage level for labourers in this country, but they did so in a most drastic manner. They even suppressed the Dublin Municipal Council because it refused to reduce the wages of the workers. They publicly announced their policy of producing a general reduction in costs by reducing wage payments all round. No doubt, in pursuing that policy they were following the Governments of many other countries, but they were wrong, as the Governments of other countries were wrong. It was that policy the world over which produced the depression in 1929 which is yet with us. If we are to get out of that we have to go in a contrary direction, and reverse that policy. We have to ensure that there is an all-round increase in the purchasing power of the workers, who constitute by far the greatest bulk of the population of this country, and spend upon consumption goods, probably, more than 75 per cent. of the total amount spent upon such goods in any one year. I am delighted to learn from the speeches of Deputies opposite that we are to have their support in any policy of that kind, and I am much more pleased to learn from the leading articles of the Irish Times and of the Irish Independent that we will have their moral support in that policy also. Of course, it may be that the Irish Times and the Irish Independent merely decided that any stick was good enough to beat the Government with, and that they gave headlines to Deputy Norton's phrases without consideration of their possible effect on industrial interests. Perhaps they will wake up to the fact some day that they were ratting upon their class, even though for once they might, by mistake, be defending good national policy.

It is quite true that there is need for new legislation for the regulation of factories and workshops in the State. The main legislation was passed over 30 years ago and things have changed very considerably since and new legislation is required. But we object to Deputies opposite telling us that new legislation is required. They were in office here for ten years, and it never occurred to them during that period. This Government has been in office for two years, and we have reached the position when we will be able to introduce a Factories and Workshops Bill in this session. It is a big Bill. It took a long time to prepare. As originally framed it was contemplated that it would fill 450 pages. We are trying to get it reduced so that the Deputies opposite will not be asked to work too hard merely to read it. We will get it reduced. It is, nevertheless, going to be a comprehensive measure. It is going to represent a codification of all the existing factory and workshop legislation, and a modernisation of it. It will contain a number of additional provisions which, in our opinion, modern conditions necessitate.

Deputy Rice told us that factories can be established in kitchens, basements, stables, lofts and the like. Of course they can. That is the law. If factories are being established in these places at the present time we cannot stop that. That is the law as we found it when we came into office. We are going to change it, but this Government is not open to criticism because that is the law. Our predecessors are. I do not think it is right that any factory should be established in a basement. I do not think that we should permit any factory to be brought into existence the main floor of which is below the level of the adjoining thoroughfare. I do not think a factory should be allowed to be operated in a house that is occupied for living purposes by anyone except the proprietor of the factory. I think that we must have very rigid conditions regulating the ventilation, the heating, the cleanliness, the safety and so forth of factories and workshops. We are taking steps to that end. I hope that we are going to get support for the legislation that will be necessary to ensure that the conditions in Irish factories will in future be all that we desire them to be. I doubt it. Judging by the attitude of the Party opposite on other legislative proposals to improve social conditions here, we are not likely to get their support in this matter. Perhaps they may feel that they have committed themselves by their speeches on this Estimate.

The legislation controlling working hours is also antiquated. There is, in fact, no legislation controlling the working hours for men. There is certain legislation in operation affecting the working hours for women and children. At the present time it would be illegal to employ a woman or a child for more than 12 hours a day or for more than 60 hours a week. That is the law as the Cumann na nGaedheal Government left it. When Deputies opposite criticise the Government because it is possible that, in certain industries, women or young people are being worked for 60 hours a week or for 12 hours a day, the answer is that there is no power to stop it: that the legislative instrument which we inherited from our predecessors deprives us of the power to stop it, and that the re-fashioning of the instrument necessary to deal with that situation is at the present time in progress. We have not delayed about it.

There has been a lot of talk too about child labour. There is, of course, no power at the present time to regulate the type of labour that may be employed in various industries. There are certain powers to regulate employment in a few industries in which employment was, in the past, generally regarded as being detrimental to health. But, apart from the very few industries covered by that legislation, there is, practically speaking, no power at all to determine whether in any particular occupation the persons employed must be men, women or children. We are going to take the power of regulation. I do not know if the Deputies opposite want to abolish the employment of young persons altogether in industry. Judging by the speeches of some of them I thought that they had that idea in their minds. It is, of course, illegal to employ anyone under 14 years of age. Up to that age young people must be at school, but after they have reached the age of 14 there is no compulsory school attendance, and the law contemplated that such young people would go out and seek employment, generally employment by way of apprenticeship: that they would learn some occupation. It may be that the school leaving age is too low.

There is at the present time a Commission, established by this Government, considering the measures that would follow as a consequence of a decision to increase the school-leaving age. It is obvious that any attempt to increase it is going to create very great difficulties. They talked about it in Great Britain some years ago, but when they came to measure the cost and the difficulties involved they did not proceed with it. They may proceed with it now, but they have not done so yet. Increasing the school-leaving age, in so far as it involved very heavy additional expenditure upon education, on the provision of schools and of teachers, would be a very serious step, but linked up with it is the much more serious consideration that the average working family cannot afford to give its younger members the benefit of continuous education up to the age of 16 or 17. In Great Britain, when they contemplated raising the school-leaving age to 16 they also had to contemplate the provision of payments to the parents of the children to compensate the parents for the loss of earning power of their children.

There is nothing wrong in young persons of 15, 16 or 17 years of age being employed in industrial occupations, provided they are so engaged for the purpose of learning some trade which will be a source of earning power to them in after life; but there is considerable objection to those industries which are established upon the employment of young persons only: those industries which are usually described as blind-alley occupations where young persons come in at 14 or 15 years of age, are kept on until unemployment insurance contributions have to be paid on behalf of them, are then dismissed and their places taken by other young persons brought in for the first time. That type of employment has very definitely got to be regulated and prohibited so that young persons, on leaving school and going into industry, will be given some avenue along which they can continually make progress until they are in a position to earn an adult wage and provide for themselves.

I think that there may be undue emphasis placed on the fact that a number of young persons are employed in industry in this country at present, due to the fact that a number of the industries which are being established are new industries. I have noticed that employers, as a body, like to take in young persons when it is a matter of training workers in some new occupation. They find it much easier to train youths of 17, 18 or 19 in some new industrial process than older men, and consequently where a new factory is being established in a district where no such factory ever existed before— where it is necessary to train the labour engaged from the raw—the tendency always is to take younger people in preference to older people. We may deplore that tendency but there it is, and at present we have no power to control it. In due course these younger people will have reached adult age and will still be employed in these factories. The only objection that would arise there would be if the practice were to become habitual as was alleged in the case of the Wexford firm. The allegation there was that the firm mentioned took in young persons, that it dispensed with their services when they had reached adult age, and replaced them by young persons employed for the first time.

Deputy Corish asked us to hold an inquiry in the case of the firm he mentioned. The Deputy knows that inquiry was held and that certain discussions took place between the officers of the Department of Industry and Commerce and the management of that firm. But we have no power to do more than make representations. Deputies may take it from me very definitely that I am of opinion that undue employment of young persons as a policy is detrimental to national interests and will have to be stopped. It is inevitable in modern commercial life, with the kind of competition that exists between one industrialist and another for markets, that one firm is bound to seek competitive advantages over another, first, by replacing male labour by female labour and subsequently replacing female labour by juvenile labour, not because female labour is more suitable than male labour, or that juvenile labour is more suitable than adult labour, but because in each case lower costs can be secured and the goods can be marketed at a lower price than the figure at which their competitors can market them and an increase of business secured.

There are only two ways in which that situation can be remedied. One is by such a degree of regulation as would be indistinguishable from what Deputy MacDermot calls State socialism or secondly, by imposing conditions by which no one firm will be able to obtain competitive advantage by debasing labour in that way. Neither is there any attempt by the State at the present time to regulate wages except in Trade Board trades. It was always contemplated that the rates of wages paid in industry would be regulated by agreements entered into between the representatives of the employers and the workers. I think that is the best system of getting an elastic arrangement in any industry. Occasionally, you will have disputes. There will be a falling out and an inability to agree between two parties. In such a case the Department of Industry and Commerce intervenes and endeavours to negotiate agreements. Our aim has been to establish a permanent industrial council in each industry so that grievances would be discussed and an endeavour made to negotiate a settlement before any strike or lock-out occurred. We have succeeded in doing that in one industry, and efforts will be made to bring it into existence in other industries. In certain industries it is not possible to contemplate that fixation of wages by agreement, because the industries are in such a way that it is not possible to make such arrangements. These are industries which are subject to trade boards.

In passing, I should say that some confusion may have arisen from my statement that the packing trade is subject to a trade board. The usual formalities for the bringing of that trade subject to a trade board have been taken; the usual legal notices required by law have been published and so forth. It is possible that the actual board has not been constituted but, in any event, it will be in operation in the very near future.

In the case of all these other trades there is a board consisting of an equal number of representatives of the employers and employees with the chairman appointed by the Minister for Industry and Commerce. Occasionally there are other appointed members but not more than three. These boards arrive at recommendations as to the minimum wage to be paid in the industry. That minimum wage is enforced by law, and it becomes an offence against the law to pay a lower wage. There have been recently a number of prosecutions for that offence. Although in earlier years certain legal difficulties prevented the Act being fully operated——

At what stage of the dispute or on whose initiative would the Department take action?

Does the Deputy mean at what time?

I mean when there is a particular dispute on.

When the industry is subject to trade board regulations it is also subject to inspection, and it is the duty of the factory inspectors to see that trade board regulations are being observed and that the regulation rates of wages have been paid. To that end, the inspectors interview the workers in these factories. They have a right to interview them in private to inspect the wage sheets, the wage accounts, and so forth.

Would their authority apply to the present dispute at the docks here?

I am glad to say that that has been settled. In that case there was no question of a trade board wage. There was the question of a particular union representing the employees not being able to agree with the employers. The function of the Department of Industry and Commerce was to get both sides around a table.

The Minister is not far from the Corporative State.

I am interested in the Corporative State. Quite recently I got a copy of the legislation enacted in Germany for the regulation of industry. I find it very hard to believe that many members of the Party opposite or any of their supporters contemplate what is in store for them if the Party opposite are ever able to enact legislation adapted on the German model. I should like to hear Deputy Dockrell, Deputy Good, Deputy Minch and other Deputies who are engaged in industry and have the control of staffs in their different concerns, comment upon the degree of regulation and supervision to which they are likely to be subjected if the German model is copied here.

Let us have an Irish model.

Let us get on to some other matter of more importance. I do not know whether Deputies opposite want a general review of the industrial situation?

We want the Directory of Irish Manufacturers.

The Directory of Irish Manufacturers is being prepared. It will be published in the very near future. I saw in the Press an advertisement asking people to apply for advertising space in it, so that as we have reached the time when advertising space in it is to be sold we may conclude that it will be ready soon.

Are we to understand from the Minister that advertising space is to be sold to those people whose names will be in it?

No, but the Department of Finance hope to make the advertising pay for the cost of its production.

Is the Minister reduced to that?

I should like to invite the Minister to give as full a review as he can of the industrial situation.

Any review would have to be of a general nature or it would necessarily be of an undue length. There were a number of matters raised with which I will deal and I will try to be as brief as I can. I will take the industries in groups. The first group consists of food, drink and tobacco. It covers a fairly wide range of industries— bacon curing, milling, confectionery, jam manufacture, meat, vegetables and so forth. The figures show that there has been an increase in the number of people employed in that group of over 2,000 since 1931. Flour milling, baking, and confectionery manufacture account for the bulk of the increase. In that group of industries, except in the case of flour milling, there have been very few new establishments. The development that has taken place has been in the form of an increased output in the existing establishments. In the figure I have mentioned there is not included the employment given in the packing of foodstuffs and so forth in consequence of the package tax. That is regarded as a separate group of industries, in which over 1,200 persons have been employed. In order, however, to measure precisely the effects of Government policy during the past two years, it is necessary to examine the position regarding food production generally, including not only industrial but agricultural production. In 1931 the total imports of foodstuffs of animal origin amounted in value to over £2,500,000. The value of these imports was reduced in 1933 to £400,000. Of that £400,000, £266,000, or 66 per cent. of the total, is represented by the import of fish, which is, in fact, the only substantial item still left. Under the heading of "Cereals and feeding stuffs for animals," there was a total import in 1931 to the value of over £6,000,000, while the corresponding figure for 1933 was less than £2,500,000. In 1931 the value of the import of wheaten flour amounted to £1,700,000. In 1931 that figure had dropped to £700,000 and will, we trust, disappear altogether this year. The production of that quantity of wheaten flour increased the production of offals, with corresponding effects on the import of offals. Oat products which, in 1931, had been imported to the value of about £90,000 fell, in 1933, to £7,000. Under the heading of "Miscellaneous articles of food," the total imports in 1931, omitting such articles as tea, coffee, raw cocoa and hops, amounted to about £2,000,000, which sum was halved in 1933. The remaining £1,000,000 will practically disappear when the new sugar factories come into operation.

Would the Minister give the relative imports of wheat for the two periods?

I have not got the figures. I am dealing only with industrial products, as such. In the apparel group, there are, of course, many different industries. Since 1931 there has been an increase in employment in the apparel industry of about 4,500 persons, which represents a doubling of the employment given in that industry. That expansion involved the establishment of about 70 new factories of various kinds. These new factories alone gave employment to 2,500 persons, the balance representing increased employment in existing concerns. The figure which I gave for employment does not include tailoring, dressmaking or millinery establishments. It refers only to what is known in the trade as "factory production." There is evidence of a very substantial increase in the number of persons engaged in tailoring, dressmaking and millinery work on their own behalf. The Department places that figure at about 1,000. In the year 1931 the total import under the heading of Apparel, excluding boots and shoes, amounted to £3,750,000. In 1933 that had fallen to £2,000,000, showing a drop in imports to the value of about £1,750,000. There is clearly room for considerably increased production and employment in the present year, and in future years, under that heading.

Can the Minister distinguish as regards the figure of 4,000, increased employment, between men's clothing and women's clothing?

I have not got the figures here.

Has the Minister the relative wholesale price indices?

Is not that very material?

There is a substantial decrease in the price of ready-made clothing.

Where could Deputies get that information?

Any ready-made clothing manufacturer will tell you that.

I want official figures. Can the Minister's Department give them?

The Department has not index figures in the case of ready-made clothing. As regards boots and shoes, seven new factories have been established and proposals are at present under consideration by the Department for the erection of two more.

Is the Minister afraid of saturation point being rapidly reached?

In the case of boots and shoes?

The position is: the industry supplied 50 per cent. of the requirements in 1933. There has been continuous increase in production, involving, as the Deputy knows, a new factory which opened during the present week. It is not possible to say with precision what percentage of the total trade of the country these factories are capable of supplying in the present year. In that connection, Deputy Mulcahy and Deputy Coburn referred to the fact that the import figures for the first quarter of the present year showed an increase. That increase is, I think, due to two causes. The first and, I think, the main cause, was anticipation on the part of certain firms that the duty on boots and shoes would be increased, or that the Control of Manufactures Act would be operated to restrict imports. For that reason, they were getting in supplies in advance. The increase is also due to the fact that a very large proportion of the retail trade in boots and shoes is in the hands of English multiple shops. One Deputy—I think it was Deputy Coburn —talked about the possibility of people still preferring to buy English boots or shoes. I do not think that that is so. I think that the public is very well satisfied with the value, quality and style of the boots produced by the Saorstát factories. But they are not always able to get them. That is due to the fact that these multiple shops have arrangements made with manufacturers in Great Britain under which they take the whole output of a single factory. They can afford to pay the import duty here if they spread the cost of paying that duty over their entire sales, whether in this country or in Great Britain. We have made various representations to the management of these stores and not without result. The situation will, however, require careful watching to ensure that boot and shoe manufacturers here get an opportunity of doing what they are rapidly becoming capable of doing—supplying the total requirements of the country. I think that there is still room for one or two, if not more, additional boot and shoe factories before we can say that our production capacity is all that it might be. The number of additional workers employed in the industry as compared with 1931 is 1,400. It is to be noted in the case of that industry that we have succeeded in doing what Deputy Minch was talking about—securing a degree of decentralisation. The new factories are situate in Dundalk, Drogheda, Kells, Kilkenny and Limerick, while the existing factories of Cork, Waterford, Carlow and Dublin have also benefited by the measures adopted.

In the textile group, with the exception of two new plants, established for the manufacture of rope and twine, the additional employment of roughly 1,000, as compared with the figure for 1931, took place in existing establishments—the numerous woollen mills, the linen and cotton factories and the jute spinning and weaving factories. It is to be noted that the total import of textiles in 1933, as compared with 1931 showed no reduction. That, of course, was due to the fact that, despite the rapid increase in the production of textile goods here, the expansion in the ready-made clothing trade, which is the principal market for these goods, was still more rapid, and the demand of the ready-made clothing trade for piece goods was met partly from the increased production of the Saorstát mills and partly from the increased imports of the type of cloth they required. The Department at present is concentrating on the possibility of securing the production here of the cheaper grades of cloth which are required, in the main, by the ready-made clothing trade. As is well known, most of the Saorstát woollen mills produce high-grade cloth only, for which they are able to find an export market on merit. In our opinion, there is room for at least six additional mills to produce the lower-grade cloth which is represented by the 6,000,000 square yards which we imported last year, and we have at present under consideration plans to secure the establishment of these mills in various parts of the country.

Under the heading of metal manufactures there has been an increase of employment of about 2,000 as compared with 1931. A number of workshops were established for the assembling of various metal articles, such as gas cookers, gas meters, weighing machines, bicycles and so forth. The main increase in employment, however, in connection with these firms, was in connection with the fabrication of constructional steel and in the manufacture of metal window frames and so forth. The general foundry and engineering trade, which was languishing for many years owing to severe competition from abroad, can now give increased employment to over 400 workers. A new plant has been established for the manufacture of galvanised hollow ware and various other articles, such as the manufacture of wire, spades and shovels, tin containers, brass rods, gun-metal goods, razor blades, reinforcing metal, sparking plugs, motor radiators, coffin mountings and so forth.

As a result of the protective duties and the other measures that have been adopted by the Government, all the commercial motor car bodies and omnibus bodies used here are now manufactured in the Saorstát and a very substantial beginning has been made in the creation of an industry for the assembling of chassis and the assembling of the bodies for the ordinary private motor car. There are six or seven makes of car now on the market which are entirely assembled in the Saorstát both as to chassis and body. Perhaps I should not say that they are entirely assembled here, but assembled in accordance with the definition of assembly which has been prepared by me and which qualifies the persons conforming to that definition to obtain certain facilities in the matter of importing parts and in the matter of the road tax concession where the horse power exceeds 16. With regard to the question of wood and timber, up to last year practically all the timber requirements of the Saorstát were imported planed and dressed, but the imposition of the new duties has resulted in a substituted import of raw timber. Modern fast-planing machines have been installed by a number of saw-milling firms. The imports of builder's woodwork, which, prior to 1931, had been imported to an average value of about £60,000, fell in 1933 to a value of £15,000, despite the substantial increase that took place here in building activities in that year. That also we have reason to think should disappear this year. The domestic woodware imported in 1931 was about five times the value of that imported in 1933. Furniture imports also fell by half. Wooden boxes and parts are now imported only to the value of about half the amount formerly imported, and the current year should see that disappear also. Other wooden manufactures which were imported in 1931 to the value of £200,000 are now all being produced at home. We have found considerable difficulty in getting precise figures as to the numbers of persons employed in that trade because it is carried on in a very large number of establishments all over the country, but we estimate that the increased employment cannot be less than 1,000 or 1,500.

There has been a very definite expansion in the production of all classes of goods required in the erection of houses—bricks, roofing materials, and so on—and about 25 new concerns have been opened for the production of these goods. Deputy Brodrick spoke at some length on the question of slate production. I cannot say that I am satisfied with the present slate production in the Saorstát. I think that those who control the slate quarries might have shown considerably more enterprise and courage in the matter of the investment of capital and in the increasing of the production of these goods, which are in very considerable demand. In fact, not merely are they in demand in this country, but in other countries. I am informed by the proprietors of one of the principal slate quarries in the country that they have on their books orders from other countries sufficient to absorb their total output. Accordingly, we could have supplied not merely all the requirements of our own country, but could have developed an export trade as well. As it is, we do not even supply our own requirements, and licences for importing in certain cases have to be issued by the Department of Local Government. Actually, there is no import duty on slates—Deputy Brodrick is misinformed in that regard —but the Department of Local Government and Public Health have laid down a condition that they will not give the housing grant in respect of any houses except Irish roofing materials have been used. Occasionally, however, they have permitted the use of imported slate in these houses where special circumstances made it undesirable that tiles should be used, and they are taking a similar course in respect of other housing materials where home production is inadequate.

There has been a substantial expansion in the production of grates, ranges, rain-water goods, and so on, but even still we are not producing anything like enough of these articles. No matter how substantial an increase in their output the existing foundries may be able to show there is, in addition to these foundries, room for one large foundry for the production of grates, ranges, rain-water goods, and so on, and we are trying to make arrangements for the establishment of such a factory in the South of Ireland.

With regard to the production of slate, there were four slate quarries in operation in 1931. At the present time, we have got ten in active commercial operation, and in the case of about seven additional quarries there is work in progress at present—not, however, on slate production, but in preparing the quarry for production or in exploration work, such as the clearing of over-burden—work which is, in the main, subsidised by the Department of Industry and Commerce. The main slate quarries at present in production are in Tipperary, Cork, one in Donegal, and recently a slate quarry which exists in Mayo has been granted facilities under the Trade Loan Acts and should be able to increase its production in the very near future. There have, of course, been very considerable developments in the printing, stationery and bag and box-making industries, and as Deputies are aware, two large factories for the production of cartons and boxes are at present being built in Dublin, in addition to five new establishments which have already been brought into existence. There are a very large number of industries in respect to which detailed reports would take a long time, such as those dealing with paints, polishes, soaps and candles, pottery, tanning, glass bottles and so forth.

I do not know what the point is but there has been no change really in the tobacco industry. All the requirements of the country are being supplied by the existing concerns. That has been, and will no doubt continue to be, the position. If the Deputy is referring to the growing and treating of native tobacco——

No; I was referring to the question of whether there has been any change in the amount of employment.

There has been a reduction of about 30 in the total number employed in the tobacco industry, a reduction which was substantially less than I anticipated because there have been very considerable developments in the type of equipment used in tobacco factories, which, in other countries, have resulted in the elimination of labour to a very large extent, so much so that the German Government, contrary to what one would have considered the spirit of the German nation, has recently made a decree prohibiting the use of machinery in the cigar industry so that hand labour only will be employed.

Deputy Mulcahy asked what was the position in connection with hosiery. The position is, so far as plain hosiery is concerned, that the existing concerns are probably capable of supplying all the requirements of the country and, in fact, there is some small export trade in hosiery of various kinds. We are not, by any means, supplying our full requirements in ladies' silk hosiery and various types of fancy hosiery. The existing establishments are capable of supplying much more of the market than in fact they are supplying, but these are a class of goods in respect of which advertising counts a big lot and many well-known brands have got a hold on the public taste which it will not be easy to break—not that the imported goods are any different or any better. In some cases, they are much worse and are certainly dearer than the products of the Saorstát concerns. The public do not appreciate that the same yarn is used, in exactly the same machines and under exactly the same conditions, in all factories producing these goods and there is, in fact, no difference whatever between the ladies' silk stockings produced in Leicester or some other English town and the ladies' silk stockings produced in this country. The machinery, the yarn, the work, the skill of the workers and everything else are precisely the same in all cases; the only thing different is the name on the package and the amount spent on advertising—and the more money spent on advertising, the dearer the price at which the goods have to be sold. It is anticipated, however, that we should be able to remove entirely the item of hosiery from the import list in the present year. Certain developments are still necessary in the matter of very cheap hosiery but three new factories have been established mainly for the production of cheap hosiery since the beginning of the year and when they get into full production, I think the last of that item will disappear.

Deputy Broderick spoke at considerable length about matters relating to building and Deputy Coburn also strongly advised us not to do anything which would result in an increase in building costs. I am not satisfied that buildings costs cannot be reduced in this country. I think there are factors operating to keep these costs up which will have to be dealt with and removed. I do not wish, however, to say anything on the matter, as the Prices Commission, as Deputies are aware, is engaged in an investigation into the costs of all building requisites. There is, I think, no reason whatever why woodword or bricks or tiles or slates or paints or varnishes or any other thing required in the construction of a house should not be as cheap in this country as they are in any country. In fact, in respect of some, there is every reason to say that they should be cheaper. In the case of woodwork, for example, where the raw material is imported mainly from the Baltic, the mills here get it free of duty, whereas the mills in Northern Ireland and Great Britain have to pay 10 per cent. duty and yet the price of woodwork is higher here than in either of these countries.

Very much higher.

Much too much higher. There is, of course, room for considerable expansion in the production of bricks. There are quite a number of places in this country where excellent bricks can be produced and although a number of brickworks have been opened in various parts of the country, there is still room for more, particularly in the West. Bricks are an article which have this peculiar characteristic—they cannot be transported for long distances and it is not economic to transport them by rail at all. Consequently, it is an industry which lends itself to the establishment of small local works supplying local requirements. It is not likely at any time to be developed upon other lines, whereby we would have one large works supplying the requirements of the country, and if there is anybody in Galway interested in the production of bricks in Galway, we shall be very glad to facilitate him in every way.

In the matter of marble, about which Deputy Broderick also spoke, certain developments are taking place. We had at one time a substantial export trade but it completely disappeared. In fact, all production had stopped for many years when I came to examine the position first. Production has now been commenced at two or three centres and marble is being quarried for use in connection with various buildings which are in course of erection—public buildings of various kinds and cathedrals and churches. The possibility of regaining our export market in marble is a matter that requires examination. The chief competitors in the market are, of course, the Italians, who have their industry very highly developed and very highly organised. They have a very strong hold on the market, and it will not be an easy task to break into that market again. In connection with the marble question and also the brick, tile and slate questions, however, I want Deputies to appreciate that the Department of Industry and Commerce has no power to engage in the production of these things. Our sole function is to interest private individuals or groups of individuals in getting into that form of production and facilitating and assisting any such groups that we may get and if, in fact, there is nobody willing to invest money or to undertake the organisation of a company for the production of any of these things, the Department has very little power indeed, although in certain cases it might be prepared directly to undertake production as a form of State enterprise. That is something, however, which, I think, we ought not to attempt to do until other possibilities have been fully explored, because it is bound to land us in a number of difficulties.

Hear, hear!

I am talking at greater length than I intended, but I want to get these things cleared up Deputy Coburn asked about the trade dispute clause in the Unemployment Insurance Act. I promised Deputy Coburn that I would do my best to find some formula which would have the effect he desired. We have been examining that matter, and I cannot say that I see a solution of the problem yet. Our efforts to find a solution have been complicated by the fact that the particular section of the Department which is directly concerned in the matter has been very heavily overworked in recent months in connection with the coming into operation of the Unemployment Assistance Act. As soon as that work becomes routine, and the machinery is working smoothly, we will be able to give more attention to the matter. I can assure the Deputy that it is not being overlooked.

There is not much difficulty in it.

I am awaiting the Deputy's suggestions. Deputy Coburn also referred to the appointment of clerks in connection with the labour exchanges. I presume he must refer to temporary clerks, because it is only in connection with temporary clerks that the Minister for Industry and Commerce has any function. Permanent clerks in connection with those exchanges are recruited by the Civil Service Commissioners. The appointments of those temporary clerks are made at headquarters. This is and always has been the practice. Appointments are made from the lists prepared by the local exchange manager, who prepares that list from those who are registered as unemployed at the local exchange. The persons on the list are interviewed by an officer of the Department who makes his comments upon their suitability. The report containing those comments is then sent up to Dublin, where the decision is made as to who will get the appointment. In fact, the procedure is quite an elaborate one to operate in connection with those posts, which carry a very low salary, and which frequently do not last very long.

A number of Deputies directed their remarks to the question of the establishment of an industrial alcoholic plant. I should say that we are not establishing an industry; we are starting an experiment. The purpose of the experiment is to find out if there are any special circumstances, either in the climate of this country or the soil of this country, which would enable industrial alcohol to be produced here under circumstances more favourable than in other countries. We think the experiment will probably prove successful. There is reason to believe that we can grow a variety of potatoes with a very high starch content. There is reason to believe that the climate of this country will permit of a campaign season much longer than is found possible elsewhere, and that, consequently, we will be able to get the costs of production much below the figure which has been achieved in other countries. There are, of course, uses for industrial alcohol other than transport purposes. In the majority of continental countries they have at the present time legislation requiring the compulsory admixture of home-produced industrial alcohol with imported petrol for transport purposes. We contemplate taking similar powers by legislation here, but nobody need postpone buying a car on that account, because the total maximum production of the plant now proposed to be established, mixed with imported petrol, will be hardly noticed. The total production available for transport purposes is not likely to exceed 500,000 gallons, whereas our total consumption of petrol in any one year is about 40,000,000 gallons. The admixture of 500,000 with the 40,000,000 will have a very small effect.

It will cost the motorists at least £33,000.

I do not think it will cost that amount.

How much will it cost?

I do not want to make any prophecy on the subject, and I advise the Deputy not to do so either.

If the motorists are going to have to pay for it they will have to pay that much at least.

I never attempt to pose as a prophet, except when I know with certainty what is going to happen, and even then I am cautious. The trouble with the Deputy is that he rushes in where angels fear to tread.

Is it since the Minister got into office that he has developed this objection to prophecy?

That is why I am in office. As I was listening to Deputy Mulcahy and Deputy Dockrell trying to prove that this alcohol was going to cost anything up to 3/- a gallon, it just occurred to me that, possibly, when they were going to school mathematics was an optional subject. They did not succeed in proving anything like what they set out to prove.

Would the Minister mind answering a question?

I want to tell the Deputy how to work his calculation. Take 18 cwt. of potatoes with an 18 per cent. starch content. Take 4 cwt. of good commercial coal.

Why not turf?

Because it must be coal in this case—coal of a special class. Take six hours of a man's time, and 6 hours of a manager's time. The result of all that is 22 gallons of industrial alcohol and 220 gallons of the residue, which is a cattle food. You can pay whatever price you like for the potatoes; you can pay whatever price you like for the coal; you can pay your worker and your manager as much as you like, and work out how much it is going to cost, bearing in mind that we are going to purchase the wash for cattle food at 1/2d. per gallon.

Would the Minister listen to my sum?

Certainly.

The Minister has told us that he is going to buy potatoes at 35/- a ton.

Is that the price? The farmer will not get much out of it, anyway.

He will do well on it.

He has told us that he is going to produce 20 gallons of industrial alcohol from every ton of potatoes.

Oh, no—22 gallons from every 18 cwts.

The Minister can make his own sum.

You have got the figures wrong to start with.

At any rate, this is the sum we have had to work out on the Minister's statement to us originally. Take 35/- a ton for potatoes. That will work out at 1/9 per cwt., which will give us a gallon of the stuff.

Oh, no. I cannot admit that, because the Deputy has the figures wrong.

At any rate this is my sum. The Minister said he would listen to it. Take 1/9 for the cwt. of potatoes which will give us a gallon of the material. I am giving the Minister credit for selling all the wash, and getting the full 1/2d. a gallon for it.

The backwash!

That is 4½d., so the net cost of his raw material is going to be 1/4½ at least The Minister is borrowing £132,000 for his experiment. If he is paying off the interest and principal and depreciation at, say, 6 per cent., that is going to work out at 2½d., so the net cost of his raw material, after deducting interest, depreciation and all that, is going to be 1/7, and the Minister told us that he is going to turn out a gallon of the stuff at 1/9. That leaves 2d. a gallon for the complete process of conversion. The Minister has made himself responsible for that statement. I should like to know does the Minister stand over that simple sum, or does he ask us to wipe that off the blackboard completely, and off the records of this House, and go back to this new sum, because before working out the answer to this new sum I should like to know if he repudiates the old one.

I never gave the old one. I am certain I never committed myself to 1/9.

Well, Heavens above!

I made no prophecy on the subject. I said that the purpose of the experiment was to find out how much we could do it at. We hope to produce it at 1/9. We may produce it at less.

So you hope to produce it at 1/9.

Yes. If the Deputy will take the trade and shipping figures, and work out what we are paying for the industrial alcohol which we are now importing, he will see that we will have done a very good thing if, in fact, we produce it at 6d. a gallon more than that. We may even have an export trade in industrial alcohol before we are finished.

And for the wash.

It will be like the export of calf skins.

They are going on well. Deputy Coburn asked where these experimental plants were to be established. We propose to establish them in North Louth and in the surrounding areas. That district was selected precisely for the reasons stated by Deputy Coburn, that you have there in North Louth a peculiar situation—a district where potato growing has been the mainstay of the population for generations but where, on account of the regulations of the Department of Agriculture, they are not allowed to sell them in the Free State, due to the prevalence of black scab in the soil. The establishment of two of these distilleries will, we hope, secure the complete utilisation of all the potatoes grown in that area. We hope to get the distilleries established and working in time to deal with this year's crop, but I can give no undertaking that that will be done, because there have been a number of unexpected delays already, and I am not optimistic enough to say that there will be no more.

Is the Minister satisfied that the potatoes grown here are the best kind for industrial alcohol?

We have carried out a number of experiments with various types of potatoes and we think it is possible to secure a continuous supply of potatoes of 18 per cent. starch content. The purpose of the experiment, however, is to find out if we can grow here in quantity potatoes with a much higher starch content than 18 per cent. We may be able to get up to 22 or 23 per cent. in which case the price of the industrial alcohol will be lower.

The potatoes grown for this purpose in Germany and other countries are not suitable for table use.

In some countries they grow a special potato which is not suitable for table purposes.

Would it not be well to start off on an experiment with these potatoes?

We hope to.

But you have lost a year.

I agree, but the loss of the year was due to unexpected delays. There were a number of comments on the peat scheme. I have here extracts from all the speeches made upon the peat scheme by Deputies opposite during the various debates that took place. They are quite amusing reading now. I do not propose to read them, however. Deputies will be glad to hear that the peat scheme is proceeding quite satisfactorily. There were, of course, the usual suggestions from Deputy Belton that some of the £20,000 to be voted this year is going to provide salaries for the organisers of the Fianna Fáil Party. It would not be a bad idea, but, unfortunately, the expenditure of that sum is going to be controlled by the Peat Marketing Board, which consists of the Chairman of the Agricultural Credit Corporation, a Director of the I.A.O.S. and an officer of the Department of Industry and Commerce and, in part, by the I.A.O.S., which will have control of most of the expenditure upon the organisation of peat societies, etc. Unfortunately, Deputy Belton's suggestion did not occur to us in time or we might have arranged otherwise.

Deputy Brodrick said nobody could get work in connection with bog road schemes undertaken in the West of Ireland except he was a member of the Fianna Fáil Party, that any member of the Blueshirts, as he called them, was debarred from getting employment. I want to know if Deputies opposite repudiate as supporters of theirs all persons at present employed either as gangers or workers on relief schemes. Are they prepared to say that none of them are supporters of their Party or, if they think they are supporters of their Party, that they do not want them? Of course they will not. They know quite well that there has been a completely impartial administration of these schemes. The one thing we are going to do is to see that membership or support of the Fianna Fáil Party is not going to be a barrier to any person getting employment as a ganger or worker. It has been a barrier for ten years. The one change effected when the Fianna Fáil Government came into office was to remove that barrier so that its own supporters had an equal chance with anybody else engaged in that work. There is no Deputy opposite who does not know that we have in fact injured ourselves and our own supporters in every county in Ireland by a rigid adherence to that impartial administration. They print in their official organ the resolutions passed by the Fianna Fáil clubs disbanding themselves as a protest against the appointment of some Blueshirt as a ganger in their district. Yet, despite the fact that they can read these resolutions and print them in their organ they come and make these allegations.

Both Deputy Mulcahy and Deputy Morrissey asked what was the position in respect of cement. I had hoped that we would have had the foundation stones laid by this. We were engaged in negotiations with a well-known Continental company for the establishment of cement factories in this country. These negotiations had reached the stage where nothing was left except to get the signatures to the dotted line. Then at that particular stage certain things happened in the company as a result of which there was a new board of directors—circumstances under which the company could not immediately proceed to take up with us where the old board had left off. The position was, in effect, brought back to where it was when we started. Negotiations have been opened up again with a number of different firms interested in the position, and I trust that within a month from to-day we shall have reached the position where some agreement will have been made which will enable the establishment of the industry here to be commenced. I do not say that the actual business of erecting the factories will commence within a month, but, in so far as the Department of Industry and Commerce is concerned, the making of the arrangements to that end will be complete within that period. Again I say that our hopes may be disappointed, but on this occasion I do not think they will, except, of course, some entirely unexpected development takes place such as occurred before.

Deputy Coburn and other Deputies referred to the position in respect of the closing down of certain branch railway lines. I stated in the Dáil, when the Railways Bill was going through the Oireachtas, that I would not refuse an order for the closing down of a branch line in any case where it was clear that the public were not supporting the line—that the number of passengers travelling or the amount of merchandise transported over the line was clearly not paying the working expenses. That would be the general rule, although there may be exceptions to the rule. In the case of the Ardee branch, in which Deputy Coburn is interested, the railway company have applied only for an order permitting them to terminate the passenger service. They do not propose, I understand, to terminate the services of goods trains. I must say that I cannot see why passenger trains should be run on that particular branch when a much better service can be given by omnibuses. The bus service can be extended as the traffic extends and can be run much earlier and much later in the day than the trains. Where only a short distance is involved they are just as comfortable a means of travelling.

Deputy Morrissey asked about the position in connection with Slievardagh coal. We have been considering the various measures which would have to be taken to secure the development of the extensive anthracite coal resources at Slievardagh in County Tipperary. The services of a very well known English coal-mining engineering firm have been engaged and the experts of that firm are, I think, at present engaged in the preparation of a report upon the area and the measures which should be taken to secure the most economical development of it. At the same time we have established a Committee, consisting of persons best fitted to consider and recommend in the matter, to advise us as to the various measures which it would be necessary to adopt to secure a market for the increased production of anthracite which may take place at Slievardagh. When we get the report of the engineers, on the one hand, and of the Committee, on the other, we shall be able to determine upon our plans. I think it will be necessary to come to the Dáil at that stage and secure approval for the proposal that will be submitted.

A number of Deputies have criticised the operations of the Prices Commission. They did so, I think, on a misunderstanding of the position. The Prices Commission, as such, is not concerned with the price charged on the occasion of individual sales by a particular shopkeeper to a particular individual. The Prices Commission are concerned only to undertake a general investigation into the prices of either protected commodities or articles of common necessity. They have been engaged on a fairly elaborate investigation into the price of wheaten flour. In order to complete that investigation, they had to get the flour millers to change their system of accounting and then wait for a period of months during which the new system of accounting was in operation before they could give their opinion on it and publish their report. I understand the report on flour will be forthcoming in the near future. They have also been engaged in an investigation into the prices charged for bread. In that case they had considerable difficulty in getting the bakers to submit information which would enable them to examine the position. They have, of course, very drastic powers to compel the submission of evidence, but they were reluctant to use these powers because they felt that the persons concerned did not fully appreciate the position. In due course, by waiting a bit and by methods of persuasion, they got the information they wanted. A report on bread prices is being drafted at the moment.

They also carried out an investigation into the price of mineral oils and they submitted a report which indicated that there was no need to take action. It has not been published because there was only one firm chiefly involved. The report at the moment is being examined from the point of view of whether it is desirable to publish it, having regard to the effect it might have on the interests of the one firm concerned and the fact that there was no foundation for the allegation that undue profits were being made. They are also engaged in carrying out investigations into the prices of other commodities and they have been appointed particularly to carry out an inquiry into the price of housing materials.

In addition to the Prices Commission, there is a Prices Controller, who is responsible for investigating the prices charged in particular sales, that is, the prices charged by any shopkeeper for any commodity to an individual customer. He, however, can only take action when he has received a complaint. I want to say in speaking to this matter—and I would commend this to Deputy Flynn-that I have no sympathy with anybody who, feeling that he has been overcharged by some shopkeeper, merely growls about it and does not sit down and put the details of the particular transaction on a piece of paper and send it to the Controller of Prices, Dublin, because such a person is obviously content to growl whereas by taking the action I suggest he, or she, might not only secure a refund of the overcharge but a general reduction of the price of the commodity in that district and, therefore, do general good in the district. Wherever the Prices Controller has received complaints he, or an inspector under him, has carried out investigations and in a number of cases he has been able to get refunds of the amount overcharged. Any person who desires to have a complaint investigated has machinery in existence by which it can be done. Deputy Brodrick made a number of allegations in regard to the Tuam beet factory.

Before the Minister passes from the question of prices, I should like to know if he is in the habit of influencing the Prices Commission as to the commodities, the price of which they are to investigate. One item to which they might turn attention is vegetables. There is a most extraordinary gap between the price that the producer of vegetables can get and what the public has to pay for them. Considering that we are an agricultural country, the variety of vegetables also is miserably poor.

On a point of order, I suggest that that matter should be left to the agricultural experts of the Party opposite.

We will leave the calves to you.

I think that the Prices Commission have certain intentions in that matter and that when an opportunity offers they intend to make the necessary inquiries. The President on the occasion of the laying of the foundation stone at Tuam said that it was intended that a certain number of native speakers from the western districts would be employed at the factory during the season. We have persuaded the board of the company that it would be a good policy so to arrange, and they have so arranged. Deputy Brodrick is obviously mixing up the employment of workers in the factory with the matter of the employment of workers by the contractors for the construction of the factory. Not merely is it the intention of the company to make arrangements for the employment of these workers at Tuam but, in fact, they have constructed housing accommodation for these native speakers when the campaign opens and the fulfilment of the President's promise arises. Deputy Brodrick also alleged that nobody could get employment in connection with the work at Tuam who was not a supporter of Fianna Fáil. I would like to bet that for one letter he has received from his supporters alleging that no Blue Shirt can get employment, I can produce ten from the local Fianna Fáil supporters saying that no Fianna Fáil supporter can get employment at the factory.

And I will produce 100.

In any event the employment of workers is made through the local employment exchange, and is entirely in the hands, and at the discretion, of either the officers of the company or the officers of the contractors who are building the factory.

Deputy MacDermot made reference to the negotiation of trade treaties, and he asked if political considerations entered into the question when the matter of negotiating treaties with particular countries arose. We have no political objection to negotiating a trade arrangement with any country. We have, in fact, been conducting discussions which, on occasions, might have been elevated to the point at which they might be called negotiations with practically every country where the classes of the goods that we export or could export, are imported. We have been also approached, by a number of other countries which were looking for something for nothing. There are quite a number of countries which are selling goods to this country and which really cannot buy anything from us. All these countries in general offer most-favoured-nation treaties to us, but we have been endeavouring to utilise the market here as a bargaining factor with various countries. In the case of countries like Germany, to which Deputy MacDermot referred, we have not committed ourselves to giving any concessions. Germany is entitled under treaty to get most-favoured-nation treatment here, and the only question that arose in that connection was whether we should continue that treaty. It has been continued.

Is there any single country that has shown any signs of taking about as much from us as we would be prepared to take from them?

We have, in fact, a favourable balance with certain countries.

Which one?

Not very many, I admit. The only one in Europe, I think, is Switzerland which takes a very substantial number of horses from this country every year. There is quite a substantial trade with Switzerland. We have been, in fact, directing trade towards Switzerland in order to maintain it. There are other goods also. Agreements have not been made on the basis of securing a mathematical balance of trade in any country, but to secure an opening for our produce where the level of prices or the demand for goods makes trade worth while. There are not many countries where agricultural prices are better than they are here. In fact, in most countries in Europe the level of agricultural prices is so much lower than it is here, and it hardly pays to export, and the Governments of these countries are trying to secure their internal trade by regulating the imports of external products.

The Minister stated that there was room for one more large foundry in the Irish Free State.

For the production of grates and ranges and rain water goods.

Is the Minister in a position to say what the cost would be?

I would not like to offer an opinion. It would be a substantial sum. I am not thinking of a small foundry but of one where articles would be produced more or less by mass production methods. The total requirements of grates would be about 40,000 a year, of which not 20,000 are being produced at present, so that you could contemplate a daily output of grates to supply requirements, apart altogether from ranges or rain water goods and other things of that description produced by a mass production foundry. I do not want anyone to take these figures as being necessarily accurate. I am speaking from memory. I would like to deal with other matters, but I have spoken at length. I listened to Deputy Rice trying on the usual fallacious theories in connection with trade and shipping statistics, and unemployment and employment figures. The position of course is, as Deputies are aware, that the total value of external trade, that is, imports and exports added together, to which the Deputy referred, has no significance whatever in relation to national prosperity. We could have a total export trade, with the figures rising like a rocket, with everybody in the country starving, industries destroyed and agriculture ruined. We could have an external trade brought down to nil, and the country prosperous and everyone working. If Deputy Rice is under any delusion in this matter, I invite him to read the speech made at the annual meeting of the Cork Incorporated Chamber of Commerce some months ago by the President of that body, in which he dealt very excellently with that particular argument.

Might I remind the Minister that the Americans held the view that he has just been expressing, and that they have found out their error?

The Americans have found out a number of errors, and I do not think they are satisfied that they have arrived at the ultimate truth yet.

Is the Minister satisfied that he has arrived at it?

I am sure he has not.

Deputy Rice made a number of arguments based on the unemployment figures. It is, of course, entirely fallacious to make any comparison between the unemployment register to-day and the unemployment register of 1931. The fact that every unemployed person in the country can at present get cash benefit by registering is, of course, an essential difference. In 1931, agricultural workers, or people living apart from the exchanges, had no interest in the exchanges. Even those living in towns very rarely got employment through the exchanges, because there was no policy in operation at the time requiring men for public works to be recruited through the exchanges. There was, in fact, a definite Government order requiring preference to be given to a particular class, which practically meant that only persons in that class could get work through the exchanges. The operation of all these factors resulted in no one registering at the exchanges except those who were in receipt of unemployment insurance benefit, and who therefore had an interest in doing so. The fact that only 15,000 vacancies were filled through the exchanges on the average during the years 1930, or 1931, is an indication of how little purpose was served by any unemployed person registering there. The position was reversed in 1932, when preference was abolished, and everyone had an equal claim to any employment going, and, consequently, an interest in registering. A definite order was issued that all workers required for public works were to be recruited only through the exchanges and, consequently, as against 15,000 vacancies filled in 1931, almost 100,000 were filled in 1932. There was, consequently, more reason for registering at the exchanges, particularly in so far as public works were concerned as no one could get employment who was not registered.

Now the position has changed again. Inducement to register has been definitely extended to all those who were not ordinarily engaged in industrial work, because the unemployment assistance scheme is in operation and persons claiming assistance, even though they might not be ordinarily engaged in industrial work, are registering at the exchanges. Consequently, you get a maximum figure in the register of unemployed, which does not represent the measure of destitution or hardship in the country at all. It represents the total number of persons who, no matter what the circumstances, would take work, or a different form to that which they have, if it offered.

It is common knowledge that a very large number of agricultural workers throughout the country, although actually employed by farmers, nevertheless registered at the exchanges in the hope of some better-paid work such as road work, turning up. At Tuam, Thurles and Mallow, where the beet factories are in construction, we had to take very drastic action to ensure that the supply of labour for local farmers would not be entirely depleted. All farm labourers in these districts registered for work at the factories, and a number of them got work, but they had to be withdrawn to ensure that ordinary farm operations in the districts would not be neglected.

Can the Minister not learn a lot from that?

I am not learning at the moment; I am trying to teach.

You must learn before you can teach.

Deputy Corish referred to the Port and Harbours Tribunal. The preparation of legislation embodying the recommendations of the Tribunal is proceeding. It will take time. No doubt we could shorten the time, if we were prepared to concentrate upon it, but it would be difficult to do that at present, having regard to the several matters that are engaging the attention of the Department. I think we have dealt with the most urgent matters in the Regulation of Rates Bill. There are other matters urgent, I realise, from the point of view of a port like Wexford. I will try to make such progress as is possible with the measure. Some parts are straightforward and simple, but other parts will be regarded as contentious, and consequently we must proceed carefully in the framing of that legislation, which is of the type that, once passed, is not likely to be amended readily for a number of years. I hope to be able to produce the Bill some time soon, but I would not like to make a definite promise.

Deputy Kelly spoke of a matter concerning the position of the owners of horse-drawn cabs. I have very considerable sympathy for the people who are engaged in that particular calling, which is now nearly obsolete and certainly it is very unremunerative. I realise that sympathy is not much help to them, but I am at some difficulty to devise any method to assist them. Suggestions were made that certain places or districts should be closed to motor traffic so as to give the cabby a chance. I doubt if these were practicable, but any suggestion made will have very careful and sympathetic consideration. I am not very hopeful of being able to devise a practicable scheme of helping these people, very many of whom are much too old for training as taxi drivers or such work; but if any such scheme is suggested, or occurs to me, I will be very glad to consider it.

Mr. Kelly

It would help agriculture, too.

I do not know if there are any other matters to which it is necessary to refer at this stage. I think I have covered the main points that were raised, excepting one or two that more properly relate to the Estimate for Unemployment Insurance and Unemployment Assistance.

There is one matter I would like to question the Minister about, and that is the Directory of Irish Manufacturers. The Minister told us nothing about what we want to know with regard to that matter, and he has told us some additional thing that we do not want to know. As regards what we want to know, it was in October, 1932, that the Minister said he would consider laying a statement of certain matters dealing with new industries before the House. In the beginning of last year, more than 12 months ago, he told the House he was having prepared a Directory of Irish Manufacturers. Additional staff was put on it some months ago. At least, we ought to hear from the Minister what are the headings under which he proposes to give information about Irish industry in that publication. Is it going to be an impersonal statement of the position like a census of production, or does he propose to list——

To write snappy paragraphs about each item?

Does he propose to give us the names of Irish industries that exist, the names of the firms concerned, something about the capital invested and something about the employment that is being given? Will the Minister tell us now, after all the work of preparation, what this directory will tell us about Irish manufactures? The Minister tells us to-night that he has advertised the intention of the Department to put advertisements into the publication. I think that is an amazing thing, and I would ask the Minister to reconsider it.

I called on the Minister to conclude.

I am merely asking a question.

Questions are sometimes permitted, if not many have been asked in the course of the discussion. It seems to me that the Deputy is making a speech.

I am merely asking this question. The Minister is inviting Irish manufacturers to put advertisements into his publication. There is a book published, the Irish Industrial Year Book, by a body that is dependent upon subscriptions and financial assistance of one particular kind so as to keep this going as a propagandist organisation for the purpose——

I think the Deputy is misinformed The book is published as a commercial venture by a private individual.

I put it there is an organisation there which is endeavouring to propagand Irish industry, and is dependent on advertisements to publish that very useful publication. In view of the fact that the Minister refuses to give the names of the individual companies here lest it be prejudicial to the other companies engaged in that particular type of industry, is it reasonable that the Minister should practically coerce Irish manufacturers into putting advertisements of their stuff in what is going to be an official directory, comprehensively made up to show the position of Irish industry in the country? I submit the Minister is simply putting in filling-up stuff, and we should hear under what headings he is going to give information.

Questions are allowed, when the Minister has concluded, to elicit information on points to which the Minister has not replied.

The handbooks will give information as to the products that are produced here and where they are obtainable. If the Deputy wants fuller information than that, information concerning capital investment, the number of persons actually employed on a particular date, and so on, he will have to await the publication of the reports from the Census of Production that is being taken each year. The 1932 reports will be published shortly and the 1933 reports at a later date. I could not possibly get that detailed information concerning each industry earlier than the report from the Statistics Branch. I do not see any more objection to putting advertisements in the book than advertising Beecham's Pills on the back of telegraph forms.

I thought that was given up long ago.

There is one question I would like to ask. I raised this matter when I was speaking on the Estimate. I wanted to know, as the Minister's Statistical Branch costs the country £22,000 or £23,000 a year, if it keeps statistics as to the quantity and value of our goods seized by the British through their special duties, and, if the Statistical Branch does not keep such records, why not?

We keep extraordinary records. We even keep a note of all the speeches made by the Deputy.

I am asking a question of national importance. It is a matter of the seizing of £4,500,000 worth of our goods.

Neither the Deputy nor the Ceann Comhairle can force the Minister to reply.

I have not got an answer, although I asked the question earlier to-day.

The Deputy must realise that neither he nor the Ceann Comhairle can force the Minister to answer.

I am satisfied with that, but I must assume the Minister keeps no record.

The Deputy must assume that I am now putting the question.

Question put: "That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration."
The Committee divided: Tá, 41: Níl, 62.

  • Alton, Ernest Henry.
  • Anthony, Richard.
  • Beckett, James Walter.
  • Belton, Patrick.
  • Bennett, George Cecil.
  • Bourke, Séamus.
  • Broderick, William Joseph.
  • Brodrick, Seán.
  • Burke, Patrick.
  • Cosgrave, William T.
  • Costello, John Aloysius.
  • Curran, Richard.
  • Daly, Patrick.
  • Davitt, Robert Emmet.
  • Desmond, William.
  • Dockrell, Henry Morgan.
  • Doyle, Peadar S.
  • Esmonde, Osmond Grattan.
  • Fagan, Charles.
  • Fitzgerald, Desmond.
  • Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
  • Holohan, Richard.
  • Keating, John.
  • Lynch, Finian.
  • MacDermot, Frank.
  • McGilligan, Patrick.
  • McMenamin, Daniel.
  • Minch, Sydney B.
  • Morrisroe, James.
  • Mulcahy, Richard.
  • Murphy, James Edward.
  • Nally, Martin.
  • O'Higgins, Thomas Francis.
  • O'Leary, Daniel.
  • O'Mahony, The.
  • O'Sullivan, Gearóid.
  • O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
  • Redmond, Bridget Mary.
  • Reidy, James.
  • Rice, Vincent.
  • Roddy, Martin.

Níl

  • Aiken, Frank.
  • Bartley, Gerald.
  • Beegan, Patrick.
  • Boland, Gerald.
  • Brady, Brian.
  • Brady, Seán.
  • Breathnach, Cormac.
  • Breen, Daniel.
  • Briscoe, Robert.
  • Browne, William Frazer.
  • Carty, Frank.
  • Concannon, Helena,
  • Corish, Richard.
  • Corkery, Daniel.
  • Crowley, Fred. Hugh.
  • Crowley, Timothy.
  • Derrig, Thomas.
  • De Valera, Eamon.
  • Doherty, Hugh.
  • Donnelly, Eamon.
  • Flynn, Stephen.
  • Geoghegan, James.
  • Gibbons, Seán.
  • Goulding, John.
  • Harris, Thomas.
  • Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
  • Houlihan, Patrick.
  • Jordan, Stephen.
  • Kehoe, Patrick.
  • Kelly, James Patrick.
  • Kelly, Thomas.
  • Kennedy, Michael Joseph.
  • Keyes, Michael.
  • Killilea, Mark.
  • Kilroy, Michael.
  • Kissane, Eamonn.
  • Lemass, Seán F.
  • Little, Patrick John.
  • Lynch, James B.
  • MacEntee, Seán.
  • Maguire, Conor Alexander.
  • Moane, Edward.
  • Moore, Séamus.
  • Murphy, Patrick Stephen.
  • Murphy, Timothy Joseph.
  • O'Briain, Donnchadh.
  • O'Doherty, Joseph.
  • O'Dowd, Patrick.
  • O'Grady, Seán.
  • O Ceallaigh, Seán T.
  • O'Reilly, Matthew.
  • Pattison, James P.
  • Pearse, Margaret Mary.
  • Rice, Edward.
  • Ruttledge, Patrick Joseph.
  • Ryan, James.
  • Ryan, Martin.
  • Sheridan, Michael.
  • Smith, Patrick.
  • Traynor, Oscar.
  • Walsh, Richard.
  • Ward, Francis C.
Tellers:—Tá: Deputies Doyle and Ben nett; Níl: Deputies Little and Traynor.
Question declared lost.
Main question put and agreed to.
Barr
Roinn