I should like to deal with the points raised by Deputies last evening on the Gaeltacht Estimates, and to deal as fully as possible with the various matters brought forward. Deputy Dockrell contributed some quite interesting suggestions, and asked very pertinent and relevant questions. As he referred to specific matters within the Estimates, I would like to deal with these in detail, in so far as it is possible to do so. One of the Deputy's main queries was with regard to the stocks held in the depôt, and in the rural industries generally. The position with regard to stock is that we have quite a considerable amount of merchandise in the depôt which was the work of the early beginners, who were being trained in these industries. It has to be remembered that we have altogether 49 industrial centres throughout the country. Last year, particularly, we concentrated upon training some of these workers. Over 300 of them were trained. But business men will appreciate the fact that in the early stages of training one does not get the quality of merchandise that will always find a ready market. We might claim to have a residue of stocks which have accumulated since the depôt was opened. That is particularly so with regard to hand-knit goods which were made in the various centres. There was also a moderate increase of stock in connection with certain new industries contemplated, but some of which it was found that it was hardly practicable to carry through. However, we reduced the stock as rapidly as we could, and kept it more in conformity with the volume of turnover. I might point out that in many respects a considerable amount of the stock is hanging over for the last two or three years. A great deal of it has been distributed and disposed of, but it is also the case that we have to continue to carry reasonable stocks so that we will be in a position to send raw materials to various depôts.
The Deputy also raised a question with regard to the method of distribution of our goods, and judging from what he said, he was under the impression that we were doing a certain amount of direct distribution, so that it might be inferred we were selling to retail purchasers. He suggested that we should follow the ordinary trade channels. The fact of the matter is that we are following the methods of the ordinary distributing trades. We sell to the wholesale and to the retail distributing trades but in no case do we sell direct to the individual customer. The Deputy, and also Deputy McGilligan, asked how the situation really stood as regards competition. They wanted to know if we were facing competition from machine-made goods, mass-produced goods, and so on. That is, in fact, one of our greatest handicaps. Machine-produced goods are competing, of course, successfully with hand craft goods. One of the problems that is causing me considerable trouble is to find in the production of a lot of the goods operated through the different centres, how we can continue to produce hand craft goods to compete with the machine-produced articles. It is particularly difficult to face that problem, because of the relative amount of raw material that has to be imported. At least, a great deal of it has to be imported. When one works it out to find exactly how much goes to the actual producer of the goods the question arises: Is the industry worth while? For instance, if we take an article that is produced at 2/-, and if we find that 40 per cent. or 50 per cent. of the material required has to be imported, and that the ultimate result to the worker represents only ten or 15 per cent. of the actual cost of the article, then one has to sit down to consider whether that industry is worth while. That, I may say, is one of the worst problems we have to consider with regard to Gaeltacht produced goods.
Deputy McGilligan referred to that matter also and to mass production goods. In fact, Deputy Dockrell and Deputy McGilligan more or less covered the same ground. They did put their finger on the obvious vulnerable points in regard to the industries as administered by the Rural Industries Depôt. We do not propose, however, to abandon such industries as we have got unless we are convinced, firstly, that they are not doing good to the extent that the expense involved justifies. We have to remember that, however ill-conceived some of these projects were, they are in existence and it would be a serious step to make a break. Deputy Bartley raised a question with regard to possible conflict or overlapping between the Land Commission and the Housing Authority in regard to Gaeltacht housing. I think I can assure the Deputy with safety that there is no such overlapping and that the Gaeltacht housing officials in all cases are in touch with the Land Commission before any definite decision with regard to Gaeltacht housing is put over. Deputy Donnchadha O Briain referred to the fact that rural industries as existing to-day were not enough. I think we are all agreed on that. He made some reference to the necessity of having Irish speaking officials in the Gaeltacht. So far as I am aware, all our officials operating in the Gaeltacht through the Gaeltacht Department are Irish-speaking and if the Deputy knows anything to the contrary I should be very glad indeed if he will bring it to my attention.
Deputy McMenamin mentioned a few matters, some of which were, and are still, a little obscure. There were a few specific matters he brought forward. He mentioned the case of one man for whom a housing grant had been sanctioned in 1931, and he said that this grant had not yet been paid. I have made inquiries and I have been informed that no payment is withheld if the applicant proceeds with the work to the satisfaction of the surveyor. The only explanation that can be given is that the person referred to did not comply with the obligations imposed on him. It has to be remembered that when these grants are approved a certain amount of work has to be undertaken. We pay according to the work that has been done and on the surveyor's report of what has been done. We go further than that. We have a system whereby those who are going to build are assured of being charged the lowest price on a contract basis, contracts having been fixed by the Department in open competition. We are always ready to—in fact, we in all cases do—give a guarantee to the local supplier covering him for such specific goods as he may supply for the building operations that have been approved. I do not think there is anything in Deputy McMenamin's statement. If he has a specific case and supplies all particulars as regards the name and location of this individual we shall further investigate it.
Deputy McMenamin also referred to the question of stock raised by Deputy Dockrell and Deputy McGilligan. The position at the moment really is that we are trying to get advance orders for practically all the goods that are going to be made. That can only be done within certain limits. We are trying to estimate the demand and trying to have our orders in the book for advance deliveries. I have explained that we have had to carry extra stock owing to the fact that a training period had to be allowed for the women folk who were engaged and whom it was necessary to train, and also to the fact that a considerable residue of stock that these trainees had produced in their early inexperienced days was not first quality goods and could not be sold as such. I think it was Deputy McMenamin raised a question with regard to our designs. He mentioned some specific case with regard to the depôt. All I can say is, from what I have seen and from what has taken place, the designer is doing good work. That is more or less borne out by the fact that at the Spring Show this year the designs got the only silver medal that was awarded for the type of goods. Moreover, we find that some of our designs have been copied by a large manufacturer in the Galashiels area.
Deputy McMenamin also referred, on behalf of Deputy Dillon, to the position in Annagry and Crolly. That brings up the question of the possibility of establishing factories in the Gaeltacht areas. I have been personally interested in trying to get these factories going. I have at the moment a friend who is keen on getting operations going in the Gaeltacht, but I doubt very much if he will decide to do so. The difficulties of transport, the distance from a port, the lack of facilities for getting emergency supplies—all these factors count far more than the cost of labour to the individual manufacturer. That is why I stressed here last night that a great many other operations will have to be visualised for the future in the Gaeltacht and why I do not think rural industries, as we know them, will in any measure meet the difficulties.
I come now to the most important contribution to the debate here last night. Deputy Lynch made a great many criticisms of the activities of our Department, and laid particular stress on the fact that the Estimates this year were lower than last year. It seems to me that Deputy Lynch either overlooked or ignored the opening remarks in my statement where I indicated exactly the reductions that had taken place, and where, I think, I gave a reasonable explanation as to why these reductions took place. They were, as I pointed out, superficial reductions. They were reductions in the book, because, as I pointed out, the actual amounts involved in the expenditure were very different indeed from what the Estimates had indicated in the previous years, and included two purposes for which Deputy Lynch himself, when Minister, was responsible. To make the position clear, I would point out again, perhaps in more detail, that in 1931-32, when Deputy Lynch was Minister, the Estimate passed in the Dáil was £53,550, whereas the actual amount expended was £25,426, or less than half the amount indicated in the Estimate. Moreover, the Estimate contained an item of £40,000 for raw materials, and the actual expenditure was £14,116. The estimate for plant was £5,000, and the actual expenditure £1,583. That will give an indication of the value of Deputy Lynch's estimates, and it is, to me, at all events, hardly playing the game either with the House or with the public. The estimated sales of products in that Estimate were £30,000, whereas the actual sales amounted to £10,892, almost £20,000 less than estimated. In other words, the sales were the equivalent of about one-third of what had been estimated that year. The wages to the workers in that year, 1931-32, were £6,250.
We find very much the same position in 1932-33, which Estimates, it must be remembered, were prepared before we came into office. In that year, the raw material estimate was £25,000 and the actual expenditure was £14,404. The estimated sales were £15,000 and the actual sales £22,969. The actual amount of the Vote expended was £26,479, on a vote of £42,000. In 1933-4 the actual amount of wages paid was £10,020. The estimated sales were £22,000 and the actual sales £24,245, so we find that, although the Estimates may not have looked so rosy as when Deputy Lynch was in office, the actual result was considerably better and almost double, in fact, what it had been in his last year. It has to be allowed of course, that it takes time, and I am not claiming for the Department or for myself any credit for the growth of sales. That growth was natural. What I want to bring out clearly here is the fact that the Estimates, as introduced formerly, bore no relation to the actual amounts expended.
There has been criticism from Deputy Lynch and others, and I think a great deal of that criticism is justified. I think, however, that criticism is justified, not against this year's estimates, but against the system that was laid down there, and the way in which the system was running, and the way in which it was still running, because I am not going to take the responsibility of making changes and cutting off industries here and there, unless I see my way to substitute something else for them. Deputy Dockrell raised the question of the distribution of the wages and other expenses, and I have the figures here for the last three years. They are: in 1932, Donegal, £2,662 4s. 2d.; Mayo, £922 7s. 8d; Galway, £708 15s. 2d.; Kerry, £13; Cork, £5; and Sligo, £174. Those are the amounts of wages paid in the different areas, for which the Deputy asked last evening. The amounts for 1933 are: Donegal, £3,231; Mayo, £6,696; Galway, £1,598; Kerry, £140; Cork, £59; Cavan, £66 and Sligo, £212; and for 1934, Donegal, £3,902; Mayo, £3,205; Galway, £2,341; Kerry, £471; Cork, £214; Cavan, £110; and Sligo, £127, making a total of £10,373 3s. 9¼d. for 1934. The total last year was £12,002 and, in 1932, £4,485. The Deputy also wanted to know what were involved in the other expenses. They are minor items such as commission to travellers, cash discounts, allowances, and sundry expenses.
To come back to the main issue, the chief feature in this Gaeltacht Vote and the matter which is exercising the mind of the Government at the present time, and my own mind and the mind of the Department particularly, is in how far this Vote is justified by results. When one considers the amount of administrative expenses, the amount of money spent on instructors, manageresses and so on, the amount of raw material which has to be imported or which has to be purchased from other areas within the country, and the net amount that goes to the workers, I think it would be very difficult indeed to justify the expenditure of this money were it not for the peculiar circumstances that exist in these areas. I want to say here, however, that I feel that entirely different lines must be examined to see if we can get better results, as I am satisfied we can get better results, in other lines of activity. I instanced here last night the result of the turf scheme. When we got the cooperation of the turf people, we were able to get rapid development there, and the result of that will be that £60,000 will go in actual cash for the turf which will be purchased in the Gaeltacht counties.
I am satisfied from all I have seen and from all the analyses I have made that that would be worth a quarter of a million turnover in an ordinary rural industry and I am satisfied also that a co-ordinated service, where the Land Commission, Forestry, Turf and Industry and Commerce were operating together is the best arrangement and I hope to secure a service on that basis whereby we will have a whole-time official from each of these. That explains more clearly what I have in mind with regard to the point raised by Deputy Lynch here last night. He spoke of a committee that was in existence in his time and over which he presided which gave valuable service. He was referring to the interdepartmental committee for Gaeltacht Services. I have also the cooperation and the assistance of the same committee. There is no doubt about it—they are valuable servants and they give every attention and make every effort to co-operate with the Department and to do all they can in their respective Departments, but it has to be remembered that their activity as regards the Gaeltacht is limited to about three or four hours a month. They can do certain things in their own Departments but what I feel is needed in respect of the Gaeltacht, and what I hope to get, is full-time people from these Departments so that the work of the Gaeltacht will be co-ordinated right back to these Departments themselves. I feel that a great deal can be done by getting the Departments active. It will perhaps only show superficially in the Estimate of the amount expended, but it will show value in real results, value that we are not getting at present from these rural industries and the like.
Kelp and carrageen are, perhaps the two matters that caused Deputies most anxiety last evening. I explained fairly fully the position with regard to kelp. Deputy McGilligan raised a point as to whether it would be possible to subsidise the production of iodine here. It would be possible to subsidise it, but it would not be wise. The total use of iodine in the Saorstát at present would only absorb about 600 tons of kelp and that certainly would not justify either a subsidy or the actual production of iodine. The world price of iodine, as I explained, has been cut. I have gone more fully into the figures this morning and I find that the total cut amounts to 66? of what the former price was. In other words, iodine at present is worth one-third of what it was—at least the price that is paid for kelp for iodine purposes has been cut by that amount.
I do not want to go back into past history or seem to criticise unduly my predecessor in the Ministry, but the fact is that we have a hang-over of kelp at present from 1931 and that the position with regard to the sale of kelp in that period was far from satisfactory. I may have to ask the Deputy out of his good nature to come round and explain some of the things—not that there is anything wrong, but the method or the absence of method in dealing with this problem reflects very seriously on the Department. I do not want to go into details here, but I would suggest that if he really did know what was going on in the Department then the position, certainly in 1931, was one which should have given him very considerable cause for anxiety. It certainly has given me very considerable cause for anxiety. The position at present is that all of last year's crop is still in Galway and that some of the 1931 crop is not fully and finally cleared up yet.
I do not propose to say any more in regard to that, but I would point out that that is the type of inheritance we have got from the Gaeltacht. I am not afraid to stand over anything we do, but I am not prepared to bring in an estimate here asking for £75,000 for specific items when I know I am only going to spend £25,000. If I feel it is necessary to have £250,000 for the Gaeltacht I will come and ask for it, and it will be a matter for Deputies whether they will give it or not. But one thing I will not do and that is, come in here with an estimate which leads people to believe that one is doing a commercial or economic job which is not being done. I want to make that perfectly clear. That is exactly what has been happening. I went to come pains in my opening remarks to indicate just what had been going on and the facts bear it out.
With regard to carrageen, the position is that we are giving a better price for carrageen than was ever given. Since the Department opened, the price given for carrageen has been better than it was at any time before. We are paying 2/6 for carrageen and the price prior to the opening of the carrageen development usually ran from 1/- to 1/3. What is the reason then that we are not getting the carrageen? The reason is very simple. Other people are now competing with us for the purchase of it. The local agents are buying it. We have a certain standard and we are trying to insist on getting that standard maintained. We know that the result of the activity with regard to carrageen is that, first of all, it has improved the quality and, secondly, improved the price. It has caused competition for what we are prepared to buy. We were in a position to buy much more carrageen last year at the full price than was offered. I presume that does not mean that the people were not interested in selling or that they destroyed it. The market was there; we had the money to pay for it, and what we did not buy was bought by others. The net result was that the people did dispose of the carrageen.
After all our main concern is to ensure that the improvement does exist for the people engaged in it. There is, therefore, nothing to be said with regard to any defect in the market for carrageen. We would like to get more and we are struggling to get more, because we believe that, having started this business and having got it almost on to a "50-50 break" we ought to continue it. Actually the facts disclosed bear out that the position with reference to carrageen has not worsened in the last year or two. In 1931-32 the amount of carrageen sold was £3,098. In 1932-33 the amount sold was £6,827. In 1933-34 the amount was £6,445, so I think that quite a steady market has been maintained. We are in a position to buy more; we were in a position to buy more and we are still in that position.
Several Deputies raised the question of fisheries. I am reasonably satisfied that by the transfer to the Department of Agriculture fisheries will not suffer. After all, the activities of my Department are fairly far flung and we have forestry now instead of fisheries. I think it is reasonable to suppose that the work will go on as usual, if not better than usual.
I think I have covered all the points raised, but if there are any other points that may have escaped my attention, and I do not think there are, we can examine the Official Reports and communicate with the Deputies who raised them.