Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 6 Mar 1935

Vol. 55 No. 3

Private Deputies' Business. - Relief of Rates on Agricultural Land: Motion (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—

That the Dáil is of opinion that owing to the increasing distress of the farming community arising out of the continuance of the economic war, the Executive Council should take steps to relieve agricultural land of rates during the financial year 1934/35.—(Deputies T. O'Higgins and T. J. O'Donovan).

Mr. Broderick

When moving the adjournment on last Thursday night I was dealing with this important question of the relief of rates. The five or six minutes at my disposal were hardly sufficient to enable me to deal fully with it. Therefore, if I to some extent cover ground that has already been gone over I hope the Minister and the House will have patience with me, and that if I quote figures rather extensively they will see the necessity for my doing so in support of the case that I propose to make. When speaking on the last occasion I explained then that in normal circumstances I would not be in favour of complete derating. My outlook on the matter is that the security of this State depends on an equitable contribution from all sections. Hence, I would not be in favour of transferring entirely to the backs of the taxpayers the liability for local services. But, in present circumstances, I am in favour of complete derating for one year. I am influenced to a great extent by a statement made by the Minister for Lands at Maryborough on the 10th February. His statement, as I interpreted it, was to the effect that the non-payment of rates, leaving the local authorities without the necessary finance, would mean the end of all ordered government in this State. It is to avert what I regard as that impending catastrophe that I support this motion for the relief of rates for the 12 months period 1934-35.

If I go rather deeply into the history of this grant I hope the House will bear with me, and that it will also grant me its indulgence if I outline in some small way how the local authorities are financed. The local authorities are financed by a direct levy of local rates, and by supplementary grants from the State. The first of these grants is called the Agricultural Grant and, as its name implies, its purpose is to relieve agriculture. I do not take it that that is a grant at all. Prior to the Act of 1898 the local authorities had no claim to full rates from a holder of land. He was never liable for more than 50 per cent. of poor rate and in many cases considerably less. Under the Local Government Act of 1898 the State came in to relieve the landlord of all liability. It took over on itself liability for the landlord's share: that is 50 per cent. of the poor rate to be levied by the local authorities. That has gone on and has been called the Agricultural Grant. That obligation was fulfilled up to the time of the Treaty by the British Treasury. The payment of this grant to the local authorities was a statutory right. It was not an optional matter with the Ministry. That was proved in a number of cases that went into the courts, but I am going to appeal rather to the sense of justice of Deputies for support for this motion than on quotations from legal decisions in the courts.

At any rate, one thing is quite clear and it is: that the agricultural ratepayer was never at any time liable for what is called the first Agricultural Grant or for the 50 per cent. relief which it gave. Therefore, I do not think that at this stage our own Parliament—and particularly in the case of a statutory obligation of this sort—or our Minister for Finance, should now be entitled to tear up all the agreements dealing with these grants. Nobody knows better than the Minister for Local Government that to maintain the standard of public services demanded by the country, and which he has done his best to keep up, is very costly. It bears very heavily on the ratepayers. This was fully seen in 1925 when the late Government doubled the Agricultural Grant, the grant which I have referred to as a statutory obligation on the State, equal to a sum of £599,911. From the point of view of convenience I shall refer to it as £600,000. In 1925 the late Government doubled that Agricultural Grant, giving, approximately, another £600,000. But even that was not sufficient. The irritation caused by the burden that was being placed on the rates was so great that what became known as the Derating Commission was set up to inquire into the whole question. That Commission unanimously reported against complete derating. The minority, of which I had the honour to be Chairman, reported that together with doubling the first Agricultural Grant equity demanded for the ratepayer that at least £1,000,000 more should be given from the Treasury. By no one was that report more enthusiastically supported in this House than by the President of the Executive Council and the Deputies who are now his Ministers. That was their attitude when in opposition. What is their attitude to-day in circumstances incomparably worse than the conditions then prevailing?

The collection of the rates is becoming more difficult. The amounts transferred temporarily, as being uncollectable, are becoming greater. In these circumstances the Minister for Finance last year deprived us of £448,000 of the doubled agricultural grant. There was then no trace of an organised attempt not to pay annuities. If I localise this question and deal with it as it affects my own county perhaps the House will grip its effects more accurately. Last year we prepared our estimate of expenditure. We passed all the statutory requirements for the local hospitals, road works schemes, the payment of the labourers employed on the roads, etc. When all that was done and could not be undone, we had notification from the Ministry that they were going to deduct from us as our share of the £448,000 the sum of £56,000. That was a severe shock to the ratepayers of our county, as the deductions in other counties came as a shock to the ratepayers of those other counties. At the end of the year, there was deducted in respect of unpaid annuities a sum of £48,000 and, in addition, a sum of £11,000 in respect of probate and death duties, for which we had taken credit, would not be paid.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Is not that the letter of the law?

Mr. Broderick

In what way?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Is it not the law that the unpaid annuities must be accounted for to the Guarantee Fund?

Mr. Broderick

I may take up that point later.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Is not that the law of the land?

Mr. Broderick

You have put a question to me which I should prefer not to answer.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I am sure you would.

Mr. Broderick

It constitutes another day's work.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Is not the Minister for Finance bound to see that the Guarantee Fund is protected?

Mr. Brennan

Under what Act?

Mr. Broderick

I may refer to that point cursorily later. The Minister who has primary responsibility for the administration of local services, the Minister on whom the welfare of the ordinary person in the country depends, the Minister who is responsible for the maintenance of the services of public institutions, home assistance and so forth ought not to be dominated by mere questions of law when the maintenance of these services is at stake. The law is a very tight, hard thing and justice and equity, the welfare of the poor, the payment of the workers on the roads and the maintenance of public institutions ought to be far more important than points of law.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Remember that in County Cork and pay your rates.

Mr. Broderick

I think that the Minister is taking up an aggressive attitude towards me and, candidly, I welcome it. I am not the least intimidated by an attitude of that kind. The Minister should remember that he and I will have to appear before the court of public opinion on the issue of the maintenance of those institutions on which the welfare of this State depends. The Government admit that the welfare of the State depends upon them. If the Minister chooses to be hide-bound by the letter of the law and does not use his powers to try to mitigate the hardship in the case of these institutions, he must accept responsibility for what will follow.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I will see that the rates will be paid in County Cork as well as everywhere else.

Mr. Broderick

I do not think that I or anybody associated with me can be accused of not complying with the law as regards the payment of rates.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Not the Deputy.

Mr. Broderick

From the first, I have held that not alone was it bad policy but bad tactics to adopt anything of that nature.

General Mulcahy

If you had the money to pay.

Mr. Broderick

I have seen no evidence anywhere in County Cork or in the other counties I travelled of a disposition not to pay rates. I have seen the very poorest men struggle in order to pay their rates. "Whatever about the annuities," they said, "we have got to pay our rates." There was an impulsive Irish feeling in favour of maintaining the people who were not able to maintain themselves. That feeling was not confined to Cork but was common to the State. Let me continue the case I was making. There was an increased liability on us for that year of £115,000. I admit that the first £56,000 could be foreseen, but the subsequent amount could not and no provision could be made for it. The county council was enabled to carry on only by the generosity of the bank in increasing their overdraft. I know that the Minister will point to the sum of £300,000, our share of which was £24,000. The Minister did not tell us that that £24,000 was in full and complete payment of the cumulative arrears of £63,000 and that we are to expect no more. That is the story of last year's activities.

What is before us this year? On Thursday last we got notification that we were to have deducted from us a sum of £118,000. I shall deal with that point briefly. Leaving aside for the moment the disastrous effects on the rates of the Minister's action in connection with the unpaid annuities, what is the position of the Guarantee Fund to which the Minister has referred? The Guarantee Fund, as its name implies, was created to repay out of moneys due to the local authorities the principal and interest on bonds held by people who advanced money to the Irish tenant farmer and thus enabled him to buy his land and become the owner of his farm. The Guarantee Fund was established for that purpose and no other. When that liability is publicly accepted by another authority, when the two things covered by the Guarantee Fund are being met by another authority and no other obligation is placed on that Guarantee Fund, I question the necessity for a Guarantee Fund at all. What was the Fund created for? To repay principal and interest on moneys advanced to the Irish farmer. That is being met by the British authorities, as has been publicly admitted. Therefore, the object of the Guarantee Fund ceases. Does the Minister accept that in answer to his question of a few moments ago? I go somewhat farther. When the liability which the Guarantee Fund was created to meet is met in the way I have described, it is doubtful whether there can be deductions for any other purpose. In my opinion, deductions for any other purpose are unjustifiable. The Minister's exercise of his power does not justify his action. But the Minister has not yet finished with us. For the conditions which have been brought about, the activities of the Minister are far more responsible than the activities of the non-paying ratepayer. The Minister sends us Orders by which we are compelled to repay certain borrowed moneys. We borrowed from the British Board of Works sums of money to build hospitals, cottages and similar structures. We have those buildings. In this case there can be no claim of inherited right, as in the case of the annuities. This was an ordinary contractual obligation between borrower and lender. We are now fulfilling our obligation. As the Minister knows, if we do not pay by a certain date, we are charged penal interest and even compound interest in respect of that penal interest. We transmit to the Minister £67,000 every year in this regard. Does the Minister transfer that money to the purpose for which it is owing? On what grounds does he hold it? As I said, there is no claim of inherited right in this case. It is an ordinary transaction between borrower and lender, but the Minister holds the money and uses it for Treasury purposes. If, in his opinion, it was not good tactics to transmit the money at the present time to the proper authority, surely, knowing our financially embarrassed position, he might have left it with us. What is the use of blaming the ratepayer when the Minister acts as he did in this case?

We hold that the least that might be expected from the Minister would be not to collect that money from us but, above and beyond all, we hold emphatically that the Ministry has no power to devote that money for purposes for which it was never intended. In many other ways, the Minister has increased our liabilities by indirect taxation, by Customs duties on medicines and requirements for hospitals and by the coal duty of 5/- per ton.

The Minister, in his late activities, by applying protection and by various subsidies is increasing the burden upon the ratepayers. Then his recent stamp duty is another imposition. All this goes to prove that by every means, such as the withholding our grants and compelling us to pay moneys which are devoted to other purposes than that for which they were intended, and by a load of indirect taxation the burden on the ratepayers is greatly increased. And although the burden of the local authorities was foreshadowed by the Minister for Lands on February 10th, the Minister for Finance must accept the premier responsibility. The Minister for Local Government and Public Health in his demands for increased services has contributed something; not much. I support the Minister when his demands are for services that are in the interests of the State. Considering the power of the ratepayers, I shall support him with that limitation. I say that he and his Department—I hope he will not take it in any offensive way—have my most sincere sympathy because the activities of the other Departments of the State are rendering his Department practically impossible to carry on. I would like to point out to the Minister, as he must be aware, that he has the premier responsibility for the welfare of the local authorities of the country. After all, we are one great unit of which the Minister and his Department are head. The people in the country are contributing to the work of his Department and the least we may look for is protection from the marauding excursions of the Minister for Finance.

The sum of £30,000 was deducted from our grants in 1933-34; £60,000 in 1934-35; and this year the estimate is £80,000. In his confusion and in his desire to protect himself the Minister for Finance has deducted these sums. What better proof could there be of the inability of the ratepayers to meet their obligations? These amounts which should have been paid to the local authorities were agreed to by all sections of the community and the Minister's own Department sanctioned them. What better proof could there be of the need for these grants than the acquiescence of the Minister and his Department and of every member of our County Council that these sums should be transferred? By his action he has himself agreed that the ratepayers are unable to meet their liabilities. I am aware that the Minister is going to give a supplementary grant of £30,000, little more than one half of a month's requirements. It will help, but it is very little, considering what the Minister for Finance has deducted in the last two years—practically £230,000.

Here is one of my principal reasons for supporting the motion before the House. The Minister is aware that when these grants are given they are applied altogether to agricultural land. When they are withdrawn the loss falls on the general body of the ratepayers. The people in an urban area are made liable for the unpaid rates and the unpaid annuities in the county. They have no redress at all. The taxpayer, even with the least bit of furniture, is liable to have it confiscated for a debt for which he is not liable. That is quite wrong. It is quite sufficient for the ratepayers to try to meet the obligations for which they are liable without having to pay the unpaid rates and annuities of other people.

As I said, one of the reasons why I support this motion is the utter helplessness of the local authorities to protect the ratepayers. I have dealt with the effect of the deductions made by the Minister for Finance from local authorities, and I have dealt a little with the efforts of the Minister for Local Government to deal with these matters. I do not want to deal with the general policy of the Minister in depriving people of the power to find redress. I confine myself merely to pointing out that the only answer we get from the Ministerial benches is their weakness to enforce the payment of rates and annuities. That is an exaggerated and indeed a nonsensical claim. All the evidence is to the contrary. The Government were presented with a petition and a resolution from my own County Council, moved and drafted by a supporter of the Ministry, bearing evidence of the admitted distress of the community. Even in the court yesterday a former Minister for Justice in the present Government bore testimony to the impoverished condition of the people. What further evidence is necessary?

What is the use in saying there is an organised attempt to withhold the payments of rates and annuities? I know there was some slight, despairing and futile efforts by some people to resist seeing the danger of their livelihood and the security of their families being swept away. These indiscretions gave the Ministry a kind of smoke screen to hide behind in order to cover up the disastrous effects of their own policy. One of the things that we get from the Government Benches when they try to explain away the position is that some people are trying to destroy the credit of this country. No man can destroy the credit of this country; no politician and no agitator can destroy the credit of this country. The credit of this country was built up by the generations that went before us, availing to the full of all the opportunities offered by external trade. The millions invested outside the country, the millions on deposit, the Savings Certificates all guarantee that, as a nation, small as we are, we stand unrivalled in the amount of our assets over liabilities, so do not hurl at us again the accusation that we destroyed the credit of the State. What we are doing is questioning the misery that has been brought on the country.

As to our internal welfare, there is the embarrassed position of local authorities, the uncertain position of everybody on whom the welfare of this State is built—farmers, business people and workers, and everybody who in any way contributes to the upkeep of the State. I do not want to develop that any further, but the Minister, the House and the country thoroughly understand the implication. Everybody on whom the State is built up is embarrassed. What is it to them individually—the credited position of the country I refer to? There is no use telling a business man who has no credit and who is being pressed by people who gave credit to him, that this country is a creditor country and there is no use in telling it to the unfortunate farmer who is bringing home his stock from the fair, with the sheriff waiting for him, and when he cannot get any credit or meet his liabilities. What does it matter to the worker of a local authority which cannot pay him whether the national budget is balanced or not? He knows that he cannot balance his own. Is there any necessity to deal with that any further? There is not a member of the House, no matter on what bench he sits, who is not as well aware of the facts as I am and who could not tell harrowing incidents as well as I could. Why then cover it up?

Up to the year 1922 there were no deductions from the agricultural grant. From 1922 to 1932 the amount deducted from my county in respect of unpaid annuities was £13,000. In the last two years the Minister has deducted £164,000. There is not a representative of a local authority on any of the benches who is not aware of the impending collapse of local authorities through the activities of the Minister for Finance and the inability of the ratepayers in present circumstances to carry the burden. Every one of them, it matters not on what bench he sits, will appear before the investigation committees now being got up in every local authority to appeal for mercy for people unable to pay their rates. It is quite evident and everybody knows it.

It is only a few short months ago since they all—we all, if you like, and I am one of them—appealed to the electors for a mandate to preserve the public services which they require and to preserve the institutions they require. I challenge any one of them to deny that in present circumstances these institutions cannot be helped and I put it to them: Are they now going to repudiate the undertakings they gave to the electors or are they going to bring pressure to bear on the Minister to give the necessary finances to maintain those local authorities? I do not wish to delay too long, but as I see the position and from the figures of deductions which I have given—and I submit no one can challenge the figures—the Minister has three courses open to him. The first is to accept the motion. The second course is the course in respect of which I appeal to the representatives of local authorities who got the confidence of the people in their efforts to preserve the services essential to a civilised State, to bring pressure to bear on the Minister, so that, if he cannot see his way to accept the motion, he will refund the entire grants due to us.

The Minister, with as intimate a knowledge as any man in this House can claim, with as keen an association with, and as active an interest in, local government, knows that I have given unstintingly of all I was capable for eight or nine years, since the new state of things arose in this country, and I did it for one reason—I could not stand under the accusation levelled by others that we were unable to govern ourselves. I said that it did not suit me to be in public life. Politics had no attraction for me, but the honour of my country appealed to me and when it was hurled at us that we were unable to legislate for or govern our country, I said: "It is clearly my duty to go in and do what I possibly can." The Minister knows well that, for eight years, I have given unremitting attention and I point out to him now, with this knowledge, that there are three courses open to him—acceptance of this motion, returning to us our grants or the total collapse of the Ministry and the public services committed to his care.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I am very interested to hear the speech of Deputy Broderick. I believe that Deputy Broderick has, as he has told us, given of the best of his intelligence and energy in the service of local government in the country. I believe that, in his native county of Cork, he is looked up to rightly as a man who is a good citizen, who takes his share of the responsibility that falls to one elected to the very important and responsible position of Chairman of the Cork County Council and who carries that responsibility not lightly and does his duty by the citizens and by his council. I am very sorry indeed that he runs away so readily from his own signature to the report of the Derating Commission.

Mr. O'Donovan

He has not done it.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

He has done it. I am not going to be interrupted.

Mr. Broderick

I do not like to interrupt the Minister.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

He has run away, with all the speed of which a man of his weight and years is capable, from his own signature to the report of the commission that sat for a long time to investigate local government in all its aspects and, as he has just told us, decided unanimously against complete derating. Deputy Broderick agreed on behalf of the County Cork and the farmers of County Cork included most of the ratepayers in that county. Now, he comes here to tell us that we must derate, knowing, as he does know better than most people and better probably than most people in this House, because of his intimate knowledge of local affairs, that if complete derating is to be adopted as a principle in this country, it would end the system of local government, as we know it. The Deputy knows that as I do.

Mr. Broderick

The Minister must forgive me for a moment.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

For what?

Mr. Broderick

Because what I have said has reference to the one year, 1934-35. I regret that the exceptional circumstances of the moment demand it, but as a policy of derating of national implications, I am totally opposed to it.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy is not as soft as he would like us to believe he is. Imagine this House agreeing to complete derating for one year and then attempting to impose rates afterwards ! The Deputy comes from the County Cork and they are not all amadáns that come from there.

Mr. Broderick

I do not think so.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

And though I only come from the City of Dublin I am not such an amadán either, as to agree that once complete derating was adopted, it could ever be gone back of. The Deputy does not believe that it could.

Mr. Broderick

No, I do not, but I would prefer the second alternative.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy asked for derating for one year with the knowledge that rates could not be reimposed after. A couple of years ago the Deputy signed a report recommending that we should not have derating. What attention can we pay to the words of wisdom that have fallen from Deputy Broderick after displaying such a reversal of opinion and making such a complete somersault?

Mr. Broderick

I want to point out that the Minister is misrepresenting me.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy will have plenty of opportunity to explain that at his leisure. He has made as good a somersault as I have ever seen made in public.

Mr. Bennett

Not as good a somersault as the Minister made.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I should be glad to hear what somersault I made. I suppose some of the Deputies here read the report of the Derating Commission. Some Deputies, at all events have read it, and any Deputy who has not, and wishes to do so now, will find the name of Deputy W.J. Broderick to it. There was a considerable number of farmers representative mostly of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party on that Commission. These were men who were backers of the Cumann na nGaedheal Government, and they gave very solid reasons why there should not be derating. They were people with long experience, some of them longer than Deputy Broderick's; they were men with a knowledge of local government. There were others who dealt with the matter from other aspects—from the point of view of the central Government and from the point of view of the central finances in a national way, and they all agreed that complete derating would not be a good thing for this country.

Mr. Broderick

I agree with that still and I stand for that report still.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy does, as long as it suits him.

Mr. O'Donovan

What about the time when the Minister was for full derating?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

We have Deputy Broderick's statement to-night on this derating——

Mr. Broderick

I said for derating for the year 1934-35.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Now listen to me and take what is coming to you.

Mr. Broderick

Yes, but the Minister is completely misrepresenting my views.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Unless Deputies Curran and Broderick and others in this House want local government wiped off and done away with—that is what it means—they will not vote for derating. Complete derating would mean the end of local government. Anyone who wants the system of local government preserved as it is will certainly not impose by a vote of this House complete derating on the country, for complete derating would do away with local government.

Mr. Broderick

Give us back our grants and we will not look for it.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

What grants have been taken that have not been made up in other directions?

Mr. Broderick

What other directions?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Yes, in other directions. Many Deputies during the course of this debate have talked about these matters. We have had this subject debated in one form or another nearly every day on which this House has been sitting for the last two years. The economic war gives rise to a variety of discussions on every subject from derating down to——

General Mulcahy

Licences.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

That is one of the minor things that comes into it. We have had this derating on every occasion in the House and we know now fairly well what the mind of the House on this matter is. We all know this, that you cannot preserve the present system of local government if you have derating. I think that will be admitted by all. If complete derating is adopted the probability is that you would have everything directed from Dublin, from the headquarters here. You would have managers put in, you would have the county councils abolished and all the elected bodies would probably go. In every local authority you would have a manager. The boards of health and the committees of the mental hospitals would go, and so would all bodies like that.

A Deputy

A good many have gone already.

Mr. Broderick

Is not that contemplated?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Is that what the Deputy has in mind?

Mr. Broderick

That was advocated the other day from the Government Benches.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I have often heard it advocated in this House.

Mr. Broderick

The Minister asked just now what grant was stopped from the local authorities. I did not like to interrupt him but I would remind him that there was £246,000 difference in the grants as compared with last year. There was £246,000 less in grants this year.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Perhaps I interrupted the Deputy improperly and asked him a question about the Guarantee Fund. The Deputy knows that by law we are bound to keep that Guarantee Fund in existence and to see that it is kept in funds.

Mr. Brennan

Question.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Deputy Brennan knows the truth of what I say. Deputy Broderick talked about the Local Loans Fund and said that we had no inherited right to that money.

Mr. Broderick

That was not the point I was making.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I think I quoted the Deputy correctly.

Mr. Broderick

I said no such thing as the Minister is alleging. I said there was a question of confiscating the right to those moneys.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

We have inherited the right to the local loans and to all payments. We have inherited finances of various kinds. The Government set up here inherited all these loans and funds.

Mr. Broderick

The Minister and I are at cross purposes. I am not questioning that we inherited them at all.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

We inherited liabilities as well as the resources and we have challenged an authority across the water. We have challenged their right to certain of these funds. Certain others follow as a corollary and we are withholding them all.

Mr. Holohan

Are not they collecting them?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Will not that dummy please sit quiet? This House is open many days in the year and there is not one day that the Deputy cannot get up and make a speech. He had plenty of opportunities if he only had the wit to avail of them. We inherited that money with the liabilities. We took the two together and we will answer to the people who put us here in this House what we are to do with these moneys. At any rate, whatever moneys we get are being used for the benefit of every class in the community. They are not being sent to England. Is that what the Deputy wants us to do?

Mr. Broderick

No. It is quite clear to me——

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy has made goodness knows how many speeches. Perhaps he will give me a chance.

Mr. Broderick

I do not like the Minister to misrepresent me.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is not closing the debate and Deputies will have every opportunity of replying to the points he raises in the course of his speech.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy apparently does not want us to hold that money, he does not want us to collect it for our own use and, therefore, he wants us to hand it over to England.

Mr. Broderick

I want you to leave it where it is.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy does not want us to collect it and these people can escape their liabilities. Remember, there are liabilities there. The local authorities are liable for these payments; they must be paid; if they are not paid now or if they were not paid last year, do you think they would ever be collected again? The only thing I can take from the Deputy's statement is that he wants the money collected and handed over to England.

Mr. Broderick

I did not think the Minister would be capable of so much misrepresentation.

Mr. Belton

Sure England has got all the money she wants.

Mr. Brennan

And some thrown in.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Deputy Broderick also talked about increased services and the increasing cost.

Mr. Broderick

I said very little about them.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy mentioned that increased liabilities were put on the local authorities by the Minister. With regard to that, I will say that as Minister for Local Government and Public Health I am bound to see that the local services are brought to the highest possible pitch of efficiency. Everywhere I speak I encourage local authorities to improve the local services, to instal everywhere they can proper water supplies, proper sewerage schemes in both town and country. I encourage them in every way, but the final word rests with the local authorities. If they wish to improve local services and have better public health services, they have the final word. If they do not send up schemes we cannot oblige them to do so. I have obliged them in some counties to appoint county medical officers of health. I plead guilty to that much. Certain counties have refused for a long time to appoint them. I am bound by law to see that these county medical officers of health are appointed.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

May I ask what have the county medical officers of health and their appointment got to do with the motion that is before the House?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Deputy Broderick said that the Minister was responsible for putting heavy additional expenses on the local authorities. One of the expenses is connected with the appointment of county medical officers of health.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

But their appointment has absolutely nothing to do with the motion before the House.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

There is another authority in a better position to decide that.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

There is another authority and that is the Chair.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Leas-Cheann Comhairle, and not the Deputy, thanks be to goodness. I am glad that there is somebody here to remind the Deputy of that.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is not developing any point as to the rights or wrongs of whether county medical officers of health should be appointed. The Minister has mentioned that their appointment involves extra expenditure on the rates.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

The motion sets out that during the entire period of the economic war there should be complete derating—not partial, but complete derating.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am aware of that.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I was not going to develop the subject at all with reference to the appointment of county medical officers of health. Evidently county medical officers of health are not an agreeable subject to the Deputy. Perhaps the county medical officer of health might find too many reasons if he were to look after the Deputy's constituency.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I can assure the Minister that my constituents are quite as healthy and perhaps more so than constituents in other places.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I am sorry that the constituency does not send more healthy-looking Deputies to represent it.

Mr. Holohan

The Minister must be proud of himself.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Not too proud. Anyhow, I have imposed that kind of extra expenditure on local authorities and I do not think that Deputy Broderick would object to that.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I must ask for a ruling.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I have already ruled that the Minister is not developing any point outside the terms of the motion.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Deputy Broderick said the farmers had suffered heavy losses. I agree that they have suffered some losses, and the men in the cattle trade have suffered grievous losses.

Mr. Fagan

It is time for you to admit that.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I have admitted that always. Does the Deputy say that I have ever said anything else?

Mr. Fagan

It has not been the Government policy to admit it.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Well now, talk to the Government.

Mr. Holohan

You have a chance of relieving us now.

Mr. Davin

The cattle dealers lost nothing.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Is not this true, that farmers all over the world have suffered grievously in the last four or five years?

Mr. Fagan

Our farmers have to meet the £6 a head.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Farmers everywhere have suffered grievously. I know some people who have suffered very much. In America, for instance, I know of one man who was a very wealthy man, probably wealthier than any farmer in this country, and to-day he is anything but well off. I am aware of very wealthy men who, five or six years ago, could have five or six motor-cars in their houses. To-day American agriculture is in such a state that these men are being put out on the doorstep.

Mr. O'Donovan

Is that the reason why you want to put us on the same level?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Is it not true that agriculture is going through a time of crisis everywhere?

Mr. Brennan

Which only aggravates our case all the more.

Mr. Belton

Does not the Minister admit that there is a time of crisis in agriculture and on top of that we have our economic war here. Our case presents many difficulties, more so than anywhere else.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Not more so. In no other country where there is a crisis in agriculture has more been done for the farmer in proportion to the resources of the nation than here. I defy contradiction on that.

Mr. Fagan

Well, I am prepared to contradict you.

Mr. Curran

I hope the Minister will be here to listen to the replies that will be made to his remarks.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I would love to be here to hear the replies and the foolish statements that will be made.

Mr. Fagan

If the Minister will come with me I will show him ample evidence of poverty as a result of the Government policy.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I think the Deputy comes from Westmeath. I was talking there to a parish priest a fortnight ago, a parish priest of one of the poorest parishes.

Mr. Fagan

Name the parish.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I will not; I do not want to drag the gentleman's name in. Anyway, I asked him about the condition of affairs in his district and he told me that he himself had lost money over cattle; he had lost money during the first year of the economic war, but he had bought cattle last year much cheaper and was able to make a profit —not much of a profit. He is a poor man. He has a poor parish and would not have many cattle.

Mr. Anthony

Well, Minister, I never heard of a poor parish priest yet.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

We know the generosity of the people of County Cork, and therefore I suppose there are none of them in the Deputy's area; but I have met a few. Anyhow, this gentleman told me that in a fortnight £10,000 were collected in the town of Mullingar, a great cattle centre, for the cathedral fund. In the last couple of months £10,000 were collected. Congratulations to Mullingar. I am delighted they subscribed so generously for such a good purpose.

Mr. Bennett

Was money collected from the farmers?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Yes, certainly. Will Deputy Fagan deny that statement? Will he deny that £4,000 were collected in Navan, another good cattle centre?

Mr. O'Donovan

Surely the Minister is not going to bring collections for a cathedral into a motion dealing with derating?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

In the town of Mullingar, in one of the biggest cattle centres of the country, they made a collection and in a few weeks during this last winter, £30,000 were collected in that neighbourhood for the cathedral fund.

Mr. Bennett

A great tribute to the Faith.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

A great tribute to the people, unquestionably. I am glad they had the money to do it.

Mr. Bennett

With all their poverty they found the money.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I am glad they found the money and I hope they will double their subscriptions.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I think the Minister ought to be allowed to make his speech without interruption. The Minister is not closing the debate and several Deputies who are interrupting have not yet spoken. They will have an opportunity of speaking later and, if they so desire, controverting what the Minister says.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I am glad the Deputy's constituency did so well and was so generous. Yet these same people come up here telling us they are "broke."

Mr. Fagan

Will you come down there with me for a week and I will show you the conditions there?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I know the constituency as well as the Deputy—I am often in it.

Mr. Fagan

Will you come down to the barracks at Mullingar and see what takes place there?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I am often in the county, but not in the Deputy's company. I hope the Deputy subscribed generously to the Cathedral Fund.

Mr. Fagan

I gave £5.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Is that all you gave?

Mr. Fagan

I am not ashamed to say it.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

You ought to.

Mr. Belton

The Minister gave more than that.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Easily more. I say that a great deal more has been done for depressed agriculture in this country than in a good many countries which I know of where agriculture is also depressed. I shall read out some of the things done.

Mr. Belton

Will you read both sides of the account?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I shall leave that to the Deputy.

Mr. Belton

I have already spoken and I am sorry I cannot speak after you.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I know the Deputy has a very lively imagination.

Mr. Belton

It is not imagination. I did not think the Minister was capable of such high flights as he took to-night.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Arrears of annuities were funded to the tune of about £4,000,000.

Mr. Belton

They will have to be paid later on.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Undoubtedly, the liability is there, but it helped.

Mr. Belton

The local authorities have paid them already.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The funding of the arrears helped those who were in difficulties over a troublesome time.

Mr. Fagan

Those people never paid anyone.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy says they never paid anybody. That is a nice implication to make with regard to the farmers.

Mr. Fagan

Those whose arrears were funded were the wasters.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Deputy Broderick earlier to-night said that the farmers always paid their way—every one of them.

Mr. Fagan

So they did when they were able.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Now the Deputy says they were wasters to the tune of £4,000,000. That is what the Deputy thinks of the farmers of Westmeath.

Mr. Fagan

It is not.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The bounties on agricultural produce this year will cost over £3,000,000.

Mr. Belton

And the British will collect £4,500,000.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The bounties will cost £3,150,000. Is that going to agriculture?

Mr. Fagan

It is going to Germany.

Mr. Belton

It does not meet what the British are collecting.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

It is coming out of the National Exchequer and will go to the farmers.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Belton made a speech already and that ought to be good enough for him.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I do not mind him.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

But I do.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

£800,000 is going to beet sugar by way of subsidy. That is also going to the farmers.

Mr. Fagan

Not in Westmeath.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

It is going to the farmers somewhere, if not in Westmeath.

Mr. Davin

The Deputy does not grow beet.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

He produces bullocks, and that is all. That is what has him as he is—always grumbling.

Mr. Fagan

I grow everything that an agriculturist should grow.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

What about tilling the soil?

Mr. Fagan

I till as much as anybody here, and always did.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

How many acres do you plough in the year?

Mr. Fagan

Thirty acres.

Mr. Curran

That is not relevant.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

It may be an awkward question.

Mr. Holohan

It would be an awkward question for the Minister to answer if he were asked.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Out of the Butter Stabilisation Fund over £1,000,000 goes back to the farming community.

Mr. Brennan

Is not that from a levy on butter?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Partly, but it goes into the agriculturist's pocket.

Mr. Curran

What comes out of his pocket?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Some of it does.

Mr. Curran

One and a quarter millions comes out of his pocket.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

One million, one hundred thousand goes to the farming community from it. The wheat bounty this year will cost about £200,000. Does not that go to agriculture? None of it comes to the City of Dublin. Since the passing of the 1932 Act by this Government, an additional £750,000 yearly is being paid in old age pensions, most of which goes to the rural community. Is that denied? Unemployment assistance is going to cost far more than was at first anticipated. It will probably cost over £1,500,000 this year.

Mr. Fagan

To demoralise the people.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

It would be difficult to calculate how much of that goes to the farming community, but about 50,000 people in the rural areas are getting some of that money. I have put down £750,000 for that. In minor relief schemes, £250,000 will be spent this year and that goes to the rural community in one form or another. Then the halving of the land annuities means that £1,800,000 is saved to the farming community.

Mr. Belton

The British tell us that they collected them.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Was not £1,860,000 saved to the farmers on that score?

Mr. Belton

I am surprised at an exmember of the Dublin Corporation saying that.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

In addition, a sum of £700,000 roughly was given in housing grants. I do not know what percentage of that went to the rural areas.

Mr. Belton

80 per cent of it went to the City of Dublin.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

No. A very big percentage of it went to the rural areas. I shall give the Deputy the figures as to house building in the rural areas and he will see what percentage goes there. I am not going to include that, however.

Mr. Belton

I shall deal with that under the Local Government Estimate.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Then £100,000 has been spent on the free milk scheme. I will not include these. Leaving out the housing grants, of which a considerable amount goes to the rural community, I make out that a sum of £8,800,000 has been provided for the rural community during the last year out of the national Exchequer in one way or another under the items I have given.

Dr. O'Higgins

I think they can all retire.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

There has been a great deal more done for the agricultural community than has been done for the poor in the cities and towns— considerably more. Deputy McGovern gave us figures the other night. I could not hear him very well, but may be that was not his fault. I could not make head or tail of how he made up his figures, but the impression I got was that they were like the kind of puzzle or riddle that used to be given to us when we were schoolboys: "Think of a number, double it, take your first thoughts away from it, and I will give you your answer."

Mr. Belton

You never forgot it.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I did not. I have a good memory.

Mr. Belton

You have been at it all the time.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

As far as I could see, there was absolutely no foundation or basis for any set of figures I heard him read the other night. As I said earlier, I admit that the prices of cattle and the difficulty of getting rid of the stock on the land are problems. They are problems for those who devote themselves to the rearing of cattle and of cattle only. It means that they find themselves in difficulties; but, on the other hand, those who go in for tillage, and those who in the last year have been rearing pigs, poultry and sheep, growing wheat, oats and other cereals, have not found themselves in a difficulty at all compared with those who might, I think, without disrespect, be called nowadays stick-in-the-mud cattle men.

Mr. Fagan

Give us your alternative to it. We can have nothing in Westmeath but cattle.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

There is enough money in the town of Mullingar to start an industry. Deputy Fagan knows there is plenty of money in the town and district and the people should be able to come forward with some practical suggestions for starting an industry themselves.

Mr. Fagan

So we have.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

It has not materialised then, but it is not due to any fault of the Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Mr. Fagan

It must be somebody's fault.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Come along with some practical suggestion. The Deputy or anybody coming along with a certain amount of capital and with some practical suggestion for starting an industry will get a warm welcome and a sympathetic hearing. Much play was made by Deputy O'Higgins, Deputy Brennan and one or two others on the subject of speeches made by President de Valera during the general election campaign in 1932. They quoted statements made by the President, if I remember aright, in Kells and in Newcastle West in the early part of 1932, and they read into those statements a definite promise of derating. I heard the statements read by Deputy O'Higgins which were made by the President at Kells and Newcastle West, and I say in neither case did Deputy de Valera, as he was then, promise derating. He did say that with that money we could derate.

Deputies

Oh!

Donnchadh Ua Briain

That is what he said in Newcastle West.

Dr. O'Higgins

With the Minister's permission, might I ask this question: has the Minister read, or has his attention been called to, a speech made by President de Valera at the fair of Athy during that general election in which he used the words: "We can and we will"?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Has the Deputy got the quotation?

Mr. O'Higgins

I have not got it, but I can produce it.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

If the Deputy had that the other night he would have read it.

Mr. Brennan

We had the one from Kells and the one from Newcastle West.

Dr. O'Higgins

I think the speeches at Kells and at Newcastle are just as explicit.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

No, they are not.

Dr. O'Higgins

Will the Minister read them to the House?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I have not got them.

Mr. Brennan

I quoted a speech in which the President used the words: "We have definitely promised derating." I will get the quotation.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

All right. There will be plenty of time later on.

Mr. Brennan

There will be lots of people to follow you.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I am delighted to hear it. Some of the gentlemen over there do not speak very often. What I was going to say is that there was read into those speeches a definite promise of derating. There was no such definite promise of derating.

Deputies

There was.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

No. The President said that we could, with £2,000,000 of that money, derate agricultural land.

Dr. O'Higgins

What did he want them to think? Was he making an idle statement?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

He said they could derate agricultural land, but he did not say "We will derate agricultural land."

Dr. O'Higgins

What was the listener to think?

Mr. Smith

He could think what he liked.

Dr. O'Higgins

He thought what he was meant to think.

Mr. Smith

Yes, and we won.

Dr. O'Higgins

Of course you won.

Mr. Brennan

You "codded" the people.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Deputy Brennan says that it was "codding" the people. Well, we did not promise them a remission of half the land annuities.

Mr. O'Donovan

You promised them the whole hog.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The President said we could derate agricultural land. We could have derated agricultural land for a sum of £1,200,000 for that year, so that if we were kept strictly to that, we could have got away with giving £1,200,000 of the land annuity money for derating.

Mr. Belton

That would not cover it.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

It would cover the derating of agricultural land in 1932-33—a sum of £1,260,000. Instead of that we gave £1,860,000 by remitting half the land annuities. That was not promised or pledged and it certainly more than justified the promise he gave. He did not give any promise about the land annuities.

Mr. O'Donovan

Britain is collecting the land annuities.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Do not run away on that statement like Deputy Broderick ran away to-night.

Mr. Broderick

I am sorry you think so.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I was glad to see that the Deputy was able to make such a complete get-away.

Mr. Broderick

It is the Minister who is running away from the case I made. I have fought to-night for one thing only—the safeguarding and the protection of the social services, and the Minister is not making any attempt to come to the relief of the people who are unable to carry them.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I have read out a list showing that close on £9,000,000 has come out of the National Exchequer from the people's pockets——

Mr. O'Donovan

Where does the National Exchequer get it?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

From the taxpayer.

Mr. O'Donovan

Who is the taxpayer?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

You, if you have paid your taxes, and the rest of us. That is where it comes from. Where else does the Deputy think it comes from? I think there is too much talk of defeatism from members of local authorities. There is too much of a defeatist attitude. They want to give the impression that this country is beaten and cannot stand up, that it cannot continue the struggle that has been made, is being made and will continue to be made. This same issue, all this same fight, was carried to the electors in the local elections of last year. Every Deputy who has spoken, and, presumably, all the others who will speak, went before the farming community in the local elections last year, and you got your answer. If the farmers of the country had not backed Fianna Fáil, we would not have got a majority, as we did get, in counties in which we never had a majority before. Is not that correct? I know that we did not get a majority in County Cork, but we got a majority in many other counties where we did not have a majority before.

Mr. Holohan

You got it on false promises.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The people had seen us in action for two or three years.

Mr. Holohan

They saw enough of your actions.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I know that the Deputy does not think very much of our actions. But the fact remains that we got the majority. The Deputy did his best in Kilkenny. He refused to pay his land annuities and his rates; he let his cattle be seized.

Mr. Holohan

I always paid my land annuities.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy fought to down the country and to hand it back to England. The Deputy will do his damnedest in that direction and to see that the money goes to England.

Mr. Holohan

It is the farmers who are suffering.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The farmers are the best judges.

Mr. Holohan

You will get your answer in Kilkenny.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

We asked for it last June, and you know the answer we got. That was the time when Deputies on the opposite benches clamoured for the local elections and said that we would be kicked out of office. What happened in County Kilkenny? The Deputy knows well to his cost.

Mr. Holohan

What happened?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

What happened in 15 or 16 counties was that we got a majority, and in some of these counties we never had a majority before. We would not have got that majority without the backing of the farmers. The Deputy tells us here that the farmers are the vast bulk of the people.

Mr. Holohan

Were they not promised derating at that time?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

No, they were not promised derating at that time. In last June they had had more than two years' experience of Fianna Fáil. And just as they gave us a return with an increased majority in the general election of 1933, so did they give us an increased majority in the local elections in June. And they gave us that increased majority after all the clamouring from the opposite benches urging us to face the people in the local elections. Deputies opposite were terribly anxious that we should face the electorate before all the people could get an opportunity of voting—before the Bill which has just now been passed could come into operation, the Bill giving all the people power to vote in local as well as Parliamentary elections. The last election was fought on a restricted franchise, and I hope you are happy about the result. I know that the rates position is not as good as it might be.

Mr. Kelly

Oh, I do not think so.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The rates position is not as good as it might be, but a lot of that is due to people like some of the Deputies opposite.

Mr. Holohan

The people are not able to pay.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy who speaks is well able to pay, but he did not pay until he was made pay. The Deputy, I think, has eight or nine holdings of land in County Kilkenny. He is a wealthy man.

Mr. Holohan

Not wealthy at all.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

He is a wealthy man and with plenty of stock of every kind on his land.

Mr. Holohan

What good are they now?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy probably tills some of his land also.

Mr. Holohan

I know I do.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

If he does till his land, he is well paid for it. However, he did not pay his rates or his annuities until he was made to pay them. If the Deputy had his way we would be in sore straits in this country. If the Kilkenny people followed his advice, they would be in a bad way.

Mr. Holohan

On a point of order, Sir, the Minister stated here that I would not pay my land annuities or rates.

An Ceann Comhairle

It is not a point of order, but if the Minister gives way I shall allow it.

Mr. Holohan

I shall try to make my statement as short as possible. Last year I sold 45 cattle and paid to the British Government £4 a head, taking the bounties and so on into consideration. That would be £180. My land annuities and rates put together would not come to that amount. The Minister made reference to tillage. I have 60 acres of tillage and I employ about seven men. The Minister says that I refused to pay rates or land annuities. I did not refuse to pay either, but the situation in the country is so bad that I stood loyally with the farmers who were in a position to put up a case to the Government for the unfortunate people who were not able to pay. I want to make it very clear that the majority of the farmers are not able to meet their liabilities and to pay their annuities or rates. That is not their fault. It is the fault of the Government. I will leave it at that.

Mr. Gibbons

Might I ask the Deputy, were not all these people who followed his example able to pay their rates afterwards?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Deputy Holohan has proved my case—that he was able to pay and would not pay.

Mr. Holohan

I said no such thing.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy says that he stood by the people. He stood by the people who wanted to smash local government in the country and to deprive roadworkers of their pay and to deprive the local authorities of the money to carry on their services. He did everything he could, by making speeches and encouraging these people, to smash local government.

Mr. Holohan

Do not be trying to make a wrong case here in this House. The people know what is wrong.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

What the Deputy was after was the playing of a political game. He does not want this Government in office and he would go to any extreme, even to the smashing of local services in the country, in order to drive the Government out.

Mr. Holohan

I do not care what Government you have in office.

Interruptions.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Smith

The Deputy was a leader down there.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

He was leading the people there with the object of driving the Government out.

Mr. Holohan

What I did I would do at any time, and I am not ashamed of it.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy ought to be ashamed of not paying for the local services he gets. The local services you get in Kilkenny are worth paying for, and the Deputy did a very wrong thing in urging the people not to pay their annuities.

Mr. Holohan

I did not.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I move that the debate be adjourned.

Debate adjourned.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. Thursday, 7th March.