It is proposed to take the business as on the Order Paper, No. 2 (Votes 32 to 40, and Votes 61, 62, 63 and 64, in that order), then Nos. 1 and 3.
Order of Business.
Might I ask if it is the intention of the Taoiseach or of any member of the Government, before we adjourn this week, to make a statement to the Dáil with regard to the particularly critical position of transport in the country? I made that request privately, and I was informed that it was not so intended. I am putting up the request again to the Government now, and my reason for doing so is that there is a considerable amount of public uneasiness, and questions are being addressed to each one of us as Deputies. It seems rather a belittling of Parliament that Deputies have to say to their constituents: "We do not know anything about it; we have not heard anything about it." It could justly be said that the conveyance of passengers, goods, stock, etc., is a national matter which should be considered by Parliament rather than by a transport company. If there is anything embarrassing in the request I am perfectly prepared to postpone it, but I think a crisis of this kind—which is second only to an invasion—should receive some consideration in the national Parliament, and that some statement with regard to our proposals or plans for carrying on the feeding of the cities and the trade of the country should be made to Parliament at some point. I repeat the request.
It is not intended to make a statement. I should make it clear, however, that any question relating to a specific aspect of the transport problem which had been tabled in the ordinary way would have been answered in so far as it was possible to give an answer. If no such question was asked, the Government cannot be held responsible. I doubt that it would be possible to make a statement which would be sufficiently informative to meet the wishes of the Dáil at the present time. In fact, the Government could add little to the information already published in the newspapers as to the curtailment of transport which circumstances have forced upon us. I do not think any more specific statement could be made at the present time. The situation is so uncertain as to make it impossible to give anything like a definite forecast.
But does the Minister realise that this kind of silence begets all sorts of odd rumours? We get perfectly reasonable people coming up and asking whether everybody in a certain town is going to starve— whether any supplies will be brought in to them. Those of us who are moderately informed, of course, know that, in so far as the resources of the State can prevent it, nobody is going to starve, but all that kind of uneasy talk could be stopped if the Minister made a considered statement, even though the burden of the statement was to the effect: "All I can forecast at present is for a week, but there is no more coal coming in, and we shall have to do the best we can on the basis of no coal," and telling us how he proposes to use the output of the Kilkenny collieries and such other collieries as we have and what plans he has in mind. Nobody expects him to forecast with accuracy what is going to happen. Everybody appreciates the magnitude of his difficulties and the great difficulty of making any reliable forecast, but any statement is better than uncertainty, and the present situation is that nobody knows the full nature of the Minister's difficulties. I urge strongly that, before the House adjourns, even if it be no more than a full exposé of the difficulties which confront him and the very limited resources he has at his disposal to meet them, he should make some authoritative pronouncement to which people could point in order to allay public malaise, in so far as it may be allayed.
We would like to know, for instance, if the Government was consulted with regard to the new programme of the railways. We should like to know also whether the Government was consulted as to the degree of preference to be given to certain classes of people and goods.
So far as the railway services are concerned, the Government was fully consulted as to the curtailments which would be necessitated by the diminution in coal deliveries to the railway company. So far as priorities in respect of railway traffic are concerned, the company has for some years past been working under Government directions and it is not proposed to alter that position. The company carries on under Government orders in respect of the classes of traffic to which it gives preference. In reply to what Deputy Dillon has said, frankly, the position is so uncertain that a definite statement could not be made at present.
Take this case. The railway company—the railway company, mark you; not the Government —published an announcement in the papers that they proposed to close down certain branch lines. Has the Government been consulted as to whether some of these branch lines might not be maintained with local supplies of fuel which are available at the railway and which can never be transported to the central pool in Dublin? There are a variety of matters of that kind on which it would do no harm to permit discussion, even if at this stage no alteration were intended; but if everybody is required to sit silent, a great deal of unnecessary discontent and misunderstanding will be created. If the Minister has nothing to say, at least let him provide an occasion on which those of us who have grievances or difficulties which we would like to bring to the attention of the Government in an orderly way may give expression to them. Let the Minister then say whatever he wants to say about them, so that our differences may be settled reasonably, moderately and in a constitutional way.
Will areas which have been cut off from rail connection, so far as goods services are concerned, be served by road transport from the nearest station?
They will.
I have in mind the town of Borris, which is eight miles from the nearest station. The people of that town are in a terrible way as to where they are to get their goods.
I should like to call the attention of the Minister to one matter which appears to be of importance with regard to priorities for goods traffic. The Minister says that the system has been in being for a considerable length of time. We are now facing a situation in which there will be rail passenger traffic only on two days per week, and it would appear to me to be obvious that there must be one system of priorities with regard to passenger traffic. In the public notice, the only condition laid down is that seven days' notice of intention to travel must be given. People engaged in work of national importance may happen to be just the very people left behind. Surely pleasure travelling and all such travelling should be completely wiped out, unless and until there is spare accommodation to carry such people? Those engaged in trade, in professional work, in official work and in Parliamentary work should have priority. These are the kinds of points which will arise in a sensible discussion of the situation by people's representatives rather than by a transport company.
With regard to replacing the closed lines by bus or other forms of road transport, I saw that that replacement of train by bus transport was specifically mentioned in respect of certain lines, but, in respect of the Portlaoighise-Mountmellick line, there was no mention of an alternative bus transport system. With regard to what Deputy Dillon has said about keeping trains going on local fuel, that particular train runs its five-mile journey through a turf bog and it should be possible to keep that line going.
Deputies will realise that if we discuss every line which it is proposed to close there will be a debate instead of a request for a debate.
Surely it is a matter about which Parliament is concerned?
Quite, but there is no motion before the House. The Deputy was within his rights in raising the matter.
A request that it be put before the House.
I think that it will be possible to have arrangements made to ensure that train accommodation will be available for Deputies attending meetings of the Dáil. I think, however, that anybody who gives consideration to the matter will realise that the institution of any form of traffic priorities for passenger trains would involve an inquisition into the affairs of individual people by officials of the Government or the railway company which it would be almost impossible to make effective and which probably would be resented in many cases. I assume that we could not base traffic priorities merely on the statement of individuals as to why it was necessary for them to travel and that their statements would have to be subjected to check. In view of the difficulties of instituting any such check and of making it effective, it will be obvious that very careful consideration would have to be given before restrictions of that kind were imposed.
Has that not been done already with regard to motor transport?
No.
You made full inquiries as to the purposes for which a car would be used, and, if the Minister did not consider the reasons sufficient, permission was withheld.
That is a very limited problem compared with rail travel.
Does all this not mean that we ought to have a discussion on it?
I urge the Minister to give serious consideration to the suggestion made by Deputy O'Higgins, that is, that whenever the adjournment of this week's sitting takes place, he should consider the advisability of taking the House and the country into his confidence rather than that semi-official statements should be published by somebody without any signature to substantiate what is stated in them. There is one thing which I thought peculiar, but for which there is probably an explanation, that is, why it has been decided —presumably, with the Minister's approval—to suspend the issue of return tickets. Is it proposed under this arrangement to let 300 or 400 commercial travellers, cattle dealers and people with urgent work to do in the country to go away with single tickets in their pockets, without knowing when, if ever, they will get back by rail again? That matter should get some serious consideration, and, for that reason, I was of the opinion that the decision might have been taken without due consideration. I realise the Minister's difficulties as well as anybody in the House, but I think the House should not be allowed to adjourn over the week-end without some information from the Minister, instead of information being sent out broadcast from some kind of semi-official source which cannot be relied on and which perhaps will be changed in the next day's paper.
We could give him a little information, too.
Mr. Byrne
I want to ask if it is not possible for the House to get an hour on the adjournment——
An hour?
Mr. Byrne
——or two hours, in order to draw attention to the transport position and the failure of coal supplies generally, especially in relation to the gas companies? The gas company is also in a deplorable position and there are thousands of people on the penny in the slot for cooking.
That is a different problem: transport.
Mr. A. Byrne
How am I to bring up the subject? Am I not permitted to ask that the position of the gas company be taken into consideration also?
No, it is a question of transport only.
Mr. A. Byrne
When the transport question has been dealt with will you allow me the opportunity to ask that question? May I point out——
That matter is quite irrelevant.
There was a substantial number of Parliamentary Questions tabled this week dealing with those matters and replies were given in full to them.
Mr. A. Byrne
The gas company——
The Deputy may not raise that question now.
Mr. A. Byrne
Will you give me permission to ask the Minister——?
Not now.
Mr. A. Byrne
I beg to give notice that on the adjournment of the House I intend to ask the Minister to deal with the Dublin Gas Company and coal supplies.
I wonder if the Minister would give an answer to this question. Is it proposed where towns are cut off that there will be road transport connecting them with the nearest railway station?
Yes. It is intended that where branch lines are closed facilities for the movement of passengers and goods into the towns serving those branch lines will be provided on the roads.
It is goods that I am concerned about just now.
Would the Minister consider providing some day this week to discuss the question?
I am afraid very much that any discussion on the general question would not be helpful at the present moment. If there are matters affecting the arrangements we have made to deal with the situation which Deputies may wish to discuss I suggest that it be done by Parliamentary question with a view to seeing whether they can in that way get the information which will satisfy them. I think it would be unwise at present to have a general discussion on the whole situation.
Could the Government not give any indication to the public as to what they ought to do? If a man leaves Cork now under the present arrangement he has no guarantee that he will get back within a month.
That is quite right.
That is a very unsatisfactory state of affairs.
Why let him out at all?
There has been a practice for some time of allowing a number of passengers to be carried on the train which leaves Cork at 9.15 and which is run for mails and goods. Will the practice of carrying passengers on that train be maintained?
As regards the order of business, it is not proposed to interrupt public business to take Private Members' business.