Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 24 May 1945

Vol. 97 No. 9

Committee on Finance. - Vote 31—Fisheries.

Minister for Agriculture (Dr. Ryan)

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £11,686 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1946, for Salaries and Expenses in connection with Sea and Inland Fisheries, including a Grant-in-Aid.

The gross total of this year's Fishery Estimate is £37,331, as against £38,271 for last year, a decrease of £940, but this year's receipts coming in as Appropriations-in-aid are estimated at £2,940 less than last year, so that the final result on the Estimate is a net increase of £2,000. As regards the items under Sea Fisheries, the E group of sub-heads shows little variation. Sub-head E (2) makes, in existing circumstances, only token provision for co-operation with the International Council for the Study of the Sea. Sub-head E (5) also consists of a token item.

Coming to the sub-heads which deal with inland fisheries, F (1) shows an increase of £175. The first and fifth items of this sub-head are closely related, due mainly to an increase in one of our commitments under the Fisheries (Tidal Waters) Acts. These Acts charge the Fisheries Vote with the recoupment of fishery rates lost to boards of conservators as a result of the Erne legal decision some ten years ago, which threw open to the public certain highly-valued tidal salmon fisheries up to then rated as privately-held fisheries. Sub-head F (2), which makes provision for salmon and trout hatchery operations, is increased by £265 this year, owing to the need for extensive repairs to the Department's hatchery at Glenties. Sub-head F (3) is increased by £175 to meet the cost of maintenance works at the State fishery on the Owenea River, Co. Donegal. The remaining sub-heads in the F group show the same provision as last year.

While on the subject of inland fisheries, I should like to refer to the outbreak of disease amongst the trout in the Liffey reservoir at Poulaphouca. The disease is due to an intestinal worm and has caused heavy mortality amongst the large stock of fish in the reservoir. The rapid growth of these trout, which occurred when the river basins of the Liffey and King's River were submerged, offered an exceptionally promising field for anglers, but the stock has now been greatly reduced, especially the older fish. The technical fisheries staff of my Department have been in close touch with the Electricity Supply Board and with the scientists who have been investigating the disease, and we are facilitating them as far as our resources allow. The future course of the epidemic cannot be predicted but there seems no reason to anticipate a widespread extension.

Passing on to the G sub-heads, which are concerned with the Sea Fisheries Association, sub-head G 1 has an increase of £600 as against last year, due to the emergency bonus awarded to the association's employees. Deputies will notice that under sub-head G 2 only £600 is provided as against £4,000 last year. That is because it is anticipated that it will be much more difficult to get equipment during the present year.

The receipts expected to come in as Appropriations-in-Aid show an increase of £150 on last year for letting of sporting rights, etc., on State properties. Item (5) for £7,000, in respect of repayment of State advances by the Sea Fisheries Association, is down by £3,000 on last year's figures. That is not to be taken as any indication that fishermen are in any worse position. The fact is that a great number of fishermen have repaid their loans completely and there are no instalments, therefore, due from them.

Deputies will be glad to hear that our sea fishing industry continues to do well. The quantity and value of the total catch in 1943 were satisfactory, but the figures for 1944 are still better. In 1943 the total catches were 277,000 cwt., and in 1944, 307,000 cwt. The value of the 1943 catch was £510,000, and of the 1944 catch, £513,000. That is for wet fish—everything except shell-fish. If the landings of shell-fish are included, the total for 1944 is £626,000 as compared with a total of £233,000 in 1939. That shows a very big increase in the earnings of fishermen, but I should not like Deputies to think that it is altogether due to increased prices. As a matter of fact, fishermen have been working hard and very effectively to supply the fish needs of the home market. The quantity went up from 172,000 cwt. in 1938 and 188,000 cwt. in 1939 to 307,000 cwt. in 1944. There was, therefore, a very considerable increase in the quantity of the landings and that increase, I may say, was very badly needed.

Certain Deputies will have seen from the balance sheet and yearly report of the Sea Fisheries Association that during the calendar year 1944 the members of the association brought in just four times the quantity landed by them during 1939 and that the amount disbursed to the members for the 1944 catch was exactly six times the amount paid out to them during 1939. The association continues to pay special attention to the needs of small holders—part-time fishermen—resident in the Gaeltacht for curraghs, trammel nets, mackerel nets, and gear for escallop dredging, etc. The experimental marketing of frozen escallops from the Connemara area, after these shellfish have been subjected to a special process, brought a considerable and very welcome addition to the earnings of the local fishermen who engage in the dredging of this shellfish. The directors referred to the great difficulties they have experienced and are experiencing in securing the machinery necessary to catch fish —engines, fishing nets, ropes, etc.—but we hope for better times.

I devoted a lot of time on the Vote for Agriculture to the question of postwar planning and I should like to say a few words with regard to our postwar plans for fisheries. One of the first problems is to define where we can fish, our exclusive fishing limits. We have never got an agreement with the various countries on what our exclusive fishing limits should be. We have some hopes of getting that matter fixed up with the various countries concerned. When that is done, the necessary by-laws will have to be made relating to trawling, etc. Our own men will know, at any rate, the waters in which they have an exclusive right, but then we must go further and protect them. That brings us to the question of the cruisers we had before the war commenced and which we handed over to Defence. These cruisers will, I presume, be available for protection but under what ownership I am not able to say at the moment. That will be a question for negotiation.

The further development of our inland fisheries will necessitate certain legislation. I think I told the Dáil before that we are having all the Acts from 1842 to 1944 consolidated. The draftsman is working on the measure at the moment and I hope it may come before the Dáil in due course, probably not this session but, I hope, next session. That, again, will be followed by further legislation in respect of any amendments that may be thought necessary. Then we will have one Act dealing with all questions relating to inland fisheries.

Arising out of the 1939 Act there are certain provisions to be implemented, for instance, the acquisition of estuarine and weir fisheries, the abolition of fresh-water netting, the restriction of estuarine netting by common law fishermen, the introduction of a brown trout licence, and some other minor matters. We will have some difficulty, as a matter of fact, with regard to staff. We have, as perhaps Deputies are aware, rather a small, but a specialised staff in the Department of Fisheries. We have been extremely unlucky in our staff arrangements. It will take some time before we can get going properly again.

During the emergency, scientific investigation of the sea has been practically suspended. This will be resumed, I hope, as soon as boats are allocated again for protection of fisheries. It was from these protection boats that this work was done. We must carry out a certain amount of investigation, and make a certain amount of returns. Otherwise, we cannot join in the advantages to be derived from the Council at Copenhagen, where various countries share their knowledge.

It is felt that young people who intend taking on fishing as a profession should get some elementary training which would fit them for that particular work. We hope it will be possible in certain technical schools near fishing centres to include in the curriculum the general principles of navigation, the elements of marine biology, some ideas of meteorology, the care and maintenance of marine motor engines, and the care of nets, with periodic lectures on sea fisheries of other countries, with particular reference to modern methods of fishing. This question, of course, will take some time, because we have to get agreement with the Minister for Education and, if the Minister agrees, we have to arrange where these courses will be given, and then, of course, we will have to arrange for the necessary teachers, and so on, that are capable of giving such lectures. But I think it will be possible to do something along that line.

We must continue then the study of the life-history and habits of our principal river fishes. In the Fisheries Act, 1939, provision is made for the acquisition by the Minister of a suitable river from source to mouth so that a thorough study can be made of the history of the salmon during its sojourn in fresh water.

The development of the shellfish industry is another matter calling for attention. The principal varieties of shellfish which we are concerned with are oysters, lobsters, escallops, mussels, periwinkles and cockles. They each will require some different treatment but, generally speaking, the development will consist in protection against immature fish being taken, reseeding of certain varieties, storage tanks in some cases, purification tanks in others, and the freezing of certain varieties before being sent to the market. When these measures are taken they should help to make more fish available for producers and thus create a better supply for consumption.

That deals with the provision of fish. The next thing is to give the fishermen a chance to get them. Boats and gear for inshore fishermen will be the points to be considered there. They will be the first necessity. Our present stocks, of course, are very low, but as soon as possible we mean to renew the fishermen's gear and get them fishing full time again. We had a number of firms in this country building boats but they have disappeared to a great extent. It would be a pity if we lost the art altogether; and my own feeling is that we must try to get the industry started here again. We know from experience that the inshore fishermen will not, or cannot, keep up a constant supply of fish of good variety. They will perhaps give you fish of a kind practically all the year round, but the inshore fishermen are not able to provide a fair variety and a good supply. It would be necessary, therefore, to have deep sea trawlers. If we intend to go out on the business of trawling, we should try to have good modern boats, probably Diesel engines, and so on. The big question to be considered is the management, ownership, and the type of fleet we might get going, but we certainly will have that question considered before the boats are available and then we will get them as soon as possible.

Even that may not give us enough fish. We have had the experience in the past that although we had inshore fishermen and trawlers, at times we wanted fish of a certain variety or had not enough fish of any kind and we had to import. We will have to consider fully our policy for importing fish when the war is over. We had a certain line laid down as a result of negotiations with Great Britain in 1938. Of course, that has disappeared now and we will have to negotiate some sort of agreement again.

We have to import fish at certain times and at other times, in fact maybe at the same time, we have to export fish, and we must make agreements as far as we can both on the import and export side. We have a fairly big export of salmon and we should like, if possible, to build up an export business in mackerel, herring, and so on. That may not be so easy. I pointed out the difficulties in that matter in answer to a Dáil question yesterday. At the present time the Minister for Food in Great Britain takes all the salmon we can give him. They are taken at a certain agreed price, which varies with the season. As long as that lasts, it suits us all right, but the Minister for Food may, possibly, at some time or another seek a new agreement.

It is a well-known fact that certain fishes come in large shoals at certain times, and one sees in the paper reports about fish being thrown back into the sea or being shovelled out to manure the gardens, and so on. It is a pity that these great supplies of fish should go to waste. We can deal with it to some extent in the future by cooling. There are two processes that we should distinguish between, cooling and cold storage. A big catch of fish might be made available for use over a week or 10 days by cooling, but if we want fish to last for very much longer than that it has to be cold stored. The Sea Fisheries Association have been experimenting with cooling, quick freezing and cold storage, and they have gained a certain amount of experience. Of course, experiments have also been carried out in other countries, of the results of which we have some knowledge here. There seems to be some future at any rate for these processes, and we must pursue our investigations as far as we can.

We are not a fish-eating people. There is a big consumption of fish on Friday and not so much on other days. Some people think that the reason is that we have not got sufficient fried fish shops, or, perhaps, they are not as good as they should be. We are considering regulations or, perhaps, legislation to deal with the fried fish shops. We want to improve them if we can and to see that they are run on proper lines so that when people go into a fried fish shop they will get a good meal and that it will not be too dear. It will not be the dear fish, but it should be good fish. We want to develop that as far as we can. Of course, in addition to providing these fish shops, not only in the cities, but in the inland towns also, we should try as far as we can to develop a sale of fish in the inland towns.

Then it is urged that we should engage in more publicity to advocate that people should eat more fish. I do not see that there is much object in that as long as we are importing fish. In so far as we increase the consumption here, we would be increasing our import. When we have built up our fisheries properly, and are producing a good supply ourselves, we might do some advertising in regard to the benefits of eating fish, and perhaps secure a higher consumption than we have at the moment.

Deputies will realise that I have given only a very sketchy outline of the various matters which have been under investigation by the Department of Fisheries for post-war operation. Of course, a number of those things will have to be very carefully considered yet. Some of them will require financing, and there may be some delay at any rate in convincing the Minister for Finance of their benefit. I think Deputies will agree generally with the outline I have given of those various matters.

Mr. McMenamin

The Minister told the House that Deputies would be glad to know that the fishing industry continues to do well. There is not much evidence of that in the provision for this year. He also read out a long statement with regard to post-war policy. The war in Europe is over, but there is no evidence in the Estimate that those things will be initiated this year. As a matter of fact, under Appropriations-in-Aid, there is no provision for the sale of even one boat for the current year. Certainly, that fits very badly into the hypothetical statement which the Minister has made. Of course, those hypothetical statements about what will be done post-war read quite well. The world was to be reformed in the post-war period. That period has arrived, and there is not the least evidence of any initiative at all with regard to this Department. The evidence which the Minister gave to show that the fishing industry is doing so well was that last year 307,000 cwts. of fish were landed. When we consider the coastline of this country, we should not be clapping ourselves on the back because we landed 307,000 cwts. of fish.

Dr. Ryan

That was by the members of the association only.

Mr. McMenamin

The pathetic position in this country, particularly during the war, was, that owing to the price of fish nobody, especially the poor people, could get near buying it. Yesterday we had two questions on the Order Paper addressed to the Minister with regard to the disposal of superfluous fish down in County Cork. One question was by the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, and the second by some other Deputy from that county. Is it not a remarkable thing that fish which was there in abundance, could not be sent to this city, or to the other towns in Ireland, in order to give everybody, and particularly the poor people, a chance of purchasing it, especially when we think, first, of the price of potatoes, and secondly, of the price of beef and mutton? I am not sure what answer the Minister gave to those questions, but I am wondering whether that superfluous fish was allowed to go to loss down there. Apparently, the trouble was that barrels could not be got to enable it to be salted. But it is not necessary to salt any fish in this country. I think all the fish landed could be sold in any day, or at least in any week, provided it could be cold stored for Friday. In the present week there are three fast days. But where is the fish? Where is the superfluous fish that was down in Cork last week? There is an ample market in this city for four or five times the amount of fish that is landed. I hope it was not another instance of what happened some four or five years ago when it was stated in this House, and not contradicted, that in order to rig the market fish were taken out to sea from the port here and either dumped or taken somewhere else. Surely, when there is such use, if not abuse, of emergency powers, some power should be used to prevent such a thing happening.

The Estimates for this year do not impress me at all. There is nothing to show that there is any initiative, or that any progress will be made on the lines indicated by the Minister in referring to the post-war period. With regard to the figure of £513,000 for wet fish landed last year, that is beside the question. The question is the weight. I do not know what is the reason for the continued stagnation in the fishing industry around the shores of this country. It cannot be claimed that there is an abundance of fish on the market at any time, because there is not a town in this country where a person could get anything like a reasonable supply of fish of any kind on practically any day of the week. In good sized towns, you could not buy enough fish for your dinner.

What is the meaning of all that stagnation? Is it that the fishermen are afraid that if they land too much fish there will be a slump in the price, and that they will suffer a loss? If that is so, I think when material becomes available steps should be taken, even by the Department, to set up a factory in this country for tinning fish. Yesterday, I got tinned herring from Canada for my dinner. Certainly, that is a sorry commentary. There is a surplus of fish in County Cork, but when a person sits down to his dinner here he finds that the only fish he can get is canned herring from Canada or from California or Alaska. Certainly, that is as big a joke as the provision I see in the Estimates for my old friend the Whale Fisheries Act, 1937. I see there is £5 down for expenses, and £5 under Appropriations-in-Aid. How is the whaling industry getting on? I do not see anything returned to Appropriations-in-Aid except this £5. Who got hold of the £5 worth of whale? I think that should be wiped out, instead of turning the whole thing into a joke. What was the £5 about? Is there somebody in this island who took out a licence or licences to fish whale? Have any licences been taken out since the passing of the Act in 1937? I thought the passing of that Act was a typical Irish joke. Has anything come of it? What is it all about? Has it been put into operation ever since? Has any protection been given to whales? Has something been done to ensure that no whales within the prescribed size were killed by our fishermen during those years, or was it left to the depth charges to blow them up? Were any precautions taken to protect from depth charges the whales within our territorial waters?

There is no use in talking about this Estimate as there is nothing in it. It does not lead anywhere; it does not give the slightest evidence of the putting into operation of the post-war policy indicated by the Minister. During the last five years, of course, we were governed by circumstances. The fishermen had to do the best they could in the circumstances obtaining. They were also restricted by the amount of fuel available. On many occasions they missed the fishing season, possibly through some fault of their own in not applying for the fuel or not filling up forms. Now that the war is over, however, we should take our courage in our hands and do something about the industry.

I do not want to develop this matter too far as it would take too long and would lead up to other problems, such as the employment problem. One cannot ignore the symptoms with regard to employment in the fishing areas. In the immediate future, some 150,000 of our men may return from England— and in the main they come from the fishing areas—plus some 200,000 of our young men who are in the various British services, the Air Force, the Army and the Navy, as well as those who are in the Six Counties. Then there are those in our own Army and in the emergency services. I think, therefore, it is incumbent on this House to take active steps in the matter.

I think it would be well-spent money to establish a canning factory in this country and, in conjunction with that, to establish some fast service by sea or land by which surplus fish in any district could be rushed immediately to the canning factory whilst it was in a fit condition. I think we should do something along these lines. Our whole marine products industry, carrageen, kelp and fishing, is in dire straits. All along the coast there seems to be no life in it. The people working in it do not seem to have any hope. They see no future in it; no hope for themselves and for their children. That is the future these people are looking forward to in a country with such a huge coastline.

I am certainly not impressed either by the Estimate or by the post-war policy of the Minister. The statement of the Minister was anything but inspiring. It certainly gave us little hope, having regard to the possibilities of the industry. This House should make some provision for employment for those people who will be clamouring for it. Some ten years ago I suggested that the Government should pay a flat rate of, say, £5 a ton, for kelp and put it into storage. All sections of this industry should be linked up. They should not be under two Departments. They all form one problem in which the same people are concerned. A house divided against itself cannot stand.

I regret the condition into which this whole marine industry has fallen. No vision has been displayed in regard to it and no direction exercised. I think something is expected from this House, because we have been jointly and severally responsible. So far as I am concerned, I feel like making an apology to the people who live in these coastal areas. We have given them very little ground for hope. Considering the large number of people resident in those areas, I think we should set up a committee of the House representative of all Parties to consider this matter and submit recommendations to the Minister. The various branches of the industry will have to be co-ordinated and put in charge of one man with commercial and organising capacity who will inspire confidence. Until that is done all the chopping and changing and cheeseparing are merely waste of time.

Mr. Healy

I was amazed to hear the last speaker say that this Government had done nothing for the fishing industry. They are doing and have done excellent work. The Deputy should remember that when his Party came into office they got the fishing industry in a flourishing condition and they gave no assistance to the industry, so that in 1930 the industry practically ceased to exist. Were it not for the assistance which the Government gave to the fishermen by supplying boats and gear they would not be in a position to avail of the last five prosperous years in the industry. I admit that this Government have not done as much as they should have done for the fishermen. I am satisfied that the present prosperity in the industry is due to war conditions. The question must be asked: how will the industry fare after the war? After a few years of good fishing and good returns, we will find that there will be a decline in the fortunes of the industry unless we adopt a new system of marketing and of preserving fish. I also admit that, if the industry is to be prosperous, we must export our surplus fish.

We must either find a market in foreign countries for it, or be in a position to preserve our surplus fish for the days of scarcity. I am aware that it is very easy to dispose of the prime fish in this country at the present time. I am sure that after the war we will have no difficulty in getting it absorbed by our local markets, as I believe that, instead of landings of prime fish increasing in this country, we will find that the landings by small trawlers will decrease. This will be due to over-fishing inside our territorial waters by foreign trawlers. The Government must make a serious effort to keep those trawlers outside our territorial waters if our inshore fishermen are to make a living.

I am quite in agreement with the Minister when he states that the area of our territorial waters must be extended. Several countries object to the limit of three miles, as it is obvious to anyone that that limit does not give inshore fishermen any protection. Prior to and during the last war, and for some years afterwards, the surplus mackerel and herrings in this country were cured, and we had a ready market for mackerel in America, and we had in Europe a market for herrings; but owing to the fact that the last Government did not give sufficient protection and assistance in the industry, we lost that entire market. That was a serious matter for the trade, as we had no means of disposing of the surplus fish. The British people did not require it, as their own trawlers were able to supply sufficient for their needs.

There are many people in this country—fishermen and private individuals—who have expended large sums of money on boats and gear, and they are very anxious as to the future. They trust that this Government will adopt some progressive policy and will improve on the old methods of curing and handling fish. The British Government realises there will be a great difficulty in disposing of herrings after this war, and for that reason, for some years, they have been considering carefully the quick-freezing of fish.

I should impress upon the Minister the necessity for considering this matter carefully and for seeing that it is considered by the association, so as to find out if the successful quick-freezing of herrings is a practical proposition. If the quick-freezing of fish is a practical proposition, it will probably be a solution of all the problems in the fish industry, and, so far as I can see, unless this quick-freezing of fish is a success, there is no future for the mackerel industry here.

I am disappointed to find that practically no research work is carried out in this country. I know that there was an official of the Sea Fisheries Association experimenting with the quick-freezing of shellfish and who made a success of it, but I believe that that official has not received the encouragement from the association that he should receive. That man should be given sufficient funds to continue the research work and also a larger number of scientists should be employed to deal with quick-freezing.

I am very disappointed to find that the Sea Fisheries Association has not made any effort to develop the home market. I agree with the last speaker when he states that very little fish is consumed in this country. I have no hesitation in saying that we should consume at least five or six times the present quantity. The association should take a lead in that matter, but so far they have not made any serious effort to do so. One of the reasons why fish is not consumed is that it is too dear. Last week in my own fishing port I saw mackerel bought for about a halfpenny each and was amazed to go into a restaurant not very far from Valentia Harbour and find that fried mackerel was being sold at 3/6. That should not be tolerated and there should be some restriction on that sort of conduct. I have always believed that there is too much difference between the price paid to the fisherman and the price paid by the consumer.

I heard the Minister state that it is intended to purchase a large number of trawlers after this war. I agree with that policy as if we have not up-to-date trawlers—trawlers which can go to sea in all weathers and which can go a good distance—it is obvious that we cannot have a continuous supply of fish. The Minister should purchase at least 10 or 12 big trawlers as soon as possible, and place them in certain ports along the coast. In that way we would have a continuous supply and an equal distribution of fish. If the question of quick-freezing is a success, we will always be able to keep up a steady supply, and there will be no necessity to import fish.

I admit that excellent work has been done by the association, but I think they could do much more for the industry than they are doing at the present time. For instance, they have made no effort to develop the home market or to procure a new market, and they have made no effort to improve on the old system of curing herrings and mackerel.

I was informed last year that the association exported prime fish. I would impress on the Minister that if the association had trouble in finding a market for prime fish, they could have got sale for that fish in this country and there would have been no necessity to export it. The association should not be allowed to engage in the export of fish, but should look after the interests of fishermen and leave the export in the hands of people familiar with it. I assure the Minister that if the Sea Fisheries Association embarks on the exporting of fish after this war, it will cost the country a very large sum of money in a short time.

I would also like to draw the Minister's attention to the fact that the Sea Fisheries Association is acting at present in a very unreasonable manner towards fishermen in regard to the supply of nets. I believe the association has refused now to give nets to fishermen who require them, unless they pay 50 per cent. of the cost. In my own constituency recently, a large number of fishermen lost many nets and the association refused to supply them without the 50 per cent. payment. Those men were compelled to go to merchants and borrow money to procure the nets. The Minister must remember that the association was set up to help the fishermen, and if that rule is persisted in it will mean that the wealthy fishermen or the lucky fishermen will have an advantage over his unfortunate brother.

Some time ago I raised in this House the question of the scarcity of cutch for the fishermen in South Kerry. I know it is difficult to get supplies, but the Minister for Supplies stated that the Sea Fisheries Association carried out research work and found that they could procure a substitute. Several people have approached me and told me that they wrote to the association, and were informed in reply that they could not supply the substitute. I would ask the Minister to try to get a supply of cutch for the fishermen as soon as possible, as the situation is very serious.

I would like to draw attention to the landing facilities at our chief ports. Certainly the landing facilities at the majority of our fishing ports are nothing short of a disgrace. Valentia Harbour is one of the most important mackerel fishing centres in the country, but we find there is only a small slip there, which was not intended for the landing of fish, but for the use of the people of Valentia Island when coming to the mainland. We find 50 local boats trying to land fish at that slip, and in a period of heavy fishing, the boats cannot approach the slip. As a result, the fishermen are not able to land the catch, and the fish miss the train, so the men receive a smaller price and the merchants suffer substantial losses.

There is great necessity for boat shelters for fishing boats along our coast. I have repeatedly drawn the Minister's attention to the necessity for erecting boat shelters at Valentia Island and Portmagee. Portmagee is a very important fishing centre. There are at least 25 motor boats fishing from that port, and the owners have no place in which to keep the boats in safety. I must urge the Minister to see that proper landing facilities are provided at Valentia Harbour and Portmagee, and that the boats are given reasonably good shelter there.

I am sure the Minister is aware that at the present time if fish which are sent from South Kerry do not reach the North Wall before 6.30 o'clock in the evening they will not be loaded on the night boat for Britain. I raised this matter recently by way of question. I need not impress on the Minister that in the warm weather it is essential that our fish should be shipped to the British market with the least possible delay. Owing to this rule of the shipping and railway companies, our fish reach the English market 24 hours late. Within the past few weeks tons of fish could not get into the British market in time owing to delay at the Dublin port. At the present time British trawlers are landing huge quantities of fish in England. Our fish arrive there in a poor condition because of the delay at Dublin port, and when they reach the British market they are not acceptable to the people and there is no sale.

I should like the Minister to take this matter up immediately with the shipping company and the railway company so that we may be allowed to ship our fish, as in other years, by the night boat. The fish merchants at Valentia Harbour are very anxious to have their catches shipped by the night boat, and they are prepared to pay the shipping company and the railway company whatever is reasonable. These companies should have no difficulty in accepting the fish for transport. The stationmaster at Valentia Harbour could always communicate with Dublin and let the people there know how many thousand boxes would be taken by rail to Dublin and then the necessary arrangements for shipping could be made and the whole thing could be smoothly arranged. For the past two years these companies have refused to handle any fish reaching Kingsbridge after 6.30 o'clock in the evening.

I was glad to hear the Minister say that it is the intention to introduce legislation to deal with inland fisheries. I suggest that some effort should be made to limit the number of nets used at the mouths of rivers so that fish in reasonable numbers can travel to the upper reaches. The Minister has power to take over weirs. What is the use of possessing such power if he does not avail of it? There is a weir in Waterville which prevents fish going into the lake there. The owner should get a reasonable sum by way of compensation, and I believe it would be a great advantage to the tourist trade in Waterville if that weir were removed.

I would like to refer to the poisoning of rivers, a practice which is on the increase in South Kerry. I hope in the legislation which the Minister intends to introduce he will impose very severe penalties in relation to the poisoning of rivers, and it is to be hoped that people who are caught committing that offence will be severely dealt with.

Mr. Cogan

While the Minister's opening statement contained some satisfactory points, it also contained some very disappointing features. The most disappointing feature is that the outbreak of peace appears to have caught the Minister's Department not fully prepared. The Minister mentioned that he proposes to adopt certain plans, to introduce certain legislation with regard to post-war development. The great danger is that it might take too long to get this work under way. The industry has apparently passed through a few prosperous years, and it would be disastrous if a slack period were allowed to intervene which would bring about depression and a decline in the industry. I know very little about sea fishing, but so far as inland fishing is concerned I think everyone will agree that it is imperative that everything possible should be done to secure that our lakes and rivers are properly stocked, that the passage of fish from the sea into our lakes and rivers is not unduly interfered with and that fishing in our rivers will be allowed to develop to the fullest possible extent.

So far as inland fishing is concerned, it is linked up to a great extent with the tourist industry. Our climatic conditions do not make for the encouragement of many types of holiday-making which might be popular in countries where there is a more steady climate. But inland fishing is an industry which is eminently suited to our climate. A fisherman is not discouraged by summer showers or by any of the weather variations which we experience here. For that reason it is essential that we should provide in our rivers ample facilities for the fishing tourist. It is satisfactory to learn that the Minister proposes, through his Department, to take over one river and study its problems fully. That, I think, is a step in the right direction. I believe if an intensive study is made of the ways of sea fish, salmon, for instance, that plans can be laid to develop the fishing industry in our rivers and to guard against undue interference in the way of net fishing, weirs and illegal activities.

The Minister referred briefly to the situation which has developed in the Liffey reservoir. What happened there was very disappointing. The disease which developed amongst the trout in that lake was a regrettable occurrence. It was a matter of intense gratification to everyone, in the first instance, when that lake became stocked with fish of very high quality. Most people looked forward to a big tourist development on that lake. It would be interesting to hear from the Minister what caused the disease which destroyed fish in the lake, whether it can be cured, whether the lake can be re-stocked in the near future, whether there is any danger of a similar disaster occurring again, and if it is likely to occur in other lakes or rivers. It may be due to some peculiarity of that lake. It is, of course, a peculiar lake in so far as it is a newly established one and it does not compare in any way with other lakes.

There is another point connected with sea fishing that concerns my county to a certain extent and that is the statement of the Minister with regard to the provision of boats for inshore fishing. I think the Minister should indicate whether orders are being placed right now for the construction of boats and whether facilities will be given to people engaged in that industry to go ahead. Arklow has always been associated to a small extent with shipbuilding, and, I think, can fill many of the needs of the Sea Fisheries Association in this matter.

Another matter which requires consideration—it was referred to by Deputy Healy—is the provision of better facilities for the landing of fish. In common with other Wicklow Deputies, I have been concerned with the improvement of the dock facilities in Arklow, and we find in that connection that the Fishery Department have neither the power not the finance to develop these docks. It is a matter for another Department, but as it is a matter which so vitally concerns the Fishery Department, I suggest that they should take power to develop these docks and landing places for fish, because otherwise there will be endless delay and certain ports may lose their trade as a result.

I should also like to know if there is any provision in the Estimate for investigations with regard to the development of fisheries generally in other countries. We all agree that there are other nations which are far ahead of us in the matter of sea fisheries, and in view of the Minister's statement that it is the intention to expand the industry, it might not be undesirable to send representatives to make investigations as to the plans to be put into operation in these countries. It would be a very desirable step before much expense is incurred here. The big trouble in regard to fishing as in regard to agriculture, is the violent fluctuation in supply. We have still the position that fish have to be thrown back into the sea from time to time. That difficulty may be overcome by what the Minister has described as the cooling or cold storage of fish, and what Deputy Healy referred to as quick freezing. Any measure which can be adopted to preserve fish until they are got on the market and distributed will tend to make the industry permanent and satisfactory.

Finally, the inland distribution of fish must be speeded up. It would appear that the most satisfactory way of getting fish to the market and to the consumer in the quickest possible way is by lorry. Fast lorries could convey the fish to whatever centre it is required in, and that is one branch which will have to be dealt with—the rapid transport of fish by the most up-to-date method that can be devised.

Mr. Carter

I am interested in a community of inland fishermen, and I want to ask the Minister what he intends to do with them. Somebody has told me that the Electricity Supply Board has taken over the fishery rights on the upper reaches of the Shannon, from Lough Derg to Carrick-on-Shannon. In this area, there are about 50 families supported solely by eel fishing and I find that they break the law if they take any fish under half-a-pound weight. Their contention is that they have no sale for the heavier fish, and that if they take an eel of half-a-pound weight off the hook and let him go he dies. That, however, is a question for the experts in the fishery department of the Electricity Supply Board.

What I am annoyed about is that these people have to pay a licence fee. The father of the family takes out that licence and if he is unable to go out to fish in the morning, and the young men go out instead, they are summoned and brought to court. There are several cases pending at the moment and I want a pronouncement from the Minister as to what is to be done with these people. They have a right, a prescriptive right, to fish on these lakes and rivers, and I hope that some day somebody will see that their rights are preserved, or, if they are not preserved, that they will get compensation. I have known inspectors—they call them bailiffs, but we have a grander name for them—to go down there and one morning they had a war. It was like the invasion of Normandy, and it was a miracle that somebody was not killed. Some of the inspectors of the Department of Fisheries drew guns and the excuse they gave for doing so was that these people had knives. The knives they were going to use were old knives which they use to cut the eels off the lines.

Mr. Corish

Neutral knives.

Mr. Carter

I want to get the position of these people clarified because I hear a good deal about it. I hear about it every day of the week. They are good, honest, decent, hard-working people, who have fished there all their lives and made a living out of it, with the two or three acres of land they have on a few of the islands in Lough Ree. I want to see that they get fair play, and I want to see that if the old man takes out a licence and is unable to go out to fish, his son will be allowed to go out to fish instead. When the licence goes to the house, the son should be allowed to fish instead of his father, if his father is unable to go out. In cases where the father is an old age pensioner and is too old to go out fishing, the sons will not be allowed to fish. I would appeal to the Minister to give his very kind consideration to these people.

Mr. Corish

Since this Estimate was considered last year there does not appear to have been any improvement so far as the fishing industry is concerned. It may be that the war has interfered with any progress which the Minister had intended to make. A number of Deputies have addressed themselves to the question of the provision of boats and gear for deep-sea fishing. My experience of the Sea Fisheries Association is that it takes so long to deal with these matters that a man who is entitled to get gear or a boat gets entirely sick from waiting. I notice that in this year's Estimate the provision for boats and gears is down by the substantial sum of £3,400.

I wonder what is the meaning of that? One would imagine, now that the war is over, that more boats could be procured for the use of fishermen. The provision in last year's Estimate under this sub-head was £4,000, and this year it is down to £600. I would ask the Minister to interest himself in the matter and get the Sea Fisheries Association to be more reasonable in their dealings with people who are in need of boats and gear. I have two or three people in mind who have recently made application to the Sea Fisheries Association with a view to helping them to get boats. One boat was examined and found to be satisfactory in every way. In one case the association turned down the application altogether, and they have been playing with the other two applications for the last three or four months. The Minister knows one of the men that I have in mind very well. He is a seasoned fisherman. He is a man who knows his job and what a good boat should be.

I do not know exactly what is meant by the provision for protection in the Estimate. I presume it is protection for our deep-sea fishermen against foreign trawlers. If that is so the provision is very small. Last year it was £50 and this year it is only £30. Now that the war is over, it is natural to expect that more foreign trawlers will be available, and that the provision under this sub-head should be increased rather than decreased. I understand that already some of those foreign trawlers that have been released from war service are at work off the coast of Wexford. There are great complaints in the Minister's constituency and in mine about the number of them that have been seen quite recently in the vicinity of Wexford.

Deputy Healy spoke about the export of fish and of the lack of transport provided by the railway and shipping companies. I think it is time that the question of the marketing of fish was thoroughly examined. We have the Gilbertian situation in the part of the country that I come from that despite the fact that Wexford is a seaport town, it is almost impossible to get fish there. All the fish seem to be sent out of it to inland towns or to the City of Dublin. Some arrangement should be made whereby supplies of fish would be allocated to large centres of population. I agree with Deputy Healy that fishermen. Who are engaged in a very precarious occupation are paid very low rates for the fish they catch. One can realise that by comparing the prices they get and the preposterous charges that are made in shops for fish or in a restaurant, if you have fish for your lunch. Something should be done to regulate prices so far as the ordinary fisherman is concerned.

I suggest to the Minister that if the fishing industry is to be properly developed something will have to be done in the way of providing facilities for the landing of the fish. The Minister knows that his own constituency has a very long coast from the Tower of Hook to Arklow, and that it has very few landing facilities. With the exception of two or three places, no landing facilities are provided for the fishermen. I think that recently the Minister's attention and my attention were drawn to the fact that the fishermen who operate in the Blackwater area have no landing facilities at all. You have a large number of people there who depend for their livelihood upon the fishing industry. I would ask the Minister to see that something is done in the near future to remedy that situation.

I was not in for the Minister's opening statement, but I infer from what other Deputies have said that he has in mind the provision of large fishing trawlers to be allocated to various areas. I think that is a very desirable thing to do. One, however, hopes that it will not interfere with the livelihood of those who are already fishing in certain waters and in certain areas. I hope if any of those men are put out of commission that when the new boats are being manned first preference will be given to those who have been engaged in fishing in a particular area. I suggest that would be the proper thing to do. In conclusion, I hope the Minister will give his attention to the provision of landing facilities for those engaged in fishing, particularly in his own constituency.

Mr. Kilroy

I appeal to the Minister to make provision for the revival of the fishing industry along the western coast. The local fishermen there have had a very lean time for a number of years, and it is to be feared that the fishing beds have been destroyed. The fishermen there are without any large boats for fishing. I appeal to the Minister to supply them with larger boats than the frail ones they have, and also to repair the slips and keep them in proper order. One or two new piers are also badly needed along the west coast for the safety of the fishermen and the boats. Owing to the war the trawlers have not been there for some time, but now that the war is over I suppose they will be back again.

Before the war there used to be 20 and 30 trawlers along the west coast every other day, every other week and month. It is true to say that they used to take thousands of pounds' worth of fish to the British and foreign markets. Trawlers from Norway used to come there. They would hardly come if it did not pay them well to do so. I would ask the Government to try to revive the fishing industry along that coast. It could be made one of our most valuable industries if it were properly looked after. I think it is a mistake not to try to revive it and see that our fishermen get a chance. The fishermen there have not any large boats, only small frail craft. If they were provided with the larger boats there would be some chance of making the fishing along that coast the success it should be.

Trawlers from foreign countries are coming in and taking fish from that area. I do not think that very much has been done by either Governments for the fishing industry in the West of Ireland. As far as I am aware they did not seem to be interested. I do not know where the Sea Fisheries Association has done anything for west coast fishing. I ask the Minister to see that the fishermen in that area are reorganised. I believe there are as good fishing beds there as in any part of Ireland, and that they could be developed. Between Killala Bay and Blacksod Bay the piers and slips require repairing as they are a source of danger in stormy weather. If larger boats were built, and if fishermen were given the opportunity of buying them by instalments, I think there is a chance of developing the fishing industry. It should now be possible to get money easily and at low rates of interest. If the fishing industry was developed there is every prospect of a rich harvest. I urge the Minister to see that more attention is given to the requirements of the western coast.

Mr. Coburn

I am afraid that if a Minister wants to assist the fishing industry it is necessary that he should serve his time as a fisherman and go out and get fish. Certain Deputies referred to foreign trawlers fishing in Irish waters. If my memory serves me right, trawlers from Donegal that fish along Galway bay come within the category of "foreign trawlers." In other words, the Donegal men went out and caught fish. I think Deputies should realise that fish cannot be regimented, and that they will not come in to meet boats manned by Irish fishermen. Is it not a well-known fact that fishermen have to go after fish? The Minister said that it was the intention of the Sea Fisheries Association to build boats large enough for deep-water fishing. If Irish fishermen are enterprising enough to take advantage of that, well and good. If they do not, they have no cause for complaint. Reference has been made to the hardship imposed on fishermen in being asked to pay 50 per cent. of the cost of providing fishing boats and nets. As well as I remember, the chief difficulty of the Department has been to get any payment of that kind from fishermen who are assisted. They want boats, they want nets, and when they have fish they want to put the money in their pockets.

In this debate during the last 15 or 16 years we have had the same old swan song. It has been stated that we are not a fish-eating people. People cannot be compelled to eat against their will. We hear a good deal about extra catches of fish now and then, and because of that people are expected to see to it that the extra fish will not be lost. We have always had that complaint about the fishing industry. With regard to this Estimate, my point is that if the Minister carries out the suggestions that have been made they are going to be very costly. The Mercantile Marine cost a large amount of money without any great advantage accruing to the people as a whole. Despite the great attention bestowed to fishing by the Sea Fisheries Association, as far as the majority of people are concerned, fish seems to be unprocurable at a price that is within the reach of the purse of the average workingman. If that is the case there is no use talking about developing fishing. If taxpayers have to pay large sums of money to foster an industry, and if they think they are not getting the advantages that they should get as a result of such expenditure, I can see very little hope for the future of the industry.

It has been stated that there has not been sufficient supervision of the rivers and that certain rivers were poisoned. I want to call the attention of the Deputy who made that assertion, and who asked the Minister and the Sea Fisheries Association to look into the question, to say, if people or neighbours were seen poisoning a river, how many would have the manliness to come forward and say so? My experience has been that when poachers are brought to justice it is very hard to get people to come forward and give evidence that would convict them.

I want to ask the Minister about the position on the east coast as it affects in shore fishermen. They are very short of fishing gear, nets and material for making nets. As far as the provision of boats is concerned, the old craftsmanship is still available to build boats to enable fishermen to pursue deep-sea fishing. The only difficulty is to find the timber. That is a difficulty which is not peculiar to the building of boats. It applies to the building industry generally. The provision of timber is one of the big snags in regard to the building of boats at present. If the Minister could do anything to facilitate the supply of the type of timber required for the building of boats, it would be very welcome to the fishermen of those districts.

The next question that arises is that of the supply of nets. One of the things the fishermen found it very difficult to procure was the necessary twine. Formerly, those fishermen were able to buy their nets intact. As often happens, necessity is the mother of invention, and those who were able to get twine during the emergency manufactured their own nets. That took a considerable time, but they did it. I think that the Minister did something last year to ease the situation with regard to the supply of twine, and I hope that his efforts will be even more successful this year.

The Minister referred last year, and in his opening statement to-day, to certain experiments he intends to undertake respecting the preservation of shellfish. I think that the Minister is aware of the situation of the shellfish industry along the eastern coast as it affects those engaged in that industry. In Kerry, a purification tank has been erected which enables those engaged in the industry to market mussels in such a condition as to satisfy the authorities on the other side and enable the fishermen to obtain a much higher price than they would receive if the mussels were sent straight from the beds, as formerly. That position does not obtain on the eastern coast. Most of the fishermen whom I have in mind are engaged in the salmon fishing, which ends about September. These men then engage in the gathering of shellfish, which gives employment at a time when employment is difficult to obtain. Owing to the medical authorities on the other side having been obliged to impose certain conditions before shellfish could be imported, those men were prevented for some years from exporting any mussels. During the past year or two, the conditions have been relaxed and they have been able to export large quantities of shellfish. To put the industry on a sound basis and to guard against interference with exports of this particular type in future, it would be necessary to erect a purification tank which would cater for the industry along the eastern coast. I would not ask the Minister to erect such a tank at the entrance to every harbour or to suit every half-dozen men engaged in the industry but I am sure a convenient site could be found which would meet the requirements of those engaged in the industry from, say, Carlingford Lough to Skerries or, possibly, Howth. That would assure the market, as well as enabling the men concerned to receive a higher price than they have been receiving during the past few years. I ask the Minister to consider those points in addition to any projects he may have for the improvement of the fishing industry in general.

I should like to remind Deputies that the fishing industry is a very elusive type of industry. It cannot be managed by the Minister in the same way as he manages his tillage policy. Some of the suggestions made by Deputies would give the impression that the Minister could do that. One cannot put fish in a strait-jacket and order them to go here or there to suit the convenience of the fishermen. The fishermen have to follow them and do the best they can. If, in some years, we do not do very well, we have to put up with it. If the Minister proceeds with his programme this year, it may be possible in a few years to have a more continuous supply of fish here at prices which the people can afford to pay. Everybody agrees that it has been impossible of late for a workman with a family to buy fish. To buy Friday's dinner would require half a week's wages. I am aware that 1/- was asked for mackerel and 1/6 or 2/- for a small place. One can imagine how much would be required to provide a fish dinner for a family of eight or nine, particularly a family of young persons who would lower a fish as they would lower a sweet. I hope that the Minister's efforts will meet with all possible success this year, especially in regard to the provision of trawlers to enable our fishermen to go further out to sea in pursuit of this very elusive article. When the trawlers are at work, I trust it will be possible to have fish put on the market at a price which the people can afford to pay.

Mr. Bartley

Our experience of the fishing industry for the past six years has been merely a repetition of that during the first war. As the last speaker said, the fishing industry is a very unsteady and fluctuating one. So far as this country is concerned, I think that the corner-stone of the industry is marketing. It has often been said that we are not a fish-eating people. In addition, we have not a steady supply of fish. We have periods of glut and periods of scarcity and anything that the Department can do to keep back fish, by refrigeration or any other process, when there is a glut, will help to stabilise the industry. Although refrigeration is very desirable, a great deal of progress has yet to be made and refrigeration will not solve the problem entirely.

We have had the experience during the last six years that all the fishermen around the coast, whether they were members of the Sea Fisheries Association or not, sent their fish up here to Dublin. We had the experience, in the West, as in other places remote from Dublin, that fish, even though it was taken plentifully on the local coast, was not sold there, and even people who had marketing contracts with the local people simply ignored them and sent the fish on to private buyers. The co-operative marketing idea, while a good one, is not, in my opinion, likely to produce the best results unless all the fishermen in the country are in it. We have had cases of Grimsby fish passing down to Galway on one train, and Galway fish passing on another train up to Dublin. I know that these societies did not succeed because the people simply ignored their rules and went into the private market, but I think the Minister should regulate the price and make similar arrangements for the Galway men as was done in the case of the Arklow men for the Dublin market, and then a lot of this kind of thing would be cut out, and it should also be remembered that in the transport of this fish a lot of it sometimes goes bad. I know that it would be something in the nature of unwarranted interference, but we know that the ordinary laws of supply and demand, as has been mentioned by many speakers, do not operate in connection with fish, that is, outside times of scarcity such as we had in the past six years.

The association, of course, only caters for a fraction of the fishermen. In Galway, for instance, the Galway fishermen are not members of it at all, with the exception of a few. For some reason or another the association has never been able to get them to come in and avail themselves of whatever privileges or advantages the association offers. They want to market the fish in their own way and, apparently, the association has not been able to satisfy them that the prices would be as good as they would get by selling privately. Even in the Aran Islands, where the association has been a great boon, in the last five years a number of these people have found private buyers here in Dublin. Now, if the fish supply is to be controlled in such a way as not to have unnecessary transportation and, therefore, to have something in the nature of regional marketing, it is absolutely necessary in my opinion that the Minister should regulate the price because, after all, if a fisherman can get once-and-a-half the price in Dublin that he can get in Galway, it is quite obvious that he will send the fish up to the Dublin market.

With regard to boats, I was interested in the suggestion that large-sized trawlers and fishing boats be tried around the west coast. I was a member of a committee of the association up to the outbreak of the war, and I wondered at the time whether they would be so needed in ordinary times as in times of emergency, and of course that was justified. I know of people who could not put down £10 of a deposit at that time but, as a result of the war boom, we found that some of those people could come along and put down £100, £150 or £200 of a deposit. That, of course, will happen, and people will try to get the best that the Government will give them. As I say, the ordinary laws of supply and demand in this connection do not operate in times of peace here, and therefore the incentive is not there for the people to put money into it.

I think it would be much better to put the industry on a business basis as in England, but I do not see much hope of that. We have been treating the industry as more or less a social service but, on the other hand, I think that a fleet of 10 or 12 trawlers would supply us with the regular supply of fish required in this country, and that all others should be cut out. As to whether that is a desirable thing to attempt or not, I should not like to offer an opinion, but when the fleets of British trawlers get going again we shall probably have the same experience as we had before and will only be able to sell our fish at sacrifice prices on the outside market.

I should like to support my colleague, Deputy Kilroy, in pleading with the Minister on the question of protection. I know that there is a three-mile limit, but I wonder if the Minister could make representations to the international organisation that has a function in this matter of fishing with a view to seeing whether it would not be possible to extend the three-mile limit to a six-mile limit. I think that with the improvement in trawling, and so on, the three-mile limit is insufficient to protect our fisheries, and spawning beds are being destroyed. I think that it is not alone the foreign trawlers that are doing all the damage. Some of our own trawlers are doing it, and if our fishermen had larger boats they could go out and spend a few days away out in the deep-sea fisheries and, accordingly, would not be tempted to scoop up the beds inside the three-mile limit.

Deputy Coburn referred to an incident that happened in Galway Bay. It is not a very nice thing to see Galway Bay fishermen interfering with Donegal fishermen. After all, they are not foreigners, but I am sure the Deputy will understand that those men who fish in Galway Bay are men whose fishing craft are limited mostly to sail, and they have not the same scope as the men supplied with power boats, and when they find that these men can come in it is quite easy to understand their resentment. That is the explanation of the incident there. I know it has been suggested that there was a scarcity of fish and that the men who came into Galway Bay were able to make more fish available for the community.

That is quite true, and naturally we were all anxious to have as much fish as possible during the period of scarcity, but I should like to know what ideas the Minister has with regard to marketing in normal time— that period that we call normal in relation to anything else, but which, unfortunately, is most abnormal in connection with fishing. On the question of refrigeration and fixing the price all around the coast for all Irish markets, the Minister might, be able to secure a better distribution and cut out a lot of this unnecessary transportation.

Finally, I should like to know when the Minister intends to introduce the Bill he promised some time ago with regard to the boards of conservators. The general view is that it is most undemocratic, and you now have a number of anglers associations with increasing memberships every year. These men will have a disinterested view of angling, and in my opinion they should have a better representation in the control and preservation of inland fishing.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I want to say at the outset that I have very little knowledge of fisheries, either sea or inland, but I have been listening to the debates on this Estimate here in this House for over 20 years, and I think I could safely say that the debate to-day, in the main, has been the very same as it was 20 years ago. The things that have been said about Irish fisheries to-day have been said practically in the same words by members from all sides of this House over the past 20 years. I think that the people of this country —that is the taxpayers—having dignified this industry by setting up for it a separate Department, with a Minister over it, and having paid the expenses of that Department for over 23 years, which run into a very large sum of money, are entitled to ask what return they are getting for it.

Coming from an inland constituency, I am entitled to ask that on behalf of my constituents, because, so far as I can see, while we may talk about markets and about fishermen not being able to market fish, so far as three-fourths of our people are concerned the only fish they can get is fish out of a can. We speak here and outside, quite properly if you like, of the home market being the right market for produce from the land. Why do we not speak in the same way about what we bring out of the sea and the rivers? Why do we dignify with a Ministry this industry if it is not worth its salt, if it cannot prove itself, and give even a decent, livelihood to those who are engaged in it? I think I would be fully justified in saying that the only time within the last 23 or 24 years in which the people engaged in the fishing industry have had a decent, consistent livelihood from it was the period of the last five years. That was not due to any effort we were able to put forth; it was due simply to war conditions.

I think we ought to face up to this matter as realists. I think we are entitled to say to ourselves that, if the industry is in the condition in which we are now told it is from all sides of the House, after 23 years under a native Minister, a period during which no money that was asked by the present or the previous Government for that Ministry was denied by the House, if we have made no progress at all, it is time there should be a serious examination of the whole position, and people should be told whether this industry can be developed, is worth being developed, and if so, how it can be done. If it cannot be developed, then I think we ought to face up to that obvious fact. I am perhaps blundering in, because, as I say—I admit it quite candidly—my knowledge of fishing, either sea fishing or inland fishing, is very small. I do not think, however, I have not only the right, but the duty as a representative of people who have been supporting a separate Ministry for this industry, and who have contributed a large sum of money over the last 23 years, to ask what we are getting for it. As I have already said, so far as the most of us are concerned, the only fish we can get at any price is fish out of a can.

I do not want to delay the House further but I suggest that we should now have reached a point, after 23 years, when we should seriously ask the Minister whether he is satisfied that it is worth carrying on in the way we have been carrying on for the last 23 years. If he is not satisfied that we are getting anything like the results we should get, then I suggest the Minister and the Department should disclose to the House what steps they think should be taken to put this industry on a sound basis, which will enable those engaged in it to earn a decent livelihood. I am sure if the Minister comes to the House with a scheme which will ensure that the House will not be in any way niggardly in voting the funds required to produce these results, but we ought not to go on fooling ourselves, if I might use the term without offence, that we have a very valuable industry, if it is giving results that none of us has any reason to be proud of.

Mr. Murphy

There are just two matters to which I should like to refer briefly. One is in connection with the experiment which was proposed by the Department in response to local representations some time ago in regard to a different type of boat for experimental fishing purposes at Kinsale, with a view to the utilisation of that type of boat in a wider sphere afterwards. I should be glad if the Minister would say something as to the immediate prospects of that scheme. I entirely agree with Deputy Morrissey in regard to the shortage of fish in many areas where, I am convinced, some attempt could be made to get a reasonably good local market. In the last few years I have seen individuals —and I am not trying to lay any blame at the door of the Minister or the Sea Fisheries Association in this matter—who were able to build up a fairly good trade in the sale of fish rapidly transported from places such as Bantry to other centres in West Cork. More recently, however, I am afraid that sufficiently rapid transport has not been available. I have had representations in the last few months from a few people who are willing to engage in that type of transport, to remove fish quickly to inland centres where it would have a ready sale, especially on Fridays. I think I can say that a great many people would be very glad to use fish, even the less expensive types of fish, on days other than Fridays.

I wonder if the Minister would use his influence with his colleague, the Minister for Supplies, with a view to seeing if, in the immediate future, further relief could be given to enable a certain number of selected people, who could be tested in every way as to trustworthiness and capacity to do this work, to undertake the rapid transport of fish to various centres in West Cork from places where the fish is caught. I suggest that arrangements might be made to give them a moderate allowance of petrol for that purpose. These are the only two points I wish to make. I hope the Minister will indicate, when concluding the debate, whether he can do anything in that connection.

Mr. Byrne

I rise to ask the Minister if he can give some explanation of the very high price of fish in the City of Dublin. I do not refer to the more expensive type of fish such as salmon and fish that one would see in high-class hotels. I am talking about ordinary fish consumed by the ordinary people. Within the last 12 months, the plainest type of fish was as dear as salmon. I should like the Minister to give some indication as to the reason for these high prices. Our trawlers go to sea as regularly as ever they did, yet no matter how good the catches are the price is still the same. These high prices are beyond the means of the ordinary working-class. On their behalf I ask the question: will the Minister explain why fish is so dear in the City of Dublin?

Dr. Ryan

I move to report progress.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again to-morrow.

The Dáil adjourned at 9 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Friday, 25th May.