I move:—
That Dáil Éireann considers that action should be taken without delay to obtain a survey of the natural resources of the country with a view to their early development.
This motion was put on the Order Paper some time in March of last year, and it is a commentary on the conduct of business by Parliamentary institutions that, though the terms of the motion asked that action be taken without delay, we were not in a position, owing to the pressure of other Parliamentary business, to consider the matter until 12 months after the introduction of the motion. In these circumstances, the mover of the motion might well be forgiven if he had fairly forgotten the terms of it and, as "hope deferred maketh the heart sick", had come to the conclusion that the motion would never be reached and, therefore, had tired of preparing the material which might be considered necessary to impress the Minister and the Government with such cogent arguments as would lead to a favourable consideration and adoption of this motion. Though we have been delayed in the presentation of this motion by 12 months, yet that too gives added force to the call of the motion for urgent action, because if, with the conditions obtaining 12 months ago, it was thought essential, in the opinion of those who put down the motion, that there should be a survey of the natural resources of the country, then with greater force might we argue to-day that that need should be given even more urgent consideration. The situation is ripe, the conditions are favourable, the war has come to an end and it was the excuse for delaying many of the normal functions of the Government, particularly with respect to any attempt at any economic organisation. The present Government has announced its policy to be based upon a peace-time development. If that is so, it is necessary that it should tackle this question of obtaining a survey of the natural resources of the country with every expedition. Furthermore there is the necessity for a comprehensive survey, a survey which will give the data, the material and the basis for any planning that may be done.
The motion does not stop there. It does not merely ask for a survey, a point which hardly could be resisted; it asks that this survey be harnessed to some action with a view to the early development of these resources. If we look back to our records, we have to go back to the administration of the first Government of the Irish Republic to see any such work done as is contemplated in this motion. That first Government of the Republic, in very difficult times and circumstances, saw the need to undertake a survey of our economic, industrial, agricultural and other resources. That work was carried on with great difficulty. Parts of the report of a number of different sections of that commission are available. Its work extended from about 1919 to 1922. Probably it would have continued its work were it not for the fact that the Black and Tans, as one might say, put a full stop to its proceedings. So far as I can believe, no one has since seen fit to resurrect that report, to carry on the work that was done, to amplify it, to give it a more comprehensive scope, to complete the survey and make practical recommendations which might in some way act as a spur to whatever Government was in office to carry out the developments of those resources.
It would appear to me that the time is now opportune for a recommencement of this work, that a commission or commissions should be established to take over some of the basic work that was then done, to go further into the matter, particularly in view of the conditions at present obtaining, and to assemble from the different sources the data and the basis for any largescale planning which it will be the duty of any Government that will be in power in this country for a considerable time to come, to undertake. There would be, of course, good justification during the war or during the emergency for a suspension of this work. There would be many difficulties in the way of carrying it out, but I can see no such difficulties now. The materials of industry are more freely available now than they were then. It is possible to obtain the services of those who can make a detailed examination of our resources and sufficient intelligent opinion is available to make its impress upon the work of any such commission. If this work is not restarted, then I think that a great deal of the talk we hear from time to time about schemes for full employment, schemes for developing of one or other of the aspects of agriculture or of industry, or for the control of industry or any definite section of industry such as transport, is without reality.
Anyone here can speak upon these questions. But only, I submit, with a qualified authority. We cannot point to any such work as I have indicated since the days of 1919-1922 as the authority for the facts on which they would base their plans. There have been, from time to time, fugitive suggestions about economic councils and various boards. All these have been rather directed towards specific ideas and specific lines of approach to various problems that have come up from time to time and occupied public attention.
The purpose of such a survey as I request in this motion is to give a foundation body of data to any Government, to any set of employers, any set of industrialists, any branch of the trade union movement, or anyone who is interested in the economic development of this country. Without having knowledge tested by facts in regard to our resources our planning has very little relation to reality.
There has been a pronouncement made recently, for instance, on what is called in this morning's Irish Independent, the Industrial Advisory Authority. I am not certain whether that is the correct or official title of the body, but it is a sufficient indication, I think, of the body to which I refer. As an example of what I mean I shall quote what the correspondent, I presume with a certain amount of authority, a certain amount of insight or imaginative ideas, sets forth as the functions of this authority. He states:
"Among the functions of the body will be the initiation of schemes for the development of industry, with special reference to the prospects of export; to inquire into the effects of tariffs and the extent to which tariffs are fully taken up by industry; and to advise concerning possible new tariffs. The Government is known not to be satisfied with the results of industrial development and to hold the belief that far higher production will be possible under a co-ordinated plan."
One can ask straightaway: on what basis was such an authority to proceed? They can obtain direction from the Minister or direction from the Government as a whole. They may have their own pet ideas, each and every one of them. They may bring those ideas to the common board, sort them out, achieve some sort of agreement and put these more or less into effect, or recommend that such ideas as they have shall be given effect to. But, in my submission, unless we have some other authority supplying them with the basic data, much of their work, no matter how commendable it may appear at short notice, how much it may satisfy local ideas or sectional aims, will not be to the national welfare, will not contribute to the national good over a long-term period. It may or it may not. We have no assurance. We have no data by which we can judge what they are doing. We have no way of measuring. We have no yardstick by which we can estimate whether their ideas fit in with the known ideas in regard to our resources; what they amount to; how they can be developed; what is the extent of their development; whether it is economical to develop them this way or that way.
I would wish, if it is possible, to get from the Minister on this motion some idea as to how far this Industrial Advisory Authority has the functions that might cover part of this motion. At first glance, when I heard of the establishment of such an authority I was inclined to believe that this could be taken as the answer to the motion calling for this survey and for something more perhaps than a mere survey —calling for or giving the possibility of getting early development of these national resources. The Minister may enlighten us upon this matter. He may let us know whether this National Development Commission has such powers as I think any such authority should have if it is to be of real service to the community. It should set in motion such a survey and see that the best brains in the country, the best minds, the best investigators, statisticians and experts in various fields are harnessed to provide us with an all-round picture of the national resources of this country, bring them up to date, give us a 1949 or 1950 picture of what was attempted to be done by the first Government of the Irish Republic away back in 1919. That it should do more is axiomatic. I do not know whether it is to be a planning council to advise the Minister; whether it has power of its own to set on foot certain actions, certain schemes and such schemes of public good and of national good as may recommend themselves to this authority, or whether it is a very restricted body. It states, for example, in the extract that I have read that it is to be concerned with tariffs. Tariffs, to my mind, are a very essential and very necessary part of the whole plan, but by themselves, and without such a survey on which they could be based, the granting, the taking off and the implementation of a tariff policy again appears to me to have little reality in relation to the good of the country as a whole.
I submit that there was little, if any, planning in regard to tariffs in the past. There was no clear-cut economic policy running through any scheme of tariffs in the past, mainly not because of any lack of an all-over idea on the part of Ministers or of previous Governments but due, I think, to the lack of such an all-over survey of the whole situation of the country. In the past—too often in fact—it may perhaps have been the general picture in regard to tariffs that they took on the character of a hand-to-mouth method of running the country. There was no long-term policy. Many tariffs were determined by questions such as the desire to obtain revenue. They were principally motivated from the Department of Finance in regard to their revenue-raising capabilities, such as arises often from protection and such as results from the confusion of the two ideas. Very often tariffs were the result of sympathetic consideration by the Party in power, of local sentiment here and there to provide employment or to abate unemployment in a given district or to the natural desire of budding industrialists to have local industries in their own part of the country.
I am not necessarily criticising these ideas or aspirations as bad or detrimental to the country. They may very often have worked to the good of the country and to the provision of employment in many cases, no matter what may have been the long view in their case. It is sometimes said that often these were cases of the dog eating its own tail to feed itself. Perhaps it is better it should do that than starve.
The objection that I have to this haphazard method of dealing with tariffs, or any other aspect of the economic policy of the country by the industrial advisory authority, such as is suggested, is that each case is taken as an individual case, unrelated to the whole economy of the country, and to that extent it may or may not be detrimental. Very often I think it works out that it is not detrimental to the long-term economic development of our national resources. That is inevitable in the absence of such a commission as is suggested in this motion. Another aspect of this lack of any real knowledge of the resources of our country and of our countrymen and women as related to these resources is the haphazard method of the development of the various industries in the country. There is the persistence in the minds of industrialists in this year of grace 1949 that the spirit of laissez faire still exists and still is dominant, but the whole current of world economic development is against that. I am sure that I need not elaborate very much on it. Take one example from many, the shoe trade. It was mentioned here and in many reports that in that trade each manufacturer is permitted to develop as many lines as he thinks are profitable. As fashions change his trade changes. He finds that some lines are profitable and that some are not. The whole trade, as a result of this individual attempt by each one to make the utmost profit out of changing fashions leads to haphazard development. What I would like to know in regard to this industrial advisory authority is: is it to have such authority as that it can exert some pressure on industries that exist, on others that are growing up and on others that it will foster, as a result of its examination of the national resources? Is it to give any direction to these industries as to the line on which they are to develop their trade? Is it to take a fatherly interest, or more than that, in the development of this trade or is it to have any jurisdiction in that respect? Is it to be a commission sitting to discuss tariffs, to grant tariffs or to recommend the granting of them and, having finished its work, is it to be a real industrial council or commission which will take the broadest possible picture and look at the needs of the country as a whole? Will it see to it that each and every industry that is to be established will have some guiding hand applied to its activities so that these may be brought into some common balance with the rest of the country? Is there to be any thought given by this industrial advisory authority to the question of whether an industry is utilising to the fullest extent the native raw materials of this country? When we come to that we immediately see the necessity for such a survey because, apart from haphazard knowledge here and there of what may or may not be in the country, there is no authoritative report, document or body which can ascertain whether we have the native raw material that could be used in any given industry.
We have no way of examining whether the materials used in any industry which are imported into this country could not be better supplied by the development of another industry or branch of industry in this country. The only criterion in that matter is the worn-out idea that the manufacturer knows his own business best, that if there is raw material in the country he should be aware of the fact and that he would naturally use it. Experience has shown in the past that that is by no means so. Experience has shown that it very often requires a crisis in a certain business or a general crisis to get industrialists to depart from time-honoured methods of doing certain operations in that industry and from using time-honoured materials that they have always used for the application of certain results. To my mind, there is ample excuse for the industrialists in this country not being as up to date as they should be in regard to the utilisation of the natural resources of our country, through the very absence of such a body as is indicated is required. Is there to be, for instance, in this industrial advisory authority any thought in regard to the export possibilities of such industries as they would foster or recommend for improvement or development? This, I need hardly say, is a matter of supreme importance. The utilisation of our natural resources for the home market is, of course, important enough. But the present economic condition of the western hemisphere and the part of Europe to which we belong is such that it is a crying need for every country such as ours to engage in export trade. In our country this is more than ever important because, with the small population we have, our markets are very restricted. I need not give any examples of the restriction which imposes severe limitations on the expansion of certain industries or on the very establishment of certain industries in this country. I could instance one. It is a coming modern industry which will have very great force particularly in regard to employment and which has great possibilities in regard to the displacement of several other materials that have been used over long periods. I refer to the question of plastics. To develop a plastics industry the first essential, as anyone who has taken the slightest interest in the matter knows, is a very widespread market. Plastics can only be turned out economically in huge masses. It is an industry which I should imagine would be eminently suitable to this country owing to certain factors in relation to the formation of such an industry as that. There is no possibility, to my mind, of such an industry taking firm root in this country, of being developed in the way it should and of all the potentialities being extracted for the development of something of national worth unless such an industry could also engage in the export market; unless, in fact, it could use the possibilities of that widespread sale abroad to enable us to sell things in that line itself in our own country at perhaps a much cheaper rate than we could ever sell such commodities were we restricted to our own four shores for that industry.
The motion states that the action should be taken without delay; that it is urgent. Without quoting any great number of figures one could state that we have a condition of affairs in this country which over a number of years showed a decline in the productivity of work, a decline in the volume of the output per wage earner engaged in all the industries and services listed in the census of industrial production under the heading of those industries engaged in transportable goods. We had a decline in the volume of output of the workers so engaged of 12 per cent. over the period 1938-44. I do not know whether there is available any later figure than this. I could not lay my hands on it. There are later figures showing an increase in productivity for the last quarter but I have been unable to trace anything later than this figure showing a decline in the productivity per individual worker. If that is a tendency which continues up to the present year—and I see no factors likely to have corrected it very much— it is a very serious tendency in our economic life to which any Government should direct its attention forthwith for remedy. That, it may appear to some, has but remote connection with the terms of this motion. To me, however, the investigation and survey of the resources of the country does not narrow itself down merely to a survey of the raw material resources of the country, the possibilities of what we could extract from our soil, our land, our industries and the other raw materials thereto appertaining. It also denotes, if it is to have any reality at all, the investigation into what natural resources we have in the form of labour force because all raw materials are themselves dead and have no value until labour force is applied to them. If, as is shown by the figure I have quoted, there is a drop in the productivity per worker that is a matter which requires to be considered earnestly by any industrial advisory body. There must be causes for such. There must be reasons why there is a drop in productivity. It may be an objective reason; it may be a subjective reason. Whatever it is it requires investigation as part of the investigation and survey of the whole picture.
There are two aspects of that question to which, perhaps, I could devote a minute or two. There might be—and it would be part of the investigation to be undertaken by such a body—the incorrect utilisation of the labour forces available in the country. There, again, we have the haphazard development to which I adverted. Industries have grown up. Certain people have become allotted to them more by accident than by design. It is difficult to know whether our wage earners as a whole are properly harnessed to the industrial machine from the point of view of the over-all good of the country. I am not suggesting that such an authority should go to the extent of a direction of labour, but it might well come to that in the future, as there is no appreciable hope of any expanding population in this country for some years to come. That was the opinion even of the Commission of Inquiry into Banking, Currency and Credit as far back as 1938. They warned that we could expect no notable increase in population over the next quarter of a century. If we are going to expand industries, such as has been suggested, if the industrial machine in this country is to be brought up to date, then it might very well be a pertinent question for such a body as to which industry or section of industry is most entitled to utilise the labour force that is available.
From time to time orators have spoken about the return to this country of emigrants from over the seas. It is a very favourable topic for some but, as a realist, as one who wants to look upon this matter from the point of view of economic development, I think there is a very restricted movement in that direction and it is very unlikely that there will be the rush back to this country that some economists or some theorists expected in the past, during the war years particularly. There may be a certain number, and, even if it could be argued that there would be a flood of labour returning, then all the more necessity is there that there should be an examination of the resources of the country to see how this labour force can best be applied, not only in regard to individual industries, but in regard to the very big schemes of national development that any Government would have to undertake in the eventuality of a mass movement of workers to this country, making it necessary for such a Government to deal with hundreds of thousands, if you like to expand to that extent, of people without work.
They could not be fitted into industry haphazardly; industries would have no place for them, new industries would not develop rapidly enough, and there would be a need for such an industrial authority to plan public works on a large scale. It may be necessary next year that there should be large scale planning of works of public utility, such as have been called for by the Labour Party year after year. It may be necessary to plan these in order to cope with unemployment, if the slump that some speakers have suggested comes about. Whether that is the case or not, my argument is that, taking it on the most favourable or unfavourable basis, whichever way you like, there is a necessity for a survey of the country's resources by some such commission as I have suggested, which will be able to arm any industrial commission with sufficient data to enable them to plan correctly in the national interest and not stumble along from scheme to scheme according as one or other political crisis arises.
I think the terms of the motion make it quite clear what I want—that we should have a far-flung scheme of national development, one that will be not exactly above politics, because I think that it is impossible in this or any other country to be completely above politics. Any schemes that evolve will have to take a certain amount of modification from whatever political Party or Parties may be in power. Apart from that, there should be such a current of thought developing from the examination required in this motion that will maintain itself against most of the pressure of political Parties here, there or anywhere else in regard to this national economic development. That would be the objective aspect.
With regard to the other aspect, what I would call the subjective aspect of that utilisation of the wage earners, there might be an incorrect utilisation of them in so far as these wage earners are given at the present time no great interest in industry. In most of our development work the workers are completely dependent upon the employers. They have no interest in the development of the firm. That figure I gave about the decline of the productivity of the workers could well be from a lack of interest in any desire of the Government to speed up production, to call for an export or industrial drive, or anything else like that, because the wage earners in the organisations to which this country is accustomed have no share in the management of industry. The industry in which they are engaged is run and controlled by the owners completely—by the industrialists, the capitalists. The workers as such have no share in the management, no control of the profits, and no voice in the development of the business. They have no say as to how the profits should be assessed, whether the industry should be further developed and whether there should be a reserve build up for any crisis, unemployment, slump or anything else of that nature. It occurred to me to ask whether this industrial authority which is being set up will have any function in regard to that matter. Having found out what our resources are will they have any control or direction on the way in which those resources will be used? Will they, for instance, be able to direct the industrialists along lines which would give the workers some real interest in the development of the economy of the country as a whole by making them partners in these industrial enterprises and developments that are now being undertaken? It may be that in other countries such an interest has been given to the workers on the initiative of the capitalists themselves.
In my experience and knowledge I think there is very little expectation that the Irish capitalists, either those who are already old and well-established or the latest entrants into the ranks of capitalists, will make any effort to give the workers a controlling interest or share in the management of their industry. Our capitalists still regard themselves as the absolute owners of industry; they believe that they, and they alone, know how to run and manage big business. They regard themselves as the masters in their own sphere of industrial activity. I think such beliefs can only be removed in this country by governmental action, action such as could be taken by a commission engaged in the type of survey I have indicated in this motion. In my opinion that is the only way in which to eradicate these beliefs; they cannot be removed by a process of propaganda or by the education of our industrialists.
Thirteen years ago the Labour Party interested itself in this matter of the setting up of some such authority as the commission I have indicated to make a survey of the natural resources of the country and organise their development for the economic well-being of the country as a whole. In a pamphlet entitled "Labour's Constructive Programme for an Organised Nation" the policy underlying this matter is correctly, if somewhat briefly, set out at pages 14 and 15:—
"The economic policy now being pursued in this country has had the effect, if not the intention, of protecting and encouraging many dubious and uneconomic forms of private enterprise on the entirely false assumption that the public interest will thereby be served. Many of the industries which have been farmed out to private enterprise are absolutely essential to the life of the nation itself and the exercise of control over them by the Government should have been preserved as a basic principle of our legislation. The methods which have been adopted in regard to industrial development generally have not served the public interest, but on the contrary have acted as an incentive to greed and avariciousness without even the pretext of an assurance that the best use will be made by the capitalists of the opportunities provided for them. So as to correct the abuses that have revealed themselves over a number of years, and as a safeguard against future abuses in regard to the organisation and management of industry, the Labour Party would establish an economic council with the necessary subsidiary bodies, to explore and survey the industrial and agricultural potentialities of the country and to plan development along progressive and remunerative lines. This council, which would be endowed with wide powers, would be independent of departmental interference; it would be presided over by a member of the Government and subject to the authority of the Government and of the Dáil, its financial resources would be limited only by the requirements of the country and its aptitude for employing them usefully and with advantage to the nation. Both in regard to policy and administration, the economic council would be directly responsible to the head of the Government.
The economic council would be authorised to establish for each industry and specific activity of the organised nation such subsidiary bodies as may be considered necessary to survey, plan, co-ordinate and direct the tendency of these industries and activities.
While considerable importance must be attached to the research work which the economic council would undertake, primarily it will be concerned with the development and co-ordination of industry, agriculture and transport. The best manner of utilising the resources of the nation —land, waters, minerals, scientific knowledge, inventions, industrial plant and the labour power of the State—would be its immediate concern."
As I have indicated, the fault in the establishment of any industrial authority is that it leaves out of consideration that which is given first place in this resumé in the functions of an economic council. It says here that it would be necessary to survey, plan and co-ordinate the tendency of these industries and activities. Without such a survey as to the possibilities there are in the resources of the country, there is little likelihood that such an authority as that suggested will be little more than a place for the discussion and debate of pet theories governing the different economic interests represented on the board. That is something we do not want. We do not want mere idle discussion. It is an urgent need of the country at the moment that the natural resources should be developed. Not only should they be developed but they should be developed with a proper regard to the interests of the labour force of the country and not merely to the interests of the industrialists. The suggestion of the establishment of an economic council has as its primary basis a survey of our resources with a subsequent co-ordination and development of them such as is outlined in this further pamphlet published in 1940 entitled "Planning for the Crisis." In 1940 the Labour Party had put forward certain schemes to the then Government with regard to the development of our natural resources. Most of these schemes were not acceptable to the Government at the time. They were not compatible with Government philosophy in relation to industrial development. The result was that the Labour Party produced an alternative policy to the one then in use or about to be implemented by the Government of the day. I move the adjournment of the debate.