I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. This measure is designed to provide for workers employed on the land of this country, on a weekly contract for wages, the right to a half-holiday. The first thing that strikes me about it is that it is rather strange that at this period of advancement of civilisation and progress we should be talking now, in the year 1950, of the need for so simple an advantage for workers as a weekly half-holiday.
The principle of rest from labour, the idea that the worker should not be kept eternally with his back bent, or with his nose to the grindstone, is a principle, an idea, which has been accepted in most parts of this country and, generally, all over the world. Here we have a section of the Irish nation, the largest group of workers following one occupation and employed for wages, the farm labourers, and they have not yet been given, by law, the right to a weekly half-holiday.
I and others associated with me in this measure are asking the Dáil to write into our Statute Book this very simple concession. I have noticed that within recent weeks opposition to the idea of a weekly half-holiday for farm labourers has been voiced outside of this House by members of the House, and I have heard opposition expressed to the idea inside this House on different occasions. I am always at a loss to understand how we can agree to have one law for one section of the people and another law for another section.
This measure vitally affects the agricultural worker on the one hand, and on the other hand the farmer who employs labour. There are many thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, of farmers in this country who employ no labour. But when this opposition is voiced, I often wonder at how short is the memory of those who are giving expression to this opposition. The tenant proprietors of this country have achieved a certain degree of security, of fixity of tenure. They would not have achieved that degree of security, they would not have achieved the present condition of what I would describe as relative prosperity —relative, that is, in relation to their condition 50, 60 or 70 years ago, when the landlords were rack-renting them and when they were held in economic subjection by a foreign power, not alone politically but economically, when there was a stranglehold on the peasant proprietors of this country— had they not fought to achieve it. The fight was made, first of all, by the men who were concerned, the peasant proprietors, but their strongest arm and their strongest allies were these men I am talking about here now, the men to whom Tone referred a couple of hundred years ago almost as the "men of no property," the men with no stake in the country other than the products of their own toil and their own efforts and sweat. These men are the lowliest section of our people to-day.
I suppose in number it will be thought that they do not matter very much, and when electioneering takes place we are all aware of the fact that the large political Parties, when making their plea for political power, inevitably design their propaganda so as to attract support from those who are numerically greatest, from those who are in largest numbers, and they would be the tenant proprietors of the land. I suppose there is approximately upwards of 100,000 men working for wages on the land, as opposed to over 500,000 of those who either own land directly or have an indirect interest in ownership of the land by virtue of their relationship to farmers or proprietors.
I think this is a fact which has affected the fortunes of farm labourers right down to the present day. I am making the appeal, in connection with this Bill, to the sense of justice which must reside in the minds and in the hearts of every member of this House, no matter to which Party he may belong. Farm labourers in Ireland work 54 hours a week. There are not many people in this country who can say they work 54 hours a week. Industrial workers at one time were required to work 70 hours a week. In the not-too-distant past, within living memory, dock labourers had to work the round of the clock. Factories and mill-workers have had to work, in bygone years which are long, long past, until they dropped. In those years it was suggested that there should be a reduction of hours, that it was reasonable that human beings, who were given intellect and a sould to distinguish them from the brute animal in the fields, should get some sort of decent treatment and that there should be some regulation of hours, that it should not be just a question of "from work to bed", as the saying goes in the country, that it should not be just a question of toiling from dawn to dark, that a man was designed and created by the Almighty for something higher than that, and that, in order to afford him the opportunity to aspire to these higher things, he should be given shorter hours of work and fairer conditions.
When those very moderate and what are now very respectable ideas were first propounded in this country by the late James Larkin 40 years ago and by James Connolly and other men like him, and when they were propounded in Britain earlier still, the very self-same arguments that are now being used, or have been used in recent weeks in connection with this very simple measure to give a small benefit to agricultural workers, were used then. There is no difference whatever between them. In those days, when the great men of that period were striving, when progressive social thinkers or trade union leaders were working tooth and nail to improve the position of workers, every device was employed to prevent the progress of what they were trying to achieve and every word that could be said was said about them and every act that could be carried out was employed against them to prevent what they were trying to bring about, a fairer deal for people who were not blessed with the world's goods who had not been born to property, who had not been lucky enough to accumulate property and who had nothing to sell, but their labour whether it was of hand or of brain.
As I say, it was said then, in the days when efforts were being made to prevent children being employed in the mines in Britain—something which everybody, the most respectable, the biggest employer in Britain or in this country to-day would look upon with horror and be appalled to think of, children being employed in the mines —and when an effort was made to stop that and bring about some degree of civilised conduct in so far as employers and workers were concerned, the cry went up that it would bring about ruin for the industry of winning coal. Every time we hear protests against this measure, based upon the argument that it will harm the agricultural industry, we are reminded of what happened in years gone by in other cases.
I think that an industry such as the agricultural industry of this country, which is our basic industry, is one which we must cherish and endeavour to bring to full prosperity by every means in our power, and upon which the whole future of this nation eventually depends, no matter what industrialisation may take place. If that industry is in such a position that we cannot afford to give the men who work the land for wages, and for the lowest wages paid to any section of our people, 1/13th of a break of their weekly contract of service of 54 hours per week, then the time has come when we must bow our heads in shame and admit that our agricultural industry is nothing to boast about and that the fault lies within ourselves.
I am asking for nothing more than that the simplest Christian principle of justice should be applied to these men. I have heard it said and bruited about by those who do not take the trouble to find out the true facts that this would be impracticable and that one cannot give a farm labourer a half-day every week because that system cannot be worked on the land. I have heard the question asked: What will we do if the cows have to be milked; what will happen in the harvest-time if every other day is wet and Saturday is fine, how can we give a half-day then? There is no more reasonable citizen in our State than the agricultural worker. There is no better class, no sounder class, no more reasonable class than that of the agricultural workers. There is no class which will rush to the farmer's aid so speedily in time of stress and danger.
In the greater part of Co. Dublin agricultural labourers enjoy a half-holiday. They have been enjoying that half-holiday since 1944. Farmer Deputies who know Co. Dublin particularly the area north of the river, will agree that that is one of the most intensively cultivated and developed agricultural areas in the country. We have there some of the best farmers in Ireland. When the idea of a half-day per week for the agricultural workers in that area was first mooted six years ago it was not kindly received. Eventually, by dint of negotiation and persuasion, which took various forms, the principle of a half-day was established. It has worked quite successfully and quite satisfactorily. It has not done any damage to the industry. Any Co. Dublin farmer will tell the farmer Deputies here that it has brought about a more satisfactory condition of affairs in agriculture in Co. Dublin. Formerly, because of its proximity to the city, there were times when it was difficult for farmers to get labour. It is not easy for them now because if the men go across the road on to a building job they can get £2 per week more and work eight hours per week less than if they were working for a farmer. But because of the successful operation of the half-day for the agricultural worker in Co. Dublin, the farmer has undoubtedly helped himself in bringing about a more satisfactory position there.
Generally speaking, the half-day applies throughout the county. I would ask those Deputies who are interested in this very important issue from the point of view of the 100,000 workers on the land to take the trouble before they cast their vote of inquiring from the farmers in Co. Dublin, without reference to their workers, whether this half-day has done any damage to the agricultural industry. They will find that, on the contrary, its effect has been most beneficial.
I know other speakers will follow me on this measure. This is not the first time this matter has been discussed here and for that reason it is to some extent possible to anticipate some of the points that may be raised. It may be said that it is not the job of the Dáil to legislate in this fashion; that the Dáil in putting through legislation of this kind would be usurping or assuming functions more appropriate to the trade union movement. It is very easy to say that but the fact remains that there is no country in the world where the trade union movement has been able to achieve effective organisation amongst farm labourers. By effective organisation I mean 100 per cent. organisation. There is no country where there has been effective organisation even amongst the farmers. That is a condition about which nobody can do very much. The previous Government saw fit to introduce a measure to bring about certain minimum standards in relation to the wages of agricultural workers. On occasion the present Minister has taken pride in the fact that he has lifted the wages to a £3 per week minimum. That is something which those of us who are in contact with these workers would not boast about because we know that that wage bears no relationship to the cost of living to-day. It is a mystery to me and to others how the farm labourer can live on £3 per week and in many cases rear a very large family.
I have discussed this question of a half-day for farm labourers in every county in the Republic. I have not gone, as some would seem to think, with the idea of disturbing what are wishfully described, in my view, as the harmonious relations that exist between the farmer and his man, or, as was said on one occasion, between the master and his man. I have gone there simply to obtain the views of the people interested in this proposed improvement or concession. I can tell the House that most people need not be concerned about the justice of the case. They can be concerned about it politically because for the farm labourers there is no more important issue at stake. When Deputies go into the lobby to vote I ask them to bear that in mind. I appeal to their sense of justice. I appeal to them to contrast the position of the agricultural worker with that of the industrial worker. In doing that, I ask them to make up their minds with a view to ensuring that justice is done to that most neglected section of our people.