Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 18 Feb 1953

Vol. 136 No. 8

Committee on Finance. - Vóta 58 — Gnóthaí Eachtracha.

Aire Gnóthaí Eachtracha (Proinnsias Mac Aogáin)

Tairgim:—

Go ndeonfar suim fhorlíontach nach mó ná £10 chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfas chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31ú lá de Mhárta, 1953, chun Tuarastal agus Costas Oifig an Aire Gnóthaí Eachtracha agus Seirbhísí áirithe atá faoi riaradh na hOifige sin (Uimh. 16 de 1924), lena n-áirítear Deontas-í-gCabhair.

Go ndeonfar suim fhorlíontach nach mó ná £38,500 chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfas chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31ú lá de Mhárta, 1953, chun Tuarastal agus Costas Oifig an Aire Gnóthaí Eachtracha agus Seirbhísí áirithe atá faoi riaradh na hOifige sin (Uimh. 16 de 1924), lena n-áirítear Deontas-i-gCabhair.

Is chuige a tugadh isteach an Meastachán Forlíontach comharthachta chun caoi a thabhairt do Dháil Éireann an Vóta i gcóir Gnóthaí Eachtracha a phlé. Ach, tar éis an Meastachán Forlíontach sin a chur timpeall, tharlagurbh éigean Meastachán Forlíontach eile a chur timpeall ag moladh £38,500 de mhéadú sa bhfóirdheontas don Ghníomhaireacht Nuachta Eireannach.

Suim £422,660 iomlán an Mheastacháin, lena n-áirítear an dá Mheastachán Fhorlíontacha, i geóir Gnóthaí Eachtracha don bhliain 1952-53. Sin glan-mhéadú de £22,530 ar an suim a soláthraíodh don bhliain 1951-52. Faoi mhíreheann C.2—An Ghníomháireacht Nuachta Éireannach—a tharla an príomh-mhéadú; tá an tsuim iomlán lena aghaidh sin, £18,500 níos airde ná suim iomlán na bliana 1951-52.

Nuair a bhí an Meastachán le haghaidh tuarastal sa bhliain reatha á ullmhú agam bhunaíos é ar líon na foirinne a bhí ag fónamh iarbhír. Ní dearnadh aon tsoláthar i gcóir postanna a bhí ar an mBunaíocht ach nár líonadh. Sábháladh roinnt airgid trí dheireadh a chur le postanna nár líonadh riamh (Oifigeach Caidrimh Phoiblí, Londain); trí gan duine ar bith a cheapadh in ionad oifigeach a tugadh ar iasacht do Ranna eile nó do chomhluchtaí Stáit (Rúnaí Cúnta do Chóras Tráchtála Teoranta, Dara Rúní don Roinn Oideachais), agus cuireadh post amháin (Oifigeach Caidrimh Phoiblí, Nua-Eabhroc) ar ceal, rud a shábháil beagnach £4,000.

I rith na bliana hathraíodh an caidreamh a bhí againn leis an nGearmáin ó chéim Chonsalachta go céim Taidhleoireachta. Ina theannta sin bunaíodh caidreamh taidhleoireachta le dhá thír nua, an Tuire agus an Ostair, tríd an ionadaí san Iodáil a chreidiúnú chun na Tuirce agus an t-ionadaí san Eilbhéis a chreidiúnú chun na hOstaire. Taobh amuigh dhíobh sin, ní dearnadh aon athrú i rith na bliana seo caite ar líon iomlán na n-ionadaithe ó ghairm atá ag an Stát ar an gcoigrích. Tá 19 gcinn d'Oifigí Gairmiúla againn i gcónaí (7 nAmbasadóireacht, 8 Leagáideacht, Ard-Chonsalacht amháin, agus trí Chonsalacht). Tá Consalacht Oinigh againn in Gothenburg, Oslo, Antwerp, Beyrouth, San Salvador agus, le roinnt míosa anuas, i Manila. Tá iomairle ar siúl i dtaobh a leithéid de cheapachán san Íoslainn.

Maidir le hionadaíocht eachtrannach in Éirinn, tá Rialtais na Tuirce agusna hOstaire tar éis a n-ionadaithe í bPáras a chreidiúnú chun na tíre seo, ar chéim Aire Lánchumhachtaigh. Tá Aire na hÍoslainne i bPáras creidiúnaithe chun na tíre seo freisin. Taobh amuigh den mhéid sin níor tháinig aon athrú ar an ionadaíocht eachtrannach sa tír.

Bhí áthas orainn i rith na bliana fáilte a chur roimh Nuneio nua an phápa, A Oirearcas an Dochtúir Ó hEadhra. Is deimhin liom gurb é main na Dála go nguidhfinn tréimhse shona dhó sa tir seo. I rith na bliana freisin fuair a Oirearcas Francis P. Matthews, Ambasadóir na Stát Aontaithe, bás. Ba mhaith liom athuair, thar ceann na Dála, a rá go ndeanaimid comhbhrón le húdaráis na Stát Aontaithe agus le baintrigh agus clann an Ambasadóra

Bhí éileamh mór ar Phasanna i rith na bliann (cé gurbh ísle é, ní nach ionadh, ná mar bhí sa mBliain Naofa, 1950) toise gur chaith níos mó d'ár muintir saoire thar lear i mbliana ná mar chaith aon bhliain eile. Is lú go mór an méid visa a tugadh ná mar tugtaí sna blianta díreach tar éis an chogaidh, mar gheall ar na comhaontuithe a rinneadh le tíortha eile chun deireadh a chur le visa. Rud tábhachtach a tharla, an chéad lá d'Aibreán seo caite, gur cuireadh deireadh leis an ngá a bhí, ó aimsir an chogaidh, le doiciméid taistil idir Éire agus an Bhreatain Mhór. Tá ár n-oifigí thar lear, go háirithe sna Stáit Aontaithe, ag leanacht de sheirbhís luachmhar a thabhairt do shaoránaigh Éireannacha i gcásanna a bhaineas le huachta.

Ar an taobh eacnamúil dhe is cuid thábhachtach de ghnó na Roinne tráchtáil choigríche na hÉireann a shaothrú. Caitheann ár dtaidhleoirí uile thar lear a lán dá n-am ag cur onnmhuirithe na hÉireann ar aghaidh sna tíortha ina bhfuilid. Tá Comhaontú Trádála i bhfeidhm faoi láthair idir an tír seo agus dhá thír dhéag. Tá a lán de na tíortha sin rannpháirteach linn san Eagras um Chomhar Eacnamaíochta san Eoraip. Is de chineál leanúnach cuid de na Comhaontuithe sin, ach cuid eile, ar a n-áirítear na Comhaontuithe tábhachtacha ato againn leis an nGearmáin, an Fhraináagus an Ísiltír, is amhlaidh a déantar as an nua gach bliain iad.

Is lán-leor mar fhianaise ar fhiúntas na gComhaontuithe sin gur chuireamar i 1952, d'ainneoin an lagadh coiteann a tháinig sa trádáil eadarnáisiúnta le dhá mhí dhéag anuas, luach £5.9 milliún punt d'onnmhuiríthe chun na dtíortha, seachas an Bhreatain Mhór, lena raibh Comhaontuithe Trádála againn. Níor chuireamar chun na dtíortha sin ach luach 5.3 milliún punt i 1951.

Ba bheart tábhachtach i saothrú ár dTrádála Coigríche Córas Tráchtála Teoranta a bhunú i rith na bliana. Tá an comhlucht sin anois tar éis a ghlacadh de chúram air féin ár dtrádáil le líomatáiste an dolaeir a chur chun cinn. Táthar anois tar éis oifigigh trádála agus fo-oifigigh eile d'Fhoirinn na Roinne seo sna stáit aontaithe, maraon le Rúnaí Cúnta ón gCeannOifig, a thabhairt ar iasacht go lánaimsireach don chomhlucht sin.

Ní cheapaim gur gá anois a thuilleach a rá maidir leis an gcor atá tar éis teacht de dheasca deireadh a chur le Cabhair Mharshall agus de dheasca an U.S. Mutual Security Act, 1951, a rith. Tá eagras amháin, afach, a d'fhás as Cabhair Mharshall, eadhon, an tEagras um Chomhar Eacnamaíochta san Eoraip, ag feidhmiú go bríomhar go fóill. Tá a coin féin á dhéanamh ag Éire i gcónaí san eagras sin. Tugann sé caoi an-mhaith do na tíortha is comhaltaí dhe chun na ceisteanna tromaí a scrúdú a thig go sonrach as an Easnamh Dolaeraí atá ann i gcónaí agus chun go bpléifidís na modhanna ar a bhféadhfaí na fadhbanna d'fhuascailt trí chomhbheart.

Leanann an Roinn dá feasachán seachtainiúil, tuairim 6,500 cóip, d'eisiúint. Chomh maíth leis sin, eisíonn an Roinn an Six County Newssheetin aghaidh na coicíse. Bíonn ann nuacht “suas chun dáta” ar chúrsaí sna Sé Chontae agus ar ghníomhachtaí ag cur i gcoinne na Teorann, agus cuirtear é seo timpeall chun daoine a bhfuil suim ghníomach acu sa bhfeachtas i gcoinne na Teorann. Is í an Roinn a imdháileann anois na paimfléidí um Dhichur na Teorann d'ullmhaigh an Coiste Ilpháirteach um Dhíchur na Teorann.

I dteannta na ngníomhachtaí sin, eisíonn an Ambasadóireacht i bPáras feasacháin tréimhsiúla (i bhFraincis) agus eisíonn an Ambasadóireacht i gCanberra feasacháin tréimhsiúla freisin. Roimhe seo dhéannadh an Ambasadóireacht i Washington feasachán d'eisiúint, ach tá deireadh leis sin anois agus eisitcar feasachán na Roinne ina ionad. Maidir le cúrsaí eolais de, sholáthraigh an roinn freagraí ar cheisteanna de gach saghas, a cuireadh chun na Roinne féin agus chun na misiúin thar lear ó eachtrannaigh a raibh suim acu in Éirinn. I gcomhair le hOifig Eolais an Rialtais agus le Bord Cuartaíochta na hÉireann, fógra Fáilte, Aer Lingus, agus Córas Iompair Éireann, rinneadar deimhin de go bhfaigheadh iriseoirí a tháinig anseo gach deis faid a bhíodar sa tír. Rinneadh tagairtí d'Éirinn i nuachtáin choigríche a scrúdú agus, aon uair ba ghá é, ceartaíodh ráitis mhí-chruinne.

Ní gá dhom trácht go mionchruinn ar a ndearna an Coiste Comhairlitheach um Chaidréamh Cultúra i rith na bliana seo caite ós rud é go bhfuil sin dearta i dTuarascáil an Choiste, a cuireadh chun na Teachtaí. Measaim go n-aontófar, tar éis an Tuaraseail sin a léamh, gur éirigh go cumasach leis an gCoiste. Dhligh an obair sin síor-aire agus comhoibriú ó Chomhaltaí an Choiste, agus is mian liom mór-bhuíochas a chur in iúil dóibh thar mo cheann féin agus thar ceann an Rialtais toise a fhonnmhaire a chaitheadar am is dúthracht chun na seéimeanna a tionscnaíodh a thabhairt chun críche chomh maith sin.

I rith na bliana ghlacamar páirt ghníomhach i geúrsaí Chomhairle na nEorpa agus rinne ár dtoseairí, cuma cén Páirtí ar de iad, tuairim mhuintir na hÉireann faoin nf a bhíodh faoi dhíospóireacht a chur faoi bhráid na Comhairle agus ligeadar solas, aon tráth a fuaireadar deis, ar an éagóir atá an chríoch-dheighilt a dhéanamh ar ár dtír.

Mr. MacBride

I would like at the outset to associate myself with the words of welcome uttered by the Minister to the new Apostolic Nuncio to Ireland, Most Rev. Dr. O'Hara. The Minister was undoubtedly expressing the views of all members of the Housein saying how pleased we are to have him here. I am certain that he can assure his Excellency that there was a general feeling of satisfaction at the Holy Father's appointment of Most Rev. Dr. O'Hara.

Likewise, I would like to associate myself with the expression of sympathy and regret which the Minister has expressed in regard to the death of the late American Ambassador, the Honourable Francis Matthews. He had been all his life a friend of Ireland and had rendered great assistance to the cause of Ireland.

Frankly, I am rather disappointed at the speech made by the Minister. It is a factual recital merely of the departmental events and certainly it gives no indication of any kind as to what the Government's foreign policy is, if it has any kind of policy. I think it is a pity that, once a year at least, we could not have a debate or discussion in the House on foreign policy. The practice should be that the Minister, in introducing the Estimate for his Department annually, should give at least a broad outline of the Government's policy in regard to different matters. It is very difficult for the Opposition to serve any useful or constructive purpose if the Government is silent on its policy in regard to any particular matter.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I would remind Deputy MacBride that this is a Supplementary Estimate, and we are dealing only with the items for which the money is being asked.

Mr. Aiken

I would point out that this is the Estimate for £10, a token Vote, to enable a general discussion to take place—the discussion which would have taken place normally last year.

Mr. MacBride

Can I take it that there will be a seperate discussion on the Supplementary Estimate in regard to the news agency?

Mr. Aiken

No. I understand there will be but one discussion. I am moving each Estimate separately, but they will be discussed together.

Mr. MacBride

One cannot help feeling that possibly the absense ofany indication of policy from the Minister's introductory statement represents the true position of the Government in regard to foreign affairs, that they, in fact, have no policy. I do not know whether the Minister would agree to elaborate, before the conclusion of the discussion, on what the Government's attitude is with regard to the concept of European co-oper ation on various matters which arise from time to time in the Council of Europe. I do not know whether the Government has any policy in regard to our relations with regard to the U.S.A. From time to time in the course of the year, I think one could easily detect a tendency to play up to a certain anti-American feeling which was rather vocal from two or three people in this House and also in tain sections of the Press here, an anti-American feeling which seems to have been bred in two somewhat different quarters. One quarter which was markedly hostile to America was, of course, the normal Communist quarter. The other quarter from which a certain amount of anti-American propaganda emanated seemed to be that quarter which is usually most closely allied to the British viewpoint; this seems to have been an overflow of anti-Americanism which has been rather prevalent in Britain in recent years.

I do not think the Government or the Minister can have had any sympathy with such anti-American feeling. Probably any casual references which were made from time to time by Government supporters or members of the Government to this country "being put in pawn to a foreign power" were probably only made in the heat of debate or in order to score rather petty political points. Nevertheless, having regard to the fact that suggestions of that kind have emanated from time to time from Government supporters or Government allies, it would be well if the Minister would take the opportunity of clearing the air, when replying to the debate.

I have always taken the view that, as regards the foreign policy of this country, it is essential to balance it between Europe, on the one hand, andAmerica, on the other. We, in Ireland, are in a unique position in that respect, in that our associations are evenly balanced between Europe and America. We have received a considerable amount of help in the past from America, where undoubtedly Ireland can wield a considerable amount of influence. That should be a very potent factor in the development of our foreign policy, but, so far, we have not developed over a long period any consistent foreign policy. I hope it will be possible to develop such a foreign policy, and I should be glad to see the development of such a foreign policy removed from the field of sharp Party politics here.

I do not know whether the Minister would also consider the advisability of making any reference to the propriety or otherwise of certain steps which were publicised in great detail and with great splash in one of this morning's papers—intended apparently to embarrass the representative of the Holy See here. I do not know to what extent it is proper for somebody who enjoys the hospitality of this country to seek to create an embarrassing position for the doyen of the diplomatic corps or for our Government. It may well be that the Minister may consider it better not to say anything in regard to the matter at the moment, but I mention it so that he may have an opportunity, if he cares, to deal with it.

There is one matter which should be taken up more actively by the Department than it appears to have been, that is, the question of our territorial waters. The Minister will recall that, during the course of the year, I put down a great many questions to him to draw his attention to the recent decision of the International Court of Justice at The Hague in the dispute over the territorial limits between Britain and Norway. That decision is one of the utmost importance to us. As soon as the decision of the International Court of Justice at The Hague was announced, the Government of Iceland took immediate action on foot of that decision by extending very substantially the territorial fishinglimits of Iceland. It does seem extraordinary that, close on 12 months after this decision, our Government is not yet in a position to indicate its attitude to the whole question.

There are a number of issues involved and I agree that they are fairly complex, but the question, by and large, is fairly simple. It resolves itself into a question of the baseline from which the territorial limits are to be measured. If the decision of the International Court of Justice at The Hague, as applied by the Icelandic Government, were to be applied to Ireland, it would extend our territorial fishery limits very considerably and, I think, would be of some tremendous assistance to our own fishing industry.

As I indicated a few moments ago, the Icelandic Government took action immediately on foot of the decision of the International Court. I have noticed since that various efforts have been made in Britain to try to coerce the Icelandic Government into retreating from the position they had taken up. I should like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Icelandic Government and people on the stand they have taken in regard to that matter. I feel that everybody in Ireland would welcome an indication by the Minister and by the Government here that they appreciated the attitude of the Icelandic Government in standing for their legal rights despite the attempt that has been made to bully them by coercive economic measures into acquiescence of the British attitude.

I am very glad to see from the Minister's statement that the development of an export trade to countries other than Britain has been proceeding successfully. I think that there is very often an insufficient realisation in the country to-day that the Department of External Affairs plays an important rôle in the development of an export trade. Undoubtedly it is of vital importance to the economy of the country that we should develop an export trade to countries other than Britain. So long as this country is dependent on just one customer, it will be very difficult to secure a proper development of the export trade whichwe desire. I am very glad to note, therefore, that exports to countries other than Britain have increased in the course of the year. I hope the Minister will never miss an opportunity of starting trade negotiations or entering into trade treaties with other countries with a view to the promotion of foreign trade. I do not know whether the relations between Córas Tráchtáia and the Department are close. I hope they are as close as possible because undoubtedly our missions abroad should be of some assistance to Córas Tráchtála in the promotion of trade.

I am sorry that the Minister did not deal more fully with the question of the news agency as I feel that there is a good deal of misunderstanding, often created deliberately, as to the position of the news agency. I regard the news agency as a service that is absolutely essential to this country. Undoubtedly many differences of opinion may exist as to the method of working the news agency and as to the various details but, by and large, I cannot understand any criticism of the news agency on the ground that we have no need for an Irish news agency nor do I understand any criticism which assumes that an Irish news agency has to be more limited in its scope than a foreign news agency. I hope that in the course of time it will come to be appreciated that Ireland needs a news agency of its own just as much as any other country.

I should like the Minister to consider the possibility of putting into operation at some time the provisions of the Act under which the news agency was set up, which provided for the setting up of an advisory committee, consisting of representatives of the newspapers and the journalists' associations. I do hope that sooner or later, once the news agency is on its feet, it will be possible gradually to hand over control of the news agency to a committee representative of the newspapers and the journalists' associations. Opposition to the formation of the news agency to a certain extent has delayed that process but as soon as the directors of the news agency and the Government can see their wayto do so, I think that they should set up this advisory committee and in that way ensure a greater degree of co-operation between the newspapers, journalists and the news agency.

I am sorry that the Minister did not avail of this occasion even to mention the biggest and most important national problem we have, namely, the Partition of the country. Last year I think the Taoiseach indicated in the course of the discussion on his Estimate that he thought the matter had been dealt with in the discussion on the Estimate for the Department of External Affairs. This year we are in the position that neither on the Vote for the Taoiseach's Department nor on the Vote for External Affairs has the question of Partition even been mentioned by either the Taoiseach or the Minister for External Affairs. True, it may be that here again the Minister or the Government have no policy in regard to it. Even if that be so, I think that the silence of the Taoiseach and of the Minister in this House might easily be misconstrued by representatives of other countries who might consider that that silence was in effect an acquiescence in the position as it stands. I hope that the Minister may be able to make the Government's attitude on this matter clear when he comes to conclude. I know it is always unsatisfactory to debate an Estimate a long time after the Estimate has been in fact passed and I suppose that was inevitable this year.

I should like to pay a tribute to the work which the Department and its officials have done generally. I know that their work has always been satisfactory and that very often it does not receive the amount of recognition it deserves from the public generally. A lot of the work performed by the Department may be of a routine nature but I know that the officers of the Department perform their duties with great loyalty to this country and that their work is of the utmost importance to the country.

Speaking on this Vote last year, I made a number of suggestions to the Minister regarding the raising of the status of some of our consular officesparticularly in Boston and Chicago. I feel that the position of the consular officers in those posts is not satisfactory. I know that the opinion of the Irish population in those cities is that the status of those posts should be raised. They are important posts particularly in regard to the development of trade and I urge the Minister as strongly as I can to consider raising these posts to the status of consulates general.

Mr. Cosgrave

I want to raise one matter on the Estimate introduced by the Minister and that is the substantial increase in respect of the news agency. I agree that there may be certain functions which the news agency can usefully discharge but as I understand the position since the legislation was introduced establishing the news agency undertakings then given by the Minister introducing it as to the scope and the work of the news agency have been departed from and the news agency has extended considerably the scope of its activities.

During the discussion on the second and subsequent stages of the News Agency Bill in 1949 the Minister on a number of occasions referred to the work which the news agency would do and to the fact that it was not intended to compete with the existing journalists or the existing practice and work which journalists covered: that, in fact, it would confine itself to certain defined spheres of activity, that it was not intended that the news agency would supply what was described as "hot" news or reports of accidents, crimes, racing, Dáil debates and so forth.

Since then, I understand that the news agency has supplied on a number of occasions to journalists and newspapers throughout the country reports exceeding the sphere of activity which was outlined when the Bill was being passed here, to such an extent that on a number of occasions the organisations representing the journalists submitted protests against the extension of the activities and referred to the fact no later than December last, in a circular. I quote:—

"When the Irish News Agency Bill was before the Dáil in 1949, specific assurances were given by the then Minister for External Affairs that the agency would not enter the field of `hot' news, or compete with existing news channels. Its function would be, according to the Minister, to `put Ireland on the map by supplying to the Press of the world accurate information concerning matters of cultural, trade and general interest calculated to promote tourism, trade and cultural relations'. The Minister further stated that it was not intended that the news agency should supply reports of accidents, crimes, court trials, stock exchange reports or Dáil reports.

So far has the agency departed from these objectives that it is now, with the aid of a heavy subsidy from the Exchequer, competing with established journalists by offering news and features to the provincial Press in this country."

I do not want to quote in extensofrom newspapers, but I have here a copy of theTipperary Starof the 25th October, 1952, and there are in that edition numerous quotations dealing with matters varying from photographs of the jumping team to a report that the Walls of Jericho have been discovered.

I think that these reports, all of which are attributed to the news agency, go far beyond the undertaking which was given to the House when the Bill was passed in 1949. I think that a question which should be considered is to what extent public money can continue to be spent and certainly spent to an increasing extent on the work of the news agency which in so far as a good deal of its activities are concerned is, in fact, competing directly with the work which journalists through the years and at present are already quite capable of undertaking and which, in fact, covers matters that the news agency was never intended to cover.

The supply of domestic news to newspapers and the supply of photographs and so on must interfere withor jeopardise the prospects of Irish journalists and newspaper men. The fact that the Supplementary Estimate introduced by the Minister proposes an increase of over £18,000 on what was spent on the news agency last year prompts the question whether the House is justified in voting this money for the work that in some respects the news agency is at present doing.

I need not read out the numerous occasions on which journalists and the journalists' organisations have expressed concern at the extent to which the news agency is interfering with the normal work which these organisations and their members are quite capable of carrying out. I would like to hear the justification from the Minister for the proposed increase which is substantially above that of last year and which is far above the Estimate originally introduced when the news agency was first established when it was expected that a sum of £25,000 would cover the expenses, allowing for changes in the value of money since which probably would account for some increase in respect of the expenses. I consider that much of the work which the news agency is now doing should be properly left to the journalists in this country who are making their livelihood in competition with an agency that is subsidised from the Exchequer.

Mr. D. Costello

It seems to me that the foreign policy of the present Government is to have no foreign policy. The present Minister has held the portfolio which he now holds for a period of 18 months, and during that time it has been, as far as I am aware, impossible to get any statement from the Head of the Government of which he is a member, or from any other Minister, as to what the Government's policy is in regard to the many matters which affect a country like ours in the world to-day, and in particular the problem of Partition, which is one of the major aspects of our foreign policy. We would have thought that on this Supplementary Estimate—the purpose of which was to give the Government an opportunity of stating its policy onforeign affairs and to give the Opposition an opportunity of discussing the Government's policy on foreign affairs —we would have had more than the mere factual statement which we have had this afternoon from the Minister. We are now in the position of not knowing the Government's policy in regard to the problem of Partition, or what its foreign policy is in regard to the many problems which now confront us in our relations with Western Europe on the one hand and America on the other hand. The country is left in the dark as to what the Government is doing. No doubt there are certain circumstances when it is a wise policy to do nothing but, either on the question of Partition or on the question of Western Europe. I do not think that this is a time when the country should do nothing. Furthermore, the Government should make it amply clear to the country as well as to interested parties outside the country that it is doing nothing—if that is its policy.

I do not think it is necessary, when there is so much unanimity in this House on the subject, to stress again the great injustice of Partition. Probably the only subject on which this House would be in complete accord is the desirability of ending Partition.

For some time we have been in doubt, I think, as to the effective means of ending Partition. On more than one occasion the present Leader of the Government has asked for a solution which he would be glad to accept if he thought it would be effective. In the summer of 1951 I had occasion to mention in this House what I regarded as a new approach to the problem of Partition. I should like to reiterate now what I said on the debate on the Estimate for the Department of External Affairs in the summer of 1951. I do not regard my remarks as containing the complete solution to the ending of this very difficult problem, but I regard the suggestions as the logical outcome of what are now regarded—certainly by the vast majority of the representatives of the people in this Dáil—as our relations between the Northern Government and the Government of this part of the country. They are thelogical conclusion of the fact that, probably without exception, the vast majority of Deputies in this House are of opinion that the use of force to end Partition would be neither effective nor desirable. Following from the fact that this Government, like their predecessors, had occasion, several times, to co-operate actively with the Northern Government in works of common interest to the two Governments, I presume that we have now got into a position—whilst never relaxing our demand that this injustice should be got rid of and whilst never relaxing the legitimate pressure we can bring to bear on the outside world to see that that injustice is remedied—where we have recognised the de factoGovernment of Northern Ireland. From the co-operation that took place between the two Governments a few times in the past three or four years on matters of common interest, nothing but good has flowed. From the comments in the Press on both sides of the Border it would appear that even the most bigoted Orangeman and the most extreme Nationalist have been prepared to admit that good can flow from co-operation on an economic level between the two Governments.

The logical outcome of the de factorecognition of the Northern Government and of the co-operation which we have had between the two Governments in the past is that we should now endeavour to bring about a much more complete economic co-operation between the two parts of the country for our mutual benefit. I can see no reason why, in endeavouring to bring about that economic co-operation between the two countries, the two Governments should not exchange commercial representatives. I can see no reason why—given active co-operation between the two Governments— we could not build up a customs union between the two parts of the country. I have examined the problem fairly carefully and I do not think there is any legal difficulty in bringing about a customs union between the northern and southern parts of our country. To my mind the difficulties are merely administrative difficulties and can be overcome. I feel that immense goodcould be achieved by co-operation between the two Governments and that, to a large extent, we could overcome the fear and prejudice which, to my mind, is at the present time the greatest barrier to the Irishmen who live in the northern part of our country joining with their fellowIrishmen in the rest of the island. I feel that that economic co-operation could be fruitful and beneficial. I can see no reason why, for example, in the administration of justice, certain very simple matters could not be fixed up between the two Governments which would greatly facilitate the working of the courts on either side of the Border. For example, it would appear to me to be a comparatively simple thing to reach agreement between the two Governments that, for each Government, the other part of the country would not be treated as a country outside the jurisdiction and that it would not be necessary to apply to the courts to serve writs out of the jurisdiction in the way in which both parts of the country have to do now if writs are to be issued against residents in the other part of the country.

Similarly, for the execution of judgments, it would be a comparatively simple matter to reach agreement by which judgments could be registered in both parts of the country. To my mind, all that would be comparatively insignificant, but it would be none the less an important development in the co-operation between the two parts of the country. It is only an example of what could be done if the two Governments were to get together and try to frame a common policy in respect of the many matters in which their interests coincide. As I have said, it does appear that the co-operation which we have had up to now has been welcomed on both sides of the Border, and all that I am suggesting is a logical development of what has been done in the past.

The Minister made no comment in his speech on the problem of Partition. He likewise made no comment on Ireland's rôle in the Council of Europe or on Ireland's present position in the many diverse happenings in the politics of Western Europe, of which weare very much a part. The relationship between the six countries which form the Coal and Steel Pact and the European countries which are members of the Council of Europe, has raised a very vital issue in the Council of Europe since the autumn of last year; but we have heard no Government statement as to what the Government's attitude is towards the present move among these six countries of Europe which are members of the Coal and Steel Pact as regards a greater integration of their economies and of their political structures. We have had no indication of our position, which must be shared by other countries in the Council of Europe, in regard to the setting up of a political authority, if such a political authority is set up as a result of the negotiations which are now in progress.

I feel that our contribution in the Council of Europe has been a very feeble one indeed. I think that Ireland has a very important rôle to play in the politics of Western Europe, and I do not think that we have been fulfilling our responsibilities in that regard.

Being a small country, we do not perhaps play a very dominant rôle when it comes to questions of armaments or of supplies, but none the less I think it is quite clear that our position—we are a predominantly Christian country in many ways enshrining in our way of life the whole of the principles which the countries of Western Europe are now trying by various methods to uphold—could have a much greater influence than our size and physical resources would appear to justify. I think that one of the reasons for the failure and the poor showing which we have made in the Council of Europe has been due to this, that the present Government has given no clear indication to its delegates or to the country. It has not given any lead by which our delegates in the Council of Europe would know what rôle Ireland has to play in regard to the many matters which arise for vital discussion there.

In case it is alleged that I am in any way warm on this when I stress the importance of playing a greater rôlein Western Europe, I should like to say that I am in agreement with the present Government's policy, the policy of its predecessors in office of remaining out of the N.A.T.O. I do want to say, however, that this country has a greater rôle to play in the building up of the spiritual resources which are the backbone of Western Europe at the present time. These spiritual resources require such a building up if the whole fabric which the statesmen of Western Europe are now trying to erect is not to topple.

I think that we cannot escape our responsibilities in Western Europe, nor can we hide from the duties which have been imposed upon us in regard to the rôle which Western Europe is to play in the politics of the present day. I think that, whether we like it or not, no country can be an island apart in itself, and that whether we like it or not, we are part of the mainland. I should like to hear the Minister, if not at the conclusion of this debate, at any rate in the near future, endeavour to bring to the notice of the Dáil and country what the Government's attitude is to these many problems which are now facing the statesmen of Western Europe, and the solution of which is so vital to the very existence of our State.

Mr. Cogan

I think I would be somewhat optimistic if I were to say that the views which have just been expressed by Deputy D. Costello would be accepted by the Minister. I would be very much surprised if they were, because I do not think that they are in accordance with the views which the Minister has expressed in regard to the handling of the question of Partition. Neither do I think that the views expressed by Deputy D. Costello were very much in accord with the statement of the former Taoiseach, Deputy J.A. Costello, when he expressed the view that the way to deal with Partition was "to hit England in her pride, her prestige and her pocket." Deputy D. Costello has suggested a more reasonable approach, if you like, than that to this question, an approach based on mutual goodwill and compromise. I think that his views are more in accordance with the viewswhich I have always held on this question than they are with the views either of the present Government or of its immediate predecessors.

I believe that we should aim at securing a greater measure of accord with the existing Government in the Six Counties. We may not accept, we must not accept and should not accept, that that State was legitimately formed, and must not abate our claims in regard to the injustice which was perpetrated on this nation when the Six Counties were carved out of the nation and set up as a State, Six Counties which could not on historical, geographical, economic or any other grounds claim the right to be set up as a separate State.

One cannot ignore facts of history. It is a fact of history that a State has been in existence in the North East of this country for over a quarter of a century. Common sense suggests that an approach based on goodwill and mutual understanding would be more likely to achieve results than one based on force or hostility. That is my personal view and it is shared by a considerable number of people in this State.

We know that discussions in regard to economic matters such as transport, hydro-electric development and other matters of that kind did a considerable amount of good, and helped to remove some of the hostility and misunderstanding which existed between us and the Six County State. We should go further. Deputy Costello suggested the possibility of a customs union. He seemed to suggest that there were no serious difficulties in that regard. I am not so sure about that. While the Six Counties enjoy or endure their present status in relation to Great Britain the establishment of a customs union would be rather difficult. The people of the Irish Republic and, perhaps, the Government, whether officially or otherwise, should encourage the people of the Six Counties to achieve a greater measure of independence than they have at present in relation to Great Britain. It would be desirable that the Six Counties should separate from Great Britain, at leastto the extent of having complete control of their own fiscal policy, complete control of customs and excise and complete control of defence.

One of the biggest steps towards the reunification of this historic nation would be the establishment of a unified defence force for the entire nation. If we could secure agreement with the Government of the Six Counties that the armed forces within the island nation of Ireland would be, even for a time, under the joint control of the Government of the Six Counties and the Government of the Irish Republic, it would be a step forward and one which, in the present world situation, might be favoured by more powerful nations in Western Europe.

It is all right to talk about strengthening the spiritual and economic forces of Western Europe but it would represent a very big step forward if we could integrate to a certain extent control of the economic and military affairs of this Island nation. It would not be any harm if the Government of the Irish Republic and the Government of the Six Counties were to meet in round table conference to discuss these matters in a realistic way. It may be that neither side is prepared at the moment to abandon the position which they have always upheld.

We have to deal not only with the past, but with the future, and the future is far more important. If an understanding could be arrived at in regard to economic matters, control of imports and exports of the entire island and, in regard to defence, for the common defence of the whole island, it would be a very big step towards the ultimate complete reunification of the nation.

Many people would feel that an approach along those lines would be somewhat revolutionary, but we must face the fact that a Government has existed in Belfast for over 25 years and, while there may not have been any historical foundation for the establishment of that Government and that State 30 years ago, its existence over that period of years creates a fact of history and an actuality which cannot be ignored and which it maybe just as well to recognise, just as we have recognised the existence of that Government in dealing with transport, hydro-electric development and other economic matters. I hope there will be a new approach to this question, that we will not follow stereotyped lines, that we will deal with it as a practical issue in a practical way.

It is my opinion that the Irish News Agency should not have been established and that it should be wound up as soon as possible. I do not think it can serve a very far reaching purpose in regard to the strengthening of this nation's position from a publicity propaganda point of view. If it is to function as a business concern, it ought to function without State aid of any kind. Ordinary journalists cannot be expected to compete with an institution or agency which is financed by the general taxpayer. The Minister should let us know the intention of the Government in regard to that agency. It is unfair that a business organisation which competes with ordinary journalists in their endeavour to earn a living should have behind it the backing of State finances. If the Minister were to say that he hopes that in a very short time this news agency will no longer require State aid it might be possible to justify its position.

The position, however, appears to be that from year to year provision has to be made to assist this news agency. That should not be the case in regard to any business concern which is competing with other people who are not in any way aided or assisted by the general taxpayer, but as a matter of fact have to pay the taxes.

I am glad that the Minister referred to the service which his Department through his agents in other countries is giving to our citizens abroad. I hope that that service is fully appreciated by our people, because it not only helps Irish citizens in other countries in dealing with other Governments, but it also helps to promote trade with other nations.

Mr. Gallagher

I am sure the Opposition will appreciate that lastyear the Minister stated he would endeavour to give this news agency a fair crack. It is good to see that they are now coming round, especially Deputy MacBride, to his way of thinking—that he is giving them a fair crack. I want to know, however, how long this is to continue. Is there to be any limit to this assistance to the Irish News Agency, or are we to continue to pour money into it year after year? In the normal way if you are giving something a trial, you fix a limit of two, three or five years. I should like to hear from the Minister if he has anything in mind in regard to fixing a limit for this news agency.

There is no doubt that this news agency is competing with the ordinary working journalist. I think that a news agency subsidised by the State should not be competing against the ordinary journalist. I know that representatives of this news agency seek interviews with people connected with the sporting world with regard to some team coming here, say, from Chicago or going to Chicago. I do not see what that has got to do with an Irish news agency or that it will help the propaganda in regard to Partition in any way. I have been approached several times to give interviews by representatives of this news agency in connection with teams travelling to other countries or teams coming here. I have always refused, because I am used to dealing with the sporting journalists of the three national papers. I know these gentlemen, and I am satisfied that they are first-class journalists. Anything I have to say I give to these journalists because they are earning a living here on Irish newspapers.

Mr. MacBride

Would the Deputy give an interview to Reuter's or the United Press?

Mr. Gallagher

Are there not journalists here representing these agencies?

Mr. MacBride

Are not Irish journalists employed by the Irish News Agency?

Mr. Gallagher

These news agencies are not subsidised by the State.

Mr. MacBride

I think the Deputy will find that there is subsidisation of an indirect nature for these news agencies.

Mr. Gallagher

There is not to my knowledge. Is Reuter's not contributed to by the various newspapers all over the world?

Mr. MacBride

If the Deputy looks into it, I think he will find that there are indirect subsidies to both these news agencies.

Mr. Gallagher

I am not aware of any Government subsidy to Reuter's or any other news agency except the Irish News Agency. I think that this news agency was established to help to publicise the injustice of Partition. What have sporting events here got to do with Partition? I know that our sportsmen are very great ambassadors, but I cannot see why representatives of this agency should look for interviews when we have local men quite fit to cover any sporting events. It may be claimed that the Irish News Agency is giving work to Irish journalists. We appreciate that. It is well known through the world that Irish journalists are first-class men. Their record in London alone is first-class, as there have been many great Irish journalists in Fleet Street. We can be proud of our Irish journalists. The fact that they are employed by the Irish News Agency is a good thing to a certain extent, but at the same time it is not right that they should be competing with the ordinary working journalists.

Deputy Costello referred to Partition. I think he was not stating the case of the Fine Gael Party. It was like what you would hear at a technical school debate or some university debate. The policy of Fianna Fáil has always been that Partition is a great injustice to this country and at every possible opportunity, whether abroad or elsewhere, our Ministers bring up this question of Partition. We are not sitting on it by any means. The Minister and the Taoiseach have dealt with it before and I am sure that they will deal with any question that comes uphere. I do not think that what Deputy Costello said to-day will give a great deal of help. Our Ministers know the facts and at every opportunity they get they certainly will bring it up. We look upon Partition as a real injustice inflicted upon us by the British Government. I will conclude on the note that I do not think it is right that this subsidised news agency should encroach on the work of Irish journalists. I think it is unfair. The Minister said last year that he was giving it a trial and I should like to know how long that trial will last—will it be one year or five years?

Brendán Mac Fheórais

I should like to appeal to the Minister to curtail the activities of the Irish News Agency to such an extent that it will not interfere with the ordinary work of Irish journalists, that it will not disseminate what has been described as "hot" news or news such as was described by Deputy Cosgrave. As against what Deputy Gallagher has said, whatever opinion the Minister may form of the activities of the news agency in its approach, I would strongly appeal to him to have an Irish news agency. If he is not satisfied that it is operated properly, I ask him to continue it and to review its activities, because I believe that there is and will be for a long time to come a place for such a news agency in this country as so many news items and stories are disseminated from this country to Great Britain and other countries in the world which are utterly distorted and do irreparable harm to this country and its people. Anybody who takes up some of the British Sunday newspapers and sees the type of Irish news or stories printed and circulated by these newspapers will readily appreciate why we should have some type of watchdog on the injurious type of propaganda that is circulated in these newspapers. If they were there even for the purpose of contradicting or correcting some of the stories published, I think they would be serving a very useful purpose. The seriousness of the matter was brought home to me by a friend of mine in Switzerland. An account was published in the Swiss newspapers of the shocking treatment meted outto horses exported from this country. That account was accompanied by photoghaphs. I do not wish to enter into the controversy circling around the exportation of horses but I do not believe that the reports carried by these Swiss papers were entirely accurate to say the least of it.

I appreciate Deputy Gallagher's sincerity but, with all due respect, I do not think he gave us Fianna Fáil policy as far as Partition is concerned. He gave us the Fianna Fáil attitude to Partition. I believe that that attitude is sincere but it cannot be described as policy merely to recognise the injustice of Partition and be determined to ventilate it here and elsewhere. All of us are at one in our determination to end Partition. As a nation I do not believe we have taken all the steps that could be taken to enlist the aid of people who could help us to solve this problem.

It is quite obvious that any approach, however friendly, to the Six County Government must end in complete failure. It is quite obvious that no matter what Government is in power in Great Britain—be it Labour, Conservative, Liberal or a combination of any two or three Parties—any approach made to it will not bear fruit as we know from experience. The Government of England invariably looks upon the Six Counties as an out-post of the Empire. It is one of their colonies, or possessions, of which they are fairly sure at a time when their colonies are fast dwindling and their Empire is growing smaller day by day.

I do not think we have attempted to enlist the aid that undoubtedly does exist in the U.S.A. in so far as Partition is concerned. Deputy Costello said we had made a very poor showing in the Council of Europe and that we have not been fulfilling our responsibilities in relation to the problems that confront Western Europe. I admit that is unfortunate but our approach to these external problems will always be overshadowed by the problem of our own partition. We do not feel enthusiastic about the problems confronting Western Europe. The delegates at the Council of Europecan scarcely be described as enthusiastic about the problems of other countries when we know from our own experience that they do not show any degree of interest in the problem confronting us. In most countries we seem to be regarded with a certain amount of suspicion and a certain amount of distrust because of the attitude we maintain with regard to the N.A.T.O. and to other military treaties or agreements into which some of the countries of Western Europe have entered. We are regarded as a nation that will not play ball. We know the reason for that. We also know the truth.

The present Minister for External Affairs has proclaimed our attitude towards the N.A.T.O., as did his predecessor, Deputy MacBride, on several occasions. Our attitude towards N.A.T.O. and our explanation for our neutrality must be properly publicised. Anybody who has travelled in Great Britain or had contact with Americans and people from other English speaking nations knows that immediately Ireland's problem is mentioned our position in the last war is raised and one is asked: "Were you not neutral in the last war? Are not you the nation that will not co-operate to defend Western Europe?" Our attitude on these matters must be properly publicised time and time again so that other countries will appreciate our viewpoint with regard to the peace and security of the world in general.

It would appear that any approach to the Government of the Six Counties must prove abortive. It would be useless to approach any Government in Great Britain. Therefore, if we are to have the aid of another world power in our efforts to solve Partition that power would have to be the U.S.A. America has had an influence and will continue to have an influence on British foreign policy for many years to come. By wielding her influence in the past she has forced the British Government to do things that she would not do in the ordinary course of events. Before we can achieve the aid of the U.S.A. we will have to co-ordinate the activities of the Irish people in the U.S.A. A big percentageof the Irish in America consists of St. Patrick's Day Irishmen. Their fathers and mothers, their grandfathers or their grandmothers came from Ireland and they have a sentimental regard for this country. They are, however, Americans first and Irishmen afterwards. That is quite understandable and we do not want them to be Irishmen first and Americans afterwards. America is the country of their birth. They are her citizens but they are willing to aid this country and willing to endeavour to bring pressure on their public representatives. The difficulty is that there are so many Irish societies in the U.S.A. that they are pulling against one another. There is no unanimity amongst them as to the best methods to be adopted in influencing public opinion or public representatives.

Were it not for our own representatives in the U.S.A. those of us visiting the country and meeting the different Irish societies there would come back not knowing what the attitude of the Irish in America is towards the solution of our problem of Partition. If the Minister endeavoured to coordinate the activities of these organisations we would be much more successful in enlisting the aid of the U.S.A. as a whole in the solution of our problem. It is extraordinary to discover the different ideas people in the U.S.A. have with regard to Partition. They, too, must be educated.

I met a prominent Congressman from the U.S.A. on one occasion. He told me that he had been in Ireland, had visited almost every county and was satisfied—I did not believe this, and I told him so—that the people in the Border counties did not want to see a solution to the Partition problem. That is untrue, and the people in the Border counties, especially, know that it is untrue, but is it not a ghastly state of affairs to say that a Congressman from the U.S.A., with a well-sounding Irish name, should believe that traders around the Border of the Twenty-Six Counties and Six Counties do not want a solution to the Partition problem?

Captain Giles

He was not far wrong. They are doing too well.

Brendán Mac Fheórais

I do not believe he was right. There may be some individuals but I believe, and Deputy Captain Giles knows, that the majority of the people——

Captain Giles

Yes.

Brendán Mac Fheórais

——have no interest in the Border traffic to which my Congressman friend referred. There is one deliberate attitude in the U.S.A., as there is in other countries, that the Partition problem is a religious problem. If we do not take steps to correct that opinion, if we do not take steps to demonstrate that these two opinions which I mentioned are untrue, I do not think we can do the good we undoubtedly could do if we could educate the Irish people in the U.S.A.

I want to say this to the Minister or to any man who may come after him as Minister for External Affairs and is engaged on this particular problem of Partition, that in a very short time the Irish influence in America will be substantially weaker. Anybody who knows anything of the U.S.A.—I do not claim to know much about it—knows that the influence of the Irish—and their influence was very big up to some years ago—is diminishing at the present time and diminishing rapidly. It is true there are many public representatives in Congress and in the Senate with Irish names. There is a big percentage of what we regard as Irishmen in these two bodies but their influence is dwindling and unless we avail of the influence they now have we will have lost a big opportunity.

There is another angle that was put to me with regard to the efforts of Irish associations in the U.S.A. to influence public opinion. I was told that some of these societies or some of these individuals were more interested in the sale of Irish hospital sweep tickets than they were in Partition, that they gave their support to Congressmen or Senators who would see that the sale of these hospital sweep tickets was not interfered with. I do not know what goes on with some of the Irish societies in America but if such allegations are true, that the Irish societies over there mix up their hospital sweepstaketickets with the problem of Partition, there is little hope of achieving anything over there.

However, I make this appeal to the Minister to make an effort at co-ordinating the activities of these Irish societies, to try to stop the bickering that undoubtedly goes on between them and to try to have one big Irish society that will have some influence with the Government of the U.S.A., which, I believe, in turn, can have a big influence with Great Britain towards the solution of the Partition problem.

Mr. Blowick

I would like to join with the Minister in welcoming the Papal Nuncio, Most Reverend Dr. O'Hara, and in wishing him a very happy period in this country. In that regard I would like to refer to what all of us must have seen with amazement in this morning's papers, a petition filed with the United States Embassy by an American citizen which sought to deprive the Nuncio of his American citizenship. I do not know whether it would be correct or proper to deal with that particular aspect at the moment, but I would like, if the Minister would make a statement.

Acting-Chairman (Mr. O'Donnell)

That is scarcely a matter for the Minister.

Mr. Blowick

I think this matter should concern the House. While the Papal Nuncio is within our country he is entitled to our protection. He represents the Holy Father.

Acting-Chairman (Mr. O'Donnell)

His citizenship is not a matter for this Parliament.

Mr. Blowick

When a citizen of another country is here he is under our protection. Certainly such a matter as this cannot be let pass lightly, because, to my mind, there is something much deeper underlying this move.

The second matter to which I want to refer is the remarkable silence on the question of Partition in the Minister's statement. I think that it is the first time since I came to this House in 1943——

Mr. O'Higgins

It was the same in 1947.

Mr. Blowick

It is a remarkable thing that in this particular Estimate for External Affairs not one single word in the Minister's statement refers to the question of Partition. I think it is the question that must be uppermost in all our minds, no matter what political affiliations we may hold. Every Irishman and woman would like to see the unification of the country accomplished as soon as possible, and it is an extraordinary thing that the Minister's statement does not refer to what must be the one outstanding national problem at the present time.

One Fianna Fáil Deputy who spoke about Partition must have been keenly conscious of the Minister's absolute apathy towards this whole question; he glossed over it by saying that Deputies, both on this side of the House as well as on his own side, could safely leave it in the hands of the Minister for External Affairs and the Taoiseach. That is an extraordinary attitude for any Deputy to take. Surely the Deputies behind the Government do not believe that once they are elected they can calmly go to sleep. I want to remind that particular Deputy that if he has completely sold himself out to the Government in that way and is content to regard himself merely as a pair of feet to walk into a lobby to vote he is not fulfilling his duty as a Deputy, and I am sure that all Deputies on this side of the House will agree with me. It is the duty of a Deputy backing the Government to see that such an important matter as Partition should not be treated in the slighting manner in which it was treated this evening.

I remember during the three-and-a-half-years' period that the inter-Party Government was in office, Deputy Aiken, as he then was, did not spend three months of his time in the country but went flying all over the globe. Apparently he was trying to solve Partition when he went out of office and knew he could not do it. Now, when this Department is in his hands where he can do most good to bring the injusticeof Partition before the peoples of the world, he does not say a single word about it in introducing this Estimate. I cannot find words to express my amazement at such conduct and I want to tell Fianna Fáil Deputies that, if they are backing that policy of letting things continue from year to year, that is not their duty as Deputies backing the Government. If Deputy Gallagher has given a picture of the attitude of Deputies behind the Government at present—that it is all right to leave everything in the hands of the Taoiseach and the Government, and if they fail to do anything it does not matter, that their only duty is to walk into the Government Lobby on divisions and congratulate them no matter what is brought to the House— that, I say, is not the duty of any Deputy. It is new to me if that is the outlook of Fianna Fáil Deputies regarding Partition.

There appear to be only two methods of attempting a solution. One, force, is out of the question. The other, which is the correct course, is to bring it to the notice of every free country in the world, particularly the U.S.A. We should combat to the best of our ability any false propaganda, particularly that which is being spread in the U.S.A. that the question is one of a difference of religion more than anything else. It is within the Minister's scope to deal with that. If he is doing anything about it, he might have told us. He does not suffer from bashfulness and does not hide his light under a bushel. I hope that, when replying, he will not preserve the stony silence which characterised his introduction of the Estimate.

Regarding emigration, the identity cards and passports provided a means some time ago of keeping a check, but they have been abolished in practically all cases. While I do not want them to return, the Department should take some steps to keep a check, so that we would know exactly how the tide of our youth is flowing. In reply to parliamentary questions here from time to time, the Department or the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach will inform a Deputy that there is no means of knowing theactual number who left the country to seek employment abroad or how many came back. While it would be undesirable to introduce any system which would oblige intending emigrants or migrants to take out travel identity cards, the Department should have some system by which we could see how many of our youth are leaving each year and how many come back, so that we may have at least an idea of the net outflow per year. The Minister may say: "What does it matter whether it is 10,000 or 20,000 that go in a year? If they go, they go." We should know the figure, either through the Central Statistics Office or the Taoiseach's Department or the Department of External Affairs. There is no use in saying we have no means of keeping a check. The Minister must have some means of doing it. I want to make it perfectly clear that I am not advocating a travel identity card system or passport system for this. They were a nuisance while they lasted and caused much annoyance and trouble to people going on business or going to work in England. The Department should be able to devise some suitable machinery to provide the information.

I would like the Minister, when replying, to say what steps have been taken to develop trade with foreign countries where we have representatives and particularly with the U.S.A. I have a keen interest in the dead meat trade, which has come into such prominence in the last few years. The Minister should see that it is developed to its fullest, particularly in the U.S.A., where it would be a dollar earner. I should also like to know, if he has the figures convenient, our trade with some of the principal countries and also what negotiations are under way to expand the dead meat trade and other trades of interest to this country.

Mr. P.J. Burke

It was not my intention to speak this evening, but when I heard the last two speakers misrepresenting facts, I thought I might as well say a few words. I am sorry Deputy Mac Fheórais dealt with the Irish societies as he did, as I feel they did a good deal for Ireland in herdarkest days. All Irish societies, no matter what differences they may have had, have pulled and are pulling their weight to bring about the ending of Partition. I am sorry this House has been used to accuse them of unworthy motives. Down through the ages the Irish abroad, just like the Irish at home, have done their best. Like all human beings, people will differ on parish committees and so on, but the fundamental principle of the Irish societies abroad has been and will be, I am sure, to do everything possible to see that this country becomes united.

The previous speaker had asked what was the policy of the Government. Our policy is well known, and we have let no opportunity pass of making it clear. Since he took office as Minister for External Affairs, the Minister had lost no opportunity of letting every friendly nation in the world know about Partition and the injustice perpetrated on this country by Partition. If any other Minister could do more than the present Minister to bring about the unity of the country, I do not know where he is. As an Ulsterman, the Minister has given a good deal of his time to seeking to bring about the unification of the country, and he will continue to do so so long as he is Minister. The Taoiseach and his Government have gone as far as they can go to show that we, in the Twenty-Six Counties, bear malice towards no man, but charity towards all. They have seen to it that all people, no matter what their beliefs, get the same fair and square deal, and those people, dangerous people who claim to be Irish, who have on occasions misrepresented us as being partisan, have not been friends of Ireland, and a future historian would mark them down as mischiefmakers.

Partition is a national matter. Opposition speakers have tried to suggest that it is a Party issue here, but it is not. It is a completely national issue, and I am sure there is no Deputy on any side who would not do everything he could to bring about the ending of Partition on the basis of a common understanding and aspirit of goodwill. Since Fianna Fáil took over office, Ministers from the two Governments have met on both sides of the Border to settle matters of common interest, such as the G.N.R., the E.S.B. and other matters. I feel that, even in that way, we have tried to bring about a spirit of understanding.

Captain Giles

Why not make an approach yourself? You have settled many disputes.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I thank you, Deputy.

Mr. O'Higgins

You might stay up there.

Acting-Chairman (Mr. O'Donnell)

Deputy Burke should be allowed to continue.

Mr. O'Higgins

I am sure there is a widow up there.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am surprised that Opposition Deputies should try to make Partition a matter of a small mean political quibble.

With regard to the news agency, I was rather surprised to hear Deputy Cosgrave speaking against it. The news agency was of his Government's creation and it was established by the then Minister for External Affairs because he thought it would be of international value.

Mr. O'Higgins

But not of commercial value.

Mr. P.J. Burke

That was the argument the then Minister put up. The news agency was not of our making.

Mr. O'Higgins

You undertook to abolish it, though.

Mr. P.J. Burke

If it is now responsible for naughty things, you must remember that it was your own creation and you should be a little more charitable in regard to it.

Mr. O'Higgins

Is this an attack on the Chair?

Mr. P.J. Burke

Nobody wants to see the news agency interfering withjournalists or taking the bread and butter from their mouths. That was not the intention when it was set up and it is not our intention now. I am sure the Minister will review the position and continue to keep it under observation.

Captain Cowan

Does nobody want to speak?

Mr. Aiken

There has been a reasonable debate on this question, with the exception of a few speeches which were neither very well informed nor——

Captain Giles

I offered to speak before the Minister was called.

Acting-Chairman (Mr. O'Donnell)

I understand that Deputy Giles was on his feet, although the Chair did not see him. Perhaps the Minister would give way.

Mr. Aiken

The Chair called on me twice. I sat for about 30 seconds and nobody offered. The Chair then called on me again.

Captain Giles

I was on my feet before the Minister even looked up.

Acting-Chairman (Mr. O'Donnell)

The Chair certainly did not see the Deputy and called on the Minister. If the Minister does not wish to give way, he may proceed.

Captain Giles

I think it is very unfair that the Minister should insist on getting in.

Mr. Aiken

I was looking in the Deputy's direction and did not see him offer.

Mr. O'Higgins

Deputies can speak after the Minister. We are in Committee Stage.

Acting-Chairman (Mr. O'Donnell)

I understand that it is not customary.

Mr. O'Higgins

It is not customary, but it is customary for a Minister to give way when it is pointed out that another Deputy was on his feet before him. It is as well to remind the Minister that the House is in Committee.

Acting-Chairman (Mr. O'Donnell)

The Chair will give a ruling on that when the Minister has concluded.

Captain Cowan

The Chair cannot alter the rules of the House. We are in Committee.

Mr. Aiken

Deputy O'Higgins would alter any rules to suit himself from time to time.

Mr. O'Higgins

There are a few rules I would alter to suit the country.

Mr. Aiken

Deputy MacBride made the allegation that we had no policy in foreign affairs. Fianna Fáil has had a policy on external affairs going back to the time of Sinn Féin and we have never altered it one iota. The Deputy has been associated with certain Parties which did alter, but we never did, and we intend to keep on with our policy until we finally win out and secure what is our object——

Mr. O'Higgins

What is the policy— to do nothing?

Mr. Aiken

—— a free and independent Republic for the whole of Ireland.

Mr. Donnellan

We gave you that.

Mr. Aiken

We will get that, I hope, with the co-operation of the vast majority of the Irish people, although on occasions we have groups like Deputy O'Higgins and his friends who are against us. I am delighted that, after a long struggle in regard to the Treaty and the issues involved in it, all the Irish people, by and large, are united on what was the Sinn Féin— Fianna Fáil policy for the past 40 years.

Mr. O'Higgins

Do not sully the name of Sinn Féin by saying that.

Mr. Aiken

The people who turned their backs on the Sinn Féin—Fianna Fáil policy have now come forward and accepted the Sinn Féin—Fianna Fáil policy. It took a bit of a kicking to get them to do it but eventually it was done. We also got rid of the King that some of them were trying to holdon to, the King, for refusing to swear allegiance to whom, hundreds of young Irishmen were shot. We got rid of him by degrees and we shall get rid of the remnants of that disastrous policy.

Mr. MacBride

Is it in order for the Minister, in replying to an Estimate dealing with External Affairs, to seek to resurrect the executions and the civil war?

Deputies

Hear, hear!

Mr. Aiken

It was Deputy O'Higgins who started it. It is on the record.

Mr. O'Higgins

I have not spoken in the debate.

Mr. Aiken

You interrupted.

Mr. O'Higgins

I merely endeavoured to draw the Minister's attention to the fact——

Mr. MacBride

If the Minister wants to refer to executions he will hear more than he would like to hear.

Mr. Aiken

The Deputy's interruptions are on the record. They were heard by everybody. They were the usual impudent O'Higgins interruptions.

Mr. MacBride

If the Minister wants to refer to executions he will be reminded that the Government of which he was a member carried out many executions as well.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is entitled to make his speech without interruption.

Mr. Aiken

Since the Opposition have accepted our foreign policy, they have tried on occasion to make it appear that there is some difference in the way that they operated it, in order that they might be able to growl a bit. They have, however, accepted that policy—hook, line and sinker. We hope that they will stay down and that they will remain tied to that particular policy.

One endeavour that has been made by members of the Opposition to emphasisethe difference that exists between this Government and the last Government—it is one of Deputy MacBride's allegations—is that we were anti-American. He made that allegation before and I replied to it. In order not to overheat the atmosphere here this evening, I shall simply refer to the reply I gave which was published in the newspapers of June 16th, 1952.

Mr. MacBride

Has the Minister got to be so really careful in replying to the debate on this Estimate that he must refer to a speech which he delivered seven or eight months ago?

Mr. Aiken

I shall put it on the records. This is a report that appeared in the Irish Press on June 16th, 1952, when there was a by-election on in Waterford:

"Speaking at Kill, Waterford, yesterday, Mr. Aiken, Minister for External Affairs, said that the exCoalition lawyers are prepared to do any sort of damage to the nation in order to tear down Fianna Fáil. The former Minister for External Affairs recently accused them of `seeking to pick a quarrel with the United States of America' in order to justify the imposition of our economic and budgetary policy on the country.

Anyone who had caught a glimmer of the inner workings of the lawyer Coalition would not be surprised at this sort of falsehood coming from this source. It was the same gentleman who assured the British Ambassador in Dublin that the Coalition Government had not decided to repeal the External Relations Act on the morning of the very day it was announced by Mr. Costello in Canada."

Mr. MacBride

That is untrue.

Mr. Aiken

It can be proved from the records if the Deputy wants it.

Mr. MacBride

It cannot be proved because it is an untrue statement.

Mr. Aiken

The report goes on:

"The voters in these electionsmust mark their condemnation of our foreign policy being made the cat's-paw of unscrupulous politicians. There was, said Mr. Aiken, about as much truth in our `seeking a quarrel with America' as there was in our desiring `another round with England' when we sought to get rid of the Oath of Allegiance to the British King and to retain the £5,000,000 a year which rightfully belonged to Irish people."

Mr. MacBride

Is that the only way the Minister can deal with the question of our policy towards the U.S.A.?

Captain Cowan

What is Deputy MacBride trying to effect?

Mr. Aiken

He has been trying to create trouble in this country for a long number of years. Unfortunately, he got into a position where, with the aid of a certain number of supporters for a number of years, he was enabled to do that. But the Irish people disarmed him very quickly when they got the opportunity. They rejected his policy and they sent him back with one other Deputy to represent Clann na Poblachta. He himself was elected only on the 24th count——

(Interruptions.)

Mr. O'Higgins

Tell us something about Partition.

Mr. Aiken

Deputy MacBride asked a question about territorial waters. That question is being examined and, when it has been thoroughly examined, Government policy in regard to it will be announced here in the Dáil. It is a very delicate and a very wide question which affects not only our relations with our nearest neighbour, but also with other countries, who want to use and enter our waters. I think the Deputy knows that certain action taken in the extension of territorial waters by certain countries has led to difficulty with a number of other countries. We do not want to get into that position, until at least the whole question has been thoroughly examined.

There have been a number of comments from various Deputies on the question of the news agency. Deputy Cosgrave seems to be a very innocent young man when he alleges that this news agency was set up by the last Government and that it was not to deal with "hot news". That was said by the then Minister for External Affairs, Deputy MacBride, but within a week it was changed, and changed to the knowledge of the then Government, and they gave him a sum of money to set up the agency. They passed also the Articles of Association which quite clearly set up an agency that was empowered to deal with all classes of news, hot and cold.

Captain Cowan

The Minister for External Affairs broke every promise he made to this House, in regard to the news agency.

Mr. O'Higgins

This Minister?

Captain Cowan

The former Minister.

Mr. O'Higgins

Is your Minister not doing the same thing?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister should be allowed to speak without interruption.

Mr. O'Higgins

I was merely pointing out to Deputy Cowan what he is supporting.

Mr. Aiken

I know that Deputy O'Higgins is pretty brazen but he cannot have it both ways. The Deputy supported it, and the Government which he supported signed the Articles of Association. Deputies O'Higgins and MacBride ought to go outside and settle their differences on this matter if they want to but they ought not drag them in here. He need not emphasise the fact that Deputy MacBride went away from the policy he announced in the Dáil. When I came along a year after the news agency had been set up, it was running as a "hot" news agency dealing with all sorts of news and pictures as would any other commercial agency trying to disseminate news and make a profit thereon.

A large number of people had been employed and an office had been set up in Dublin, another in Belfast and another in London. I may tell the House quite frankly—as I did before— that, while fully in favour of the general idea of having an Irish news agency that would be the channel of disseminating Irish news to the world rather than have to rely upon British and American news agencies, had I been the Minister responsible for introducing the proposals I would not have set it up quite in the way it was set up by my predecessor. In this world, with one Government coming after another, we should, I think, endeavour to see that any work undertaken by a previous Government should be brought to as successful a conclusion as is possible. That is what we started out to do.

I came in to the Dáil and asked for a Supplementary Estimate. This year I am asking for another Supplementary Estimate for the news agency, and I hope that in next year's Book of Estimates the sum required will be very greatly reduced because the news agency's income has greatly increased, though it is a very low percentage return. Last year I think it wound up with an income running at the rate of about £16,000. Its outgoings were a little over £60,000. Next year I hope that its income will be up and that the amount of money we will ask the Dáil to vote for the agency will be much less than this year.

Deputy Cogan and others asked me what was going to be the future of this news agency. As I said, we wanted, first of all, to make certain that it got a fair chance. I would like to see it very much further away from Government than it is. If we could only get people who are interested in news-papers here to co-operate that would be done. The result would be that the present organisation would simply be taken over by a new group. It would not mean that the staff would be dispensed with. After all, the staff who are employed by the news agency are Irishmen. They are competing with foreign news agencies, and the organisation here that deals with the big bulk of the journalists of the country areperfectly satisfied with the arrangements that have been made by the news agency with their organisation.

There is a rather smaller organisation, the members of which are in important positions representing foreign news agencies. They are very much against the continuance of the news agency, but the reason the news agency was set up was to compete with the foreign news agencies as disseminators of Irish news. It was a good thing for our country that we should have some channel other than a British-controlled or an American-controlled agency to send our news to the rest of the world.

Another thing has happened— perhaps, people will say it was costly. The number of news items appearing in continental and American papers that are not unfriendly to our country has greatly increased.

Deputy MacBride referred to a matter which appeared in the papers to-day. It was also followed up by Deputy Blowick. I wish they had not bothered their heads about it because in my opinion it is not worth notice and if we do notice it it will only serve the purpose for which the step was taken.

Of course, it is not true to say that I did not advert to Partition. I do not think the Deputies who had no Irish had any excuse because I sent round a number of translations in English of the speech. I did advert to the fact that the information section of our Department was carrying on its work and that our delegates going abroad disseminate the literature and the leaflets about Partition showing our case. I also showed how the members of the groups going abroad took advantage, when opportunity offered, of stating our case.

I can stand on my head and make all sorts of speeches about Partition. I could write and make speeches every day in the week but I think my business is to make certain that I take advantage of every situation to forward the cause of the ending of Partition and that is what we have been trying to do.

We could raise the Partition controversy to a white heat. The question ishow long it would hold at that. I think it is much better that we should be fully determined and say calmly that we are not going to rest until Partition comes to an end and that we are going to judge everybody's attitude towards us and towards any other question of national freedom by their attitude on the question of Partition.

I said to representatives of various countries that we believe that if they ask us to get interested in their freedom we are entitled to get the same interest regarding our freedom from them. During the past year we have continued to send out bulletins to some 6,000 or 7,000 people all over the world. In addition, we have sent a fortnightly bulletin dealing particularly with Partition. We have sent literally hundreds of thousands of leaflets prepared by the Mansion House Committee dealing with the matter of Partition. I feel that, as time goes on, more people are not merely getting to know more about Partition but are taking an interest in it. That has been shown by certain happenings in the U.S.A. in the past 12 months and, indeed, by certain happenings there in the preceding 12 months.

I think Deputy Mac Fheórais is wrong in talking about the bad organisation and conflict between various Irish clubs in the U.S.A. Deputy Mac Fheórais was in the U.S.A. for only a few days. I have been there a great number of times, on and off, over the past 20 or 30 years. I know the Irish societies intimately in most of the cities there. I know their loyal and devoted service. It is true to say that the members are human beings and that they will have their differences and express them. In that respect they are no different from the Irish people at home, from the English people at home, from the American people at home, or from any other people. Whilst they may disagree from time to time on details as, for instance, on what political Party in the U.S.A. they should favour and, like everybody else, disagree very violently on that subject, there is no disagreement on the question of Ireland and her right to as much unity and freedom as they have in America.

One of their great arguments withthe people of the U.S.A. on the question of Partition is to say that we only want what the American people have—that we only want our children to be able to do what the American children do every day when they pledge their allegiance to "one nation, indivisible and free." I refer to the children's salute to the flag. We want our children to be in a position to make that salutation to their own country. With the help of God, the day will come when they will be in a position to do it. There is really no difference among the Irish people on that question. I think, in fact, there is no difference now among the members of the Dáil. Political Parties here as in other countries will spark occasionally if somebody on the opposite side says something that hurts a bit. But fundamentally not only have we the same point of view on this matter but everybody in this House will do his utmost to further the cause of the unity of Ireland.

Vote put and agreed to.