I move—
That Dáil Éireann is of opinion that the Minister for Industry and Commerce, in the exercise of his functions as head of the Department of Industry and Commerce has failed to take effective action to prevent the cost of living rising to its present high level, and requests the Government to take immediate steps to deal with the matter in the public interest.
This motion has been on the Order Paper for almost 12 months, so that it can hardly be said that one is not prepared to go ahead with it at this stage. It is a motion for which one would not require much preparation. We read in the newspapers this week-end that the price of butter was increased from 3/10 to 4/2 per lb., while the Dáil was adjourned. I should like to know if the Government has received any protest from the housewives' association against this uncalled-for and unnecessary increase in the price of butter. I should also like to be informed whether the Minister received a communication from Mrs. O'Carroll, representing the housewives' association, asking him whether the Government had consulted any representative of the general public, of her organisation or of any organisation catering for child welfare or the general interests of the country, before agreeing to this increase.
I have reason to believe that no person representing the general public was consulted and that it was an Order made by the Government themselves, without consulting the Dáil, thatbutter would be 4/2 per lb. And this in spite of the fact that it is only a week ago since a Minister stated the imported butter which now costs 4/2 per lb. could be sold for a profit at 3/9 per lb. I want to know from the Minister why the imported butter should now be 4/2 per lb. when the Minister stated it could be sold for a profit at 3/9 per lb.? This is an imposition on the people. Butter has gone off the tables in a good many of the homes of working-class families in Dublin. It has gone off the table in the homes of the unemployed, those in receipt of unemployment benefits, those in receipt of national health benefits, those on domiciliary treatment benefits and those suffering from tuberculosis. Substitutes are being used such as margarine. I do not know how long that will last. Other substitutes are being used in working-class homes, in the homes of the unemployed and in those homes where there are large families.
The people, instead of buying butter and margarine, are purchasing dripping everywhere they possibly can. They are using that as a substitute for butter. They cannot afford butter at the present day. Butter is gone beyond the purchasing power of a very large percentage of our population. I only speak for Dublin. I say that it is rather unfair that the organisations were not consulted.
I will go further and say that meat has gone off the table in respect of more than half the population of this city, even for the one day a week— Sunday. The price of meat has increased. If 2d. or 3d per lb. is not put on the meat, it has gone up at least 1d. per lb. There is another commodity that used to be bought. I refer to cooked ham. The price of cooked ham is gone beyond that at which even a reasonably well-paid family with a moderate rate of wages could purchase. There is no use saying we have not a rationing system nor is there any use saying that there is no need for ration books. Foodstuffs and the necessaries of life are rationed since the people are unable to pay the price for them.
Meat has gone off the tables and butter has gone off the tables within the last week or so. It was stated here quite recently, in reply to a question— I forget who asked it—that the £ which was valued at 20/- and bought 20/- worth of goods in 1940 was to-day worth only 8/9. That means that an income of £200 which a man or woman or a person in the government or municipal service received in 1940 is to-day equivalent to only £90 according to the experts and the economists. Every member of this House who has to keep a household knows how difficult it is to make the income go as far as he can because of the high prices demanded for goods and especially for foodstuffs.
We earnestly appeal to the Minister to remedy the position. I can make no suggestion and, as I have said before, I am not charged with the responsibility of making suggestions as to how it can be done. It is up to the Minister and the Government who have economists and experts on the staffs of the Civil Service to help them to devise some ways and means by which the people can get a fair share of the food at a reasonable price.
We all know that those on domiciliary treatment benefits, those in receipt of national health benefits and those on home assistance are not getting sufficient to keep them in good health. I will go no further than to say that they are not given sufficient to keep them in good health and it is up to the Minister and the Government to find a remedy for that.
Take our Army pensions for example. Take the case of the man who gave 25 years service in our National Army or that of the man who gave valuable service in the Old I.R.A. When such persons got pensions the Government meant those pensions to purchase goods to the full value of the amount of the pension given in order to help those people to live. If that pension amounted to £100 per year—and very, very few of them got that pension—it is now worth only £50. Others got pensions of £20, £30, £40 and £50 per year while others got small sums of from £7 and £8 per year. Old I.R.A. representatives at the Mansion Housemeeting issued a pamphlet in which they said that the vast majority of the Old I.R.A. have pensions under £25 per year. Are we going to do anything to help them to buy even what it was thought the £25 could buy at the time the pension was given them? These people have gone beyond the stage of being able to get employment in competition with younger men. The country owes a lot to them and it should not forget them. Those people are rapidly passing away. They are in receipt of a miserable pension of less than £20 per year.
What has happened in regard to the price of every article? The price of the tin of boot polish for cleaning the boots and shoes of the children and the price of floor polish and tinned goods has increased. The price of every article used in the working-class household has gone up somewhat even if it is only by ½d. There is no reduction. There is to be a reduction in the price of an imported commodity—tea. It would be no compensation to the people to take more tea and less butter and less meat.
From the health point of view I think that something ought to be done. I again say that the unemployed are anxiously looking forward to the Government doing something for them to enable them to get sufficient food for themselves and their children. The price of butter has increased. There is an increase in the price of clothing and the price of woollen goods has gone up. The price of everything you could think of has gone up within the last five years. The present Government promised they would reduce taxation and would do something for those people. They have done nothing. I want to give the Minister another opportunity of devoting his time to making a personal attack on myself. That is his job—his joy is to mention the name Alfred Byrne in some disparaging way—and I let him have his job.
I do not want to go into this motion further. The dance tax that was removed might have been put to some good use for the people. £140,000 a year was given back to the dance hall proprietors on the same day that theHouse by a majority voted for the removal of the subsidies on bread. I think it was most inconsistent. The removal of the subsidy on foodstuffs is something that the Government empowered themselves to do. When the last Budget was introduced the Minister tried to justify it. I said at the time that it was the most vicious Budget I ever heard of in my 40 years of public life in this country. I said it was the most vicious Budget ever introduced and I repeat that. It was an imposition on our working-class people.
In addition, the Minister killed the goose that laid the golden egg. He increased taxation, he increased the tax on the licensed trade. He would not take advice at the time. The ordinary revenue that was to come from the licensed trade has been reduced. The proprietors of those houses will have to pay a high rate of interest while they are doing any work or carrying out improvements.
I remember that the Minister for Finance was very careful to inform every member of the House here who was a member of Dublin Corporation that they could have done something about the valuations. At the same time as he was trying to put that over, he knew it was not true. He knew that was the law made by himself or carried on or enforced by himself when he had power. He had power to amend the law, to prevent inspectors going in on the word of people reporting their neighbours for putting up a shed or a kitchenette. He told the authorities at the time that it was not necessary to enforce these regulations, but he says: "Alfred Byrne was a member of the corporation that imposed these conditions." The corporation did not impose the conditions. My colleagues on the corporation here know that it is done by the rate collector in accordance with instructions laid down under the Valuation Acts and the members of the corporation as such—aldermen and councillors—have nothing to do with giving instructions or even amending the valuations.
