We will leave it at 99. We then had the situation in which the Korean War developed. A stockpiling campaign was carried on, and, in spite of the best efforts of the inter-Party Government, the cost of living rose 3 per cent. to 103. In the meantime, however, wage levels had been increased on the average 20 per cent. during those three and a half years, and with an increase of only 3 per cent. in the cost of living, the balance of prosperity was in favour of all classes of people, whether wage-earners, traders, farmers or other persons receiving incomes or deriving benefit as a result of these increases.
When the general election campaign was in full swing, the cost of living was the real issue and the increase of 2d. per lb. on butter was used most effectively in Dublin City, and probably in Cork City and Limerick City, but when the change of Government took place, the first action taken by the Minister for Industry and Commerce was to decontrol certain prices, with the immediate result of increasing the cost of living. People were not warned during that campaign that this decontrol was going to take place. It is a remarkable fact that the improved situation, with the emergency long passed, has not come about and that conditions at present are worse than they were. I heard the Minister say that the trade recession had passed and that things were better, but, if they are better, why have we more unemployed this year than last year, if the trade position last year was worse than it is this year?
In considering prices in relation to this Bill, we must remember that no effort has been made by the Government to keep prices down. In fact, looking over the record of the past two and a half years, it seems that the Government deliberately decided to mop up the margin of prosperity which was brought to the people during the inter-Party Government régime. It is being mopped up now by the increased prices and higher cost of living. When the Government was being formed, point 15 in the Fianna Fáil programme, published at the time with a view to securing the support of persons other than Fianna Fáil Deputies, set out that it was the policy of the Party to maintain food subsidies and to control the prices of all essential commodities, but that clause has long since been deleted, because, only a few months after the change of Government, the prices of many essential commodities were decontrolled, and only a year after, in the Budget of 1952, the prices of other foodstuffs were increased. The price of butter was increased from 2/10 to 3/10 per lb., and, during the last 12 months, the price of butter has been further increased by 4d., making it 4/2 per lb.
The housewife of 1951, before the change of Government, could buy three pounds of butter for 8/- and at present that amount of butter costs 12/6. She could buy a lb. of butter and a loaf of bread for 3/4½d. which is now 5/-, all but a halfpenny. Similarly, the price of sugar has been almost doubled, and by ministerial Order.
It has increased to 7½d. per lb. compared with 4d. per lb. before the change of Government. When it was decided to decontrol tea which was available at 2/8 per lb., it was suggested that the decontrol of price would mean that there would be competition and that consumers would get cheap tea. Instead of that, it is a very poor type of tea that can be got at less than 5/- per lb. as compared with the previous price of 2/8. Again, the housewife who normally uses flour for the purpose of home baking paid only 2/8 a stone for flour before the change of Government. Flour at the present time costs 4/9½ per stone, while the price of the loaf of bread has been increased from 6½d. to 9½d. Taxes have been imposed on spirits and beer with a consequent sharp increase in prices. The result is that the purchasing power of the week's wages has been considerably reduced. In fact, we saw that in the first 18 months' administration of the present Fianna Fáil Government, the purchasing power of the pre-war £ fell 2/-. It fell from 10/10 to 8/8, taking the 1939 purchasing power of the £ as the basis for that calculation.
The increase in food prices particularly had the effect or reducing the value of wages and bringing down the standard of living of the people. The first concern of any Government—and it was the first concern of the inter-Party Government—should be to improve the standard of living of our people, to give them a greater margin over and above the cost of bare essentials, in order that they would be able to improve their standard of living. The deliberate decision of the Fianna Fáil Government to withdraw the subsidies meant that, in fact, they were deducting so much from the incomes of our people, whether their incomes took the form of wages orprofits. They had to meet those extra costs from the margin left to them over and above the cost of meeting bare essentials.
I consider that we had not reached a stage in this country when it was proper for us to withdraw the food subsidies overnight without arranging to compensate for that loss in some other way. If we were to embark on a policy that would bring general prosperity to the country, it might be urged that people could participate in that prosperity and that they might be compensated in some respects for these increased charges. but the policy that was pursued had the effect of bringing about a serious trade recession, the restriction of credit and a standstill in the business world. We have not yet recovered from that position.
These conditions were deliberately brought about by the Fianna Fáil Government when they came into office in order to make people believe that the inter-Party Government had not done a good job during their three years' administration. The people have had time since to sit back and judge for themselves. The verdict we got from the people of Cabra-Glasnevin district only this time last year showed clearly that they did not approve of the policy of the present Government, particularly in relation to food prices and the decontrol of prices in respect to many essential commodities. They did not approve either of a policy which caused so much unemployment amongst the people. We cannot say at this stage that the position has improved since last year. We can produce figures to show that, in fact, the position this year is worse than it was last year. For instance, we can take the figures for unemployment and we can say that there are more people working on relief schemes at the present time than ever before. Many of these schemes were introduced simply and purely for the purpose of absorbing unemployed workers who would otherwise have no alternative but to draw unemployment benefit and sign on at the exchanges.
I regret that the Minister did not indicate in his speech this evening thatthere is any prospect of improvement in relation to the standard of living of our people, the purchasing power of wages and stability in the matter of prices. The only stability apparent, so far as prices are concerned, is that they just cannot go any further as the people would not be able to bear a higher level than exists at the present time. During the last year it is significant that tariffs in respect to many goods have been increased. They have been increased by remarkably high percentages. The Minister, I am sure, will argue that these increases were justified and that if they were not applied there might be greater unemployment.
