Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 26 Feb 1959

Vol. 173 No. 2

Committee on Finance. - Vote 51—Transport and Marine Services.

I move:—

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £92,000 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1959, for certain Transport Services; for Grants for Harbours; for the Salaries and Expenses of the Marine Service (Merchant Shipping Acts, 1894 to 1952, and the Foreshore Act, 1933 (No. 12 of 1933)); for certain Protective Equipment for Ships; for certain payments in respect of Compensation including the cost of medical treatment (No. 19 of 1946); and for the Coast Life Saving Service.

The purpose of the Supplementary Estimate is to provide for a further sum of £212,000 for C.I.E. The major part of that, namely, £120,680 is, I think, a book transfer of money which was provided in the current year's estimate for the G.N.R. Board, but which was not paid out to the G.N.R. Board before the merger with C.I.E. on 1st October last. The balance of £92,000 is to cover increased losses on the part of the G.N.R. undertaking not budgeted for when the original Estimates were prepared.

Deputies will recollect that the amount included for C.I.E. in the Vote for Transport and Marine Services in this year is £3,204,300. Of that amount, £793,300 is for repayment to the Central Fund, in accordance with the requirements of the Transport Act of 1950, of advances made to meet interest payment on transport stock in 1957-58. A further amount of £793,300 is also included to enable C.I.E. to pay interest on transport stock in the current financial year without recourse to the Central Fund as in previous years. The balance of £1,617,700 is to cover capital expenditure and expenditure on renewals and replacements to the extent that working profit, before charging depreciation and interest on transport stock, falls short of this expenditure.

The G.N.R. undertaking within the State, apart from the Dundalk Works, was merged with C.I.E. on 1st October last and the losses and capital expenditure of the two undertakings were also merged. Losses and capital expenses of the G.N.R. Board from 1st April, 1958, to 30th September, 1958, were met out of the provision for the board in the Vote. The unexpended balance of the G.N.R. Board in the Vote was £120,680. The additional amount of £212,000 required is entirely attributable to the portion of the G.N.R. taken over by C.I.E. If, therefore, the merger had not taken place, C.I.E. would not require any increase on the provision in the Vote. When account is taken of the unexpended balance of £120,680 in the Vote for the G.N.R. Board, which falls to be surrendered to C.I.E., the additional amount to be voted for C.I.E. is £92,000.

The financial year now coming to an end is a transitional one for C.I.E. Under recent legislation, as the House is aware, they are under a statutory obligation now to eliminate losses by the end of the next five years. To assist them in that task an annual Grant-in-Aid of £1,175,000 will be provided for each of the next five years under that legislation. That obligation is, of course, a very formidable one and it would be unfair and unreasonable to ask C.I.E. to embark on the crucial five-year period encumbered by borrowing to meet losses arising during the present financial year, especially as these losses are attributable to the part of the G.N.R. undertaking taken over by C.I.E. in October. I am asking the House, therefore, to approve the Supplementary Estimate and give C.I.E. the clean start which it was intended by legislation they should be given.

This appears to be a tying-up Estimate. We are merely making provision for the payment to C.I.E. of certain moneys to cover certain losses incurred in the operation of the G.N.R. for which provision was not made at the time of the taking over of the railway. Aside from that aspect of the Estimate, I should like to ask the Minister if he is now in a position to give us any closer estimate as to the way in which he thinks C.I.E. will be able to fulfil the obligation imposed upon them by legislation, namely, to become a financial lineball at the end of the five-year period.

Could the Minister say what are C.I.E. losses at the moment? I think they are about finishing their financial year now. They will receive a subsidy of something over £1,000,000 per year for the next five years. Can the Minister tell us what the losses for the current year are likely to be? Can he tell us whether in fact, there is any real relation between the current losses and the subsidy which they will get in each of the next five years? I have a suspicion that the losses are in the vicinity of £2,000,000 at present.

If they are losing £2,000,000, giving them a subsidy of £1,000,000 or thereabouts is still very much under-shooting the target which was set by legislation. In a small and sparsely populated country like this, the difficulty of making a railway undertaking pay its way is recognised by everybody. I do not think the difficulties of C.I.E. are a political issue in this country, and they are certainly not a Party political issue. I think all Parties would say if C.I.E. could pay its way, well and good, but if it cannot, in order to maintain a railway system, we have to subsidise it and that subsidy is given in the interests of the people who use the railway service. At the same time, methods of efficiency and methods of Organisation can, of course, play a big part in helping to bring about a reduction in the adverse balance on the railways.

I am very glad to see that the new Board of C.I.E. is approaching its task, giving evidence that it is alive and alert to the responsibilities which devolve upon it.

This would seem to be a matter for the main Estimate, and not for the Supplementary Estimate which is very specific. The Supplementary Estimate deals with the losses as a result of the merger between the G.N.R. and C.I.E. and no detailed criticism of policy can arise on a Supplementary Estimate.

I assure you I shall not spend more than three minutes more on this whole question. What I wanted to do was to put on record my appreciation of the way in which the Board of C.I.E. is dealing with the many problems which confront it. C.I.E. seems to have gone out in a very special way to get the co-operation of the thousands of workers employed by the company. I have always said to the Boards of C.I.E., when dealing with them, that unless they could carry the workers with them in the things they were doing, they would be up against very serious difficulties.

The board has quite intelligently decided that it will have a close liaison with the trade unions concerned, that it will acquaint the trade unions with what it proposes to do and that it will invite the unions to contribute their suggestions as to how these things can best be achieved. I have a feeling that there is already a substantial improvement in the relations between the board and the trade unions. I hope that intelligent policy will be continued. In fact, I feel sure it will be continued and if it is, it will probably play a bigger part than any other factor in helping to bring about a balance in the accounts of C.I.E. My main purpose in rising was to ascertain from the Minister what C.I.E. losses are at the moment so that we can judge, now that we are about to enter the first year of subsidy, how far the subsidy will go to meet current losses.

I should like to refer to an interesting fact. On the occasion of adopting an Estimate of £3,880,000 subsidy for the amalgamated railway company here, I should like to refer the House to the Derry Journal of Tuesday, 24th February. The Lough Swilly Railway Company had an improved year. If Deputy Norton's reference to a small and sparsely-populated area had reference to anywhere in the country, it had reference to the area around Burtonport, because if there is a sparsely-populated part of Ireland, it is that part. The Lough Swilly Railway Company operated a transport undertaking between the City of Derry and Burtonport, through Letterkenny and on to the west, and this year the Lough Swilly Railway Company have a total net income of £11,583.

It is not a railway company.

It is a transport undertaking.

But it is not a railway company.

The directors recommended a dividend of 5 per cent. on the preference stock and 7 per cent. on the ordinary stock, less income-tax, leaving a balance of £22,622 to be carried forward. That is the only transport company in this country now left in the hands of private enterprise and it can pay 7 per cent. on its ordinary stock. We are planning to pay £1,250,000 subsidy in the next five years in the pious hope that C.I.E. will break even. After Deputy Norton's observations, I do not want to sound ungenerous. I believe the chairman of the board, who is an old "Fianna Fáiler," has shown great courage and despite his bad qualities, I greatly admire his decision to abandon the position he had as chairman of the Turf Board and undertake the formidable task of guiding the future destiny of C.I.E. I wish the board and the chairman of the board good luck in the work to which they have put their hands.

I welcome what Deputy Norton said and I hope he will not misunderstand me when I say that it often struck me that one of the difficulties in having satisfactory relations between C.I.E. and the trade unions was the multiplicity of the trade unions operating in the service of C.I.E. I have seen reports of the enormous difficulties created for B.O.A.C. in London who found themselves involved in every kind of difficulty in labour relations owing to the multiplicity of unions serving that company,

I am delighted to hear that the Board of C.I.E. has reached the sensible conclusion that if it wants to have any prospect of success, it must work in friendly co-operation with the trade unions representing the men. The trade unions could make some reciprocal gesture in getting some joint council to represent them effectively so that negotiations would not have to be conducted with about 15 trade unions —or is it 14 unions C.I.E. have?

I think there are 23.

All of us appreciate the difficulties associated with that, but from the point of view of the trade unions themselves, it would be a maximum contribution to the effort which Deputy Norton acknowledges on the part of the Board of C.I.E. to deal on a basis of cordial reciprocal good relations with the trade unions, if the pattern of the trade union organisation of the workers on the railway were simplified, which at present calls for 23 unions to represent them.

I agree this is not an occasion to go into too great detail and I shall not do so. The price must be paid and all of us must do what we can to help the Board of C.I.E. to make a success of the enterprise to which they have put their hands. On behalf of the rural community, I think the Minister might sound a note of warning. If we are to get the type of patrols that he is sending into the rural areas, a kind of general Gestapo to "lep" on the back of any farmer who carries anything on a tractor for which he pays an £8 licence, we will not have the goodwill of the rural community.

It is admirable to show goodwill towards trade unions representatives of the employees and it is admirable to reassure the Board of C.I.E. that we wish them well and hope they will succeed; but it will not create goodwill if the people of the country are to be persecuted and harried as they are being persecuted and harried by flying columns who are, I suppose, engaged in an effort to restrict what has come to be known as illegal transport. A little "live and let live" would help. I shall return to that in greater detail on the main Estimate.

May I just say, if I am not out of order, that I am glad to see Deputy Norton back from foreign parts and looking very well.

Thank you. Once I was clear of this Government, I felt much better.

The purpose of this Estimate is to fulfil an undertaking to hand over the G.N.R. to the Board of C.I.E. without any liabilities attaching to it and it is to serve no other purpose than that. We shall have, I imagine, a fuller opportunity of discussing the effects of the operation of the new transport policy when the main Estimate comes along. I hope by then to be able to give Deputy Norton more detailed information than I could possibly supply him with now.

Vote put and agreed to.
Votes 15, 68, 30, 31, 39, 41, 44, 62, 26, 51, already agreed to in Committee, reported and agreed to.
The Dáil adjourned at 5 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 3rd March, 1959.
Barr
Roinn