Deputy Brennan has 15 minutes left.
Private Members' Business. - Employment Policy: Motion.
Debate resumed on the following motion:
That Dáil Éireann deplores the failure of the Government to produce coherent policies to combat the problem of rapidly rising unemployment.
—(Deputy Dowling).
Thank you. When I finished on a rather acrimonious note on the last day I was trying to prove that one could hardly discuss rising unemployment, with which this Private Motion deals, without discussing the effects which rising prices have directly on that situation. I was ruled out of order and I do not want to pursue that line further today.
The motion deplores the failure of the Government to produce coherent policies to deal with rising unemployment. The Minister for Industry and Commerce has already spoken to the motion and his words are on record. I failed to find anything in what he said which would in any way alleviate or allay the anxiety of those who are genuinely concerned about employment in the various industries and service industries. This debate started on the 6th of this month and, since then, the position has deteriorated further, with each week showing lengthening queues at the unemployment exchanges. Each day has failed to bring anything from the Government or the Minister by way of a suggestion, let alone a policy, to deal with the overall position of rapidly rising unemployment.
Many people waited for this White Paper on the economy. It was delayed for a month for reasons which we all know. It now comes before us with nothing in it in the form of a concrete suggestion other than that wage demands and demands for higher incomes should be moderated if made at all. The Government spent many days during the Cork by-election campaign trying to convince the people that the economy had not really suffered any serious setback. The Minister for Local Government has insisted that the building industry is not suffering from any deterioration whatever, contrary to what everybody else in the country thinks.
Against that background the White Paper points out, as the Taoiseach and Ministers pointed out to people in various sectors of the economy when they brought them in for a summit meeting, that we really are facing a serious position. We have got to make up our minds one way or the other. Are we or are we not in a crisis position? Are we facing rising unemployment? Is the position serious? Does it warrant the appeals made in this White Paper? We are all aware of the resilience of Irish industry. It has been built up over the years and it is capable of coming back if given the chance.
When we were in office, on one occasion the British found themselves in a serious position with regard to the deficit in their balance of payments. They took unilateral action and applied a levy on all imports into England. They made no exception for our goods. We thought we might get some preferential treatment. A deputation went across to discuss the matter with them. When we failed to get any exceptional treatment from the British when they applied the levy to our goods, as they did to all other imports, we promptly applied a subsidy to exports in order to enable industrialists to overcome the serious situation which they were facing, and to prevent any lay-offs, redundancies or short-time working in industrial employment.
Were you in the EEC then?
That was a concrete, definite, positive effort by us which had the desired effect. Industry will pay tribute to the fact that it got them over a difficult time. It is nonsense for the Minister to ask were we in the EEC at the time.
You could not do it if you were.
That is debatable. That is not what the Irish Shoe and Leather Workers Union suggest in their submission to us today.
They are experts.
They say it can be done. I should like to draw attention to the warning which that union issued to every Member of this House today about the serious situation they are facing. In their submission to the Minister they point out that under EEC regulations it is possible to take action and they outline the action they propose to take. In the last paragraph they say—and it is up to the Minister to refute it—they believe that adequate provision is made in the articles of accession to the EEC in sections 68 and 69 to provide for this contingency. They number remedial actions from one to seven. They say that, under the terms of the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement, in Article 19 there is special provision to cope with this unusual situation.
We all know that the Treaty of Rome provides that where a member country finds itself in a serious situation, if it can be proven that it is attributable to membership, action can be taken either unilaterally or by agreement with the members concerned. This is what the Common Market is all about. We have no evidence whatever that anybody is seeking a means to offset the serious situation into which we are plunging week after week. I have had numerous contacts with industry in recent times, and particularly with people in the clothing industry, who pointed out that they will have to close up their business owing to imports from low-cost countries, particularly Portugal and Korea. Nobody is investigating whether this is dumping or, as it was put in an article in a newspaper recently, whether we are paying for sweated labour in other countries. The price we are paying is the laying off of our own employees in the clothing industry.
Everybody in the clothing industry, and particularly in what is known as the CMT industry—the cut, make and trim industry—knows perfectly well that we are faced with a serious situation and that factories will have to close unless something is done to enable them to continue. We are applying certain measures. We are complaining about what we cannot do owing to membership of the EEC but, in non-EEC countries like Portugal and Korea wages are at their lowest, and such countries are flooding the market here today. This is evident in the shops in Dublin. They are flooding the market with cheap shoddy clothing which is under-selling anything our factories can produce with the costs they have to meet, with their overheads and with the expenses and taxes which face them.
The purpose of this motion is to extract from the Minister for Industry and Commerce, or some other responsible member of the Government, a statement which will allay the anxieties of industrialists about what they are facing in the future. Will any remedial action be taken to prevent what is becoming a serious and rapidly developing unemployment situation?
The Minister tried to show that we were no worse off than any other country. It has been frequently said in this House that the test of any Government is their ability to act in a difficult situation. I challenge anybody to produce any evidence of any effort made, let alone any demonstration of their ability to tackle, the numerous everyday problems which are occurring in the present economic situation.
Is anything being done to intensify the "Buy Irish" campaign at a time when it was never more needed? Has any extra money been put into that campaign at a time when, to use their own phrase, we should put our money where our employment is? Somebody sent me Christmas cards the other day for a very laudable and worthwhile cause. They asked me to buy the cards to help a benevolent society. When I turned the cards over I saw they were printed in England. These are the things that count. They are small when taken individually but collectively they amount to a great deal.
Recently the Taoiseach, when opening a debate here, pointed out that workers were now at least in the happy position of knowing that, if they are laid off, unemployed or redundant, there is ample provision made to pay them a substantial amount of what they were earning prior to their unemployment and that, if they become redundant, they will get generous redundancy payments.
When I was Minister I had the pleasure of seeing the pay related scheme piloted through both Houses. This made provision to pay married men with dependants if they were unemployed almost as much as they had been earning. I also had the pleasure of piloting through the House the amendment to the Redundancy Bill. This made provision for redundancies so far as they were likely to occur. The Taoiseach referred to these two safeguards recently and insinuated that in some way he or his Government had something to do with the making of these provisions.
The Minister should take note of the submissions from the boot and shoe industry and the Irish Shoe and Leather Workers' Union submitted today. He should also take note of the serious position of the clothing industry at the present time, particularly the shirt factories in Donegal. I am not using this issue as propaganda. Many shirt factories in Donegal are likely to face redundancies, short time or even closure, unless something is done. I have this on good authority from the people directly involved. I appeal to the Minister not to regard this as a Fianna Fáil gimmick and as something which was done for the sake of occupying Private Members' time. He should consider the people who are facing increasing unemployment. No employee is sure if his employment is secure in the weeks ahead.
The Government should make a statement, formulate policy and give some assurance that they will take action to offset and minimise this. There are a number of things they can do. Why have they not done anything? Why have they not made some suggestions? Will the Members of the Coalition go into the Lobbies and vote against this motion? This motion was put down for the purpose of shaking the Government out of their complacency and making them realise that, if they are to continue as a responsible Government, they must show signs of tackling the problems facing them.
The Deputy's time is up.
I think I was entitled to some injury time.
Acting Chairman
The Deputy has been allowed three minutes injury time which has been already used.
I am glad to have had the opportunity to refer to those few matters. As I said the last day, one could speak for hours on this and——
Acting Chairman
Will the Deputy conclude?
The Minister told us that something wonderful would come from the White Paper. But it is merely a litany of the serious problems confronting the people.
It is an important element in any proper reception and adequate approach to a problem to first analyse the component parts of the problem to see what policy matters the issue has thrown up. That is what is attempted in the White Paper. A short time ago we met representatives of the employers, the farmers and the trade unions in an effort to speak plainly to them and to reach conclusions in continuing talks on what should be the necessary elements in a united approach by all concerned to the problems of the Irish economy in the post oil increase era. There is a difference between this period, with its increases in the prices of oil and other commodities necessary for industry and previous periods when this country faced economic difficulties. That was the overriding concern of the Government in presenting this White Paper —that this issue, the range of problems faced by the Government and the country, should be taken out of the ruck of party politics and that public representatives, whatever their political viewpoint, should be able to see above the partisan heat of charge and countercharge what were the problems, international and national, faced by the economy at the present time. We commenced in the White Paper, which has been in the hands of Deputies for some weeks, by outlining some of the repercussions on the home economy of certain international events.
The discussion on the previous occasion on this motion was somewhat coloured by the approaching by-election in Cork. Far from Government spokesmen in that campaign pretending that matters were otherwise, they spoke of the serious problems before us. In much the same spirit, the White Paper continues by saying that the responsibility of the Government is to tell the people just how things are so that together we may get, by agreement, a common approach to those problems.
It is interesting to see the dramatic illustration of the changes in the more serious circumstances we face now by contrast with the period before the oil crisis. The situation arising from the oil crisis is dealt with in the White Paper which contains a table of the pre and post energy crisis forecasts of percentage change in GNP for 1974 over 1973. In that table one can see the expectations of the major economies prior to the energy crisis and the current position.
It can be seen from that table that in the United Kingdom, prior to the energy crisis, they were going for a growth in GNP of 3½ per cent; the United States, 2¼ per cent; Japan, 7½ per cent; Germany, 3¼ per cent; Italy, 7¼ per cent; France, 5½ per cent and Canada, 5½ per cent. For the same countries, in the wake of events associated with the oil crisis and the increased price of energy importation from abroad, figures drawn up by the same agency, OECD, for the United Kingdom show they now face a drop of 2 per cent in their GNP. The same goes for the United States, a drop of ½ per cent. Japan faces a drop of 1½ per cent and Germany, where they previously looked forward to an increase of 3¼ per cent, now faces an increase of 1¾ per cent. Italy, where they expected beforehand an increase of 7¼ per cent, now faces 3½ per cent while France, formally 5½ per cent, is now a mere 4¾ per cent. Canada, 5½ per cent prior to the oil crises, also experienced a drop.
The same goes for all countries. Formerly they expected a repetition of last year's growth but now they are lucky to come near the half way stage in the expectation of last year. The burden of the Government's case before the by-election, throughout this debate, and in any discussion we have had with any of the interests this autumn, is that governments depend on an understanding by the general public of the kind of world economic situation we live in. Whatever anybody might think in this House, whatever any Member might put forward as his solution to the problem, no solution can command any respect if it ignores some of these problems from abroad.
On the balance of payments situation one can see the changes that occurred from the expectations of the world before the increase in oil and commodity prices and the situation immediately after. It is as though this is the great break of this century, certainly the great break in development since the Second World War. While we can say that, with temporary stops and turns, the economies of the developing countries of the western world have over that period expanded, it can be said that our path in the years ahead is very uncertain. In all the countries the Governments are engaged in this discussion with their social partners—the employers, the unions and the farmers— in an effort to find the best means of averting the worst repercussions of this worldwide recession.
We face a special problem from our close economic ties with the British market. Although we have diversified our export outlets over the last few years, mainly as a result of our membership of the EEC we remain dependent on the United Kingdom for the sale of more than half of what we produce. Anybody who examined the proposals in the recent British budget know that Chancellor Healy could not be described as being euphoric in his expectations of the performance of the British economy in the coming year. He has forecast that there will be low growth and high unemployment arising from the expectations of his budget. The proposals brought forward by the British Chancellor amount to a mild reflation of the British economy. While this cannot but help us in our own exports in that area, industrialist in Britain complain that they face a very lean and meagre future as regards the profitability of their industries.
Therefore there is little prospect of our major market expanding sufficiently to take up the slack that is occurring in some of our industries which are suffering a recession. Of course, it is not all gloom. It is well to keep a sense of proportion. Whilst our unemployment figures are very high, high enough to give grounds for serious concern, figures in recent years have also been very high. There was a very serious situation in unemployment in February 1972 Admittedly that was a later month than now and our situation is qualitatively more serious but I mentioned that to suggest that the crisis the Opposition speak of has not yet arrived, though we are in a most serious situation. It is a situation that we cannot regard with any complacency, nor do we.
The information on job creation continues to be very hopeful. In the period up to the 1st April, 1974 to 31st December, 1974—and this is the opinion of the IDA also—this information shows a very good record in terms of job commitments. The IDA predict 21,000 job commitments in this nine-month period as against 23,000 for the full financial year 1973-74. A number of the undertakings approved will be capital intensive, necessitating a great deal of construction work. This will mean some assistance to the building industry which is encountering problems. Another industry experiencing difficulty is the textile industry but the problems of that industry did not commence this year or last year. The Committee for Industrial Organisation, in the course of reports produced in the 1960s, pointed out certain structural weaknesses in this industry, problems of management and equipment. It was clear then that that industry, at some stage in the free trade future, would be in severe difficulties. The down turn in the British market has accelerated this process which, potentially, was there since the early sixties. All concerned with that industry knew those problems were there.
The problems were compounded by the fall in demand in the British market. Many of the firms which have closed or announced redundancies in recent months have been incurring trade losses for some time. The greatest difficulties occur in the woollen and worsted section, which has contracted sharply in recent years as a result of import competition. Deputies opposite know that there is no reason for surprise in this development. In 1966, when we signed the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement, this spelled closure for many industries on the home market. The full lash of that agreement on the home market will not be felt until next year but already we are, in practical terms, in a situation of complete free trade with Britain with certain foretold consequences for such traditional industries as textiles and woollens.
The same goes for the clothing sector which has been under stress and strain. There has been a general down turn in clothing markets throughout the world. Anyone who is interested can read the figures for himself in the OECD reports. He can see that it is not just a special pleading by a member of this Government, looking at our situation.
There is a very sharp downturn in the UK clothing market and that, of course, has a particular significance for the Irish clothing industry because it is in that market that the greater part of the Irish export outlet in clothing is found. Much of our competing imports, of course, come from the UK, so we lose both ways. Home demand at present, according to information available, is not proving exceptionally buoyant—it could indeed be described as very sluggish. Therefore, prospects for employment both in output and exports are not particularly encouraging in the months ahead in that industry.
Our position in regard to footwear is well known also. There is increasing import competition from the UK and other members of the EEC. This predicament of the footwear industry, as many Deputies know, is not of recent origin. For some years—again we can go back to the reports of the Committee of Industrial Organisation of the sixties, an excellent series of reports analysing the structural problems of the industry—we have known that the footwear industry at some stage in the free trade future would face very great difficulties. Footwear imports have been increasing rapidly in recent years but the rate of import increase was not anticipated to reach the high level it has reached. Eighty per cent of imported footwear comes from the UK.
In the engineering industry, declining home demand is the major factor affecting output. Reductions in tariffs under the Anglo-Irish and EEC agreements operate here also. The Minister for Industry and Commerce made the point, and I was glad to hear Deputy Dowling make the same appeal earlier in the debate, in regard to the effect of buying Irish in the home market, although it is questionable whether our market has ever been a home one in the sense that other markets in the EEC have been. This was one of our worries in the past when we argued against too cavalier an approach to free trade in this country. We pointed out when considering this matter that historically we have never had a home market closed off from external competition, a situation not operating for our main competitors who, over the years of their supremacy in industrial production, were able to build up a strong consumer loyalty to national brands in every section.
Deputies opposite have asked where in the White Paper we see a response to the problems before us. If one reads carefully, if one looks at the White Paper impartially, there is a clear commitment that the criteria governing our approach to the economy at present are the preservation of living standards and the maintenance of employment at whatever cost and against whatever international odds that exist. We must preserve and extend our employment at a time of great difficulty. We must give priority to keeping production going in existing industry. In looking at the difficulties of many firms at present, it has been noted that in many cases as a result of inflationary processes they are worried by the shortage of working capital. There has been increasing competition in the home market and the export markets have not been quite as buoyant as they should have been and consequently it has been more difficult to maintain orders.
However, we have taken concrete action. Through the Central Bank, we find that the commercial banks have been asked to respond positively to the short-term liquidity requirements of business concerns. In other words, in our anxiety to keep firms' doors open, clear directions have been given to the chief credit agencies to provide working capital to firms in difficulties. We have also undertaken, in paragraph 96, to ensure that any additional funds which Fóir Teoranta may need at present would be made available, and there is no qualification, no reservation as to upper limits written into the White Paper as to the extent of those extra funds.
As well, we have arranged for a remarkable increase in the amount of cash available to the IDA to enable the efforts of the authority to be intensified. The Exchequer provision for this in the capital budget for 1975 will be £42.5 million as compared with £19.5 million for the nine months from April, 1974—equivalent to an annual £26 million—and it represents a concrete instance of the Government's concern to maintain employment in that period, to ensure that when international recovery comes about, as come about it will, this country will be in a position to reap the best benefit in the conditions prevailing when our main export markets again pick up. The total investment in fixed assets involved will be about £150 million in 1975 as compared with about £90 million for the 12-month period from April, 1974. These are no gimmicks. They are solid reassurances to our population of the Government's confidence in our ability, in the ability of our industrialists and workers, to come intact through this period.
Coming within my own area, there is the provision of trained workers, a very important element in the industrial programme. Though we are encountering problems of unemployment, even at this period we suffer from a shortage of skilled workers. Some counsels might suggest that a period of high unemployment is not the occasion to expand a training programme. I assert the contrary, that this is indeed the very period in which to expand our training programme and capacity, to ensure that a shortage of skilled workers does not lose us the possibility of outside investment in Irish industry.
Again unqualified, we have written into the White Paper that as part of their manpower policy the Government will make additional resources available to the training authority to enable the authority to expand their programmes of industrial training. The point is made in the White Paper —I have made it myself repeatedly —that a valuable industrial training programme can itself be a valuable instrument of manpower policy in times of rising unemployment. More places will be made available in training centres for workers temporarily disemployed and for young workers experiencing difficulties in getting jobs.
These actions are not those of an Administration that have lost their grip on events, have lost their confidence in our capacity to control events. I have every confidence it will be met by co-operation from all sections of the community. I am confident that in our resumed series of talks with the employers, the unions and the farmers we will get the co-operation needed to ensure that our economy comes through this trying period intact.
I have been concerned at the lack of information we have had up to the present on the labour market. Our statistics have not been able to inform us as to the areas under stress, the industries in trouble. I have now made arrangements for the setting up of an inter-departmental manpower committee which will initiate measures to improve the amount and value of present sources of manpower information, which will co-ordinate the manpower information available through the resources of the National Manpower Service attached to my Department, the Industrial Development Authority, the Training Authority and the Department of Finance. By this means we wish to bring forward suggestions for short-term measures to alleviate unemployment from all of the different agencies involved in job creation and the resources available to the separate agencies, all of whom, in their separate fields, are working hard to provide new jobs. I would hope by means of this inter-departmental working party to ensure that we have centrally available to us information on industries in trouble now, expected to be in the months ahead and, accordingly, to take measures inasmuch as such are within our power to ward off the worst effects.
Deputies opposite have mentioned, legitimately, problems in the building industry. Political points, naturally, have to be made in a debate of this kind. Nobody denies that there is not material about on which one may make serious political points based on these problems but, for the record, it should be said that exceptional measures have been taken to ensure that the building industry is enabled to continue at as full a capacity as is possible over the coming year. For example, exceptional measures have been taken to improve the supply of mortgage finance for private housing. Last year the Minister for Local Government arranged a special interest subsidy for borrowing from building societies which cost about £2.4 million a year. This, it must not be forgotten, is in addition to the relief from corporation profits tax enjoyed by the societies and the arrangements for the payment of income tax by the societies at a composite rate. Taken together these measures are now costing the Exchequer approximately £9 million a year. We have also negotiated through the associated banks stand-by credit facilities for the societies totalling £11 million to tide them over any temporary difficulties.
Of course the major problem in the building industry, as in other areas, arises from the worldwide problem of inflation. The rise in prices during the past 12 to 18 months has forced the public to reduce their savings in order to maintain constant living standards. On the other hand, increases in prices have wiped out a large part of the real value of the savings. The effect of inflation has been particularly severe in the building industry and the drop in the purchasing power of the average deposit has been severe also. There has been a problem also on the production side of the industry where, earlier this year, there was an increase in stocks, when builders and builders' providers bought at very high prices. Now, with the falling off in demand, those stocks are themselves found to be tying up large amounts of cash with repercussions on the viability of many firms throughout the country.
But this is not an administration which has been standing by idly or otherwise. The Minister for Local Government has been active in ensuring that sufficient cash is poured into this industry. But, as I have said, it is pouring money into an industry at a time of worldwide inflation, at a time also when in the neighbouring country the building industry is in sharp decline, especially in the private housing area.
There are not any novel solutions to the situation facing us. The figures I quoted at the beginning of my intervention here—and I see I am nearly at the end of it——
The Minister has approximately one minute left.
The figures I quoted at the start suggested that if we are not in a general world recession we are certainly in world conditions of slump. It behoves all concerned with the future of this country and its economy to act responsibly, to make fair criticism and to wish well any Administration that is attempting, as are we, to work with all the groups in our country for a national path, a national partnership, as the White Paper puts it, out of the present world crisis. I have every confidence that that we shall do.
As well as speaking generally about the problems of unemployment, which we and the people are quite satisfied the Government are doing nothing to rectify, I want to speak in particular of the situation in my own city, Limerick. In order to bring home to Deputies just how serious is the situation, the best I can do is to quote the actual official figures of redundancies that have arisen in the last few months which I obtained as recently as this afternoon from the official agency in the mid-western region, the Shannon Free Airport Development Company. Those figures show that in the very recent past in Limerick and Shannon—it can be taken almost as one unit for the purposes of this argument because a high proportion of those who work at Shannon live in and close to Limerick —there have been 1,066 people let go from their employment. The Shannon Free Airport Development Company says that at least another 100 can be expected to become redundant in the next couple of months, that is, even if only the firms which have indicated an intention of closing do so and there are no additions. Therefore, that is a figure of 1,166 people in one small region of Limerick City and Shannon alone thrown out of employment. That is not merely a statistic; that is a human tragedy, not alone for 1,166 people, most of whom cannot get any kind of alternative employment, but for their families also.
There are perhaps 5,000 people immediately affected by that sort of situation. They find no consolation in Government White Papers, in the list of grants to the IDA and all that kind of thing we have heard from the Minister for Labour. They are out of work. They have no immediate prospects of re-employment. They look, as they are entitled to look, to the Government to give them employment. Thank goodness, there has been reasonably good employment in the Limerick region for several years past. The real pinch perhaps will not be felt by those people for some months because happily, due to the redundancy and pay related schemes introduced by Deputy J. Brennan when he was Minister for Labour and Social Welfare, financially these people will be reasonably well off for at least a few months after they lose their employment. The real pinch will be felt in a couple of months' time.
I attended a meeting last week called by the Mayor of Limerick at which various representatives of the area were present, including senior representatives from SFADCo. It is quite clear that in the short-term there is no project in a position to employ those people. I do not think the morale of the city of Limerick and of the mid-western region will stand this kind of mass unemployment suddenly thrust upon it. It is very disturbing to go through the list of factories and of redundancies. The most serious of all is in the clothing industry where 300 were let go from the Danus factory and 220 from the Aquascutum factory, 190 from Scripto and 15 from a furniture factory—more than 700 in four factories in Limerick. In Shannon the total loss at the moment is 301 and another 100 are expected shortly by the Shannon Free Airport Development Company. I can only trust that their optimism in expecting that only another 100 will lose their jobs in the next few months is well founded because from what one hears the position looks like getting much worse.
We are told there are two major industries coming to the Shannon region—the Alcan factory at Foynes and the Burlington factory near Clonlara, County Clare. However, I am informed by SFADCo that neither of the factories will be in a position to go into production before December, 1976—25 months away. To hold out hopes of employment for people who are unemployed now by telling them that there will be two good factories in the region 25 months hence is not much consolation.
Even if those factories were there tomorrow morning rather than in 25 months' time they are still of little value to many who have lost their employment. In Limerick city there has been a tremendous tradition in the clothing industry. The Limerick clothing factory which was originally the main one and is now owned by Aquascutum of London has been continuously in production for 124 years and is one of the oldest clothing factories, if not the oldest, in the world. There are men and women in that factory who have 30, 40 and 50 years' service and the chances of their being able to take up any other form of employment, even if it were available which it is not, are negligible. They have given a lifetime to that trade, they are trained fully for it and are incapable, through no fault of their own, of taking up alternative employment. In many cases they are not capable of being retrained, even if the facilities were available, which they are not.
The situation with regard to Aquascutum is serious, not just in the fact that all these people have been thrown out of work with only a fortnight's notice, but also the way that situation developed. Aquascutum took over the Limerick clothing factory some years ago with a great flourish about the prosperity they would bring to the area. They have three factories in England that are on full-time working while the unfortunate employees in Limerick are let go. The suggestion is made in Limerick—probably with justification—that the Irish employees are expendable, that if production has to be cut back the Irish can go while the other workers are kept in full-time employment in Britain.
About a month or six weeks ago I attended a meeting with the Minister for Industry and Commerce. Incidentally, I am sorry he has not seen fit to be present at this debate today although he spoke on a previous occasion. I attended a meeting as part of a deputation on behalf of another clothing factory—the Danus factory, where 300 jobs have been lost. We were told at that meeting by a director of the Aquascutum factory who is also a member of the Oireachtas that there was no problem whatever in the factory and he could not understand why the Danus factory was closing. At least the Danus factory gave a couple of months' notice to their employees but Aquascutum of London sent a telex to their employees telling them they would be out of work in two weeks although some of them had served that firm for 50 years.
The employees of this factory have been offered the absolute minimum in redundancy pay. In fairness to the management of the Danus factory, they have offered over and above the statutory amount to their employees. The English directors of Aquascutum refused to come here to discuss the matter with the trade union concerned and the Irish director has said he does not know anything about the matter because the English directors do not tell him anything. In the meantime a total of 520 clothing workers in Limerick city are out of work with no prospect, as things stand, of getting work.
The Minister for Industry and Commerce was contacted last week several times on behalf of the workers of that factory but he said no useful purpose could be served by meeting representatives of the workers, public representatives or trade union officials. It was pointed out to him that he was coming to a function at the Ferenka factory, which happily is going from strength to strength. This is only a few miles outside Limerick city and it was suggested to the Minister that representatives of the workers could meet him there. However, he declined to meet them, he turned his car and went straight back to Dublin as soon as the function at Ferenka was over. He had the gall to make a speech at Ferenka telling the people in Limerick how lucky they were because two big factories were due to come into production in December, 1976. I do not know where these unfortunate people will be in the meantime and I do not know what will be done for them. However, I know that whatever about Dáil Éireann deploring the failure of the Government to produce coherent policies to combat the problems of rapidly rising unemployment, the people, and particularly the workers of Limerick, deplore the failure of the Government to do this.
Members of the House will recall that in 1969 or 1970 the town of Dundalk suddenly ran into serious problems in relation to employment when a number of engineering firms found themselves in difficulties. At that time the Government were called on to take remedial action, to take special steps to restore employment as rapidly as possible in Dundalk. That was done then. The people of Limerick are now calling on the Government to do for their city what was done for Dundalk at that stage because the disaster that has hit Limerick is no less than the disaster that hit Dundalk at that time. For the sake of Limerick, its workers and their families I can only hope that this Government will act as effectively as the Fianna Fáil Government acted in relation to Dundalk. If they do not Limerick faces a very bleak future. It is shocking that after achieving almost full employment in that city in the last two or three years we should be back now to the kind of situation that obtained 20 years ago in Limerick under the previous Coalition. I am afraid that is what it amounts to.
It is the opinion of the people of Limerick that the introduction of a new industry for workers who were trained in a particular type of work and who, in many cases, were too old to undergo successfully retraining, is no use. The Government will have to step in to help in one way or another so as to ensure that factories in the city which are now being closed will be re-opened and that the workers will be re-employed. I do not know in what way that could or should be done. I do not mind if it entails the Government buying the factories and running them themselves. That would be nationalisation. In any case, I have no problems of an ideological nature in regard to this question. I am concerned only with helping in some way those people who are now out of the employment in which they have been engaged all their lives up to now.
It has been suggested, and it is a good suggestion, that some form of a co-operative might be started in Limerick in relation to these factories and that this would have Government assistance to enable them to be re-opened and to sell their products. That has been done successfully on a small scale in other areas so I do not see why it could not be done in Limerick. Apart from the human tragedy involved in this case there is the great tragedy of the loss of skill and tradition. There are people working in those two factories now not only whose parents and grandparents but whose great grandparents worked also in the clothing trade. Their skill was not acquired easily or quickly and has been in those families for more than 100 years.
All that looks like being blown away because of the Government's refusal to produce any coherent policy to combat the problems that have afflicted these factories. In regard to the Acquascutum factory, perhaps it will be more relevant to raise this matter on the Mergers and Monopolies Bill, but the Minister for Industry and Commerce has a duty to inquire into these kinds of take-overs by foreign combines if, at the first puff of cold wind, the Irish factory is the only one of the four in these islands to be closed while the other three are kept going at full production. That kind of pattern, and it is a very sinister one, is what is happening in relation to Aquascutum in Limerick and it may well be repeated in relation to other factories in different parts of the country with resulting increased unemployment in these other areas.
I do not wish to continue for too long because I know that Deputy Moore is anxious to make his contribution and I am glad to be able to facilitate him in that regard. I make one final appeal on behalf of the 1,166 redundant people and their families in Limerick and Shannon. I appeal to the Government to come down and do something and not merely read out statistics and say that there are factories which will commence operations in two or three years' time. Let the Government keep open the factories that are there by continuing to make available the only sort of employment that most of these people can turn their hands to. If the Government fail in this regard. Limerick could be in the same situation this year or next year as it was in 1956 and 1957. None of us, hopefully not even the members of the Coalition, wish to experience that again.
When the Minister for Labour was concluding he said that the Government should have the good wishes of all in so far as the unemployment problem is concerned. We on this side of the House have no intention of using the misery caused by unemployment as a weapon with which to beat the Government. If one wishes to attack this Government one does not have to make a weapon because events speak for themselves. When the Government ask for the good wishes of others they must not try to avoid the criticism they deserve. One thing for which they must be criticised is their complete failure, and the wantonness of their treatment, in regard to the construction industry. It is hardly a mere coincidence that on the two previous occasions when Coalition Governments were in office, the mistake was made of not paying enough attention to the construction industry.
After agriculture the construction industry is our most important industry. Apart from the social aspect of providing such a basic need as housing for our people, there are the many ancillary industries involved. The Government are supposed to be rich in experience and to have a wealth of economists but so far there have been no signs of the problems of the construction industry being tackled. The misery attached to losing one's job need hardly be emphasised but there are difficulties for people in other ways in so far as housing is concerned. Because of Government bungling young couples today are deprived of the opportunity of acquiring a dwelling of their own. The Minister for Local Government may state that there is no crisis in the industry but can he tell us, then, why so many building operatives have become unemployed or why the seven builders' providers in this city are working a 3-day week? I heard the excuse put forward that the providers had overstocked but one does not overstock when there is a good demand for one's products because, in that case, one is selling all the time.
Even at this late stage will the Government listen to those people who have been telling them that all is not well in the building industry? Will they listen to the trade unions concerned? Will they tell the people why there is such a drop in the private sector of building? Can they guarantee that they will reach their target of 25,000 dwellings next year as they did this year? Last year when the Minister told us of the target he had in mind we wished him well and we did anything we could to speed up the housing drive. However, the Government have bungled the situation. The purchasing power of the people is not being maintained. Not enough money is being injected into the industry and young couples today are finding it increasingly difficult to save a deposit for their houses. In any large urban area the maximum loan from local government for a house is £4,500 but most houses are selling at more than £6,000. Therefore, a young couple must find at least £1,500 for a deposit. Added to this are legal expenses and a house must be furnished. That is why I say it is being made impossible for a young couple to purchase a house.
I hesitate to interrupt the Deputy but what he is saying would be more appropriate to the Estimate for the Department of Local Government.
I appreciate the point made by the Chair. The sum total of unemployment is a reduction in the purchasing power of the people and as purchasing power decreases unemployment increases and, so, the vicious circle goes on.
If the Government wish to curb unemployment and it is my belief that they do because I do not think anyone would wish for the creation of unemployment, they are going about it in the wrong way. The construction industry is an example of where they have gone wrong. That industry is being starved of funds and this is causing a great social problem. The Government should drop their classic economists and bring in a few of those off the street who are looking for houses and ask them where are the difficulties. They would say the difficulty is that they cannot bridge the gap between the Local Government loan and the selling price of the house. The Government are going on with grandiose schemes, telling us what will happen next year and what they did last year. It is a kind of Alice in Wonderland Government with jam yesterday and jam tomorrow but never jam today. It is today the people want employment.
Deputy O'Malley gave a very good illustration of the position in Limerick where there is large-scale redundancy and where there are promises of two major industries which will not become operational until 1976. What will the unemployed do in the intervening period? Wait in the hope that State funds will keep them from starvation? The vast majority of people do not want that kind of existence. We have seen unemployment before but what we now feel a grievance about is that the Government when elected had great plans for full employment. Allowing for the fact that there is a world economic blizzard, we see no proper planning to reduce the effect of it.
There is a basic reason for that. It is that the Coalition Government is composed of the Fine Gael Party which is generally conservative in outlook and the Labour Party which is socialist in outlook. Outside or even native investors do not know whether it is a Government of free enterprise or a Government of dogmatic socialism. The people who are suffering through this ideological battle between the two parties are those now losing their jobs by the thousand each week. It has been stated that by next year we may well have 90,000 unemployed. We should like to put the Government on notice that we on this side of the House have no intention of sitting back and seeing 90,000 unemployed. The Government must even at this late stage decide whether it is a Government of free enterprise or one of tough, dogmatic socialism. They must first make up their minds on that and, secondly, they must agree to make every possible effort to save the construction industry because, if they do not, unemployment will not be reduced and they will breed that kind of despair in people's minds that will cause loss of confidence in any form of democratic Government.
I intervene to tell the Deputy that I am obliged to call the mover of the motion or somebody nominated by him at 7.15.
My point is that the Ministers should drop their extramural activities and confine themselves to the job they were appointed to do, to build the economy so that we can offer a full life at home to each of our citizens, to each family a proper housing standard and for each person willing to work and capable of working there should at least be a prospect of gainful employment. The Government have fallen down on this and if people had a chance of passing judgment on their efforts I know what the result would be. I plead with Government through the Minister to make every possible effort to rejuvenate the construction industry. If they do not, I can well believe we shall have 90,000 unemployed by January.
Deputy Fitzgerald wishes to speak for a few minutes. May I give him some of my time?
Certainly. The Deputy may give as much time as he wishes but the debate must conclude at 7.30.
I made this request today following a question by me to the Minister for Industry and Commerce last week regarding job creation and job opportunities for those becoming unemployed in the Cork area. To say I was dissatisfied with the Minister's reply is to put it mildly. It appears that the Minister for Industry and Commerce and the Government generally have lost interest in the employment situation. As one leading article during the week put it, they are now a group of tired Ministers who had the will but no longer have the intention. This seems to be the position. I am sorry; it is no pleasure for me to contribute to a motion like this. I should like to have an hour to discuss all the problems that exist but, because my time is so short, I shall refer only to the Cork situation.
The Minister for Industry and Commerce talks about job promises for 1975 and 1976 but I ask him as a matter of urgency what is the position of those now losing their jobs. In my own constituency is an area affected more than many others and that is Blarney. Blarney has a tradition of a textile industry going back over hundreds of years. We have had redundancy after redundancy and it is still not finished. There is one new industry coming which is very welcome but it will only cater for a fraction of the people being laid off. What is in store for those in the 45-55 age group who are laid off? Is it permanent redundancy? What effort did the Minister and his party make to avert this?
I am disappointed that the Ministers for Industry and Commerce and Labour are not listening to me. The Minister for Posts and Telegraphs is present. We have seen him interfere in other Departments but I have not yet heard him comment on the unemployment position. I would ask him to convey to the Government the seriousness of the position that exists in Blarney. Despite the apparent lack of interest on the part of himself and the Government, let them, for goodness sake, come to Blarney before Christmas and do something.
I suggest two things—I am sorry I have not more time. One is to set up a source of emergency finance for these companies that are in trouble and the second is to push and promote with the utmost vigour a Buy Irish campaign. It is the best form of patriotism and the one that should be, but is not preached by Government Ministers. It is a sad state of affairs that in Cork city shops there are far more English and Scottish Christmas cards on sale for this Christmas than there are Irish. Shame on the Government and shame on the Labour Ministers within that Government for accepting the situation that now exists.
The motion before the House is:
"That Dáil Éireann deplores the failure of the Government to produce coherent policies to combat the problem of rapidly rising unemployment."
We had a geography lesson from the Minister for Labour who cited a variety of countries out of the White Paper, Canada, France, Italy, Germany and others. It was a fairly selective presentation. On the other hand, we had the Minister for Finance today at Question Time saying in reply to a colleague of mine who had inquired whether the Government had decided to publish a plan:
We have not come to a decision not to publish one. The exercise of revising expectations is continuing all the time and as soon as one can assume with reasonable certainty the pattern of likely performance in the world economic scene a plan will be published.
So, in fact, the Government have no plan. The Minister for Finance has indicated that they are not prepared to produce a plan. Our motion is that the Government have no coherent plan to combat unemployment. Every member of the Government must support this motion considering that one Minister has indicated that they have no plan.
The Minister for Finance was questioned today about the printing of labels for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs and again, shame on the Government, those labels were printed in Britain. Irishmen are not good enough to produce this kind of work. Our workers are as efficient and more so than people across the water.
The situation has not changed. The labels were printed where they always were printed. This is hypocrisy.
The Minister for Posts and Telegraphs has accepted labels printed in Britain.
As did his predecessors.
I would ask the Government to ensure that every commodity that can be produced here will be produced here in the future. If we look at the ever extending queues outside the labour exchanges we will become aware of the situation. No doubt the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, the Minister for Finance or other Ministers are not aware of the situation. They were never on dole queues. They do not want to know about dole queues, they do not want to know about unemployment, and they have no policy, as was admitted today by the Minister for Finance.
The figures published by the Central Statistics Office do not give a true picture of the situation but according to the Central Statistics Office on 11th October we had 71,500 people unemployed, on 18th October we had 72,499, on the 25th we had 73,477, on 1st November we had 74,850, on 8th November we had 76,282, on 15th November we had 78,474 and the figures for 22nd November are not yet available. They must be fairly substantial when they have not yet been released. We have an increasing number of people unemployed while items that could be produced at home are being produced abroad and the Government are standing by and allowing this to happen. In addition to this the number of people on short time has increased since 11th October from 2,717 to 4,329. This does not take into consideration the vast number of people who do not pay social welfare contributions and do not draw social assistance. There are a large number of self-employed and professional people who are now unemployed. They do not appear on the live register. The figure of 78,000 is a farce. As I indicated on the last occasion, the figures fall far short of the actual situation. If the age for receipt of old age pensions had not been reduced from 70 to 68, the figure would now be in the region of 110,000 unemployed. The change in the age was a sensible one and possibly one that was long overdue but it means that another 25,000 or 30,000 people can be added to that figure.
We now find the Minister for Finance telling us they have no plan and will not have a plan until such time as they can read the world situation. We had geography lessons from the Minister for Labour. The people want to know the actual position. The outlook for 1975 gives some indication of what is to come. It says that due mainly to causes not of Ireland's making the economic outlook for the economy for 1975 is not promising. It says that present indications are that our major problems of sluggish growth, high unemployment, rapid price increases and a large balance of payments will continue. That is what the workers have to look forward to.
The problems that confront our major industries—the building industry, the textile industry, the boot and shoe industry have been indicated here. I would say the Government have deliberately killed the building industry. I believe there was a positive approach by the Government to kill the building industry because no effort has been made by any Minister to ensure that the building industry, which is a very important industry and one which would help to stimulate other industries, would not be allowed to run down. It was allowed to run down to the same level as it did on the previous occasion when the Coalition Government were in power. Who will be the victims but the wage earners? People in cushioned positions like Ministers of State will not be affected by the upsurge in prices and by unemployment until the next election. Then they will probably find themselves out of this House and they may have second thoughts but it will be too late.
I will not deal with price rises or promises, with the way the people were fooled prior to the last general election, the misleading statements that were made.
Will the Deputy please stay with the motion?
One cannot divorce prices from employment because the purchasing power of the individual is all-important.
We are dealing with unemployment.
If employment is to be expanded, there must be a wage packet for the worker and he must be able to purchase. Workers at present are unable to purchase because of high prices.
The Deputy is moving beyond the motion.
The Minister for Labour was allowed to mention the increase in the cost of a variety of items and he was not reprimanded. The promise to reduce prices made during the last election campaign was a betrayal. The people who now show no concern for the unemployed will have quite a lot to answer for in the future. A Minister of State has stated they have no policy. We hope that when the vote comes the people who have read the motion will vote according to their consciences.
I want to say again how appalled I was when it was indicated today that simple items that could be produced here are being produced outside the country and that Departments of State are aiding and abetting unemployment by purchasing from abroad. Our workers are better than the workers of any country. They are sought throughout the world. I hope the policy of the Government will be revised at an early date.
The Deputy's time is now up. I must dispose of the motion.
The excuse of a White Paper that we have been promised for so long gives no comfort to the large queues outside the labour exchanges, to the people who are uncertain whether they will be next for either redundancy or unemployment. I hope the Government will, as a result of this motion, realise that we are concerned about the people who are on the bread line, and that this motion will stimulate some thought in the minds of those who care nothing for the people who are unemployed at present.
Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá: 56; Níl: 62.
Tá
- Allen, Lorcan.
- Andrews, David.
- Barrett, Sylvester.
- Brady, Philip A.
- Brennan, Joseph.
- Breslin, Cormac.
- Brosnan, Seán.
- Browne, Seán.
- Brugha, Ruairí.
- Burke, Raphael P.
- Callanan, John.
- Carter, Frank.
- Colley, George.
- Collins, Gerard.
- Connolly, Gerard.
- Crinion, Brendan.
- Cronin, Jerry.
- Crowley, Flor.
- Cunningham, Liam.
- Daly, Brendan.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- MacSharry, Ray.
- Meaney, Tom.
- Molloy, Robert.
- Moore, Seán.
- Murphy, Ciarán.
- Nolan, Thomas.
- Noonan, Michael.
- Davern, Noel.
- de Valera, Vivion.
- Dowling, Joe.
- Fahey, Jackie.
- Farrell, Joseph.
- Faulkner, Pádraig.
- Fitzgerald, Gene.
- Fitzpatrick, Tom (Dublin Central).
- Flanagan, Seán.
- French, Seán.
- Gogan, Richard P.
- Haughey, Charles.
- Healy, Augustine A.
- Hussey, Thomas.
- Kenneally, William.
- Kitt, Michael F.
- Lalor, Patrick J.
- Lemass, Noel T.
- Leonard, James.
- Lynch, Celia.
- O'Connor, Timothy.
- O'Malley, Desmond.
- Power, Patrick.
- Timmons, Eugene.
- Tunney, Jim.
- Walsh, Seán.
- Wilson, John P.
- Wyse, Pearse.
Níl
- Barry, Peter.
- Barry, Richard.
- Begley, Michael.
- Belton, Luke.
- Belton, Paddy.
- Bermingham, Joseph.
- Bruton, John.
- Burke, Dick.
- Burke, Liam.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Clinton, Mark A.
- Cluskey, Frank.
- Conlan, John F.
- Coogan, Fintan.
- Corish, Brendan.
- Cosgrave, Liam.
- Costello, Declan.
- Creed, Donal.
- Crotty, Kieran.
- Cruise-O'Brien, Conor.
- Desmond, Barry.
- Desmond, Eileen.
- Dockrell, Maurice.
- Donegan, Patrick S.
- Donnellan, John.
- Dunne, Thomas.
- Enright, Thomas.
- Esmonde, John G.
- Finn, Martin.
- Fitzpatrick, Tom (Cavan).
- Gilhawley, Eugene.
- Governey, Desmond.
- Griffin, Brendan.
- Hegarty, Patrick.
- Hogan O'Higgins, Brigid.
- Jones, Denis F.
- Keating, Justin.
- Kelly, John.
- Kenny, Henry.
- Kyne, Thomas A.
- L'Estrange, Gerald.
- Lynch, Gerard.
- McDonald, Charles B.
- McLaughlin, Joseph.
- McMahon, Larry.
- Malone, Patrick.
- Murphy, Michael P.
- O'Brien, Fergus.
- O'Connell, John.
- O'Donnell, Tom.
- O'Leary, Michael.
- O'Sullivan, John L.
- Pattison, Seamus.
- Ryan, John J.
- Ryan, Richie.
- Staunton, Myles.
- Taylor, Frank.
- Thornley, David.
- Timmins, Godfrey.
- Toal, Brendan.
- Tully, James.
- White, James.
Tellers:—Tá, Deputies Lalor and Browne; Níl, Deputies Kelly and B. Desmond.
Motion declared lost.