Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 25 Jun 1980

Vol. 322 No. 10

Estimates, 1980. - Vote 3: Department of the Taoiseach (resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

That a sum not exceeding £3,638,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1980, for the salaries and expenses of the Department of the Taoiseach, and for payment of certain grants-in-aid.

—(The Taoiseach).

Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Mr. Moore)

I spent a lot of time in the House listening to the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste, Deputy FitzGerald, the leader of Fine Gael and Deputy Cluskey, the leader of the Labour Party. Having listened to their speeches and knowing there are people outside who are interested in this debate, I can only say that it bodes ill for democracy if one takes at their face value the contributions of Deputy FitzGerald and Deputy Cluskey. Both of them indulged in personal abuse of the Taoiseach but neither of them put forward a single constructive idea which if adopted by the Government might lead to improvement in the people's standard of living. I shall not, although I am tempted to do so, attempt to reply with equal vehemence and vituperation as that would be a waste of time. These two Deputies became almost paranoid in their endeavours to discredit the Taoiseach. I am not a psychiatrist but, as a politician, I can analyse their contributions and see the reasons behind them. I am not a disciple of Freud but it is very interesting to find that both Deputies see in the Taoiseach a man more able than they are, who is far beyond them as a politician and a leader. They cannot match his approach to the country's problems and cannot match his performance in the House, and so they try to bring him down by abuse that is almost vulgar.

This is a pity. I have heard both of them do better on other occasions. They should not let their frustration colour their outlook so much that we get from them not a contribution to the adjournment debate but merely a flow of words with a jaundiced look on them. If they want to serve their own cause and serve the people they should discuss the problems of the country in a responsible way and drop the personal attacks.

Nobody denies that the world is going through a difficult time or that it is the duty of a Government to protect especially the weaker sections of the community at such a time. The Government in its budget this year sought to distribute the national wealth on an equitable basis. They got their priorities right and considered first the weaker section, the old age pensioners and blind pensioners, the widows, the orphans and others who must be given help by the State. Increases in pensions were given on a scale never before seen in this country. There are difficulties at present but I am very confident in and very proud of the Government and the party of which I am a member because their first priority in the budget was the weaker section. I am not complacent or thinking that the weaker sections got enough but they got some insulation against the suffering they would have endured in the present world situation.

The Opposition should raise their sights and get out of the rut they get into when they try to substitute vulgar abuse for the policy of a party. I hope that perhaps somebody more eloquent than I am will be able to bring them to some sense of realism so that they will make contributions here of which they can be proud afterwards. I do not think the contributions from the Opposition so far today will ever be a source of pride to them.

We have a problem in industrial relations, as we have always had. In the first quarter of the year things had improved very much. I have been a member of a trade union, the second largest in the country, all my working life and since becoming a full-time politician I can see many problems from both sides. I do not always blame the trade unions or the strikers. I have even seen unofficial strikers justified. I do not suggest employers are always perfect. I know instances to the contrary where management caused strikes. However, we must not think in a narrow, sectional way but remember that we are citizens of a young, free country striving to build up its economy so that all citizens can enjoy a fruitful life with a standard of living as high as possible.

I suggest to anybody involved in industrial strikes that we must think on a broader basis and ensure that any action we take to improve our position will not be at the expanse of perhaps a lower paid worker. Without naming any particular strike or conflict going on at present, I have one in mind where it would mean that the strikers by their action would make it harder for workers on a lower scale of pay.

I know the difficulties of trade unions. I have seen the efforts of the Trade Union Congress trying valiantly to end some of the more damaging strikes. I appeal to those involved in strikes to remember that nobody ever wins a strike. When the men or women go back to their jobs they have lost so much that it takes a long time to make up for it. The strike nowadays, especially in present circumstances, is not what I believe it was when I was young. There was a time when workers, especially in Dublin, had to fight the bosses, some of whom were very unjust. As a disciple of Larkin I read of his efforts in the 1913 strike. In later years I knew him and what he stood for. I knew his burning concern and how he strove to uplift the workers. Today most strikes are in the public sector where there are no private capitalists. We have strikes going on in semi-State industries where the employers are the ordinary citizens and where all that is wrung from these bodies is wrung partly from taxation imposed on these citizens. Surely it behoves everybody employed in a semi-State concern to realise that they are not fighting private capitalists but fighting the ordinary people to obtain what they want. I have seen in this city long queues of people waiting for social welfare payments because there was a postal strike. Those people did not cause the strike, but they suffered. As a trade unionist I appeal to my fellow trade unionists who are contemplating strike action or who are on strike to be guided for the sake of the people by the Congress of Trade Unions and to back the congress in their efforts to bring about a better atmosphere in industrial relations.

The Government do not interfere in strikes because we have got the Labour Court, the Congress of Trade Unions, the trade union movement and employers' associations. We in this very small society should be able to find the means to have proper negotiations. In order to build up our economy we should look on the strike weapon as the very last thing that will be used, because too much suffering has been caused by strikes. I know that those on strike suffer, but I believe that by improving their standards and by sticking to the negotiating table they can help to avoid strikes. I believe the time has now come when the trade unions will have to insist on management being efficient. I know there have been cases where management were not efficient and when the unions fought inefficient management we all paid for it. The trade unions must tell management that they want efficient management.

The Government have legislation for the election of worker directors in many of our State industries. One of our most successful semi-State concerns have about four worker directors on each of their boards. Those people are doing very well. The workers in the concern are well paid. It is a long time since they had a strike because the men from the shop floor are showing that they are as competent as the professional directors in perfecting a unit which can operate successfully in the commercial world. Several semi-State industries have worker directors on their boards. Those worker directors, together with the professional directors, have been able to show what their combined brains can do. Trade unionists should look at this and see that the strike weapon is becoming outmoded. Workers can improve their conditions by going to the table with their employers and working out proper policies for the improvement of the firm concerned as well as for everybody else. If this is not done more innocent people will suffer.

I want to pay a tribute to the Minister for Labour for his unremitting attention to industrial problems. He has been involved all the time in trying to solve those problems. I have been engaged in unofficial strikes. When people say that we should ban unofficial strikes I believe they really mean that the strike weapon should never be abused. It has been blatantly abused in recent years. There is something wrong when workers have to take unofficial strike action. The worker is justly responsible, or else the management have not been listening. I have seen the whole structure of industry change considerably over the years. Our society is changing as the State creates more and more semi-State industries. There is no use now talking about bad capitalists, because a lot of them have disappeared. We have semi-State companies run by the people. I hope that more and more semi-State bodies will have worker participation on the boards.

This year, when we realise the problems the economy is facing, we should have the trade union movement play a full part in building up our economy so that, to quote the economists, we make a bigger national cake and so that there is more of it for each one of us. If some of the strikes we have had recently are to be extended to other areas it means there will be more suffering for all concerned, our national image will be damaged and outside investors will not be so keen to come here. Whatever weight my words have I hope that they cause people to think and that the trade unions, instead of insisting on strikes, will ensure that management is efficient. The trade unions are very often blamed for strikes. This may be correct in some cases but I have also seen inefficient management being the cause of strikes.

There are faults on both sides and we must eradicate them. If we do not eradicate them, further suffering will be caused to people who can least bear it. If we want to build a Christian society we must look to those lofty ideals. One would like to have a magic wand to change things, but when we have not it must be unremitting toil. The last speaker from the Labour Party benches said that when a Land Bill was introduced to control the price of land it got no support from this side of the House. It did not get any support from the Fine Gael benches either. I pay the Labour Party tribute for being sincere about the Bill. They wanted to do something about the price of land. I believe that, far from solving the price of land or the housing problem, the Bill would have caused greater problems. It would have put more barriers in the way of providing a supply of developed land than anything else I know of. That is why we rejected it. I believe that some of the people responsible for the Bill realise that it was far from being a weapon to increase the purchase of land at proper prices and allow more houses to be built. Anybody interested in the housing problem knows that one of the biggest barriers to a speedy solution is the fact that there is not enough serviced land. I do not believe the present system of land purchase is ideal. I have no time whatever for the people who make vast profits from the sale of land. They can often be immoral.

I realise that the housing problem is a great one. Successive Fianna Fáil Governments down through the years have provided local authorities with moneys for the creation of land banks. Dublin Corporation, for instance, have built up a reserve of land. This policy of land reserves has been very successful in terms of housing output which, though not as good as we would wish it to be, resulted in the housing in Dublin city alone of somewhere between 60,000 and 70,000 families during the past 30 or 40 years. That is not a bad achievement for a city of our size. While not wishing to minimise the problem of the numbers on the housing list, I would point out that the foresight of Fianna Fáil in relation to housing legislation has enabled us to reduce very considerably the housing problem.

Again, as a result of the foresight of the Government we are now witnessing the rebuilding of the inner city. Even the construction of one house in this area is a costly business but despite that consideration, I defend such development. This capital city of ours must be redeveloped. There must be more inner city building in an effort to stop the sub-urban sprawl. Economists tell us that it is bad economics to use arable land for building purposes and that we should be able to develop the inner city area so that people might live there with practically all the amenities they would enjoy in the suburbs. Obviously, if a family, especially a family in the lower-paid bracket, move from the city centre to the suburbs, they suffer a loss in income by reason of having to pay additional bus fares to and from work. The inner city authority have been given £1 million by the Government, not merely for the building of houses but for the provision of amenities. The development that is taking place in the inner city area is an example of what I would regard as real social progress even if I am not satisfied with the rate of that progress. I am of the opinion that we could step up the housing drive by various means but to do so would require effort on the part of all of us—Government, trade unions and employers.

When we are discussing the national understanding we speak of the social partners. In a country as small as ours we must all be social partners. I do not believe that we have very many wealthy people but there are many people who are not enjoying the standard of living that they should be enjoying. However, Fianna Fáil have always set the headlines and shown courage in taking unpopular decisions to impose taxation. We have always looked after the weaker sections first. That is why the Government were so generous this year in the budget in so far as the weaker sections were concerned. No other Government have ever given them increases of the same magnitude. Next year we hope to be able to give even more.

There has been reference to the medical card system. Perhaps there was wrangling in this regard in some cases but if that happened it was not due to any policy of the Government.

There are many people who need further help, whether in the form of increased pensions, of better housing or something else but we can only effect these improvements if our economy is so geared as to create the wealth that is necessary. Obviously, it is not possible to distribute wealth if we do not have wealth. This takes me back to my old theme of trade unions and employers getting together and realising that such groups as old age pensioners, widows and those on blind pensions are people with very little muscle in terms of making a case for improvement. Such people are not in a position to go on strike. The responsibility for them rests with all of us.

Regarding strikes generally, any man taking strike action should ask himself first what effect the strike will have on his fellow worker. I believe in the free enterprise system but that system must be so organised and so governed as to ensure that the weaker sections are protected. The Government are criticised for situations that are outside their control. This happens particularly in relation to oil prices. We must face up to the situation that since OPEC are the countries who have the oil, they are in the position of setting the prices for that commodity. Recompense for increases in oil prices can be made only at the expense of the less well off who are not in a position to fight back. Regardless of which political party any of us happens to support, we should regard our society as one unit but made up of very many groups, some of whom are very weak and to that extent we should endeavour to create as much wealth as possible in order to be able to help those most in need.

The Government are setting a headline in terms of social concern. They have indicated their policy in this regard. I am convinced that after we have given an account of our stewardship we will be returned to power at the next general election with a big majority.

Mr. W. O'Brien

This is a very sad occasion for all of us, regardless of whether we represent Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil or Labour because none of us likes to see our little country in a bad situation economically. Unfortunately, our economy has never been worse than it is now. It is interesting to note that each speaker here today has referred to inflation and to the cost of living. During the past few years it has been very obvious that our country has been beset by evils of all kinds. Does anybody, even in Fianna Fáil, deny that the cost of living has been spiralling, that inflation has been increasing by leaps and bounds, that the economy is deteriorating, that unemployment is increasing and has now reached almost 100,000, that the purchasing power of our £ has been reducing rapidly? There is serious concern in industry. Law and order has broken down completely and it is now not safe for any Irish citizen to walk abroad.

In this situation the people of Ireland are crying out for leadership, for a Government they can respect and have confidence in. Fianna Fáil have forfeited the mandate they received three years ago. They have been too busy trying to grapple with their own political differences to do anything about the economy. More than three years ago, when they were in Opposition, on any occasion when I stood outside the barrier in this House or sat in the Seanad I heard Fianna Fáil crying out about prices. Then they introduced the famous manifesto. I was delighted to see that manifesto because it contains a record of what they would have the people believe they would do for the country. On page 10 of the manifesto it is stated:

Government policy must be directed towards discouraging increased costs and prices in all areas where it has control or influence. This policy has been absent in the last four years.

They were to exercise control over prices. What did they do to the food subsidies? I am not surprised there are not any Fianna Fáil Deputies over there today. They would need to have neck to be there. I am not casting a reflection on Deputy Connolly, the Minister of State. It is his job to be there. In Opposition he was a great critic of our prices policy and I am sure he feels sick today listening to my comments on the prices explosion we have had since 1977.

Fianna Fáil said they regarded price control as necessary, yet they have not done anything to combat the underlying causes of inflation. During our time in Government, whenever we took up a newspaper we read of Fianna Fáil criticism of our prices policy. We had Deputy Lynch in Opposition running to the Government accompanied by Deputy Mrs. Lemass. They had been on a shopping spree and they told us the cost of the shopping basket. Today they would not get what would fit in a pill box for the same price.

Fianna Fáil have not made any effort to control prices. The value of increases in social welfare benefits has been eroded before it reaches the hands of beneficiaries. The old and the poor are experiencing the most difficult period in history because never in the history of the State were the unfortunate underprivileged people so neglected by a Government.

I will refer briefly to local government. In their manifesto Fianna Fáil promised to introduce a new scheme for house improvement grants. The manifesto stated that Fianna Fáil recognised the importance of encouraging people to remain in rural Ireland and would provide adequate funds for effective local improvement and amenity schemes. Last year, however, they abolished all grants for house improvements and none of us can take lightly what they have done to local improvement schemes. People who are not in a position to buy new houses cannot get grants and parents of married couples who let them stay in their homes cannot get grants or loans for extensions.

In Fine Gael and Labour we have been talking about the dreadful condition of our main and county roads. In my county the roads have never been so bad and I have said the time must come when money will be found to improve the roads which are deteriorating rapidly. I am a layman and I am giving a layman's opinion of our roads, but in The Cork Examiner of 5 May 1980 there is a quotation from a member of the County and City Engineers Association:

The cost of maintaining, strengthening and developing our road network has increased by an average of 25 per cent over the past few years, but local authorities' revenue which goes towards road upkeep has been limited to an increase of between 10 and 11 per cent in 1980, for the third successive year. This meant that the extent of the repair work has fallen steadily in the past few years and was now about one-third the already inadequate level of 1977, said the Association. The engineers say that the signs of these neglected areas show in the increasing incidence of potholes, surface cracking and the deformation of the carriageway of major and minor roads. Each of these troubles stem from the inability of many of our roads to bear the weight of modern traffic and the severe winter of the past two years.

That tells us the position and how serious it is. People driving cars find themselves in great danger in rural Ireland. They do not know what kind of manhole or pothole they will run into. In a short time the Government will be placed in the position where they will have no choice but to find money for the roads.

I should like to say a few words about agriculture. A lot has been said about it today and anything that is worth saying once is worth saying twice. Agriculture, a very important industry, is going through a very difficult period. In 1976 there was what was known as an employment relief scheme which was £17. It was of little good to any farmer and under the Coalition it was abolished. I remember being in the Seanad at that time listening to some people who are now Ministers of State crying crocodile tears because that happened. They said that farmers could not survive and that it would be a terrible handicap on the farming community. How things change. Now we have rates which, in my own county, have gone up by 300 per cent. On top of that there is no credit available to farmers. Anyone who tried to develop his farm and borrowed money from the bank is now in the position that he is not able to get the grant due to him.

I have been approached on a number of occasions by farmers who really need their grant money. I was in touch with Agriculture House. Lately I made representations about three farmers and got three very nice acknowledgments back telling me that the grants had now gone for payment. In my innocence I believed that the payments would be forthcoming in five or six days. I informed the farmers that their money would be paid in a week. Three weeks elapsed and I had communications from the unfortunate people who were frustrated because of a lack of money. I again got in touch with the Department and a very nice, courteous civil servant came on the phone and informed me that I had misinterpreted the letter and said it only meant that the grant was approved for payment. I asked what time would elapse between that and actual payment and was told it could take three months. I asked why that happens and was told it was due to shortage of staff, a backlog and the fact that no overtime was allowed. When we are talking about unemployment we must surely see that people are employed where work is available. It is a frightful situation where farmers must wait for £12,000 or £14,000 and all they have when they come to see one are letters and more letters from bank managers asking why they did not keep their promise and pay back their money. These are decent people who never in their lives knew anything about being in debt or who had never broken their word to a bank manager. Now they find themselves in a most embarrassing position where they cannot face up to their responsibilities.

Much has been said about housing and I listened to the Minister of State, Deputy Moore, speaking about it. Housing is in a bad way. In my county some schemes are not approved with the Department. What really cripples people about to get married is that a loan of £12,000 is not enough because there is no hope of building a house for that sum. There is no way they can get money and even if they could there are no bridging loans available. As a result many people in the process of building have to stop because of lack of funds.

I listened to the Taoiseach, the Minister for Energy and Deputy Moore speak with confidence as if they had never left Dublin, read a newspaper or had any branches down the country to tell them what was happening. There were very few rural Deputies over there today. It must be very depressing for them and it is no joy for me to speak like this. As a constituency representative and worker close to the grass roots I find that I am redundant because there is no money in the kitty to meet what people are entitled to have, people who built houses and heard so much about the £1,000 grant. We make representations and receive acknowledgment after acknowledgment.

The Minister of State is a man to whom I have written. I get a nice letter from him and I even get one from him when I do not write to him. When I write to his Department I get a letter from him: "Dear Deputy" or "Dear Willie""The matter is being investigated". That is no good to me. I must tell the people that there is no money. I am right to say that. The Government said it in 1977 when there was no truth in it. If I am not telling the truth now, the Minister of State will have an opportunity when replying to say so. I will give him six names and if he can pay them in a fortnight I will stand up here and apologise.

I have been to O'Connell Bridge House and it is in a shambles. I went there on one occasion and could not get inside the door. On another occasion when I telephoned the Department I was told that I had better ring the following Monday because they were moving house. Where would one encounter such happenings in a Government Department? That is outrageous and the Minister of State present is aware of the facts. There is little use telling us that there were 40,000 applications. Those qualified for grants should get them. I do not see why public representatives should have to carry the can because of the inefficiency of the Government or the lack of money. People are slow to believe that there is no money because they were told three years ago that there was plenty of money and the only trouble with our economy then was because we did not have good Government.

We are all aware that there is no money available. The cost of the average house has gone to £25,000 compared with £12,500 in 1976 and £14,400 in 1977. I can recall the National Coalition Government being criticised because the loan limit was £4,500 but at that time houses were costing £7,000. Those anxious to purchase houses had to find £2,500 but bridging loans were available. The situation is different now if one has to approach a bank manager. Last week I accompanied an unfortunate constituent to meet a bank manager but the bank manager became so frustrated when I called that I expected he would call for the gardaí at any moment. He felt we should have been aware that money was not available. He looked at me as if I had deceived my friend but I did not realise the situation was so bad. I hate to say such unpleasant things but they must be made public. This morning the Táòiseach spoke about moderation in wage demands and said that people were not approaching this matter in a responsible way. The Taoiseach also told us we were not an island in isolation. It is a pity that something similar to that was not stated in 1977 when we were being told that inflation was of our own making with a small amount of it being imported due to the price of oil. The Tánaiste made reference to the situation that existed in 1976 and quoted what Deputy Richie Ryan, as Minister for Finance, said in that year. He reminded us that Deputy Ryan had said our economy was like a cork floating on the ocean, but the cork is not floating now.

Many nice things were said about the condition of the country, but we were never worse off. The Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach referred to Deputy FitzGerald and Deputy Cluskey and said that they were jealous of the Taoiseach because they could not match him. When one examines the economy one can see that there is no need to match the Taoiseach. Deputy Moore was critical of our approach and I invite him to ignore us but to keep looking behind him. That is the greatest danger. The country is close to bankruptcy because we cannot pay our way. Tourism was never worse; empty rooms. The knock at the door is not that of a guest but of the VAT man. How could tourists be encouraged to come here with the price of petrol? We have priced ourselves out of existence. However, we are told that we are doing well. If one was not living here one would get the impression, having listened to the Taoiseach today, that he was the greatest thing since the sliced pan, but those living in rural Ireland in particular are well aware of the position in relation to prices.

When in power we heard a lot about strikes. Deputy Fitzgerald, now Minister, for Labour, had a lot to say then. When strikes occurred he jumped up, beat the benches and asked what the Minister for Labour and the Labour Party were doing. Now we have become accustomed to strikes. We have had so many of them that we are not inclined to realise the effect they are having on our economy. We have often heard statements about law and order. However, law and order has gone. At one time violence only occurred in cities but now it has extended throughout the country. One is not safe walking in a street in any big town. The gardaí are afraid to tackle the people involved. The gangsters have taken over. We were criticised and asked what we were doing about violence, but those who took over the country to solve such problems have run away from them.

The situation was never worse. Unemployment, something we heard a lot about when in Government, is close to the 100,000 mark. It is nothing new to me that so many people are out of work under a Fianna Fáil Government. Between 1971 and 1972 the number of people unemployed was roughly 17,000. That occurred at a time when we did not have to cope with any international crises or economic recession. That unemployment occurred at a time when the country was going well. Of course, Fianna Fáil never solved unemployment problems; it was the emigrant ship that solved it for them. The Government should tell us that they realise that the economy was never worse. At the first opportunity they should move, because the country will get worse. The Government should go to the country and, if they get the mandate they abused in 1977, they are entitled to return, but at present they are on borrowed time.

Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism (Mr. O'Malley)

I should like to thank Deputy O'Brien for his colourful contribution. The part I heard was more remarkable for its colour than its accuracy, and in the circumstances I shall start with a point I intended to finish on, to refer to the export situation so far this year. It is a pity that Deputy O'Brien will be deprived of the opportunity of hearing the figures because of his departure from the Chamber but he would find them interesting. I read in a newspaper the other day that the May figures had been announced and that there was a big drop in exports resulting in a serious situation.

The CTT target for exports for this country for this year is £4.2 billion. If that were to be achieved on target the figure for the end of May should have been £1.579 billion and in fact the figure for our exports at that time was £1.625 billion, the target having been exceeded in times of considerable difficulty which could not have been foreseen in many cases at the end of last year so far by £46 million, and appearing likely to remain at that very healthy level. This is one of the best criteria by which the basic health of the economy can be judged even at a time of considerable difficulty like this. Those who shout in the way they do, do a considerable disservice although in many cases I suppose they have to because it is part of their job and I am not blaming people like Deputy O'Brien.

Mr. Quinn

At least we were shouting with a little bit more objectivity than all the roaring that went on in the previous period of opposition.

Mr. O'Malley

I would not think so at all.

Mr. Quinn

I did not expect that the Minister would.

Mr. O'Malley

I want to deal with some aspects of industry and the problems which they face at present. Notwithstanding the problems, it is interesting to see that they can achieve such growth in output, in employment, in exports, and in manufacturing investment in all of which the increases this year are likely again to be among the best in Europe, if not the best, as they have been in most of these areas for the past two years.

At present there is increasing evidence that the growth of Irish manufacturing industry has slowed down and that many firms are beginning a period of arrested growth or lesser growth than they have been used to over the last number of years and in some cases there is actual retrenchment. Seasonally adjusted unemployment has increased by a few thousand over the past two months but the increase in unemployment should be viewed in the context of an increase in population and an increased labour force and we find that the percentage in fact is apparently continuing to drop. A number of factors are contributing to this situation. The international trading climate is exceptionally poor. The United States economy is currently in recession. Unemployment in the United Kingdom is now at a post-war peak of over 1.5 million and negative growth is expected in the United Kingdom this year.

The economic outlook for the EEC as a whole was described, following a recent meeting of the European Council, as extremely difficult. At the same time there is evidence pointing to a significant loss of competitiveness of Irish manufacturing industry. Costs, especially wage costs, are increasing at a faster rate than in other EEC countries. A further contributing factor in many cases is the impact of expensive domestic credit. Since 1977 there has been a general upward movement in interest rates in Europe and the United States. During the last six months the rise has been particularly rapid and rates have reached historically high levels in many countries. These rates appear to be quite firm at present with one exception; in the United States there has been, during the last two months, a very sharp fall in the key prime rate reflecting a sharply reduced demand for loans there as the US economy moves deeper into recession. This fall, however, has not been manifested yet in other countries.

Here in Ireland interest rates have reached their highest level since the push for industrial investment began. These high rates reflect economic forces both within the domestic economy and external to it. International trends play a very significant role in determining interest rates here. In an economy with a high volume of external financial transactions it is difficult to create a significant differential between interest rates here and those abroad without inducing some external capital flows. Domestically the supply of credit to the private sector can be regulated by the Central Bank but the Central Bank cannot similarly regulate the demand for credit. It must call upon interest rates, the price of credit, to balance these forces. If the bank were to do otherwise there would be downward pressure on our external reserves and the integrity of our currency would be in danger.

The Government are very conscious of the adverse impact of high interest rates on industrial output and employment. A number of mechanisms already exist to protect companies against these high rates including grant-aided leasing, section 84 lending and the Industrial Credit Company EIB facility for small industry. For some time now, however, the Government have also been urging industry to borrow at least part of their loan requirements abroad in order to offset the high cost of domestic borrowing. In Germany, for example, the cost of funds for a 12 month deutchmark loan is approximately 8.5 per cent. When all commissions and lending margins are included the total net cost to an Irish company should be about 13 per cent while our membership of the European Monetary System ensures that the exchange risk inherent in such a loan is lessened. The Central Bank to date has enhanced the attractiveness of such borrowing by considering it to be outside its credit guidelines. The total amount of such foreign borrowing during the guideline year to February 1980 was £129 million, most of which went to the manufacturing sector. During the last four months the volume has increased more rapidly. Most of this borrowing has been done by larger export oriented companies used to trading overseas.

In the case of small and medium sized companies and largely domestic market oriented companies some of the mechanisms I have mentioned are not applicable and it is more difficult for such firms to gain access to foreign borrowing. Also these firms tend to be reluctant to borrow abroad since, understandably, there has been little tradition of this kind of borrowing in the past and consequently a lack of expertise and skill in operating in foreign exchange markets. Given the magnitude of the differential in interest rates between Ireland and some other EMS countries and the present problems of the smaller and medium sized Irish companies, the Government feel there is a need for an additional mechanism to provide these companies with access to funds, particularly for working capital, at rates comparable with those enjoyed by competitors abroad.

Accordingly the Government have devised a new scheme to achieve this aim. It is intended that the Industrial Credit Company will borrow £50 million in deutchmarks for lending to Irish industry at an interest rate of approximately 13 to 13½ per cent. Several features of the scheme will be different from the existing ICC EIB facility for small industry fixed asset requirements. The maximum loans available will be £250,000 or 50 per cent of the applicant's working capital requirements, whichever is the lower. Some details of the scheme remain to be finalised and I expect that the Minister for Finance and the Industrial Credit Company will be in a position to announce full details within a few days.

Among the many benefits both tangible and intangible that I expect the new scheme will have are the fact that first it will reduce the competitive disadvantage under which Irish domestic firms are operating vis-á-vis their EMS competitors. Second, it will give an incentive to Irish firms to increase investment or to maintain existing levels of output and employment at a time of difficult market conditions due to falling demand and high inflation. Third, it should have a significant psychological effect on industry by translating theoretical benefits of EMS membership into reality. Fourth, I expect that it will create close contact between Irish industry and European commerce and thereby encourage firms in understanding and assessing the risks involved in foreign currency borrowing.

Notwithstanding the considerable assistance towards job maintenance and job creation which this scheme will afford, we have also to remain competitive on costs in order to secure orders and to maintain jobs. Basically this means that our wage increases this year must be in line with those in other EEC countries. In the final analysis the forces of international competition will determine whether Irish products are competitive on costs. If they are not then a decline in employment will inevitably follow.

Such a decline would have disastrous consequences both social and economic for this country. Let no one be in any doubt about this, given the rapidly growing numbers of young people in our total population. For the European Community as a whole the numbers of young people coming onto the labour market will decrease slowly in the mid-eighties while our numbers will continue to increase. At present Ireland is the only country in western Europe where more than half of the population is under the age of 25.

These young people are conscious of being better educated than their forebearers and they are aware of the opportunities that should be open to them in this country. They are the first generation of Irishmen and women not to be dominated by the national question. They take Irish independence for granted and see a wider role for themselves and for Ireland in Europe. Membership of the EEC and of the European Monetary System and the break with sterling are seen as a sign that the country can stand on its own feet with the rest of them. It is clear that, for us, solving the unemployment problem, as it is called, cannot be viewed as a once and for all challenge that must be met within the next five to ten years. We face an exceptionally rapid rate of increase in the working age population, not just for years but, indeed, for decades ahead. These people must be provided with an opportunity to make their contribution to building a better future for this country.

This year, between 50,000 and 60,000 young people will leave our educational system. If we fail to provide jobs for a high proportion of them, the consequences will be serious for all of us. In the past, emigration has provided a safety valve for this kind of situation, particularly for the less well qualified sections of our labour force. We can no longer fall back on this solution, as other countries are not in a position to provide job opportnities on a large scale for our surplus labour. Besides, this solution is an admission of defeat and the country is all the poorer for the loss of its greatest resource. The alternative to emigration, if we cannot provide jobs, is an unacceptably high unemployment rate, an increasing tax burden on those already employed, a demoralised younger generation and substantially increased social unrest.

I believe that the key issue now facing our society is how this rapid and sustained growth of the potential labour force can be absorbed into employment. Simple logic tells us that this can only come about if the rate of growth of output is maintained at a very high level, while simultaneously the link between the growth of output and employment is strengthened. This means that we must create viable productive jobs at a rate and on a scale never achieved here before, if we are to create the conditions in which we can attain full employment, at the same time as maintaining a rising standard of living. The essence of our problem at the moment is that we are not creating enough wealth to do either.

Growth in our wealth depends on our ability, through our manpower and our other resources, to turn raw materials into goods and services that are demanded at home and overseas. The value added through this process is the source of the wages which pay for the needs of the work force and their families and of the taxes that fund Government programmes and thus determine the community's standard of living. It also provides the surpluses or profits for private and public enterprise to maintain the capital stock and to finance the further growth of value added in future.

In a small and open economy such as ours, this value adding process has, for the most part, to be carried out in direct competition with foreign producers. This means that we cannot tolerate the creation of non-productive jobs, simply for the sake of creating employment. Artificially created jobs by the State means simply that we, as a nation, become less productive and less competitive. These nominal jobs must be paid for either by increased taxation or by an increase in State borrowing. We must reject the illusion that the State, in some sense, can create new short-term jobs at the stroke of a pen. These so-called jobs cost money. They have to be paid for by the rest of the community.

It is a fundamental law of economics that in the long run it is impossible, without disastrous consequences, to take more out of the economy in wages, taxes and profits than is put into it by the production of goods and services. This basic value added principle needs to be more widely communicated and understood by each individual in our community and we must give as high a priority to the creation of value added as we do to its distribution. It takes actual productive projects to create long-term self-sustaining jobs and growth. This means that we must go out and identify new markets, develop new products and produce them competitively. In an increasingly tough international climate, opportunities are not necessarily going to be easy to come by. Achieving jobs and output targets of the scale needed will not be a matter of a few grandiose gestures. It will require a sustained effort with small projects as well as large, and a wide range of industries where Ireland is able to establish and maintain a competitive edge.

The key requirement is enterprise. Enterprise of all kinds will have an important contribution to make. Foreign enterprise will continue to be a vital source of new investment and jobs. Public enterprise, either alone or with the private sector, has a contribution to make. However, domestic private enterprise will have to take the leading role, through both the expansion of existing business and the creation of new business. In this context, the role of government is to create the conditions in which enterprise, both public and private, can flourish. So far as public enterprise is concerned, it is sometimes suggested to us that it is the solution to many of the problems which I spoke about and that in some cases it is almost exclusively the solution.

I have said before, but I think it is worth repeating, that we have had some unhappy experiences in manufacturing industry in the public sector in recent years, experiences which dilute one's enthusiasm for that as a major avenue along which we could achieve our goals. While some of these public, semi-State companies have not been successful, others have. One should acknowledge that fact. In very contemporary terms, one of these companies whose success should be acknowledged in this respect is Aer Lingus.

Mr. Quinn

Hear, hear.

Mr. O'Malley

One looks at its position today, which is an unhappy one. The opportunities, for example, in ancilliary activities in Aer Lingus are enormous—not the least of which is servicing for many other air lines. One could have fore seen a situation where perhaps another 1,000 jobs could have been created on that side alone. I wonder what the position is today and whether any public corporation would be prepared prudently to undertake the kind of risks which now appear to be involved in areas such as that.

I would like to come back, however, to the question of how the Government can seek to create conditions in which enterprise of all kinds, particularly private enterprise—which I see as the main thrust of our economic progress here, both in the past and in the future—can be helped to flourish in the ways in which Government can give assistance. In setting out the Government's actions to accelerate and facilitate job creation in the manufacturing sector, the picture certainly would not be complete without a re-statement by me of the benefits to industry of the new 10 per cent corporation tax rate which will apply for 20 years from 1 January 1981. As the House knows, the Bill was passed in the Seanad yesterday and becomes law today or tomorrow. The primary objective of the 10 per cent corporation tax scheme is to accelerate the pace and rate of investment by Irish and overseas promoters of manufacturing projects.

It is only through continuing investment in modernisation that industry can provide the jobs we need. As the new scheme will apply to home as well as export sales it is a positive inducement to firms whose business is largely based on the home market to proceed with their investment plans which will in the longer term reap their own rewards. There is the added advantage that accelerated capital allowances will continue to be available under the new scheme. The continuation of these incentives means that the pay back period of capital investments generally by industry will be substantially reduced and the risks associated with such investments greatly minimised. Because the new scheme will improve the return on owners' funds, it enhances the capacity of companies to grow both in size and in asset value. This scheme is designed to encourage the retention of profits, not their distribution. In turn, the economy will benefit from increased investment, improved efficiency and productivity and higher job creation. There is a pressing need for many firms in the labour intensive and more traditional sector to modernise and adapt. The new tax incentive will assist these firms to get on with the job of replacing outmoded plant and machinery so that their continued survival and future growth may be assured.

The longer term advantages of the new scheme for manufacturing companies selling on the home market are also very substantial. These will include significant increases in after tax earnings, an improved cash flow and liquidity position and the consequent strengthening of their financial base which will enable them, by means of their own resources and by borrowings, to extend and grow at a much faster rate without additional financial exposure. The new tax scheme is also designed to provide a positive stimulant to new domestic investment aimed at import substitution on the home market. As the incentive will not differentiate as between home and export sales it will have the effect of promoting greater linkage between what had been until now wholly export orientated enterprise and the existing domestic manufacturers.

These developments will in turn lead to the creation of a more balanced and integrated industrial structure. The 10 per cent incentive will also act as an effective spur to domestic companies to expand and diversify their export business. The new scheme will also prove to be a very attractive incentive to foreign investors as we will have one of the lowest rates of tax on manufacturing profits in the industrial world. This together with the other inducements in our industrial promotion package will ensure that Ireland continues to be a prime location for overseas investment.

There was a net gain of nearly 9,000 jobs in manufacturing industry for 1979. The significance of this tremendous advance can best be judged not alone by the fact that it was the most favourable outcome for ten years but also against the outturn in other EEC countries, where there was a decline of 1 per cent overall in manufacturing employment. It is also very heartening that this was achieved despite a deterioration in the domestic and international environment. In 1979 the manufacturing sector had to cope with the industrial disruption in our postal, tele communications, electricity and banking services. In addition there was a worldwide slow down in economic growth, which was largely brought about by the massive rise in oil prices and the curtailment of supplies. The growth in labour costs this year will be a crucial factor in determining the rate of future industrial growth and job creation. It is in our vital interests to ensure that unrealistic pay increases do not add to the other serious difficulties facing industry by making our unit labour costs substantially out of line with our overseas competitors.

Even against a somewhat gloomy background the IDA are confident that they can achieve 30,000 job approvals in 1980. Job approvals for the first five months of 1980 totalled almost 14,000, which is the best achievement to date in this field. More importantly, there could be a rise and there is likely to be a rise, in spite of all the difficulties, of about 4,500 people in the overall numbers employed in manufacturing industry this year.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister has five minutes left.

Mr. O'Malley

In addition to a net gain in employment, manufacturing investment is expected to continue to grow by about 12 per cent. This is in strong contrast to the disinvestment or static investment which characterises most of the developed world. Manufacturing output is projected to expand by up to 5 per cent, a performance which, if achieved, will place us near the top of the league of industrialised countries in 1980.

Any person connected with business here, whether as an owner, a manager, a worker or a trade unionist, must be aware that we are at the centre of a period of great difficulty. The world's oil dependent economies have been hammered by enormous increases in the price of oil and the major markets of the world are in a slump. The money markets are unstable and exchange rates and interest rates are volatile and unpredictable. Ahead we have the prospect of further increases of energy costs. For our open and energy importing economy many of these world uncertainties and problems are inescapable in their impact and in their implications. They present great challenges that can be overcome by virtue of sensible approaches by all the social partners involved in the success of our industries. It is certain that we also have within ourselves a capacity to destroy our own efforts.

I would need another half an hour to sing that theme, so I will leave it.

Mr. Quinn

I am glad that I was in the House to hear the Minister speak, as I find myself in agreement with much of his analysis. I could not help thinking, listening to his state of the nation speech, albeit in the field for which he has explicit responsibility, that, using the terminology of British political commentators in relation to their Conservative Party, the Minister must undoubtedly at this stage qualify for the title of leader of the "wets" in the Irish Cabinet, if one accepts that division within the British Tory Cabinet over monetarists and Kings Inns economists or politicians.

Mr. Deasy

Other terms are used as well to describe it.

Mr. Quinn

I agree with the Minister that we are confronted with the political reality of a generation of Irish people who for the first time are not dominated by the national question. This is totally at variance with the leader of the Minister's party, who wishes to dominate this generation yet again with the national question. The Labour Party fully agree with the Minister's analysis that solving the unemployment problem is the key issue facing us, that linking the growth of output and the cost of GNP with the rate of absorption on unemployment is the key issue. It is extraordinary that the Minister, having so accurately analysed the situation, should state that he is placing his faith in domestic private enterprise taking the leading role, believing that somehow or other an economy in which private enterprise takes the leading role will achieve full employment.

It is in the nature of capitalism that no capitalist country has solved the problem of unemployment. Capitalism never set out to solve that problem. Capitalism has done many other things. As an economic system it has created untold wealth; it has produced new technology and so on. Indeed, there is no more fulsome praise for capitalism than that contained in the comments of Karl Marx. If we are looking to capitalism or to domestic private enterprise to give it the green version, to solve unemployment, we will look in vain. It has not done so in the past and is not geared to do so in the future. Yet the Minister, a man of considerable ability demanding the respect of many in the House, insisting that domestic private enterprise must take the leading role is to continue with an illogical position or a position that refuses to look at all the facts if solving unemployment is the key issue.

There is undoubtedly a role for the private sector but also for the public sector in the industrial area; and to that area the Minister says that because of some unhappy experience with individual State companies he is not convinced of the correctness of that position. If we were to apply here the logic of the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism and the criteria which he chooses to apply to the public sector in the private sector we would have lost faith in it years ago, because at this very moment the liquidators are overworked with companies going bankrupt and failing in the open, private enterprise system. The classical theory that first year economic students in our universities are taught is that this does not cost the Exchequer any money because these are individuals taking risks with their own money. But post-1929 that is no longer true because they are using AnCo training grants and IDA advance factories and God knows what else to achieve the private enterprise growth to which he referred.

A small, open economy like ours cannot aspire to managing capitalism and the crisis within capitalism internationally and pretend that outside forces do not exist. We can, in so far as we are capable, attempt to control our market and economy, but this Government have consistently refused to try to do so. We have had three years—it is virtually three years, just short of 5 July—of this administration and its responsibility extends back to 16 June and 5 July when it was voted into office in this House. Let us not try to pretend, as Senator Mary Harney tried to do on radio, that there was a change of Government in 1979. There was a palace revolution but not a change of Government. This administration have had three years in office. The manifesto, which must now take its place beside Hansel and Gretel, The Famous Five and other such children's stories, makes incredible reading. I shall not embarass the Minister of State by quoting from it. It had one virtue and the Minister for Economic Planning and Development expanded and developed that virtue. It attempted to develop a planning cycle, attempted with a certain naivete but with undoubted sincerity, certainly on the part of that Minister and the leader of the “Wets” and the other members of the Cabinet, to get some organisation of the planning cycle and the planning process in our mixed economy. Since the palace revolution that has been abandoned and there is not even the pretext now of economic or indicative planning that there was prior to 1979. Indeed the last document that came from the previous regime was uncremoniously discarded when it was published last January.

The Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism speaks about the performance—the undoubted performance in many areas—of the manufacturing sector and makes no reference to any other area of the economy. He talked about no other economic plan and yet puts all the responsibility—he ended his speech on this—on working people to show restraint and bear the brunt of this problem without anything being offered to working people in return. The only area of our economy that needs to be planned or controlled is that of the wages of ordinary workers. There is no suggestion of controlling profits or the allocation of credit or finance. The Government have consistently refused to take on that control. There is no suggestion that cost elements might be controlled.

The Minister, in a written reply to Deputy Barry Desmond, indicated horrendous figures for the cost of acquisition of land for industrial development in County Dublin in the last two years, figures that ran to £4 million or £6 million, speculative costs that disappered into the pockets of private individuals who will not be subject to wealth tax or perhaps to any capital gains tax. This House has refused to accept an effort to deal with that component of cost by introducing a fairly reasonable and well worked out measure, if I may say so, that would control the cost of all development land, not just residential or housing land.

There is need, if we seek seriously to make this institution relevant to the hundreds of thousands of young people outside the barriers of either Kildare Street or Merrion Street—and it is not easy within the framework of a democratic, open system—to make what is happening here and what happens at the polling booths every four or five years meaningful. To make it work there is need to begin seriously to plan the economy both economically and socially. There was an attempt to do so but it is now abandoned and with its abandonment there is absolutely no proposals from the present Government. The bunkum mentality demonstrated in the last three or four days would be farcical if it were not so damaging to the real prospects of people outside the House.

So far as the Labour Party are concerned there is need for the Government in recognition of their inability to control capitalism either internationally or domestically to realise that in trying to make a mixed economy work they must move much further to the Left than it has previously wanted to move. I believe that a step would be made if the Government took the following measures. Within the Cabinet there are individuals who have the administrative experience and skill to implement these measures. There must be more control of banks and major financial institutions. Our entry into the EMS and the separation of Irish currency from British sterling makes that proposal very simple and feasible. The Government have yet to act on it, but they have made a start. They must go much further down the road in relation to credit guidelines and access to credit. There are still numerous loopholes through the 18 per cent ceiling and the 13 per cent ceiling of which the Government and the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism are aware. If we do not control our own resources in terms of credit we cannot begin to create the new wealth to which the Minister referred.

The second area in which the Government must move is in establishing clear, planning guidelines for the private sector. There should be planning agreements for certain sections of the private sector either by category of products or by sub-sector or by particular industries. Food processing is an obvious example. In my own constituency we witnessed a crisis in relation to food processing. On one hand we are exporting cattle on the hoof because of marginally better prices in different parts of the European market and, on the other hand, meat factory workers are threatened with redundancy. I do not believe the private sector would be averse to such planning agreements. They are getting enough money in grants and support from the State. The only private thing now about the private sector is profit and control of profit and little else. With the kind of funding now going into the private sector, which is a net beneficiary of capital and current account, receipts from the Exchequer, the least we should be able to get back from that sector is planning agreements. Some of the grants should be conditional on those agreements. They must be parallel to any planning agreement.

My third point is that there should be a form of industrial democracy conditional on the private sector not getting the tax-payers' money. Why should the community at large accede to the requests of the board of directors of private concerns for a grant for this, an improvement of that road or guarantees of foreign borrowing if the private sector are not prepared to share responsibility for the allocation of those funds with their own work force? Many workers throughout the country do not have access to the books of the company in which they work. There is no right to know and no public information legislation that would enable employees to see what the position is. Is it any wonder that with inflation rates as they are, that they seek within the laws of the jungle that capitalism has conditioned them to be brought up in, to maximise their position irrespective of the implications or the impact on others? The Government have been dramatically conservative in their failure to continue the initiative taken by the former Minister for Labour—it was a beginning of a process —in relation to worker participation in the State sector.

My fourth point is developing the public sector. I am not talking here about another agency to foster the Irish language or about another agency in the non-productive area or some such addendum to the civil service. I am talking about the creation of industrial employment in the public sector. Aer Lingus is the model I have in mind. Executives and management in the public sector have demonstrated quite clearly that they have the motivation, the capability, the expertise and the skill to achieve the sort of growth and development in job security which only the State sector can provide.

The Minister in his address was quite interesting about public sector employment and was very sceptical about artificially created jobs. The House has been treated with contempt in relation to artificially created jobs to the extent that five new Ministers of State were created. I say that in the presence of the Minister of State at the Department of Labour. If ever there were artificially created jobs which undoubtedly are non-productive they are those. The biggest problem they had for the first week was trying to find out what the new Ministers of State would do never mind talking about whether they could do the work. One of the things the new Ministers of State have done is to take the flak from their Ministers, which might be considered fairly productive. The clean hands of the Minister of State in the House in relation to the industrial mess makes it a little bit more difficult to have a go at him than the silent Minister for Labour who has virtually disappeared out of the House, to say nothing of the Minister for the Environment. Those people are now shadows on the screen rather than people who should carry the can for something for which they have Cabinet responsibility.

My last point is that we have got to do something about creating an equitable taxation base. The old refuge in a commission, whose first task is not to report too soon and certainly not before the next election, will not satisfy the hundreds of thousands of workers who marched in unprecedented fashion in every major city and town in the country.

My five points, which are the basis of an economic plan, are control of finance houses, steering and directing of finance funds into the productive area, planning guidelines for the private sector, a substantial development of industrial jobs in the public sector by the establishment of a national development corporation, the introduction of industrial democracy in both the private and public sectors to give workers the right to know and the right to have a say in how the profits which they have helped to create can be reinvested, an equitable taxation system for everybody irrespective of what they do and a new deal between urban and rural workers in relation to food processing here so that the work of small farmers in isolated areas can have added value put to it in the towns and cities throughout the country and retain the benefit of rural produce for urban workers and, consequently, for rural workers. There is absolutely no evidence that any of this has even been contemplated by the Government despite some of the noises made in the Fianna Fáil manifesto.

Economic planning on its own is not enough. The late Seán Lemass responded to the pressure of the Labour Party in the 1965 general election by changing the name of the then Economic Institute into the Economic and Social Institute for Research, the ESRI as it is now called. As far as I remember the Third Programme for Economic Expansion was titled the Programme for Economic and Social Expansion. The Irish Times complimented the late Seán Lemass for talking about the need to move to the left. The only thing he ever did was to recognise the need but he did not move very far. That recognition was there in a way that is regrettably absent from this particular Fianna Fáil Government. An economic plan is feasible and is not in itself a panacea. The last 20 years have seen no country possessing a panacea for the ills that confront the globe but we can do better than what we are doing at the moment and we can learn from the lessons of the past.

We have a new and totally transformed population. There has got to be social planning to cater for the reality of that new phenomenon. There are two areas which require particular and immediate attention as this Dáil gets up at the end of its third year and will obviously not come back until late October or, if the evidence of not coming back until last February is to be taken as setting an example, we might not even come back before Christmas. That might suit some of the lawyers in the House or me but it will not suit the people we represent.

I believe there are two major areas which this democratic assembly must respond to if it is to be taken seriously by the new population which daily walks past the security barriers on Kildare Street and Merrion Street and wonders what kind of 19th century nonsense frequently goes on here. I believe it is absolutely essential, in order to get any kind of physical and urban social planning into the country, to grasp the nettle of control of development land, land on the periphery of our towns and cities and inner city land which is up for redevelopment out of the open market system and bring to it the same measure of control in our mixed economy which we have successfully done with education and medicine. Nobody in this House seriously suggests that people should have access to medicine purely on the size of their cheque books. Nobody in the House seriously suggests that people should have access to education or to health purely on the size of their cheque books.

The struggle to get that consensus view and opinion was not waged by the Conservatives or by the green Tories. It was notched up as a victory for the trade union and labour movement throughout the entire world but particularly in Europe. The same struggle and principle apply now to the question of monitoring the price of development land which must be taken out of the open developer-speculator market. This can be done without the confiscation of property or without the denial of property rights for the individual. All that would be involved would be to deny the speculators profits and property rights. Who in this House will stand up and say seriously that he represents that interest? Is there anybody in Fianna Fáil or in Fine Gael for that matter who wishes to say that he represents that interest and that, consequently, he is prepared to vote against the Bill? Anyone who might be prepared to defend that interest must be prepared also to go before the public at the next election in the knowledge of having defended the speculator interest. If we do not take land into ownership in a way that will allow it to be retained for the community the added value which the community itself creates, we are putting an enormous price on the reconstruction in the inner city area and on the new construction in the peripheral areas of urban Ireland. And it is into urban Ireland that the new population will settle. We have enormous problems ranging from drug abuse to the lack of social and educational facilities which in many ways are caused by the complacent nature of our urban environment. As I have said on numerous occasions in the past, we are building into the bricks and mortar of rural Ireland a social injustice which will be very difficult to eradicate unless we take action now.

What is curious about the measure in question is that it is the one area over which the Arabs do not have control, the one area in which we are absolutely sovereign. We alone can control that process. There are not international pressures of any kind that are determining what we do in that area yet we seem to be reluctant to take the action that is necessary.

Another issue that is very real and pressing is the question of divorce, of martial breakdown or of family relations, depending on which way one wants to phrase the matter. For a variety of reasons, associated largely with the changing nature of Irish society—we are the ones who are changing: there is not any alien philosophy being imposed on us but we are changing the way in which we live, the way in which we work and we are open to new ideas—there has been brought about a change in the relative position of man to woman and of parents to children with the consequence that marriages which in the past had broken down irretrievably and which were suffered in silence or in anguish by both the parents and the children because of there not being any alternative either socially or legally but for that situation to continue will not be tolerated any longer by either the young or the not so young.

On the issue of divorce, the decision as to whether the relevant Article of the Constitution should be changed will be taken by the sovereign people outside this House, but surely we have the courage to put that question to them. Surely even those people who are convinced that, in either social or in moral terms or in both divorce is the wrong choice, are sufficiently democratic to be prepared to allow the question to be put before the people by way of referendum, or do they not trust the Irish people? This Dáil should at least accept the reality of broken marriages and of the anguish and of the suffering that such situations cause. In terms of the social planning that I outlined earlier should we not at least set the objective that before we go to the ballot box again we will give the people of this State the opportunity individually of making the choice as to whether we should respond to what I perceive as being a change in society?

It would be easy for me to criticise the Government for failing to deliver on various promises, but generally I try not so succumb to that sort of temptation. There are alternatives to the way in which we organise our society. There are ways of organising society that are different from the traditional ways, and there are solutions that we can design if we have the courage to face up to the problems as they are analysed.

I was very glad to have been in the House when the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism was speaking, because I considered much of what he had to say to have been both relevant and pertinent. I agree that the primary task facing the country is the creation of work to meet both existing and future needs, but we begin to disagree to the extent that I do not believe any longer that traditional private capitalism has the capacity or the will in the context of our Irish open economy to create sufficient wealth. That system has not succeeded in the past when we were a protected country and there is not any indication to suggest that private enterprise, given the main role that the Minister would wish it to assume, would have success in this regard in the future. That is the viewpoint, both ideologically and politically, of the Labour Party. If that viewpoint is accepted we must move, in the words of Sean Lemass, to the left. We must create a productive role for the public sector and a clear framework within which the private sector can go on to achieve their role within the overall framework of our economy.

But if we continue to rely on traditional capitalism to solve what the Minister describes as the key question, that is, the provision of full employment, I would suggest simply that we have regard to the most successful capitalist country in the world and ask ourselves if they have solved their problem of unemployment or, more important, let anyone of us go to the ghettos of New York or to the slums of the southern States of America and ask a Puerto Rican or a poor black if they are employed fully in what is the richest and most successful capitalist country in the world.

Mr. D. Andrews

The Taoiseach this morning made a point which struck me as being particularly relevant to the current condition of the nation. He said that in the national interest there must be found ways of improving industrial relations. The Taoiseach did not say that the situation in this regard was a national blight, but I would go so far as to say that this is the case. However, there are other areas with which I should like to deal. It is not my intention to beat the economic drum. That has been beaten long and hard throughout the debate so far. In most instances it has been beaten effectively. Instead, it is my intention to deal with two items which have been of considerable concern to me as a public representative in the recent past. These are two matters which from my personal perception I consider are not being treated with the sense of urgency they demand—our attitude to road traffic deaths, the whole question of road safety and our attitude to the environment.

In my humble contribution I will deal first with road traffic deaths. It is in the general national interest to tackle the problems of road safety, pollution, and a number of other associated matters, but the time available to me is short and consequently I must encapsulate what I have to say in a reference to road traffic deaths and injuries. The generation to which we belong properly look back in horror at the complacency with which our forebeares used their children as chimney sweeps, at how our people were hanged for sheep stealing, at how women were used as beasts of burden in the mines. Future generations will look back with the same horror at this generation's indifference to deaths on our road, at our complacency and incomprehension of what is a social blight. If the pattern of present road deaths continues for another generation there will scarcely be a family who will not have contributed some member to the continuing slaughter.

Daily we hear cries of horror and indignation from all quarters about killings in the North-East of the island. Of course we express indignation at the dreadful murders, the terrible maimings and bombings, by whomever they are committed, and of course one side or other of the political divide, depending on their prejudices, express condemnation. Very responsible people express condemnation, and it is possible to do so. The nation suffered the psychological trauma of deaths during the frightful Civil War. One should produce figures to back up one's arguments, and figures speak for themselves.

Since 1969 deaths from politically motivated violence in the North have totalled 2,037. Deaths during the dreadful Civil War in the early twenties were about 4,000. From 1968 to 1978 road deaths in the Twenty-Six Counties numbered 6,173, and in the same period in the Six Counties the figure was 3,228. Again, referring to the part of Ireland over which we have jurisdiction, the number of people injured from 1968 to 1978 was 103,183. Last year more than 600 people died on the roads in the southern part of Ireland. Taking the period to which I referred in an all-Ireland context, we are talking about more than 10,000 people dying on the roads. Death knows no boundaries, political or otherwise

Some remedies have been proposed. For example, when the Miníster for the Environment reduced the level of alcohol in the bloodstream for the breathalyser test it helped to reduce the number of deaths on the roads last year by 29 compared with 1978. Of course that is not much consolation for the fathers and mothers, husbands and wives, the families of which members in one way or another have been hurt.

But deaths and injuries on our roads are continuing. I suggest as a matter of urgency that some or all of the oil companies who operate here might consider coming together to make a concerted sustained contribution by way of a road safety campaign. We are living in a democracy. I am not criticising the oil companies for the large profits they make, we can only urge them, not force them to do this. It appears to me they have a social obligation to the country in which they are operating. Of course we want their oil, of course we must pay their price, of course we want to keep our cars on the road, but I suggest that they have a social obligation in this respect to the countries in which they operate.

I repeat that I do not offer this suggestion as a criticism but as a plea—I am not carping or criticising. These multinational companies have huge resources, financial and technological, and if they got down to organising a road safety campaign as a matter of urgency it might help to resolve the national blight I have been talking about.

Future generations, we hope, will cure what we have been unable to cure. They will look back in horror at the legacy we have left them, the crosses by the roadside, the maimed and the injured. A major effort should be made now in the schools to educate our young people that it is not either fashionable or clever to get into a fast car and drive stupidly and dangerously on our roads. There seems to be some kind of masochism about driving fast. It is stupid and dangerous and our young people will not thank us if we do not organise a campaign of indoctrination against the idea of driving recklessly to the danger of others. It is neither fashionable nor clever.

I should like to take an abstract from our statistics for 1976 and give a breakdown of Twenty-six County road fatalities: 53 people were killed by pedal cyclists; 70 people died in accidents involving mopeds, motor-scooters and motor cycles. Car deaths were 423 in 1976. In the same year 5,056 car drivers were injured. In regard to public service vehicles, large, there were 15 fatalities. In regard to goods vehicles deaths amounted to 104 and tractor deaths amounted to 19. In regard to other motor vehicles there were seven deaths, other non-motor vehicles five and not stated two. We have the dreadful figure of 698 deaths in that year. There seems to be an almost social acceptability of deaths on the roads. Comparing death by way of motor car accident with death by the barrel of a gun we express horror on one side and regret and less than horror on the other. There is a sense of fatalism, inevitability, that it is going to happen anyway. Of course it is not going to happen. We will have to stop it and I believe now is the time to do so.

I do not intend going into the realms of how we should go about that. I have offered a number of solutions. I have put forward a number of ideas which I hope will be taken up and will not be done on a once-off basis but rather on a sustained and concerted one. If somebody is told something once they may or may not take it in. On the second time round it may begin to impinge on whatever lobes are necessary to accumulate knowledge, but at the third and fourth attempt the message finally gets through. That repetition is necessary. I do not believe in a horror campaign, quite the contrary, but I do believe in a campaign to expose the horror, because such it is. It is a national scandal, no more or less.

I know the argument will be advanced that we have reduced the alcohol content in the blood in relation to the breathalyser test. We must now ask ourselves do we need to reduce it further? Is it necessary to examine the fines and penalties in relation to drunken driving? I do not want to sound pure about this, nor do I want to sound moralistic about it, because that simply is not my style. I hope I sound realistic and logical about it. For example, perhaps we should examine whether we should have week-end community work camps for drink and driving offences. Those are some of the options we shall have to examine very shortly if the graph about which I am speaking does not drop very considerably.

I am speaking about a minority on the roads, a group of undisciplined louts, impatient, lacking in self-discipline, self-control. How many times have Members of this House pulled up at traffic lights and, before the lights have changed to green, a citizen behind starts blowing his horn? That is impatience, lack of discipline, immaturity; it is stupid and unnecessary because it is seconds only before——

Mr. Harte

Not if the driver behind is in a big rush.

Mr. D. Andrews

That is more of it. The driver behind, being in a big rush, may kill somebody else.

Mr. Harte

He may be under pressure to be somewhere.

Mr. D. Andrews

Then, that driver should behave himself. In my view he is lacking in self-discipline. He is not thinking of other people. He is thinking only of his rush. I did not set out to preach the gospel according to Saint David or anything like that; far be it from me. These are the realities and I believe something will have to be done about them. This is a minority enforcing their will on the majority. I believe that the majority of road users are decent citizens. Indeed I am certain also that a lot of the drivers I am criticising are decent people out of their cars. Some sort of schizophrenia seems to take over when a person gets behind the wheel of a car because that person may be quite decent out of his car.

Mr. Harte

Does the Deputy ever find himself in the second car when the lights change?

Mr. D. Andrews

I have had to discipline myself in that regard. There was a time when I became very impatient being stuck in traffic. But then I disciplined myself because I realised none of us is indispensable. I used to turn on the radio and wait until the traffic got moving, sometimes taking five to ten minutes particularly in the city. Probably I have been in some of the worst traffic jams in the world, in Lagos in Nigeria. In fact I think I was in a five hour traffic jam in Lagos. I was coming from a conference and was not in a hurry and it was a rather interesting experience to be in a foreign country in those circumstances. Nevertheless I would not like to be caught in a five-hour traffic jam in the heart of Dublin, although things are moving in that direction. I am sorry to deviate but there are certain days in the city of Dublin when traffic conditions become intolerable, when the roads are chock-a-block, particularly in wet weather, with a consequent increase in crashes of one kind or another.

I believe it is undemocratic for this minority to force their will on the majority. It is not right for these people to put other people's lives at stake. Neither is it right for them to put their own lives at stake but, if they do, that is their entitlement. What I object to is that by putting their own lives at stake they may kill others. Of course we do not want to see people killing themselves. I believe we live in a great country and that the solutions to these problems lie in our hands. We must not pretend that they do not exist. Perhaps the more we speak about it the more the public will be educated to an awareness of these facts.

In the second leg of my contribution I want to deal with our attitude to environmental vandalism. In the recent past the Minister for the Environment has been making a special effort and, in my view, has been doing a good job in relation to protecting the environment. But there still remain weak areas, and none weaker than the situation which occurred recently in the Funcheon River in County Cork which was poisoned by a lethal does of chromium. This appears to have been caused by a particular individual's thoughtlessness. I appreciate that this case may be sub judice and I do not want to go into it in detail because that individual is entitled to the protection of the law also. But the environment is as much entitled to the protection of the law as he is. The environment does not belong to any single individual: It belongs to the nation as a whole. It belongs to this and future generations and it behaves us, as the present generation, to protect it for the future.

If this pollutant had been poured into the Blackwater in the area of Fermoy the consequences would have been unimaginable because I understand that the good people of that town take their water from that river. Thank God it did not happen. These incidents could be prevented if people would stop and think about the consequences of their actions. I am completely satisfied that the person or persons who performed this act of vandalism would not do it again if they reflected on the consequences. I am a fisherman myself and I know that it will take these rivers many years to recover from the effects of this pollution.

The Minister for Fisheries and Forestry, Deputy Power, recently visited County Mayo and I had the good fortune some weeks afterwards to be in the area of Lough Mask. This is one of the most magnificent lakes in the country and I have a question on the Order Paper asking the Minister to designate Lough Mask as a wildlife preserve. The local people appreciate that the lake does not belong to them but to all of us and they would act as custodians and trustees for the rest of the nation. They are good people who realise their responsibilities. I do not expect the Minister to read my contribution but perhaps some of his civil servants would take note of my plea in the Official Report and urge him to designate Lough Mask as a wildlife preserve.

Only a short time ago I made my own small contribution to ensuring that there would not be pollution there when some outside influences attempted to build chalets on the shores of this beautiful lake. Thankfully that intrusion was resisted but no doubt they will come again as they always do. For the time being that particular hurdle has been successfully crossed and the application regarding the chalets has very properly been rejected.

Lough Ennel was until recently a dead lake but it is now back to full health, thanks to public awareness and pressure. Lough Sheelin is, however, in a different situation. I realise that in speaking about the environment one has to balance the rights of people such as farmers who have an entitlement to make a living against the rights of others to enjoy a lake and its facilities. Lough Sheelin is probably one of the most historic trout lakes in the country, although Corrib anglers might argue that point. It is a beautiful lake which was almost destroyed by pig effluent. I have met and talked there with people of all political persuasions. There is no doubt that they are good people but they have a responsibility to ensure that pig slurry is not allowed to flow into the rivers and onwards to Lough Sheelin. The consequence of this is to increase the growth of algae in the lake and reduce the supply of oxygen, thus causing the death of many thousands of fish. The Minister for Fisheries and Forestry is aware of the problem and I have no doubt that the Minister for the Environment will do something about it very quickly.

I now wish to deal with the matter of litter. Dublin Corporation spent £7 million last year on the disposal of refuse and litter. People ask what tourists will think about our litter problem but I want to know what we ourselves think about it. Recently I passed through O'Connell Street and the amount of litter there was indescribable. The solution to the problem will not be found in the appointment of litter wardens. I do not believe the corporation should have to sweep the streets; keeping them litter-free is a matter for people in general. Who has not seen a person throwing an empty cigarette packet through the window of a car or throw an ice cream wrapper on the street? People of all ages throw litter on the streets and leave it to someone else to deal with the problem they create. There is a lack of self-discipline in our character and sometimes I am as guilty as most, although not in regard to litter. In my own constituency of Dun Laoghaire I can see the problem of litter in George's Street. The problem is not confined to O'Connell Street; it is nationwide. It shows a total lack of awareness and respect for the areas in which other people live and a haphazard attitude to public hygiene.

Mr. Harte

It was a pleasure to listen to Deputy Andrews but his speech was more low key than I would have expected. He raised matters which I felt could have been dealt with on another occasion and I should have liked to hear him speak about the economy and national issues. I found myself very much in agreement with him on the subject of death on the roads. As a father of a young family and as a public representative who listens to the complaints and shares the sorrows of families who have lost loved ones in traffic accidents, I must say that I believe many traffic accidents are due to late night dancing which takes place in virtually every town and village.

When I speak to young people about this they say that dances are over at 2 a.m. and that when the older generation were going they were over at 3 o'clock and in their grandparents day it was 6 o'clock. There is no point in lecturing the young generation about midnight dancing. However there is one big difference and it is that they have available to them fast moving cars. They are living in an era where there is excitement and motor car racing. There is also the drink aspect involved. That is not to say that all young people killed in road accidents are drunk. In many cases they are total abstainers. I cannot allow this opportunity to pass without following through on what Deputy Andrews was talking about and questioning the attitude of authority in allowing licences for midnight dancing where drink is available in the full knowledge that when young people come out of these places of enjoyment they get into cars and engage in dare-deviling and driving too fast.

There is scarcely a parish in Ireland where someone has not been killed in a family in circumstances I am outlining. I do not know what the moral thinking of authority is which grants midnight extensions and does not provide adequate Garda patrols to control the area afterwards. Like other Deputies I travel through and outside my constituency late at night and my life is in my hands and my heart is in my mouth when I approach places where I know there is midnight dancing. It is not a question of one's own safety or the safety of one's car or how one drives it but of the other person. We will have to think this out and I ask the Government to take serious note of what I am saying.

If there is need for midnight extensions and that extension includes the serving of alcohol there is an equal obligation on the authority to ensure that persons coming out of such places of recreation, fun making and pleasure do not get into a car while they are drunk. I have ample evidence of people walking out of such dances getting into cars and speeding off, tearing off tyres as they leave the place where the car was parked. The whole thing is suicidal and it is wrong for authority to close their eyes to it. I am not one for taking away young people's pleasures but I should like to say as sincerely as possible and with the utmost responsibility that it is totally wrong to grant late night extensions and then close one's eyes to what happens afterwards. The adult population are often wakened out of their slumber by the noise of people hooting horns, revving engines, wait for the crash and think: "well, they got past that corner". It is time the Government took note of this.

This Government were elected in 1977 on promises contained in an election address known as the Fianna Fáil General Election 1977 Manifesto Action Plan for National Reconstruction. It makes very interesting reading to go through the different pages now, particularly as a Donegal Deputy, when I read about what they have to say on posts and telegraphs. It is almost impossible for someone from the county to make contact with the rest of the State, Northern Ireland or the outside world.

Last week I had the experience of spending two days trying to contact North Donegal, from 3 o'clock on Wednesday until 7 o'clock on Thursday, but I could not get through. I tried the operators to re-route my calls through the north of Ireland and they told me that this was not possible despite the fact that, on occasion, I could talk one or two of them into doing that. If there are technical difficulties about contacting Donegal on certain occasions such as broken lines or mechanical or technical failures alternative arrangements should be made. It is almost impossible for anyone to make a call to County Donegal.

Last year this was so diabolically bad that as public representative, at least hoping to be responsible in my public attitude, I told the Department of Posts and Telegraphs that I would not pay my telephone bill until such time as a proper service was made available in County Donegal. They must have forgotten about me because I have not, received an account from them since. I have not paid it and I do not intend to pay it until such time as a proper service is provided.

They can cut off my telephone if they like. The Minister for communications is going to work a miracle in the next four years. He will provide automatic telephones and one will be able to ring any part of the world in four years' time. In the meantime it takes about six days to get a letter to County Donegal and it takes 20 minutes at the best of times to get a Dublin operator to make a phone call to County Donegal. The service is now so bad that I have no confidence in posting a letter in Dublin today to have it delivered in Donegal on Friday morning. What I have to do is to take the letters home with me and post them locally to make sure they are delivered the following morning.

I remember the time when I came into this House. It was under a Fianna Fáil Government but we have had Fianna Fáil Governments and Fianna Fáil Governments. In 1961 when I came to the Dáil I could have posted a letter and as long as I had done so before 8 p.m. in Dublin it would be delivered to any part of Donegal the following morning. Now it takes four or five days. I am glad the Minister has come into the House because I have a question on the Order Paper asking him to explain the reason why we could not contact Letterkenny telephone or telephone numbers in North Donegal for two days last week. I hope the explanation stands up to examination.

The Government promised many things under the heading of health. I do not wish to bore the House by quoting from the Action Plan for National Reconstruction but at a health board meeting last week the CEO told members that he would not be able to continue to provide the services he was expected to provide on the budget given to him. He said he had been told to cut back £1 million. With great effort by him and his staff he achieved that but now, with inflation at 20.4 per cent, he will now have to look at his figures again to see if he can cut back another £1.2 million. The Department of Health have told the health board that supplementary payments will not be made to the board with the result that wards or hospitals will be closed. That is a very serious situation. I am not an alarmist but I am anxious to convey to the House information given to me at the health board meeting last week. I am sure the same situation exists in other health board regions.

Before Fianna Fáil came to power they scrutinised the agricultural industry and told the people what was wrong with it under the National Coalition. They made certain promises which were read out by other spokesmen today and it would be a boring exercise for me to repeat them. Agriculture has taken such a hammering under Fianna Fáil that many farmers who overstretched themselves because they had found confidence in themselves and in the industry are in trouble. Those farmers felt confident that they would be able to meet any financial commitment they might enter into and many bank managers advanced large sums to such farmers to re-invest in their holdings or to purchase adjacent land. Many of those farmers now find themselves in the situation of having to face banks that want the money back and having to cope with a reduction in profits. Those profits increases under the National Coalition and had improved in the last two or three years but now have disappeared. Many farmers now find themselves in dire financial straits.

Farmers living in Border areas must cope with another problem. I am speaking of farmers of all denominations and political beliefs. I am referring to those with accounts in banks north of the Border. That was a normal and reasonable thing down the years. My family, going back to my great grandfather, from 1880 to 1900, had a bank account in a branch in Strabane. The Harte family have been dealing in that bank ever since. I would have continued to have my account there but for the fact that I moved residence to another town. That was a normal thing just like it is normal for people in Kerry to cross the border to work in a bank in Cork, or for people in Limerick to move to Clare, or for people in Tipperary to deal in Cork or Limerick. It was usual for people living in Donegal to have an account in banks in Tyrone, Derry or Fermanagh. The same thing must also apply to people living in Leitrim, Monaghan, Cavan and Louth. However, when the Government took us into the EMS one of the conditions was that all people living in the State must move their accounts back from banks outside the State.

Many farmers in my constituency with substantial overdrafts in banks in County Tyrone or other parts of the North of Ireland were told that they would have to settle their accounts in the North of Ireland and move to a branch in the Republic. They were advised to talk to a bank manager in the Republic. Many of those farmers were lucky enough to act immediately and did not lose out but those who did not—most farmers had other important things to do and did not attach a lot of importance to the bank their cheque was issued on—when forced to do so found themselves in a very difficult situation. They had to tell bank managers in Donegal that they had overdraft accommodation of £100,000—many of them had accommodation in excess of that amount—in County Tyrone and were anxious to transfer money to settle that account. In many cases they were told by bank managers that they could not do so because it would take £110,000 to settle the account of £100,000. It was easy to explain that this was only a paper transaction although the customer would be paying interest on £110,000 instead of £100,000. Many farmers found themselves trapped in this corner.

After some negotiation farmers were told that as the Government had restricted credit the banks were not in a position to advance £110,000 to settle overdraft accommodation in the North. They were told that they could obtain only £100,000.

The Minister for Posts and Telegraphs smiles as if he is of the opinion that I am not telling the truth and that I am overplaying this matter. I am not and there is nothing isolated about this. I am aware of one farmer who had overdraft accommodation of £240,000 a very extensive farmer who was developing his farm and employing many people, who had to transfer his account from Tyrone to Donegal. That transfer would cost £30,000. That came about because of the actions of a party who talk about the unity of Ireland. They interfered with the God-given right of Donegal people to have their bank account in Tyrone or Derry. It is similar to people in Mayo having their bank account in Sligo town or people like the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs crossing the Shannon at Athlone to have his account in a town in County Galway. They are the God-given rights of Irish people but that was not thought of by the Government when we were entering the EMS. Nobody referred to the fact that there could be difficulties between North and South on this issue.

Many farmers and business people find it impossible to increase their overdraft accommodation in a Donegal bank to discharge the overdraft in a North of Ireland bank. Those people still have their accounts outside the jurisdiction. The other great deal the Government meted out for agriculture in Donegal was to remove the employment allowance and to increase the rates on agricultural holdings. Many farmers now find that they are paying double or three times the amount of rates that they had been paying under the National Coalition. I am not in favour of allowing farmers to earn excessive amounts of money and to get off without paying their way. But the position is far from that. The position now is that many farmers are finding it very difficult to meet their commitments. If farmers did have a glorious few years in the seventies, let all of us remember—and I was brought up on a farm—that the farming community are the backbone of this country, that many farmers work long hours and do hard work on the farms to support their wives and families and that very often the labour is not that well paid.

The Government will undoubtedly tell us the amount of money they are spending on roads. I would venture to say that County Donegal must be noted for having the worst roads in all of Ireland—and I am talking about 32 counties. If one falls in behind a large vehicle heading to Killybegs or Burtonport to collect fish or take goods in that direction, there is no possibility of overtaking it. I wonder how the drivers of these vehicles are able to negotiate the roads. The potholes are so bad that I am surprised that many more serious accidents are not happening.

The cut-back on the expenditure in County Donegal for roads and environmental schemes and so on has caused the redundancy of 110 people. Those people have been sacked by Donegal County Council because of a deliberate decision by this Government to cut back on moneys. Many people think that it is only 110 people, but there are 110 families involved and those families now have to find some other way of surviving. It is an appalling situation when the Government refuse to allow the county councils to adjust their rates to provide the services that the councillors know should be provided and then refuse to give them money so that they can provide the services—and if the services cannot be provided then men have to be paid off. A few weeks ago I raised the question of this redundancy. One of the most disgusting aspects of it is that the Government agreed to wage increases to people in the employment of the Donegal County Council, that is, the salary and wage earners, white collar workers and road workers or labourers. These increases were justified and in line with the criminal inflation which is rampant in the country at the moment. But the Government did not provide the money to pay those increases, so Donegal County Council were saddled with the option of not paying the increases or paying off the people at the end of the line, and that is what has happened. It is detestable that in a modern society other people must be sacked in order to pay people increases. When this was discussed at the county council meetings all parties were sympathetic to the point of view I am putting forward. In fairness to them their hands are tied. The responsibility for this rests fairly and squarely on the Government, who overspent when they came into power to try to meet the election promises. But now the honeymoon must be paid for.

I do not know to what extent the people in the Republic will tolerate this much longer, but we are on a slide to disaster unless the Government face their responsibilities to distribute wealth in a fair and equitable manner, unless they realise that the money made by the very wealthy in society is not for their personal use but for the use of the society in which we live and must be distributed so that the rich do not get any richer and the poor do not get any poorer. This the Government have failed to do. Their election promises were giveaways. Many of the poor people when they found that they did not have to pay rates on their homes thought that this was not a bad Government and that they would vote for it. So they did not have to pay their £15 or £25 or £35 a year depending on the amount to be paid and they were very grateful to the Government for relieving them of this terrible burden. But the fact is that the owners of very big houses, many paying £1,000 a year, were benefiting much more than the person living in the county council cottage. These were rich people who did not object to paying, did not feel any great difficulty in meeting this demand and were willing to make their contribution. But in the lust to get back into power this Government made so many promises that fooled so many people that the people I have just spoken about, the people who found it difficult to pay the rates, were so grateful to be rid of the burden that they never realised that this concession was balanced in favour of the rich. Everything the Government have done since shows that they are a rich man's government.

There are people unemployed in County Donegal. We have no money to build houses there. The Minister, Deputy O'Malley, came to Donegal last week to open factories and he has a protest outside his office today. Deputy O'Malley says that we have so many factories in Donegal now that people are coming from Northern Ireland to work in them. But he never mentioned the high unemployment in Inishowen where the rate of unemployment is probably the highest in the EEC. There was not one mention of the people living in Inishowen.

I want to conclude in the few minutes I have left by taking the Government's point on Irish unity. Fianna Fáil told us that Eamon de Valera would unite the country. After 25 years that record played out and it is not a very encouraging thing to look back over the speeches that Mr. de Valera made in the early days of Fianna Fáil. Then we were told that Seán Lemass would do it, and in a way he had a better vision of Irish unity than the founder member of Fianna Fáil. But he did not do it. Then, of course, it was the turn of the former Taoiseach, Deputy Jack Lynch, and it would be unfair of me to judge him in the same way as Eamon de Valera or Seán Leamass. Deputy Lynch took over at a time when it was difficult to unite Irish people. But he did not succeed. Now we are being told that the man who is going to unite the Irish people is Deputy Haughey. The amusing thing about all this—and any Deputy who wants to take the time off to do it should do some research and he will see the point I am making—is that the speeches of Eamon de Valera, the speeches of Seán Lemass and the speeches of Deputy Jack Lynch are identical with the speeches which Deputy Haughey is making at the moment. There is no difference other than the place, the time and, I suppose, the atmosphere. The words are virtually the same. He has made no effort to unite Ireland.

Their policies have been totally contradictory of a desire for unity. The case which damns the Government most is the EMS, which has made Irish money foreign currency in the North of Ireland. In connection with the Department of Education and Irish unity, if a young person living in a Border area opts to go to a school in the North of Ireland he or she forfeits the right to third level education because nobody in the Department of Education, particularly the Minister, has the vision to set a leaving certificate examination that would allow any child from the Republic doing secondary school education in the North of Ireland an opportunity to sit for the leaving certificate examination——

Acting Chairman (Mr. Kenneally)

Would the Deputy please conclude? He is over his time limit.

Mr. Harte

——which would permit that child to qualify for a university. When we are talking about Irish unity, let us be honest about it. Let us talk about the things that matter. Pie in the sky and dreaming about a united Ireland have produced nothing. Whatever chance Eamon de Valera, or Seán Lemass had or Deputy Jack Lynch had of uniting Ireland, I say with regret that Deputy Haughey has a terrible disadvantage. It is no secret that one million people North of the Border will never trust him, even if he had it 110 per cent right. He will never be trusted because one of the robberies that took place today——

Acting Chairman

The Deputy has gone away past his time. He must realise that everybody is only allowed 30 minutes, sorry.

Mr. Harte

A bank was raided in Donegal today and a sizeable amount of money stolen. The guns used in the robbery of that bank were imported and I do not have to elaborate on that point.

Minister of State at the Department of Transport (Mr. Flynn)

I might say that it is often frustrating to have to listen to some of the debates in this House. It is never worse than when one is subjected to the prophets of doom and gloom that one has to listen to on occasions like this. On the occasion of adjournment debates it is expected that every effort will be made to embarrass the Government and because of that, I cannot forgive a lot of the drivel that we have been subjected to here for the past while.

The Minister for Transport, Deputy Reynolds, will be speaking tomorrow in the House, I presume on matters concerned with his Department of Communication which covers Posts and Telegraphs and Transport and I have no intention of pre-empting anything that he may say. Since I became Minister of State at the Department of Transport I have had an amazing advantage in having been very closely associated with the Minister for Transport in all matters concerning the Department.

I shall give some personal reactions on transport matters as they have occurred to me since taking office. As we all know, transport accounts for about 16½ per cent of gross national product, net of taxation and also for about 11 per cent of household expenditure in this country. Consequently, it is of major importance to us all, whether corporate bodies or family units. It is a trueism to say that transport is essential for the wellbeing of the economy. Everybody realises this. For that reason we at this time have to be concerned with new transport measures and the taking of very important decisions as far as transport matters are concerned.

The role of transport in regional development cannot be overlooked or over-emphasised. As a public representative from the west of Ireland, Deputy Harte will fully appreciate that it is absolutely essential that the Department of Transport functions well in giving people in the far-flung reaches of this country the best possible transport system——

Mr. Harte

If the buses in Donegal could run on time, the Government would be given full marks for that.

Mr. Flynn

That can be achieved in economic circumstances. Provision of these services is costly but society has accepted——

Mr. Harte

We would give two cheers, not three.

Mr. Flynn

Society has accepted, by and large, that it is necessary to support the transport system and there is a continuing support as far as the Government and the Department are concerned to maintain and develop these services to give a better service to all concerned in the west of Ireland.

The problem in our urban centres is evident to all of us and has been growing a pace for some time. With that in mind, the Government set up the Transport Consultative Commission to look, first of all, into the major traffic congestion in Dublin city. It is indicative of the regard that the Minister for Transport and the Government have in dealing with this very important problem that within a fortnight of the commission making their recommendations, the Minister for Transport, in line with the recommendations, has taken the initiative to set up the task force which will make available interim measures to bring about a speedy solution to the transport congestion situation in the inner city and indeed, in the Dublin centre generally.

There are enormous costs as far as investment is concerned in transport infrastructure. Because this matter was dealt with recently in the Dáil, it is not necessary for me to deal with the enormous amounts of money needed to bring about a solution in this regard. Suffice it to say that the Government are conscious of this and have taken the initiative there as well in providing the necessary finance for the electrification of the Howth railway line. This is going on apace. All moneys that are required to bring it on stream in the appointed time will be made available by the Government.

The commission's report was confined, of course, to an investigation of urban passenger transport in the Dublin area, but they felt in their recommendations that many of the measures they advised could be applied to other large urban areas and city centres. In this regard it might be well for interested parties in, say, Cork, Limerick and Galway, to apply themselves to the study of the commission's report. I am sure they would find therein all the measures deemed necessary to improve the traffic situations in their own towns.

I will go so far as to say that there has been no worth-while transport debate in this House since I took office. The Minister and I were very disappointed at the recent debate when the Estimate for the Department of Transport was being taken. Indeed, in that debate the Opposition Deputies were somewhat at a loss to make a good case as far as transport was concerned. They had little idea about what they would like to do on transport matters.

Mr. Harte

Seán Lemass was the one who sorted it out.

Mr. Flynn

A lot of the current parliamentary questions from some Opposition Deputies showed a dichotomy of approach in regard to transport services, whether surface transport or aviation. It is understandable why Deputies should require information about fares as far as Aer Lingus and CIE are concerned——

Mr. Harte

Now we are getting off the ground.

Mr. Flynn

——but one certain spokesman on the Opposition benches does not seem yet to have his mind made up as to whether he wants cheap fares with consequent uneconomic service to be provided by Aer Lingus or whether he wants to reduce Aer Lingus losses, for example on the North Atlantic route, which of course is not consistent with a cheap fares policy. We would regard it as important if the main Opposition party would make up their mind once and for all just what their transport policy is and what line of approach they are going to take, without going hither and thither as they are at present.

They also have this great double-think on CIE. The Government are more than conscious of the Financial burden on the Exchequer which the CIE deficit represents and because of their consciousness in this regard they are taking the necessary steps to see if something can be done about it. This is indicative of the way this Government have been operating the past three years.

Mr. J. Ryan

No roads.

Mr. Flynn

Instead of sitting around with pious hopes making speeches about what might or might not have been, they have taken the inititative and have appointed consultants to bring submissions to them in the very near future as to likely methods that might be adopted to do something in regard to the deficits.

Mr. J. Ryan

That is about the fifteenth consultation.

Mr. Flynn

Just as the Minister for Transport of recent date took the initiative and was quick off the mark to do something about the transport consultative commission recommendations as far as Dublin was concerned, the Deputy can rest assured that the present Minister for Transport will be just as quick off the mark in dealing with matters that will be raised when the McKenzie report comes to hand in the near future. The matter of road freight transport is of paramount importance to our economy.

Mr. Harte

It is pertinent in Donegal.

Mr. Flynn

The necessary steps are being taken to bring about a situation of liberalisation which will gear——

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Harte should not interrupt the Minister.

Mr. Flynn

——the road freight system for the 1980s. Coupled with that we have an imaginative harbours programme that will join with the road freight policy——

Mr. Harte

The Minister was all right when he was flying aeroplanes.

Mr. Flynn

——to bring about the necessary improvement as far as imports and exports are concerned. We do not regard it as satisfactory that 80 per cent of road freight here is own transport. The transport consultative commission now sitting on road freight got their terms of reference from the Minister in the recent past. They have met on a few occasions and they are under instructions to make a speedy submission to the Minister who will act in the best interests of all concerned as soon as the report is with him.

Mr. Harte

Will the Minister build a bus shelter at Lifford?

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Harte should not interrupt.

Mr. Harte

The Donegal people would be grateful to the Minister if he provided them with a bus shelter.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Hold on a minute, Minister. Deputy Harte should not interrupt.

Mr. Flynn

It is regrettable that Deputy Harte finds it necessary to raise his voice to me. I listened to him for a considerable length of time without interruption.

Mr. Harte

All I am looking for is a bus shelter.

Mr. Flynn

If Deputy Harte wants a tussle this evening, he will get it from Deputy Flynn.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This is what the Chair is afraid of and the Chair has a fairly good idea of who might win that battle. But the Chair does not want that battle.

Mr. Flynn

I bow to the Chair's superiority in the matter of the tussle.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair does not want that battle so Deputy Harte will please stay quiet.

Mr. Harte

We do not want anything elaborate like what the Minister is talking about, just a bus shelter and buses to run on time.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Will the Deputy forget about bus shelters and let the Minister speak.

Mr. Flynn

When the bus shelters are being handed out I will make quite sure that there is one big enough to cover Deputy Harte. The question of the economy was raised at great length this morning and this afternoon. We all have to recognise that there is some difficulty with the balance of payments and that there are problems there at present.

Mr. Harte

Hear, hear.

Mr. Flynn

There are two areas that must be considered, the international forces at play in the world and the domestic tensions we have at this time. In relation to international forces, that is concerned mostly with the increase in the oil import bill. When one considers that between 1978 and 1980 the import bill for oil and oil products rose from £333 million to something in the region of £800 million, it is not too difficult to understand that in an open economy like ours this puts a heavy strain on the economy. This has made a significant contribution to our external deficit. That is agreed by all.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Flynn

It must be agreed that this Government have taken all available steps to deal with the matter. We considered this question of energy and resources so important that the Taoiseach on assuming office immediately created a Minister for Energy who has been very active on the ground. Anybody who has even a casual look at the daily papers will realise this. It can also be fairly stated that very keen arrangements have been made to guarantee our supplies as much as possible. We all look forward to a day in the not too distant future when we will be able to announce an oil find off my coastline. That will be a proud day for Fianna Fáil and we will be able to handle that as well. In a more serious tone, I hope that when that oil find comes——

Mr. Harte

It is about time the Minister became serious.

Mr. Flynn

——it will not make a beggar of this nation. There is always the danger that one is inclined to mortgage the benefits before they come to shore. Deputies can rest assured that the Fianna Fáil Government have their priorities right. They will use the benefits that accrue from such a find to benefit the living standards and to help to develop the infrastructures so that our standard of living will be maintained long after the find has been registered.

There has been some pretty heavy weather as far as wage increases are concerned and that could be regarded as the domestic tension that I referred to earlier. There is always an aspiration for living standards to be raised but unfortunately people want living standards to be raised in excess of the capacity of the economy. When there is greater productivity it is only right and proper that the producers should be allowed to achieve a higher level of income and thereby a higher standard of living. But the position at the moment is that there is a demand for a rapid improvement which is not being paid for by increased productivity and unfortunately——

Mr. J. Ryan

All the people want is houses to live in.

Mr. Flynn

——it has to be paid for then by external reserves and by borrowing. The debts have to be paid by somebody and the Fianna Fáil Government are not prepared to put on those who come after us the intolerable burden of reducing the deficit from an unacceptable level. That is why the budget is framed in the way it is framed this year.

Mr. J. Ryan

No more houses this year.

Mr. Flynn

People realise what has to be done. We must adjust the balance of payments deficit and an incomes policy must play a major role in this strategy. There is no word of encouragement from the Opposition benches to assist the Government in bringing about the desired result as far as the balance of payments in concerned. When one considers their track record, when one considers the number of economists they are supposed to have in their ranks——

Mr. Harte

The Government have one less.

Mr. Flynn

——one would have expected them to have something constructive to say.

Mr. Harte

The Taoiseach had one too many.

Mr. Flynn

Unfortunately their track record is not worth talking about and they admit that they gambled with their future and ours. In the process they made a shambles of the economy. That must be one of the most damning statements ever to emanate from an Opposition.

Mr. J. Ryan

The Minister also gambled last December.

Mr. Flynn

There were two major contributions this morning from the leaders of both Opposition Parties and they were not directed to any matter that could be related to the economy.

Mr. Harte

The Minister was not here.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Harte——

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Harte

Deputy Flynn was not in the House when Deputy FitzGerald and Deputy Cluskey spoke.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Harte already got a 33-minute half hour without interruptions and the least we could expect from him is that he would not interrupt at this stage.

Mr. Flynn

Deputy Harte is quite right. I stayed this morning for the only worthwhile contribution which was the contribution of the Taoiseach but because I was interested in knowing, I took the opportunity to get the unrevised edition of the contribution of those who spoke afterwards.

Mr. Harte

The Minister was not here.

Mr. Flynn

I never said I was here, I just said that I was here for the Taoiseach's speech. I paid studious attention to everything that was said subsequent to my departure. The two efforts were concentrated in the main on a personal attack on the Taoiseach. This is not new. The pattern of action in this regard is now virtually an everyday occurrence here. This has been the pattern since the Taoiseach assumed office last December. There has been a concerted attack on his personal integrity, on his ability to hold office and even on his right to be elected Taoiseach at all. One would have expected more from the sanctimonious craw-thumpers of the opposite side, who like to portray themselves as all things bright and beautiful, the defenders of the rights of individuals, the paragons of virtue, and who see the mote in every one else's eye but fail to see the beam in their own. They seem to regard success as something to be ashamed of and something that does not befit a person in public life.

Mr. J. Ryan

Can the Minister give the encyclical?

Mr. Flynn

We in Fianna Fáil have always been blessed with good leadership.

Mr. Harte

The only difference is that the present Taoiseach has been attacked from here whereas the last Taoiseach was attacked from behind over there and nobody did it more than the Minister.

Mr. Flynn

We see in our Taoiseach an outstanding leader, a talented competent decisive politician whose contribution to public life has been enormous. The true worth of Deputy Haughey's contribution to this country will be assessed by historians, but for now the general public see him as the one politician who can bring economic stability and can lead us out of the difficulties we are in. Will the Opposition never learn? Did they not hear the public reaction last September to the personal and vindictive attacks on the Taoiseach at that time by the Leaders of the Opposition?

Mr. Harte

Which Taoiseach is the Deputy talking about? Is he talking about Lack Lynch?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If Deputy Harte does not wish to listen the Chair will ask him to leave the House if he continues interrupting.

Mr. Harte

I am sorry, I wanted to know which Taoiseach he was talking about.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will have to show his sorrow.

Mr. Flynn

Did they not hear that some of their most loyal supporters were standalised by the words used by their leaders at that time? Surely they have more to offer their supporters than a cointinuation of a tirade of invective, innuendo and ambiguity which has so permeated their minds that they are incapable of formulating any policy that might be helpful to furthering the economy? I ask myself why are they doing these things. Why are they continuing in there valley of political darkness? Is it because when the Taoiseach was elected Leader of Fianna Fáil they saw their chance of beating Fianna Fáil was gone for ever?

Mr. Harte

That is a terrible indictment of Jack Lynch.

Mr. Flynn

Is it that they see that the Taoiseach is a man of such enormous courage and ability that he might solve all our economic ills? They would not like that. Perhaps that is why they continue this personal invective. Are they afraid of the possibility that he might bring stability and peace to this country?

Mr. Harte

I hope he does.

Mr. Flynn

Would that be one reason why they continue these personal attacks on him? Or is it that they are in awe of his leadership qualities? Do they see in him the virtues and qualities of leadership which they themselves can never aspire to or hope to attain? Or are they motivated by personal malice which has so invaded their thinking towards the Taoiseach that they cannot escape from the depths of despair which typifies all their contributions here in the recent past?

Mr. Harte

The last time I heard that, it was about Jack Lynch.

Mr. Flynn

I am nauseated by Deputy FitzGerald speaking——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

There is a voice in the background that should be silent. Will Deputy Harte please desist?

Mr. Harte

I heard that record before and then it was Jack Lynch they were talking about.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If the Deputy heard the record before there is no need to remain to hear it now. I shall not warn the Deputy again.

Mr. Harte

Sorry, but it is hard to take it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It may be but there is nobody asking the Deputy to take it.

Mr. Flynn

I appreciate the Chair's protection of my right to speak in the House. I am sorry that Deputy Harte has a very tender skin as regards some of these remarks. I know from experience that there are certain points which seem to touch a raw nerve and I am sorry if I have to deal with some of those subjects. I am nauseated in listening to Deputy FitzGerald seeking to wrap the white mantle around himself and inferring that Fianna Fáil are engaged in political interference in certain areas of public life such as the Garda Síochána and Customs and Excise and RTE to mention but a few.

Mr. G. Collins

I shall answer that one.

Mr. Flynn

Very well, Minister, you are going to answer that tomorrow but I should like just a moment to suggest that those in glass houses should not be throwing rocks about. I say "rocks" deliberately. When it comes to political interference little stones might be better in the hands of the Opposition than rocks. Acute embarrassment is probably being felt on Deputy Harte's Front Bench at this time over little incidents that might be happening in the west of Ireland. I have no doubt that certain words in a local newspaper in the recent past will make prescribed reading for some of the good people on that side of the House before the week is out. If the impact of some of these written words were known then I think Deputy FitzGerald would have restrained himself or further, might have refrained from making any reference whatever to political interference.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I have already today referred to this. We must not have allegations from any newspapers of any kind, local or otherwise.

Mr. Flynn

When it is suggested that the Fianna Fáil Party use their power in any way to apply pressure or interference with the rule of law—I particularly mean that—it ill-becomes the Leader of the main Opposition party to be referring to these matters. He might very well look along his own Front Bench and deal with it there first.

Mr. Harte

That is a general statement that the Deputy should back up.

Mr. Flynn

The Deputy should not ask me to embarrass him further.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

No interruptions, please, and no allegations of any kind.

Mr. Flynn

I have had enough of the insults to my Leader and if it gives anybody in the Opposition any satisfaction to know that their continued attacks on the Taoiseach have drawn forth one to give them battle, so be it, but from this day forward while they continue this personal attack on the honour and integrity of that good man they will have to deal with some of us who will come in and stand in the trenches beside him.

The Fianna Fáil record for the past few years has been, to say the least of it, impeccable——

Mr. Harte

That is the one you had for the last election.

Mr. Flynn

——but the Fianna Fáil record over the last six months is the one that would seem to be most in question today. I suppose it was regarded as our first political problem and I suppose it is the political problem nearest the heart of Deputy Harte also, finding a lasting solution to the problem of the six north-eastern counties. I think it could be fairly said that more has been attempted in the past six months by way of political initiative than even the most optimistic could have hoped for. It must be admitted that the Taoiseach has elevated the problem in political terms to the very highest level. Contrast this high-powered and sensitive approach of Fianna Fáil at this time with the muddy thinking during the Coalition days. Witness the strategy of the Fianna Fáil Government on the national and international scene. This, coupled with the Taoiseach's Ard Fheis statement, his opening speech in the Northern Ireland debate here recently, and his "Panorama" interview has placed on public record, beyond yea or nay, Fianna Fáil's policy and aspirations on behalf of the Irish people as regards Irish unity.

We are confident that the Taoiseach has the full support of the majority of the people of this country and that he has the dedication and courage to bring about a happy solution in peace and harmony for all who live in this island. Deputy FitzGerald boasts about what he did for Northern Ireland when he was in office. I think the most eloquent assessment of his efforts came from one of his own former colleagues in Government, Dr. Conor Cruise O'Brien, who admitted that Deputy FitzGerald had done nothing at all.

The Taoiseach has taken a further step in a practical way of helping to improve relations between the community in the Six Counties and the Border counties. I have been honoured in being appointed by him to give special consideration to cross-Border activity and development. For the benefit of Deputy Harte and anybody else who is interested I am making at this time a fairly detailed study of all the projects——

Mr. Harte

The study was carried out four years ago.

Mr. Flynn

Yes, I accept that. Why does the Deputy continue to interrupt me? Is this hurtful to him?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair must again remind Deputy Harte that he is not entitled to interrupt. The Minister has about four minutes left to conclude.

Mr. Flynn

These reports are being studied in some depth by me and the House and Deputy Harte may rest assured that there will be positive action on the ground as regards these developments. It is my intention to be available at all times for those who are interested in discussing these matters with me. I intend to visit the area quite often during the recess and discuss these projects in person on the ground.

Our first economic aim, as stated by the Taoiseach on many occasions, is industrial relations and industrial peace. It is fair to say that there is an angry population outside and they are not satisfied that things are well as far as industrial relations are concerned. This is against the background of continued efforts on behalf of the Fianna Fáil Government to bring about industrial peace this year.

I do not believe any strike situation can have a lasting benefit for any section of the community. It does not have advantages for individuals, unions, employers or for the economy. Any small, short-term advantages individuals get are quickly dissipated. When one asks a person who has been on strike for a considerable length of time if the strike has brought any benefits to him or her the answer is always no. I believe the unions would like to see an end to this kind of situation as well, because the funds they must make available as far as strikes and strike situations are concerned, could be much more fruitfully utilised in providing training sessions and providing their members with better facilities. The employers have to meet deadlines. They would like to safeguard their investments and they would like to develop a stronger reputation as far as meeting deadlines is concerned. Strikes are certainly not in their best interests.

The economy suffers most of all. We have suffered a lot in our international reputation. We have suffered as well as far as international investment is concerned. Something is basically wrong when unions do not speak on behalf of their members, when arrangements freely negotiated cannot be implemented because of the intransigence of minority groups. The structures are already there and they were formulated after years of effort on behalf of the unions, the employers and the Government in a concerted effort, painfully on occasions. How can we cast aside those structures now without inviting anarchy? If the procedures need changing, if unions think they need changing, if employers and the Government think they need changing, let us have the changes in consultation with all the partners. Once the necessary changes have been brought about surely it is reasonable to expect that negotiations taking place under those procedures should be binding on all concerned rather than having a situation of stop-go like we have at the moment.

The Department I am responsible for have problems in this regard. Despite the repeated efforts of the Minister for Transport and the Minister for Labour we have not yet reached a satisfactory solution. I would like to join with the Minister for Transport in once again appealing to those people, in the national interest, their own interest, the interest of their unions and in the interest of the community at large, in these trying times, when investment is so essential, when tourist development is so essential and when we need the resources they are denying us, to reconsider their stand and come back to the consultation table where I can assure them they will be welcomed and where a fair and honourable deal can be worked out to suit everybody.

There are a lot of aspects of industry and agriculture I would have liked to deal with especially as far as small industries are concerned because I believe, despite the fact that there have been major advances in the work of the IDA in attracting new investment and new industry into the country, that there is one area—I believe the Fianna Fáil Government are conscious of this area—where major advances could be made in job creation at this time, that is in the area of small industry.

There has been a very positive approach to this. The Taoiseach today gave an assurance of assistance, technical and every other way, to those interested in developing, in extending existing small industries or establishing new ones. This is an area which we should, as a responsible Government, preach hard and often to everybody concerned, where the winds of inflation and the winds of foreign investment do not always hurt as much as they do in the larger capital-orientated industries. We can provide lasting job opportunities by furthering the small industries programme. I would like to express the wish that further help and resources will be made available in this regard. I can only put on record in the minute left to me the thanks——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am afraid the Minister is in injury time now.

Mr. Flynn

I am in injury time because of Deputy Harte's continued interruptions.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

One minute to conclude.

Mr. Flynn

I do not wish to attract the Deputy's attention again but I would like to put on record the appreciation of the people in the less well-off areas of the country, the west of Ireland, which I represent, to the Fianna Fáil Government for their stand in the agricultural sector. A vote of congratulations should be passed to the Minister for Agriculture for the efforts he has made on behalf of agriculture in the short time he has held office and for his efforts in maintaining the CAP, which has been of enormous benefit to the farmers in general and, in particular, his great efforts on behalf of the western farmers in bringing back a package in the last few weeks, which has been sought by many Governments over the years and could only be achieved under the reign of Deputy Charles J. Haughey as Taoiseach and his very capable and competent Minister for Agriculture, Deputy Ray MacSharry.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We will have to leave it at that.

Mr. Flynn

I wish the Opposition would learn the good lesson they are getting from me this evening and apply it. We are sick and tired of listening to their personal atacks on our Leader. If they have nothing else to do except attack our Leader then they are certainly destitute of any worth-while programme as far as an alternative Government is concerned. They will get their answer at the next general election.

Mr. J. Ryan

I have listened to the Minister of State at the Department of Transport getting a certain amount of mileage out of his portfolio. I have listened to a unique encyclical put together by the said Minister and a most unusual case being made for the beatification of a man while he is still alive. That is my reading of what was said in his speech. While I appreciate that embarrassment——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I do not think we will take over the power of Rome here at this stage.

Mr. J. Ryan

I was wondering about that. I will gamble on a little embarrassment because the Minister said at the outset that all we were thinking of doing was trying to embarrass the Government. I do not believe there is any need for us to try to do it because they have embarrassed themselves already. I believe that in this Adjournment Debate, despite the remarks of the Minister of State, one must give priority to an assessment of the Taoiseach's performance since 7 December 1979. I am sure the Minister of State will accept that we are entitled to that.

Mr. Flynn

That is the first constructive thing said by the Opposition today.

Mr. J. Ryan

I may not say a lot more but I accept the compliments of the Minister of State. In the latter part of last year our economy had developed a serious list, in nautical terms, on the seas of inflation and unemployment. Many of the Government backbenchers who were concerned for their safety at the next general election, which we hope will not be for two years, manipulated——

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I will have to give Deputy Ryan injury time too if this is to continue.

Mr. J. Ryan

The west apparently is awake.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The west will certainly have to go asleep again.

Mr. J. Ryan

I wish they would. The Government backbenchers in the latter part of last year——

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If Deputy Harte and Deputy Leyden would stay quiet Deputy Ryan might get his chance.

Mr. Leyden

I may not get another chance to get in.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We will call the Deputy tomorrow some time.

Mr. J. Ryan

The Deputy is not in Roscommon County Council now, he is in the Dáil and for a change he might have a little manners.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If Deputy Leyden is going to start where Deputy Harte left off the two of them will have to leave the House.

Mr. Harte

The Chair has elevated that man to my level.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I would not like to do that. Deputy Ryan without interruption.

Mr. J. Ryan

These backbenchers, towards the end of last year manipulated by various means the election of the new Taoiseach who, in the previous two years, had been in charge of the Department of Health during which time he had created for himself the image of a saviour or of a messiah. Indeed, all he did then was to project his own image.

Mr. Leyden

We already had a messiah—the one from Castlebar.

Mr. J. Ryan

The then Minister for Health had convinced these backbenchers that if they elected him as Leader of their party he would lead them to victory in the next general election. At one fell swoop after his election as Taoiseach he abolished the Department of Economic Planning and Development and sacked the Minister concerned. In addition the new Taoiseach turned his back on the idea of job creation and publicly dissociated himself from the Fianna Fáil manifesto by regarding it as a complete and utter failure.

Today I detected a rather sharp conflict between the Taoiseach and the Minister for Energy when the latter associated himself closely with the manifesto and said that more people have been put to work in the past three years than has ever before been the case since the foundation of the State. He maintained that the implementation of the manifesto was needed urgently to resolve chronic economic and social ills in our society and that any criticism of this gospel was only superficial. The Minister must be living in cloud cuckooland. It would be worth his while to go down the country and to talk with housewives, with workers, with farmers and with young people. Surely he does not believe that there is not a serious crisis in our economy. As we approach the end of the first half of 1980 we have an unemployment figure of 95,000 which is rising rapidly. In addition there are 50,000 school leavers completing the leaving certificate examination this week who, as confirmed by experts at national level, have very little prospect of work in the near future.

Was this the sort of situation that led to the sacking of Deputy O'Donoghue from his ministry? I recall that in one of his major statements to the House he committed himself to the objective of full employment by 1982. He spoke also of an inflation rate of 5 per cent but that is another matter. When one considers the employment problem in conjunction with an inflation rate of 20 per cent which is increasing rapidly each year without any effort being made to control it, one realises how serious the situation is. In reply to a Parliamentary Question last week we ascertained that the £ of 1979 is worth 84 pence today. That in itself is a clear indication of the very serious increase in the cost of living and the effect this is having on our way of life in terms of take-home pay.

I might add that in the period since December last the economic situation has worsened considerably. This observation was confirmed recently when we were told that we may expect a trade deficit this year of £750 million. That represents an increase in deficit of the order of £170 million on last year when we were told that we would have to curtail our borrowing and live within our means and also that there would have to be a cut-back so far as the enormous deficit of 1979 was concerned. Instead, there is a substantial increase.

There are closedowns every other day so far as industry is concerned. I am not in any way a pessimist but one has only to read the newspapers to realise how bad the situation is. Only today there is news of the threatened loss of 1,000 jobs. There are redundancies and job losses and despite the best efforts of the IDA, whom I commend for the very good work they have done down through the years, there will be a net job loss situation this year. This is a very unfortunate situation in a country that has a young and increasing population.

It is very sad for somebody who has worked in a job for many years to be told that he is not wanted any longer. When a man loses his job his entire family are affected. It is very difficult for somebody who has reached middle age and who is made redundant to find another job. Unfortunately, the situation in many employments is that people who have reached the age of 40 are not wanted any longer.

It is a crazy situation that we should be building new industrial bases when our traditional industries are going to the wall and when people who have given, perhaps, 30 years service lose their jobs. We welcome new industries but the closure of existing ones is very sad. This is the sort of situation that is creating industrial unease. There seems not to be any light at the end of the tunnel. The traditional industries that have survived so far seem destined to go to the wall in the years ahead. Perhaps this is because of the unfortunate situation in the EEC and because of world trade but it is something we must live with. The Minister of State at the Department of Transport complimented the Minister for Agriculture on the package that he brought back from Brussels some weeks ago.

Mr. Flynn

And rightly so.

Mr. J. Ryan

On the occasion of the return of the Minister there was a press conference arranged to cover the Taoiseach's welcome home at Dublin Airport for the Minister. We all saw this event on our television screens. However, I am well aware of what the farmers in my area at least were thinking about that package in the weeks that followed. It was not very well packed for a start and what it contained was not very valuable. It involved a 5 per cent increase at a time when there is an inflation rate of 20 per cent. Farmers are intelligent people. It is not easy to fool them. It is difficult to think of any reason for a press conference on the occasion of the Minister's return from Brussels. Indeed, it is difficult to think of any reason for emphasising the package concerned.

Before leaving for Dublin last evening I talked with farmers at the local mart in Nenagh and they told me that in one week there was a net loss in respect of cattle of £20 per head. This is part of the package, the situation in which small farmers have to live. Costs are rising daily and profits are falling. Many people believe that the milk and honey days of the EEC, the big profits, are over unless the Government take steps to alleviate the sufferings of small farmers: many of them will be forced from the land, perhaps in the way envisaged by Commissioner Mansholt when he said small farmers in Ireland would be leaving the land in thousands.

Mr. Flynn

What about the £300 million aid for western farmers?

Mr. J. Ryan

Promises, more promises.

Mr. Flynn

That is not a promise. It is on stream at the moment and it will be very effective. Of course there is not a direct ratio between a 5 per cent increase in farm prices and a 20 per cent inflation increase.

Mr. J. Ryan

The people of the west will tell the Minister in due course all about the 5 per cent increase on the back of a 20 per cent inflation rate. I should like to go a little further into agriculture and talk about the Government's land policy, what I will call the promised land policy. Since 1977 I had been listening to Deputy Gibbons, and for the last 25 years to previous Ministers about this land policy. Now we are being told that instead of a land policy we will get a White Paper.

Mention of a White Paper has a fearful effect on me because it means a delay of 10 or 15 years before anything is done. Deputy Gibbons in the last Government, or the new Government, or perhaps I should call them the pre-Christmas Government, gave a commitment to produce a land policy. I presume the commitment was given with Cabinet approval, the Cabinet with collective responsibility, and I presume that when Deputy Gibbons left, many Cabinet members would still be in favour of a land policy. I cannot therefore see any reason for this step backwards, five or six years. In agriculture as in the industrial sector there is grave unrest, particularly among small farmers, and anyone who was outside the gates of Leinster House today would have seen smallholders from all over Ireland raising their voices in impatience at the neglect of their needs and the needs of their families for land to make their holdings viable.

I know hundreds of such farmers in my constituency who need land urgently and at the same time I know of substantial holdings in the area which for some time have been on the stocks for division, but not a thing has been done. I refer in particular to three estates, one of 1,300 acres, which would be of great benefit to the many smallholders who need land, which would help to keep many of them on the land. I am afraid of the consequences if this delay goes on, if this unease is allowed to creep in among the smallholders, the backbone of our agriculture. I am not happy about the way in which acquisition and division of land are being proceeded with. The people who will read the record of what I am saying will know what I am talking about. They are losing their patience and there may be more than marches—that is what I am afraid of.

The public sector is not any different from the private sector. This year has been bad for the public sector. The Central Bank has asked in its report for further substantial cuts in the public sector in areas of most concern to the under-privileged, the poor, the people in need of housing, and the children, responsibilities of the Departments of Social Welfare, the Environment, Education and Health.

I am a member of a health board and there has been a cut of £1½ million in the Mid-West region, and this affects essential services. We have been told to make do with what we have—a holding operation. There have been serious cuts in capital programmes, buildings, x-ray units and orthopaedic clinics. Work urgently needed has been postponed. The health board, ably assisted by action committees, have made a case for a full maternity unit in the county but they have been told there is not any money for expansion of their services.

I have been a member of a vocational educational committee for many years and I know there is a serious crisis in that sector of our educational services. I am proud of the contributions made by the vocational schools, the CEO's, teachers and the VEC to the economy of the area. We have placed many boys and girls in good employment. But this year the situation is so grave that I am wondering if we will have the chalk, the pens and paper for the pupils in September when the new school year opens.

I am a member of two boards of management, and this year the financial allocations to run the schools, to maintain the services, have been cut by 50 per cent. This makes the job of running the schools nearly impossible for teachers and headmasters. It is a sad day for Ireland when a Government who in their manifesto showed so much concern for young people have made it nearly impossible for those associated with vocational schools to carry on. Of course the effect will fall ultimately on our children.

The same crisis situation exists in the primary sector. I have been asked by many school managers to air specially the serious financial cut backs they have been asked to bear in regard to per capita grants and allocations for buildings and construction work in the primary schools for which they are responsible. Surely this deserves immediate attention from the Minister for Education?

In the social welfare field I listened to the Minister of State, Deputy Moore, emphasise Government concern for the under-privileged. He referred to the increases granted them in the budget. While at the time they appeared to be worth while, in the intervening four months the serious escalation in the cost of living has practically nullified them. Indeed the differential rents scheme recently announced from the Custom House has hit the less-well-off and has caused serious reaction throughout the country at local authority level. People who are unable to get jobs through no fault of their own, people with families, who are disabled, sick, find that that scheme has been altered. Rather than their rent being assessed on 50 per cent of their social welfare benefit—which is little enough bearing in mind the present high cost of living—it is now assessed on their full social welfare benefit. I have described it as a new version of Robin Hood, rather than robbing the rich to give to the poor it is a case of robbing the poor to give to the rich. It is something the Minister for the Environment and the Government should seriously reconsider. There may not be a substantial number involved but those being subjected to this hardship are the less-well-off in our society. If 1,000 people only are affected—and that is a conservative guess—that system should not work to their detriment.

Again dealing with people in receipt of social welfare I might refer to the vicious fuel variation clause implemented by the ESB in their accounts which constitutes a frightful imposition on people who are unable to meet these costs. I have seen instances of a normal bill of between £8 to £10 being doubled as a result of that fuel variation element. Irrespective of what side of the House we are on, if we have a social conscience in respect of the less-well-off that fuel variation cost should be subsidised by the Government to offset its drastic effects on the incomes of these people and their way of life. This is something that should be considered both by the Minister for Social Welfare and the Minister for Energy.

Mr. Flynn

The panacea for all our ills as far as the Labour Party is concerned are subsidies here, there and everywhere.

Mr. J. Ryan

I am talking about a terrible imposition on people with low incomes occasioned by this fuel variation clause in electricity accounts. That is a fact of life we have got to live with. Something should be done about it. I feel very strongly about it. It should be a matter of concern to all of us.

I should like now to move on to the Department of the Environment. In this area very many people are affected by cut-backs in allocations this year. County managers were appointed years ago under the 1941 Act. These people were appointed to manage. Unfortunately because they are being hamstrung by financial restrictions at Custom House level these people, who are concerned about and know the needs of people in their areas, can no longer manage or perform their duties properly. At present we have a situation reaching crisis point at local authority level in regard to roads, housing, sanitary services and employment. We are all aware of the present state of our roads. Somebody has called them a series of potholes around the country.

In regard to housing I know that in my area in March we received £500,000 for the building of houses in North Tipperary, at a stage when we were committed already to a figure of £800,000. The ultimate effect will be that the county manager may invite tenders, examine contracts from now until the end of the year but no houses will be built in my area—and I presume that is the picture across the country—unless and until the Minister makes further allocations for house building. The same stringency applies to the sanitary services. Moneys are not available. Because of that dire financial situation in my area there are now 33 men about to be laid off in North Tipperary County Council. Indeed this situation will deteriorate further because the roads situation and the moneys allocated to them will worsen when we will be faced with further unemployment in the public sector at local authority level. There was a grave mistake made in February with the cancellation of the home improvement grants. That scheme created employment, and helped people improve their housing.

On the industrial front I believe that if we are to survive this recession industrial peace is absolutely essential. I mentioned one aspect of industrial unrest in the House last week on the Estimate for the Department of Labour. That was the fact that Labour Court decisions take so long to emanate from Dublin. Many months may elapse between the hearing of a case and the issue of its findings and recommendations. Nothing is more annoying to a worker with a genuine grievance than having to wait six months for its resolution. I recommended to the Minister for Labour last week that further consideration be given to decentralisation of the Labour Court and the conciliation services because all matters nationwide cannot be resolved in Dublin. I recommended the establishment of regional offices as part of an early warning system for the avoidance of industrial unrest. Such should be recommended to the Government with a view to creating an atmosphere in which industrial peace would permeate our society once again, putting our economy on its feet. I hope the Minister for Labour will consider that suggestion of mine and establish in Cork, Galway, Waterford and Limerick Labour Court offices, thereby decentralising the Labour Court and resulting in industrial peace throughout the country.

Mr. L. Lawlor

I shall commence where most politicians do now when addressing themselves to economic matters, that is, in the international arena. There have been many warnings and comments emanating from EEC summit meetings, from the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and all the other international financial institutions regarding the present international situation. Here I should like to refer to some personal experiences. I had an opportunity of visiting Iraq with an all-party group at the end of 1979. Iraq is a country endowed with oil reserves, natural gas, minerals and, in the northern part of the country, a developing agricultural economy. During that visit we were afforded a real insight into how another part of the world is planning and developing. This morning the Taoiseach referred specifically to the recycling of petrodollars. Fundamentally that is the course ahead for this country. We must adopt a completely new and aggressive approach to exports. We have a number of Government agencies, structured and financed from this House in order to assist in the promotion of exports.

The visit of the all-party committee to Iraq showed us that there is a lot more we can do and a great potential for Ireland. It has been said time and again that there has been a vast shift in financial resources to the oil-producing countries and we must now endeavour to get some of those funds back into our economy. We must adopt a new and aggressive approach. Indirectly quite an amount of Government spending is going towards promotions, but the people who have taken on themselves this pioneering role find on returning to this country that they do not get support from semi-State organisations or from public and private companies.

We found that the Scandanavian countries, particularly Finland, have been extremely active and aggressive in selling their products, especially technical, and educational expertise. When we looked at these new projects we felt that we could have undertaken these tasks equally well. However, we came to the conclusion that it is very difficult to get a number of people in industry to accept the necessity to be aggressive and undertake projects and contracts in that part of the world. It is sad that we are not making the most of the opportunities which arise. Iraq was one of the first countries to do a State-to-State energy deal with our new national corporation. The people we met expressed a great desire to trade with Ireland and there is tremendous potential for our exports. This is the one clear and positive path we can follow to ensure continuity of economic growth.

There is no doubt that the international economic situation is grave and it is a lot more difficult in other developed countries than at present in Ireland. We cannot, however, allow the prophets of gloom to get recognition. We must work our way out of the difficult international situation. The fact that we are a small country has certain advantages in some areas. I would urge our companies to give due recognition to the opportunities being opened up by a number of our semi-State trade promotional organisations and to endeavour to brief their work force on the potential, conditioning them to have a willingness to go abroad and promote exports even though it sometimes involves long spells away from home. There are many outlets for the excellent products we are capable of producing.

The one capacity which they do not have in the area about which I have been speaking is the capacity to produce food. That is our great national resource but we have not as yet developed in the processing sector a product in a consumable shape or form. We are still far too willing, particularly in the meat sector, to allow exports in a form which does not give the greatest return. I would ask semi-State organisations to develop a much more comprehensive programme of awareness here. The people concerned are familiar with the potential and endeavour to take advantage of opportunities they see at first hand. They provide grants to bring abroad personnel from companies which might have export potential. During that trade mission the CTT group constantly made the comment that many of our companies with potential for exports do not follow through. At this time of retrenchment in the home market and in the British and European markets, we must look further afield and take on a pioneering role which in the missionary sense has been so much a part of our history. We must adopt this new approach in order to get the maximum number of petrodollars to pay for the tremendous increase in the price of our oil imports.

The Joint Committee on State-Sponsored Bodies have had the opportunity to look at the operations of a number of prominent State-sponsored companies such as Aer Lingus, ACC, Bord na Móna and the Irish Sugar Company. Today we met representatives of NET. In regard to Aer Lingus, we visited the airport about six weeks ago and met a number of personnel involved in the flying side of operations as well as others on the maintenance side. The difficulties facing Aer Lingus are of particular concern to every community-minded individual. The company are going through a period of disruption when they can least afford it and when it is most undesirable.

I am at a loss to understand the attitude of some of the members of the NEETU. As somebody from the engineering industry who has served an engineering apprenticeship and who was a member of that union and is still closely associated with it, I cannot understand the new aggressive approach which seems to have crept in. It is not desirable and will not be sustained. People who have had a tremendous opportunity to advance themselves in an educational and technical area funded in the main by the State should not now hold to ransome this great semi-State organisation which has done more to promote the name of Ireland than all the other promotions we have undertaken abroad. Now in the middle of the peak season we find that the company are again in difficulty and it is not all that long since they last had major difficulties. They seem to have the capacity to carry on even in the face of great difficulties and appear to be succeeding in maintaining the operation of flights. This strike went to a vote and I spoke recently to one of the employees in the company who had voted in favour of strike. He could not justify the attitude of mind which prevailed. They have made a case that protracted negotiations have gone on and that they have fallen behind in the status quo situation in the company. They probably have and it may be that they have a just case, but the strike weapon should be the last way of dealing with a difficulty.

I will not embark on any kind of union bashing because I do not believe it is necessary. It is incorrect and there has been far too much of it over the past five or ten years. It has become a usual way of explaining a lot of major difficulties in labour relations. I cannot accept the attitude that at a peak time in the year technical people who know their own abilities and importance should try to create a difficulty in that semi-State company. Hopefully these people will not have to learn the very expensive, harsh and cruel lesson of today's world that they will only in due course damage their own potential and that of their colleagues.

In my constituency we are anxiously awaiting the development of £25 million Aer Lingus investment to create 600 jobs of a complex, technical nature. This may be affected and many other areas may be affected by the situation which exists at present which is not acceptable. I urge the people concerned to show a gesture, and management likewise, and decide, without resolving the detail, to return to work and put a time limit on resolving the differences. They should show goodwill all around in this time of difficulty internationally and reverse the decision to bring back Irish technical personnel who are doing excellent work abroad promoting the name of Ireland and the aspects of that company and its facilities, and not take them away from the very lucrative contracts that company hold because of their ability.

We must find a new way forward in industrial relations. In the Taoiseach's address to the nation shortly after taking up office, he asked for a decade of endeavour. Let the eighties be the decade of endeavour. Let us find a new way of resolving difficulties and introduce a new flexibility. The improvement is already there. The man-hours lost in the first quarter of this year is a tremendous improvement on the previous year but it is not good enough. Every time we have one difficulty in the strike situation it is not good enough.

We had an explanation today from some of the senior executives of NET who said that for five weeks at the Marino Point plant they had a strike which cost £5 million, £1 million per week on a plant where the personnel involved know quite well that the overspend is tremendous. The previous administration allocated funds to commence that development and this Government took up the very expensive tab to complete it, one of the largest single investments made in this country. Yet again technical personnel, because of demarcation lines, decided to have a strike. That was the net cost of it.

In looking at the whole area of industrial relations I cannot understand why there has to be demarcation between employer and employee. We hear a lot about taxation, PAYE, employers and employees. Having visited the educational facility available to management, the IMI, and the educational facilities available to trade union members, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions facility, one cannot understand they are not all under one roof and not educated and working together for the benefit of the country. There is a tremendous need for a new dawning in the whole area of labour relations. I urge employers and employees to decide now that they will adopt new approaches and attitudes particularly in a time of economic difficulty.

We know there are major difficulties in certain companies and, as the Taoiseach pointed out this morning, major achievements in job creation and job approvals this year. There is tremendous progress on one side but unfortunately bad news is spoken about a lot more than whatever progress might be made. It is a major cause for concern. In the area of industrial relations, the commission have been far too slow in reporting. We assumed they would have come forward a lot sooner with imaginative proposals. There is need for change. There is a tremendous fragmentation in the union structure. Perhaps there is not a united approach on the employer side. The Taoiseach, in his nationwide address, pointed out that a lot of the difficulties probably stemmed from management. That is an area not often highlighted. I know the NESC some months ago produced a report which highlighted difficulties in management regarding personnel relationships and so on. Unless we work together to resolve these difficulties they will continue and will not be to the advantage of the community.

If one from this side of the House is calling for a constructive and positive approach from employers and employees one would assume that politicians might show some example. Unfortunately that example was not forthcoming in the House today. One had limited, negative personal attacks on a man holding the highest, most demanding office in the land at the head of the Government. It has become a feature of the two Opposition parties since the Taoiseach took office. The Irish people have tremendous respect and regard for the office of Taoiseach and they know that who-ever holds that office is their representative and under the democratic process they decide at elections who will head the Government. During our term in opposition we had economic difficulty with the last Government. There were international difficulties and difficulties here at home all accumulating in job losses, high finances and so on. From the far side of the House during that period the Fianna Fáil Party put forward an alternative economic strategy to that of the then Coalition Government. It was constructive and positive opposition. As yet we have not seen any such suggestions or ideas. We had a press conference the other day in which Fine Gael blandly announced there should be cuts in Government spending. They were very short on the implementation, methods and effects. They criticised but did not put up any alternative set of proposals. I do not propose to dwell very long on criticising the Opposition as it is not forward looking. It is negative and not accepted by fairminded people in the community. We must at this stage, as politicians, point the way forward and show leadership. That is already coming through very decisively from this side of the House under the new Taoiseach. Already there have been major steps forward in our relationships regarding the Northern Ireland problem. It is the major economic difficulty and, therefore, politically it deserves the attention of the Taoiseach and the members of the Government responsible. It is getting that attention and, hopefully, we are making some progress.

I should now like to refer to my constituency, Government spending in it and developments and progress in the western part of county Dublin. We hear a lot about cuts in Government spending but I am pleased to see that under the Government there is a great awareness by the respective Ministers of the needs to cater for our young people. In the area of education there is a recognition of the need to continually invest in education. The Taoiseach this morning referred to the tremendous potential we have in our young population. We are investing in the region of £10 million in post-primary schools in my constituency and more investment is planned. Recently there was a presentation to all Members representing the northern part of County Dublin by the National Institute of Higher Education in recognition of the tremendous investment there.

The telecommunications sector is another area of tremendous importance. Development is taking place in that area and the Government accept, and realise, that they must continue to invest in those necessary key services. I should also like to point out that Dublin County Council was granted a 19 per cent increase in real terms in the funds provided by the Minister for the Environment for the improvement of the infrastructure. We should not get carried away by the global comments about cutbacks. Selective restrictions on Government spending are necessary and will continue to be necessary but we must not forget the other progress that is being made. In my constituency the IDA invested £15 million in job creation. I am pleased to say that unemployment and job losses are not major difficulties in my constituency. I am aware that those difficulties exist in certain areas.

I should now like to deal with the question of energy, its potential and the need for restraint and productive use of energy. The Joint Committee on State-Sponsored Bodies visited Bord na Móna some time ago and we got an idea of the tremendous potential of that fuel. We were briefed on the investment by the Minister for Energy and on Government policy generally in that area. There has been a complete shift of emphasis, a new awareness of the potential of the sources of energy we have. It is crucial and vital that we should maximise those excellent resources. It is good forward planning to leave the nuclear option to one side for the present. The capital requirement, coupled with the technical difficulties that may be experienced, would not warrant or justify that type of investment on behalf of a country of our size.

This Dáil term could be summed up by stating that tremendous progress has been made. Tremendous difficulties have been experienced and difficulties will continue to arise. Some of the rishest countries in the world are experiencing difficulties. We cannot be isolated or insulated from the harsh realities of EEC policies and difficulties or American difficulties. We must realise now that we will experience more difficulties but we must approach them in a positive and constructive manner. I hope we will do that and, as a united party, we will be in a position to deal with the challenges ahead. I have no doubt that the Taoiseach, in the course of his discussions with the executives of semi-State bodies, indicated the need to purchase Irish equipment and materials and, for those in the export sector, to promote the potential available.

I am reasonably optimistic about our potential. There are many young people looking to us to create a good future for them. That is our challenge and it is also one of the rare expanding resources we have which many other countries are short of. That is why we are attracting some of the largest international projects. I look forward to the remainder of 1980 as a period of consolidation when there will be a recognition by all concerned that we must find a better way of going forward. The national understanding and the need for single figure increases is the major economic requirement needed to ensure continued development.

Debate adjourned.