I move:
That Dáil Éireann, alarmed by the ever-increasing rise in unemployment, condemns the Government for continuing to ignore this social disaster or to take any positive action to deal with the situation.
We all recognise that this is the pressing issue by which we will all be judged. This is the subject of relevance to the people, particularly our young people. I want to make some preliminary observations. Over the last few weeks politicians have been preoccupied with a matter which does not appear to affect the lives of the ordinary citizen as much as this awesome problem of unemployment. I am speaking of course of the questions, doubts and apprehensions raised about telephone tapping, bugging and other matters which rate importance in their own areas. The public expect us to do something positive, to give them hope where there is no hope and to create opportunities which do not exist at present. They do not want to be distracted and they do not want to see us distracted by continuing reports, leaks, observations and interviews relating to this matter.
We put down this motion last week because we wanted to focus on this issue which is the common responsibility of all Members of this House. Before the last general election we all gave commitments to reduce the numbers of unemployed and we also promised to set up a judicial inquiry into the matters I have referred to. As Fianna Fáil spokesman on finance and economic planning may I plead with the Government to honour that commitment and take this subject out of the arena of political dissension? Would they do what they said, and what we said, and set up the judicial inquiry to set the public mind at rest? If they do that the public will realise that we are concerned about the problems they are facing. Members on both sides recognise that this is our fundamental responsibility. If that commitment is honoured I give an undertaking on behalf of this side of the House that we will focus on the fundamental issue — the need to create opportunities, hope and above all employment for our people.
In November 1982 the Government promised to take firm and decisive action to deal with the growing problem of unemployment which at that time stood at 170,000. Today, 18 months later, that number has increased by 40,000, and that number is still growing. So far we have seen no evidence of any action, much less firm and decisive action, from the Government to deal with what we all acknowledge to be the most pressing issue facing Members who come here to discharge our obligations to the electorate. The problem has reached crisis proportions and thousands of people, especially young people, cannot see any Government plan, programme or central direction to which they can respond.
There is a limit to what Government can do, or should pretend they can do, in terms of generating jobs. We have seen the growth of public expenditure, representing 68 per cent of GNP, an increase of over 28 per cent, in a few years. We must create a climate and encourage people to do for themselves, to create opportunities by offering incentives. People should know that once they put their hands to the plough they will not be discouraged from continuing to plough the furrow by way of tax burdens and impositions which have reached an unacceptably high level. That is the subject on which we should focus this evening.
We have exactly three hours to come up with a broad outline to solve this problem, Fianna Fáil will have 90 minutes to make their contributions and the Coalition will have 90 minutes. We have deliberately decided to focus on this as the only issue which justifies our presence. This is the test on which the Government will stand or fall. We all owe the public an apology because this Government did not order business in a way to enable us to have a comprehensive discussion on this issue. We would like to put forward our plans and test them against the Government plans, even if we had to wait another month to hear the Government's plans. But no, we have this three hour debate. As I said, we all owe, particularly Government, the public an apology for constraining us from discussing this growing crisis.
While this is a national crisis, it is a dangerous crisis in certain parts of this country, particularly in this city. I heard a discussion on the radio about the problems facing the people of Tallaght, the sense of hopelessness that pervades that area and the inadequacy of this Government's attempts to help the young people. We do not need to focus on the problems of the inner city, unfortunately. My colleague, Deputy Gene Fitzgerald, will understandably refer to the crisis in our second city, Cork. In Dublin, Cork and elsewhere we are seeing and tolerating an economic and social crisis and waiting for something from a Government who tell us that the National Planning Board may be coming up with proposals but when they do the Government will first have to consider them and a few months later we will be discussing them in the absence of firm and decisive Government action. That is the background to this problem.
I want to put a few facts on the record. It is not our intention to add further to the hopelessness, frustration or despair running through the country, but we must acknowledge the extent of the problem and then see how we should tackle it. The economic conditions of the rest of the world by which we are greatly influenced are already lifting. We have a higher level of GNP in trading than any other country in the world. We have an opportunity, if we had a plan and a programme, to avail of that lift. By comparison with the rest of Europe, the trend of unemployment here last year was an average of just over 16 per cent, almost two-and-a-half times the growth of unemployment in the rest of the EEC. There are problems in the other member states but unemployment is tapering off throughout the EEC. However, that is not the case here. There are factors which relate to the lack of economic policy and the dismal performance of the Government. It has to be acknowledged that we have a massive growth in population which is not a feature elsewhere. Having said that, the fact is that conditions outside are not only benign but positive in America, Japan and Europe. Yet we are still waiting for something.
The Minister has told us that his first priority is to control and regulate tax revenue and seal off loopholes. We are waiting for that priority to be realised. I will name some of the major industries which have closed since the beginning of this year. We have lost at least 2,000 jobs in manufacturing industry: Irish Biscuits, Blackwater, Youghal, Kelly's Portlaoise, Keenan's, Bagnelstown, Burlington, Fords, Cork, Warner Lambert, Stainless Steel, Roscommon, Westinghouse Dunleer, Youghal Carpets. There are many more. It was mentioned in the debate in relation to Fóir Teoranta that they were unable to cope with the growing number of job losses last year.
In 1980 one out of every 14 people was unemployed. As we speak, that figure is one out of six. That demands action. The numbers employed in manufacturing industry and those employed on the land, which is our greatest national resource, are outnumbered by the numbers unemployed. That is startling. Is that any grounds for reassurance? The number of those under the age of 25 who are unemployed is greater than the total number who were employed ten years ago. Is that something to be proud of? Do we just sit back and say we will have a report from the planning board soon or that we will concentrate on the priority of collecting tax? Do we realise that out there is a seething bed of discontent? People are concerned about their husband, son, wife or daughter. What about the indignity the unemployed are suffering? We hear about it on radio every day. How long do we think we can sit back? How long do we think they will confine their frustrations to talking on radio programmes? Not only is unemployment rising but employment is falling. In the face of a Liverpool here, with a growing population of young people, in 1982 and 1983 the numbers employed fell by 45,000.
I state these facts to highlight the problem we face. The Government gave a commitment that they would take firm action to deal with this problem. Behind the statistics is a human crisis which is threatening not only to undermine the economy but much more. Let us look at some of the factors which are the background to the problem.
One of our responsibilities is to create a climate in which people will invest and are satisfied that they are not being penalised by working. The level of investment last year at 23 per cent of GDP was the lowest for 15 years. The Public Capital Programme last year was slashed by 25 per cent. That is the contribution from Government to create the environment for infrastructural development in which others can make plans for industrial and manufacturing activity. Foreign investment in this country has dried up. The IDA are talking about attracting 1,000 jobs this year. Did we think we would reach a stage — I do not blame them — where one of our State agencies with the greatest degree of support and financial incentive would acknowledge that the climate for investment here was so poor that nothing, not even their expertise or contacts throughout the world, could attract more than 1,000 jobs at this stage?
In case we think they are getting everything else right in terms of the budget deficit and so on, the Minister acknowledged as recently as 7 February that total foreign indebtedness at the end of 1983 is just short of £9,000 million. At the end of 1982 it was just short of £7,000 million. That is an increase of £2,000 million in a year in which the Government told us they would reduce the level of debt. The Minister has suggested that those of us who state these facts are undermining confidence but look at some of the hamfisted attempts made in the budget in relation to gilts. If there is something to be done about them it should be done but there is a way to do it without undermining confidence. If the Government and the Department of Finance expect to raise £1,000 million on the domestic market this year, which was the projection, they will not succeed because of the way they have undermined confidence by their handling of bond washing on the Stock Exchange. There are people looking for some place to invest funds but if the Minister wants money he had better make up the shortfall elsewhere. It will not be available to him at a time when we need to encourage investment.
While all this is happening we have the emergence of what is being called the black hole, the unrecorded outflow of £1,000 million from the economy last year. This has occurred to such an extent that we will probably have to revise our figures for growth last year and our projections for growth this year together with our balance of payments estimates. How can we plan when as a consequence of the clear indications this Government have given they are going to penalise investment, get in as much tax revenue as they can and levy charges on all kinds of activities? That message is also going out to other countries which were formerly attracted here.
We need a comprehensive plan for national development in all areas by which every action of Government will be informed, tested or judged. If a budget is not part of a comprehensive national plan for development it is of no consequence. In the weeks before the budget the Minister for Finance managed to focus attention on the options and alternatives open to him. Economic and other commentators were drawing up alternative budgets and not paying enough attention to the genuine one. All the words that were written and the comments which were made do not matter in the face of the issue with which we are now dealing. A budget which is only an instrument to implement a comprehensive plan is not just a neutral budget, it is a nonsensical budget. This neutral budget followed the most deflationary budget in the history of the State the previous year. There were unprecedented levels of taxation and levies of all kinds. We deflated the economy and penalised everyone who made an effort to improve things. We even succeeded, unfortunately, in dividing the community and created tensions between employers and employees and PAYE workers and others. The Minister aggravated the situation by ignoring facts.
There are ways of creating new hope and confidence in people. We should take down all the signposts which are pointing backwards in our economy and which penalise effort and incentive. We should clearly signal that if they take risks they will be rewarded whether they are self-employed, industrialists, agriculturalists or employees. There is a whole range of areas where this can be done. We welcomed the minimal effort announced in the budget that the Minister would grant tax concessions to venture capital for new manufacturing industry. Remember, however, that the same Minister in his previous budget abolished the tax concessions which had existed here since the thirties. We argued and pleaded with him not to do so, to no avail. He abolished tax concessions for people investing in publicly quoted companies as if anyone would pretend that the dividends yield from investment in publicly quoted companies up to last year would measure up to the return in investment from the safe havens of gilts and building societies.
The tax concessions should be expanded to include not just new manufacturing industries but jobs in existing industries because they are very clearly at risk. It would be a sign to those who have committed themselves over the years that their efforts will be rewarded. Indeed, the Minister should not confine it to manufacturing industry only. I am sure he is aware that the IDA or consultants in other organisations would tell him that the ratio in respect of new jobs is at best one to five in the manufacturing industry and the service sector. Surely jobs that are created in the trade and services sector, where the real growth potential is, will pay dividends? If one looks at the developing economies of America and Japan, particularly America, one can see they have precisely the same number of people employed today in manufacturing industry as they had about 20 years ago. Nonetheless, there has been a 2 per cent growth in employment in real terms in the other sectors. I hope the Minister is prepared to take account of that and make that proposal when he introduces the Finance Bill. Frankly, the revenue that might be lost as a consequence of this would be more than repaid by the investment, employment and activity which would follow. The tax yield would be much more considerable than the Minister would lose in making concessions of this sort.
We want to promote common purpose and enterprise and to establish cohesion between employers and employees. As a clear indication of that common purpose and ownership in all activities, including employer and employee relationships, we should promote motivation among employees by developing concepts of interrelationship and industrial democracy, sharing of information with employees, profit sharing and shareholding by employees. For instance, to acquire shares for employees we could encourage shareholding through the allocation of shares at preferential rates through the acquisition of shares by employees on the Stock Exchange or through normal commercial channels. We could also encourage it by giving signals to the industrial sector, who now, incidentally, seem to be moving in that direction and are prepared to acknowledge that disclosure is not necessarily bad, to promote a sense of common purpose. We can do these things if we move in that direction. The Government might also consider giving a lead by encouraging commercial State-sponsored bodies to seek a Stock Exchange quotation or to introduce profit sharing and shareholding schemes for employees. We need to take radical action because we do not want to confine our efforts to what has been done up to the present in terms of worker participation on boards.
We should encourage people to move out of safe haven investments. They are already moving out into risk-taking investments. Apart from the undisclosed sum of £1 billion mentioned recently, a considerable amount of money is being invested abroad by Irish business, manufacturing and constructing companies. I would not criticise them because in order to maintain even skeleton activity here they are going to a better climate. Surely we should see the need to encourage that kind of investment here. We must promote venture capital investment through tax incentives for employment-creating activities in industry, agriculture, forestry, fisheries, tourism, construction, the service sector and even community development programmes which are the nub of much that happens in rural Ireland. We can encourage pension and life assurance funds managers to channel their funds to resource development for employment creation. This must not be beyond the wit of Government.
We must acknowledge that the level of Government allocations for forestry and fisheries is actually falling in money terms, much less in real terms. If the public purse cannot promote activity for employment in these areas the Minister must stir his imagination to attract pension funds and others to invest in these programmes. They are waiting to do so but are being constrained by the out-moded thinking to which the Minister seems to be particularly prone. Surely he is aware that people are waiting to invest, given the signal. If the Government cannot provide funds they should at least encourage others to invest venture capital to generate employment opportunities.
Our industrial development programme has served us well but the IDA and CTT acknowledge that we are now dealing in a different world. We are not able to attract investment in the same way through grants for fixed capital assets and so on. The focus now is different and must be based on product development and marketing incentives. Even a small share of the growing international market would deal with out problems and realise our potential and we must shift the emphasis in that direction. Fixed capital assets are not of much consequence when the unit is failing. We should encourage the IDA and CTT to combine together. Both have an international reputation and many contacts. If we had a plan they would carry it out. We must employ a research and development programme, sophisticated product development and an aggressive marketing strategy. Those who have been most actively involved do not see much hope in the way things are being done and perhaps they are looking elsewhere to see how they can make their contribution other than through these agencies.
Our first resource is our people and we must have a programme for investment in education. We recently had a debate on education and I am glad to see our spokesman in the House. Anything we have ever done has been based on a programme of investment in education. This was particularly so during the sixties and seventies. There is no point in having a nice academic discussion on a programme for education if it is not supported by the necessary investment funds. Our first priority must be to develop the skills that will give added value at technological, marketing and every other level.
Last year's nonsensical decision to cancel examinations in modern languages was evidence of blindness to the need to encourage our people to acquire these skills. This decision was taken for the sake of a miserable £0.5 million, although as an afterthought they changed it. We must invest in education to equip our young people.
Agriculture needs a plan. We are cutting back on farm modernisation. Does anyone suggest that Irish agriculture is too modern? The allocation for farm modernisation is now 50 per cent less than two years ago. Marketing is needed to develop our agri-food industry. The Germans and Dutch are using Irish-type names to market their products but we have no real marketing programme to make the most of what we have. We must work through the co-op movement in every area to develop the strength and cohesion of Irish rural life, which was also a great characteristic of this city until it was undermined in recent times.
Forestry, fisheries and tourism are our resources. Tourism has been a growth are internationally for five or ten years. We have almost killed it here and we moan about what is going to Northern Ireland. We should be getting our share but it is diminishing and the potential will not be realised until the Minister has second thoughts in relation to the level of indirect taxation which is crucifying this sector.
The European Social Fund is ploughing money into this country. Most of it is intended to promote employment in small and medium-sized enterprises. By definition every Irish enterprise would qualify for assistance. Management support in small and medium-sized industries for research and development and marketing is vitally important. We must beware of using these funds for administrative growth, as has been happening. I do not want to criticise agencies because many of them have played a considerable role but if we do not have co-ordination between the IDA, CTT and AnCO we will not be able to maximise the creation of real jobs and real targets in new enterprises.
We must have strong and aggressive policies. The Taoiseach should talk directly to Mrs. Thatcher and tell her that she cannot put a chain around our necks, using the false and specious arguments about the budget which she has been allowed to get away with. He should tell her that what she claims to be her contribution to the European budget is as to 45 per cent the European own resources contribution. We must use every possible means to achieve again what was achieved in the sixties when we generated a sense of confidence, patriotism and respect for what we are. Following what the then Taoiseach acknowledged to be an era of depression and despair — the vanishing Irish — the Fianna Fáil Government realised this achievement. Nothing less than a comprehensive plan as a signpost to the people will achieve it now. Let us have an end to the inertia and analysis; let us get on with the job.
