Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 5 Jul 1944

Vol. 28 No. 21

Appropriation Bill, 1944 (Certified Money Bill) —Second and Subsequent Stages.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

An tAire Airgeadais (Seán T. O Ceallaigh)

Is dócha gur ar éigin is gá dhom a rá gur gnáth-chuid dár gcóras airgeadais an Bille Leithreasa, agus go mbíonn dhá phríomh-chuspóir aige. Is é an chéad cheann ná a údarú go dtabharfaí amach as an bPrímh-Chiste deontais i gcóir Seirbhísí Soláthair go bhfuil Dáil Éireann tar éis toiliú leo cheana. Ní leor aontú na Dála le Vóta, áfach, chun airgead dfháil as an bPrímh-Chiste, ní mór Acht chuige sin. Thug an tAcht PrímhChiste, 1944, údarás chun go dtabharfaí amach an riar sin de mhéid iomlán na Meastachán don bhliain airgeadais seo a dheon an Dáil mar íocaíocht i gcuntas, agus údaruíonn alt 1 den Bhille seo suim eile atá ag teastáil don bhliain seo do thabhairt amach.

Is é an dara cuspóir atá ag an mBille ná a leagadh síos go dleathach cé na seirbhísí gur ceadaithe an t-iomlán a tugtar amach a chaitheamh ortha, agus cén tsuim is ceadaithe a chaitheamh ar gach ceann díobh. Riartar na seirbhísí agus na suimeanna san i Sceideal don Acht, a bhíonn, mar sin, mar threoir ag an Árd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste agus é ag scrúdú cuntaisí féachaint an bhfuil airgead poiblí á chaitheamh mar ba thoil leis an Oireachtas nuair deonadh é. Tugtar "leithreasú" ar shuimeanna cinnte airgid a chur ar leataoibh ar an nós seo chun críoch áirithe a luaitear, agus is é seo is bun le teideal an Bhille.

Tugann an Bille an gnáth-údarás chun airgead dfháil ar iasacht agus chun fáltais áirithe de chuid na Rann Stáit d'úsáid mar Leithreasa-igCabhair.

The Appropriation Bill is, as I need hardly remind the House, a routine feature of our financial system and has two main purposes: firstly, to authorise the issue of money for the Supply Services out of the Central Fund; and, secondly, to appropriate moneys which have been issued from the Central Fund.

The House will have observed that Dáil Éireann recently completed its consideration of the Estimates for the current financial year for those public services which depend for their finances on moneys voted annually by the Oireachtas and which are known as the Supply Services. The passing of an Estimate by the Dáil, however, does not authorise the issue of money out of the Central Fund, which can only be done by legislation. The Central Fund Act, 1944, authorised the issue of the proportion of the total of the Estimates for the current financial year which had been granted on account by the Dáil; the further release from the Central Fund provided for in Section 1 of this Bill will make available the balance required for the year, excluding the amounts of the Supplementary Estimates for Unemployment Insurance and Unemployment Assistance and for Supplies passed last week by the Dáil, and such further Supplementary Estimates as it may be found necessary to introduce later in the year.

The term "appropriation" means the setting aside of definite sums of money to be spent on specified purposes. The necessity for appropriation is written into our Constitution by Article 11. The services on which may be spent the sums authorised to be issued from the Central Fund under the Central Fund Act, 1944, and under this Bill, and the amounts which may be spent on each such service, are accordingly laid down by the Bill, being set out in Schedule (B), which is, therefore, the headline by reference to which the Comptroller and Auditor-General scrutinises accounts to see whether public moneys are being applied in accordance with the wishes of the Oireachtas.

The Bill also makes the usual provision for borrowing by the Minister for Finance for the purpose of meeting demands on the Exchequer, the amount authorised to be borrowed being the same as the amount authorised to be issued from the Central Fund.

Mr. Counihan

The few subjects I have to raise on this Bill do not concern the Minister or his Department, but I trust he will bring them to the notice of the proper authority. The first question I want to raise relates to the Vote for the Gárda Síochána. I have nothing but admiration for the Civic Guards and the manner in which they discharge their duties on all occasions. For the past three or four years, however, cattle-stealing has been very rife throughout the country. It is a very difficult crime to detect. When the Guards do succeed and bring the culprits to justice, it is surprising the light sentences which these culprits receive. As I say, the cattle thief is very difficult to catch. There have been some cases where thieves committed this crime brazenly. I do not think it would be right to refer to any particular case or to any particular judge, but I understand I am in order in referring to the question of the sentences inflicted. When these people are convicted the sentences imposed are entirely too lenient. I suggest to the Minister that there should be some minimum penalty laid down for cattle-stealing and that the matter should not be left to the option of the judge when the thief is convicted in public court. Cattle-stealing is becoming a racket. The few cases which come before the courts only represent a fraction of the cases of cattle-stealing throughout the country. The condition of affairs will get worse if people, when they are convicted, are let off with a sentence of two or three months' imprisonment while they may have stolen cattle worth £150 or £200. It is an easy way of making money if they can get off with a mild sentence.

There is another matter that I want to raise. Recently, a case was brought to my notice of a neighbouring farmer, two of whose employees had met with accidents during the past 12 months, and when his insurance policy, under the Workmen's Compensation Act, fell due, his company refused to take him on. Now, if he had been a man who had been in collusion with his workmen, with a view to getting money out of the insurance company, one could quite understand that, but I know that the farmer concerned is a strictly honest man and that there could be no better employer so far as his workmen are concerned. It is a very serious matter for that farmer, or for any farmer, as far as that goes. Take the case of a farmer's employee who gets killed in an accident, and the case comes before the courts. If the farmer had not insured that employee, he might be completely wiped out as a result of the compensation he would have to pay to the widow and children of the deceased employee. There is another side to that. Supposing an employee was killed and that a certain amount of compensation was awarded by the court against the farmer, and that the farmer was insolvent, the dependents of the deceased employee would get no compensation because the farmer was insolvent and unable to pay. These are cases which the Minister should look into, or get the proper Department of the Government to look into. Even if it means legislation, still it should be looked into, and it should be done in the immediate future. The refusal to renew an insurance policy of that kind is a very serious matter for the employer concerned, and in the case of an insolvent employer, the dependents of the deceased person gets nothing. I think that most employers, with any means, take very good care that their employees are insured to the full amount under the Employers' Liability Act.

Another point which I want to raise is as follows. We have all read in the papers, from time to time, cases of defalcations and embezzlements by people who are handling public moneys. I see Senator Sweetman looking at me, but the first class of people I am going to bring in, in this connection, is the solicitors.

Mr. Hayes

Good enough.

Mr. Sweetman

I presume the Senator is aware that the solicitors are trying to get legislation enacted in regard to that.

Mr. Counihan

Well, whatever about solicitors, I say that all persons in the country who, in the course of their business, are handling money belonging to the public, should be compelled to take out a fidelity bond. Each and every one of them—whether solicitors, auctioneers, cattle salesmen, stock-brokers or others, without exception, who are handling money belonging to the public—should be compelled to take out a fidelity bond. In that connection, I suggest that if solicitors or other similar bodies were to start a non-profitmaking insurance company, on similar lines to those of the insurance company we in the cattle trade formed, the premiums for those fidelity bonds would be only 1/- or 2/-, and in a very short time there would be as much money in the pool, with the interest on it, as would pay the expenses.

Mr. Baxter

And the company directors also.

Leas-Chathaoirleach

I presume that Senator Counihan does not propose to dwell too long on this matter, because there is nothing about it in the Appropriation Bill.

Mr. Counihan

No, Sir, I do not propose to delay the House on this matter, and I only mentioned it because I think it is very serious. The amount of the defalcations is proportionately small, I admit, but even so you can see from the newspapers the amount of hardship and misery that these defalcations and embezzlements have caused to a great many people. At any rate, I think that the whole question is worth looking into and that it demands the attention of whatever Department of Government is responsible. I would ask the Minister to consider this matter. Some of these cases concern my own business, but they concern the general public also.

Mr. Baxter

I suppose that the collection of this money and the levying of it in the form of taxation is very important, indeed, and we spent a good deal of time yesterday and this morning on that question, but I think that a matter of even greater importance is the manner in which this money is spent. Indeed, a determining factor in the ability of the State to pay, and the ease with which the Minister can find this money, is the manner in which he spends it. So it is with all of us. If we spend recklessly, extravagantly or not wisely, I suppose we will reap the consequences. In this Bill we have, under a series of headings, the manner in which this money is disbursed. I shall not go into any general discussion on the sub-heads as a whole, and I am sure that that will console some Senators. I shall not even go back, for the edification of Senator Hawkins, to the manner in which our turf problem is being handled. The Senator may wish to come back to that himself, and I should like to hear his comments on what I said yesterday, but I want to direct attention to a matter that got some consideration in connection with the Finance Bill. I might have gone back on it to-day, but I did not wish to delay the House. I imagine that the Minister included myself as well as Senator Sir John Keane in his remarks to the effect that proposals had not been put up as to what might be done. Now, I could keep the House here for a considerable time talking on constructive proposals that have been put up by myself and other Senators. I think that the Minister will agree that it is not my habit to make proposals or suggestions unless I have some concrete ideas in my mind in regard to effecting them. I think that most of the debates in this House show that Senators on all sides are anxious to put forward constructive proposals, and such proposals will make all the difference as to the future of this country, if they are only implemented. Unless constructive proposals are to come from us in our day, and be operated with vigour and imagination, I am afraid that our future will not be too bright.

I am not in the least way a pessimist. I listened to Senator Paddy Kehoe here yesterday, and he indicated that if he could live for the day, that was as much as he was concerned about. Well, if we are to go along in that way, it would be a poor lookout for all of us. If a farmer went on that basis, his cow would not have many calves—any farmer will understand the significance of that. With regard to agriculture, whatever the Minister may think about the money spent and administered in and around the industry, I feel that more will have to be done in order to reap the benefits that should come to us from the amounts we have spent on it already.

I am not going to hold the House for any time on discussion of a question which was raised in the Dáil and raised repeatedly, by Deputy Hughes, to which the Minister did give some attention, namely, a survey of our soils. We are doing practically nothing in that regard. The Minister in a statement in the other House said that he had read a recent paper which was published on this subject and he showed a certain amount of interest in it. He went on to say that to start out at any time on an analysis of the soils of this country was a wise and proper thing but that it would take decades to get it completed. I should like to have it completed to-morrow because I feel we cannot make proper use of the soil of this country or we cannot use it to the maximum efficiency without knowing and understanding it. We have no organisation in existence that will discover for us how it is constituted and we are doing nothing to bring into existence an organisation to give us that service.

In the other House recently the Taoiseach also dealt with a Vote for the Emergency Research Bureau. In that bureau an organisation was set up to do certain things but not much, if anything at all, is being done by it for agriculture. That may not be a 100 per cent. correct presentation of the facts but very little is being done for agriculture. I have no doubt at all that very useful work is being done in other ways and that possibly the foundations are being laid for much more useful work in future. You could, however, never establish such an organisation if you had not some trained personnel already available. You had the nucleus of the organisation inasmuch as you had a certain number of young men who had been trained in a special way and you had older men, their teachers, who were able to collect these young men around them and to set them to do a specific job of work. They are learning things and making new discoveries every day, but if you had not got them trained, they could not make these discoveries nor could they use these discoveries to make further discoveries in the future.

In regard to our soils we have no organisation at all. Across the Border, the authorities are doing a good deal of this work and in Britain they are doing an immense amount of work in that way. In my opinion we are not going to get efficient production in this country until we know much more about our soil. Although I say it myself, I am not entirely a fool in regard to farming matters, but I frankly confess that I should like to know my own soils better. If, however, I want to know what I am to do in the treatment of the soil on my farm, in order to secure better yields from my crops, I cannot get the information from anybody. There is no bureau in existence to give me the kind of answer I want to get. I have reached the stage, in fact, where I do not go looking for answers, because I simply cannot get them. That is not satisfactory when you consider that this information is placed within the reach of farmers in other countries with whom we shall have to compete in the future in the markets of the world. I put it as a concrete and practical proposition that we should not have to wait decades to make these discoveries.

May I pass on to another point? Senator Buckley yesterday in the course of his speech gave it as his view that the Government and the State could do certain things for agriculture mainly along the lines of research into, and the treatment of, animal diseases. In that respect we are very backward indeed. I shall not dwell at length on this matter but it is absolutely essential that something should be done. In every country at present there is a great deal of room for research, discovery and treatment with regard to animal diseases. I do not know whether we are much more backward in this country in that respect than other countries, but definitely with regard to the question of tuberculosis in our herds we are not at all progressing. Conditions in the United States are amazingly forward in comparison with conditions here in that respect. I am not going to discuss that question further than to say that it is one thing that might receive attention, but it is only one thing, and if Senator Buckley and other people think that that is all the State can do for Agriculture I do not agree. I suggest to Senator Buckley that he might invest a little of his savings in the purchase of a farm of land. It is amazing what one can discover by getting down to practical work on a farm oneself rather than by jumping across the fence into another person's farm to talk to the farmer about agriculture. It is only when you go amongst your own herd of cattle and discover one day that a cow has mastitis or that something is wrong with some of your calves or with some other animals in your stock that you come up against a practical proposition. That makes you think of other diseases and the problem of their treatment and you begin to realise that the whole question of scientific research in regard to agriculture is not being thought about, much less being investigated.

Take the whole problem of plant life, the science of biology. If I were asked, I just could not tell what we are doing here in that regard. I just do not know as between the College of Science, the Albert College and University College, what is being done in regard to the study and improvement of plant life and the distribution of knowledge in that regard throughout the country. I see in the Estimate a sum of £70,000 for grants to University Colleges under a number of sub-heads. I realise of course that the Minister is definitely at a disadvantage in discussing this matter. I am at a disadvantage myself because I have to confess my own ignorance of the scientific side of the work. It is because I do not know as much about it as I would like, and because I know that other countries are learning and are far in advance of us in regard to this knowledge, that I want to see something done here. I remember that two or three years ago I made some inquiries as to the position in regard to afforestation in our universities and I was told that there were three students studying afforestation at the National University. The Minister can check up and see if that is the actual position this year but if we think of afforesting this country and of getting people with a trained mind and a scientific approach to the subject, under present conditions we must go off to Germany, Canada, Sweden or some of the afforested countries of the world to bring over experts to direct and dictate the policy of this country, when these experts really cannot understand this country and could not understand it except by living in it for a number of years and by having available any amount of scientific data which is not available at the moment. That is one aspect of the matter.

When we come to this problem of crop production, the growing of plants, grasses and everything pertaining to life on the earth, everything that is essential for the maintenance of man and beast, what are we doing, what do we propose to do, and what do we know about these subjects? We know the Russians have perfected a wheat which can ripen in the Arctic Circle. They have another type of wheat that comes up year after year without being re-sown. It is true the yields are low, but they have achieved that much. Then we have Americans who have trod the lands of the earth, over the highest mountains in the world, across the plains of Asia and all through Europe to bring home all sorts of grasses which they are grafting on to varieties to be produced under their own conditions of life, to see what they can do with them. I read recently of a type of grain which has been produced in the arid soils in the Middle West of America and which is now being transported for production in Central Asia.

The same thing is being done with regard to other types of grasses. I am over 50 years of age and I do not know of any new grasses which have been produced in this country in that time, nor do I know anybody in the Seanad who can give me the name of one. All sorts of new plants, clovers and various types of grasses are being grown in other countries, but we are doing practically nothing to bring those plants here and transplant them into our soil and climatic conditions and to build on them the kind of plant life we want. We have a few specialists here, but we have nothing like the numbers we ought to have, and I do not believe that we have even the type of people working on it which is essential if we are to get that higher intellectual concentration on the job, on this very highly skilled and highly technical work, which is necessary if we are to make a success of it. It is not necessary for me to stress the type of training, or even the temperament necessary to make a success of the production of new types of grasses, grains, flowering plants and shrubs, and I regret that we are doing so very little here in the way of administering the moneys which the Government gets into its hands in building up the research organisation which is necessary if we are to make progress in that direction.

I have said that I do not know what the position of our university is with regard to research into this type of work. I do not know the relationship between the College of Science, the University and the Albert College, Glasnevin, where we ought to start putting into operation the results of the discoveries made in the College of Science. I do not know what machinery exists for the purpose, or whether there is any coherent organisation for it at all. All I know is that we are doing all too little about it, and we as farmers are without the technical equipment which we ought to get, which we cannot build up for ourselves and which, even in groups, we can scarcely build up because all sorts of university buildings and such equipment are necessary. There is no other medium through which it can be created than the effort of the State. We have to start somewhere and I cannot see the greater productivity which I want to see from the fields of Ireland being attained otherwise than through the activities of research students who up to the present are not being applied to the job at all.

There is at present no organisation at all so far as I know to do anything like that. It is true that a certain amount of work on a very restricted scale is being done in the Albert College, with regard to the production of certain types of grasses, and in that connection, while I do not know very much about it, may I say that we have a professor with a small staff there engaged in a certain type of work? Wheat and other grains are being grown. We have experience down the country of the fruits of the labours of these people and we are convinced that these people have not got at their disposal the facilities necessary to do for us the work which we want done. My personal experience is that over the 20 or so years of the State's existence, with all the changes of Government, and so on, the people dealing with the breeding of our grains have not yet produced an oat grain which will stand on a great many of the soils of the country.

I am convinced that they are being asked to do the impossible. One man with a few assistants is expected to do as much as a big organisation in Britain or the United States, or we are waiting perhaps to see what the specialists in these countries will discover and then try to use their discoveries in our conditions which are completely unlike theirs. I regard it as a very essential matter. With regard to the point raised by Senator O Buachalla yesterday as to animal diseases, I think that, to a certain extent, that is highly problematical. There are authorities in the world like Sir Albert Howard and others who believe that if plant life were more vigorous and healthy, and developed in the manner in which it might be developed by scientific research, many of the animal diseases of which we know to-day might never exist at all. Before I treat diseases in animals, I should like to see what I could do about treating the soil and the plants growing in it. It is necessary to discover your soil constituents first, and nobody in this country is bothering to do a thing about it.

I do not know whether the Minister will regard that as a constructive proposition, but it is my line of thought. The Minister may or may not be aware that in Britain there is an immense new library being built up around the soil and its life. To me that is very interesting indeed. I was recently reading a book by Clifton Reynolds, a gentleman who went out and did what I suggest Senator O Buachalla should do. He bought a farm and started in to work it, without any previous knowledge of farming. He has written three books, and I take this quotation from his most recent book. Speaking of Britain, he says:—

"It seemed odd to me that after so much time the oldest of industries should be so backward in scientific knowledge. I could not help comparing farming with other industries known to me—engineering, pottery, textiles, furniture, aluminium and so on."

I am sure that will strike Senator O'Donnell as being very true.

I should like to conclude my remarks on that note because it is in tone and harmony with my feelings about life in general, but, in dealing with Government administration, one has to advert to many things and sometimes to things that are not too pleasant. I do not know how the Minister may have regarded my remarks up to this, but I am now about to be more unpleasant, without any great desire to be unpleasant. I want to bring to the notice of the Minister a matter which to me is an angle of administration which none of us can commend. It is a matter over which we cannot easily stand, and I do not think the Minister would like to stand over it. I am raising it because I want to have the Minister's disapproval of it, because I think that in its way and in its sphere, it is just as pertinent to our future and our aims in the future as anything I have said. I have here a copy of my local paper, The Anglo-Celt, of 17th of last month. There is an advertisement in it headed: “Notice” which runs:—

"Ballyhaise Fianna Fáil.

Annual letting of Bow Meadow Bog will take place on Monday night at the post office at 9 p.m. Banks not claimed and paid for will be re-let.

Secretary."

What is the significance of that? Bow Meadow bog is portion of the State farm at Ballyhaise, County Cavan. That portion of the farm has been separated from the farm proper, and handed over to the local Fianna Fáil club for letting. I do not want to be in the least bit offensive with the Minister about this. He can see the significance of it as well as I can, and I do not want to dwell on it unduly.

Mr. Hawkins

I am sure the Senator is very familiar with this particular area, and I should like to ask him whether any other organisation in that district applied to the proper authority for the taking over and working of that bog?

Mr. Baxter

The Minister will be able to tell the Senator that. I am not in the least bit concerned with that matter. The point is that no part of the property of this State ought to be passed over to a political organisation to administer. I think that would be an intolerable situation to permit to develop here. It is something we all should condemn. If we allow that kind of thing to happen, it is useless to profess our desire for clean administration under which no man is above the law and where all people are treated equally. I can say further that I know the practice has been that people who want bog have to pay 1/- to the Fianna Fáil club before getting the right to go on the bank. I do not know what Senator Hawkins thinks about that, but I would not stand for it from any political organisation. There are half a dozen ways in which the land of the State could be distributed and administered. Any of them would be much more efficient; any of them would be regarded as much more impartial, and all of them would be better for the moral tone of this State. Once started on that line, where are you going to stop? We might as well administer the Old Age Pensions Act or the Unemployment Insurance Act through a political organisation. The advertisement says: "Banks not claimed and paid for will be re-let." I have not troubled greatly to inquire into the details. I might have got any amount of information with regard to the amount of arrears due and all that kind of thing. To me, all that does not matter. The point I am making is that it is wrong to establish the principle that you can only get a bit of bog in this country if you pay a subscription to the local Fianna Fáil club. I honestly think Senator Hawkins would not stand for that. Looked at from the proper viewpoint, it will be realised that that line of action has demoralising effects which will last far into the years when we have passed off the political stage of this country. I am calling the Minister's attention to this matter in the hope that not alone will he take steps to put it right but that he will see to it that in every branch of administration for which he is responsible the rights which ought to be enjoyed by every citizen on an equal basis will not be reserved for those who belong to a certain political organisation.

Mr. O'Donnell

One advantage of a debate on the Appropriation Bill is that it creates a sort of "free for all", and members of this Assembly have an opportunity of dealing with all aspects of the national life as affected by the payments made through the various Departments. It was my unhappy experience last year that I was creating a precedent in asking the Minister to look with greater indulgence upon schemes for the more intensive cultural development of the country. He humorously reproved me afterwards for complaining, on the one hand, of the high cost of running the house, and, on the other hand, asking for more expenditure. I did not complain even then of the high cost of running the house. I think that the amount expended by the State on cultural development is not as much as it should be. The only portion of the Vote that gives results of which we are all aware is the £1,000 voted to the Abbey Theatre. There are other grants made, of course, to the National Gallery and to other cultural societies, under one heading or another. The Minister said last year that the amount expended on cultural development here was reasonable. In reply, I say that it all depends upon what one would define as "reasonable". I would hazard the guess that a total sum of £50,000 was not expended by the State on what I might describe as purely cultural development. I am raising that matter again because I should like to see a greater development of, say, the work of the Manuscripts Commission, the work of geological survey and the work of historical societies. Those are not matters which cost the country a whole lot of money, and an investment on those lines would give results which could not be valued in terms of money.

Last year I asked the Minister to consider the establishment of a civil list for necessitous authors and others —people who in one sense or another had given good service to this country. I am quite aware of the fact that the Minister is in entire sympathy with the idea but has found it impossible to accept it owing to the difficulty of deciding who would be entitled to benefit. Since I spoke on this matter to the Minister last year the deaths have occurred of two Irish authors, a man and a woman, whose literary merits cannot be disputed by anybody. They gave their whole lives, in one way or another, to the national cause, and both died practically destitute. No later than this week I met a man in the streets of this city whose contributions to Irish music will probably be remembered for all time. He has not qualifications probably to earn a living otherwise, but that man is practically starving. I do say that, while I appreciate the Minister's difficulties in respect of the distribution of such a civil list, at least a start might be made in that direction, and that, where the Minister and his officials can be convinced that there is dire need in the case of individuals, something should be done to help them. Such persons may be adding to the cultural value of this State. In the worldly sense, they may not be practical people, but I think that the nation owes a duty to them. I suggest that we have a national duty towards those people who died within the last year. They were in dire need, and they gave the best that they were capable of giving to their country. I know that the Minister will not challenge my statement on that. I know that he is sympathetic, and I again make the appeal that both he and the Department would re-examine this whole question, and see whether it is not possible that such people as I speak of would get succour and support from the State.

One of the advantages as well as one of the disadvantages that arise from the bringing forward of this Appropriation Bill is that it gives us at least the opportunity of paying tribute to the services which the various Departments have, in our opinion, rendered to the country during the past year. I would like first of all, if I may, to refer to the question of marine shipping. I should like to pay tribute to those who have been engaged in the shipping and transportation of goods from foreign countries to this country during the past 12 months. I should like to pay tribute to those unknown people who man our ships and who have brought goods from far and strange places to us in the midst of the greatest dangers. I should also like to pay tribute to those who direct that company. My only regret is that when, many years ago, some of us went to this Government and to its predecessor, they did not take our advice then. If they had, the position of the shipping line which is being successfully operated to-day would have been greatly strengthened. I am sure that I am making no mistake when I say that if either Government had the foresight in those far-off years to discover what they discovered later—that there was a necessity and a purpose for an Irish shipping company—the ships which the company is running to-day would be much better than they are, and many of the inconveniences that we are suffering as well as the failure of those ships occasionally to sail, would have been obviated. I think the least tribute that we can pay to our Irish sailors, and particularly to the men who man those ships, is to praise them for what they have done and thank them for it, because in many ways their courage and perseverance in bringing goods to our shores from far-away places have averted crises which would create a tremendous amount of unemployment in the country. My colleague, Senator Brennan, is much more closely associated with marine shipping than I am, and could probably speak with greater authority. I think, however, that whenever we get the opportunity of paying a tribute to any Department of State the least we ought to do is to pay that tribute, no matter what other differences we may have.

Senator Counihan, when speaking, made reference to the question of theft, especially in relation to cattle. I think we must all deplore the terrific increase there has been in thieving generally, and particularly in the city. I think it is no exaggeration to say that during the past year most of the big stores, warehouses and factories, and other places of business, have been entered and goods taken from them. The lack of civic righteousness that is to be observed is not to be placed at the door of any Department of State. I can say from my own personal experience, and that of others in this city, that we are all under a debt of gratitude to the members of the detective force for the manner in which they discharge the duties entrusted to them. They are extremely active and efficient in apprehending those who engage in thieving of all descriptions. Personally, I have found the members of the detective force both courteous and efficient. I am referring in particular to those engaged in the detection of crime. Thanks to their ability, the thief who succeeds in getting away with a burglary in this city at the present time is a very clever man indeed. I think it is only right that we should compliment the members of the detective force for their ability in tracing those people.

Last year, when the Estimate for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs was under discussion, complaints were made about the telephone service. The Minister at the time promised us that there would be a betterment of that service. Despite the fact that a new exchange has been opened since then, I am afraid that any of us who have occasion to dial "O" to make an inquiry or a call, find that the promises made by the Minister on that occasion have not been fulfilled. I know, of course, that this is not a subject with which the Minister for Finance is intimately concerned, but I hope that he will convey to the Minister of that Department the dissatisfaction that still exists amongst people who use the telephone and have to dial "O". On the last occasion the Minister said that, as a result of tests which had been carried out, the average time that elapsed between dialling "O" and getting a reply was ten seconds.

I had the experience myself recently of having to wait two minutes 15 seconds, and I reported that to the supervisor. Maybe it was that they knew who was calling and wanted to irritate me. A delay of that kind would be a very serious matter if the call were for a public service ambulance to take a person to hospital. The person might have died and received eternal judgment before the terminal operator would have replied. The telephone service is a highly important one and should be highly efficient. There is no excuse why it should not be highly efficient except, perhaps, that the service is understaffed. If that is so, then that position should be corrected. This is a service which affects the people's attitude towards Government policy more perhaps than any other. The telephone service is one that can cause more annoyance to people than perhaps any other State service. It makes people swear and curse at a Government which gives them such an inefficient service. I hope that something will be done to improve it.

With regard to wireless broadcasting, I am glad that the Minister has acted upon the suggestions that were made here last year as to the necessity of setting up an advisory council in connection with broadcasting generally. Broadcasting seems to be nobody's child, or nobody's baby. There is not a single person that I have met that has not, from time to time, told me how the broadcasting service could be run. I would like to pay tribute to the broadcasting service. Nobody, except those who have no intimate knowledge of the difficulties which the broadcasting authorities have to face from time to time, will cavil at the quality, generally speaking, of the programmes which are now being broadcast from the Dublin station.

There are two or three items of outstanding ability to which everyone listens on Sunday nights. At the same time, while I am fully aware of the difficulties, I would appeal that more imagination be used inside the station. I do not know how we are going to get loose from the bureaucratic control of the broadcasting service, nor do I claim that any failure on the part of the service is due to bureaucratic control; but, so far as there is bureaucratic control, I would suggest a loosening of that control as far as it applies to the type of programme sent out by the station. I am asking for something very difficult, and do not want to be in any way niggardly in my appreciation of the work being done or my appraisal and knowledge of the difficulties to be faced.

Senator Baxter mentioned the Emergency Research Bureau in connection with investigations of soil. From the industrial angle, we are more than grateful for the work the Bureau has done and we appreciate the work it is doing. We hope that work will be extended. When I mentioned it here on the last occasion, the attitude taken by some Senators was that that work was of a sort which industrialists should do for themselves. I would like to point out to such Senators that the people who pay most of the taxes are industrialists and it is the least service to which they are entitled. As a general rule, if industrialists bring along any matter to the Bureau and receive help, they pay for it.

There is another service to which I would like to pay tribute, as I am more or less in close contact with it— the Gaeltacht Services. Their factories are located in outlying districts, in places where ordinary commercial enterprises would not take the risk of inaugurating industry. It is probably because of that that the Government has decided, in regard to the wide places of Donegal, Kerry and Mayo, to take a chance and establish industries, in order to keep the local people employed and stop emigration from those parts. So far as the principle of employment goes, it has proved of great value to those employed as well as to those requiring goods of a certain nature. The Gaeltacht Services are giving excellent service, producing excellent goods and marketing them in a successful manner. Until such time as others are prepared to take the same risk and go to the same places to start factories, I am not going to cavil at the fact that the Government is a competitor with me in business. The Gaeltacht Services have done very good work, and if there is any kind of profit to the Department concerned, it will help the Department of Finance; while those who buy the goods are receiving goods which are beautiful, useful and good. The work includes kelp development, toys, homespuns, etc., and has been one of the highly commendable experiments of this State.

With regard to the Office of Public Works, I would like to make a plea that, where possible, the older houses coming into the board's possession be spared. I can foresee some difficulties occasionally in regard to preservation where certain property comes under the control of the board. We had a case some time ago when the house of a certain lady, a house which had historical and cultural associations with modern Ireland, was destroyed. It is a pity that that was done. I would suggest that such houses be kept in being, even at some little extra cost to the State. At a later period, they might be used as historical museums or, better still, as agricultural stations to enable our people to make more scientific advancement in the use of the land.

I am amazed to see that the amount voted for Forestry shows a reduction on the previous year. If there was one Vote where there would be general approval for an increase, it would be Forestry. People much more expert than I—such as John Mackay—have been pointing out the tremendous increase which could be made in afforestation. I am sorry to see that the Vote this year is even less than last year and I hope there will be some explanation regarding that.

With regard to Vote 60, I am sorry that the findings of the Commission on Patents and Trade Marks have not resulted in a change in the Department. Last year I pointed out that the giving of trade marks to firms controlled from outside this country made it hard for struggling Irish industries to exist. I pointed out that Irish firms, Irish-controlled and Irish-owned, had been refused trade marks exactly similar to those subsequently granted to firms not under Irish control. For the sake of the further development of our industries, I hope that the findings of the commission will be put into effect as soon as possible.

I was not here in time to hear Senator Sir John Keane's solution of our industrial problems, but I am entirely in agreement with him regarding the necessity for a bureau of standards. It was not this year nor last year that the Federation of Irish Industries asked that such a bureau be set up. We have constantly asked for it and I hope that next year's Estimate will contain some provision for such a bureau being formed in this country.

Pádraic O Máille

Tá uimhir bheag daoine sa tír seo agus níl mórán le labhairt ar a son. Is iad na daoine atá i gceist agam múinteoirí scoile atá ag imeacht ar íocaíocht na sean-aoise le blianta anuas. Bhí aithne agus eolas agam ar go leor de na daoine seo le dhá fhichead bliain anuas agus is féidir liom a rá go mba daoine iad a rinne sár-obair ar son na Gaeilge. Ní mar gheall ar an íocaíocht a bhí siad ag dul amach ag múnadh na teangan ach le grá don teangaidh agus le grá don tír. Is féidir liom a rá, ina theannta sin, go ndearna cuid de na daoine seo gníomhartha maithe fearúla le linn cogadh na saoirse anso in Éirinn.

Daoine eile a bhí i seirbhísí poiblí, fuair siad san a dhá oiread a gcuid tuarastal ach ní bhfuair na daoine atá i gceist agam ach leath an tuarastail a bhí ag dul dóibh—agus tuarastal ríbheag a bhí ag cuid acu. Creidim nach bhfuil faoi láthair ag cuid de na daoine seo a bhfuil mé ag caint fúthu ach £60 sa mbliain agus daoine iad a rinne an oiread sin ar son na tíre.

Ní lán-chothrom gur pinsean chomh beag sin bheadh dhá fháil acu. Tá a fhios agam go maith gur ceist achrannach í seo. Bhí lúb ar lár blianta fada ó shoin sa réiteach a bhí déanta i gcás na múinteoirí scoile.

D'iarrfainn ar an Aire agus ar an Rialtas féachaint le cothrom agus ceart a thabhairt do na daoine seo. Níl mórán daoine i gceist agam agus ni go leor airgid a thógfadh sé cothrom a thabhairt dóibh.

Mr. Sweetman

There is one matter in connection with the Appropriation Bill, and the Department of Justice, in reference to which I have given notice that I proposed to raise a question to-day. In 1937, a new set of rules and a new set of regulations were brought into existence in connection with the work of the Land Registry. As the House is aware, the Land Registry was set up in 1891, and various fees were, from time to time, charged under it, but there was a provision in the Act that the fees so charged must not in any circumstances exceed the cost of the Land Registry. Nothing was provided, and nothing has been provided since, that the fees charged must equal the cost but it has apparently now been decided that that is to be the case. Prior to 1937 the fees were fixed in 1918, and naturally enough, after the passage of 20 years, it was considered in 1937 that those fees should be varied and obviously increased to meet increased charges. But the whole basis at the bottom of the 1937 rules was to try to make it easier, simpler and cheaper for the farmers of Ireland, who had bought out under the Land Acts, to have their titles put properly in order, not only in regard to the methods to be adopted but also in regard to solicitors' charges. They were in some cases substantially reduced for the purpose of making it easier and simpler for the future. The solicitors' profession accepted the reductions, believing it was to be for the betterment of tenant purchasers that machinery should be adopted as a result of which, as soon as possible, all the holdings in the country would be registered in the technical term "free of equities".

Now, in 1944, new fees have been inaugurated, and my objection is not only to the amount of these fees, but also to the fact that they have struck at one of the principles in the 1937 Rules, that there is no discrimination made between certain transactions, and no effort made in the new scale of fees, as was made in the 1937 Regulations, to encourage the system by which tenant purchasers could have their titles of registration free of equities at the smallest possible cost. I am not going to weary the House with details about the exact fees that are being charged, but there are a few cases that I must bring to the Minister's notice, because without their incidence it is not fair to expect him to deal with the matter. The ordinary copy of a folio which has to be got day in and day out, used to cost about 2/6, but now, as a result of the new scale, that charge has been doubled to a minimum of 5/-. Recertifying a copy means, without any other entry, simply putting on a stamp, and this used to be got for 1/-, but now there has to be a revenue stamp of 1/- and an additional fee of 2/6. To discharge equities on a holding, value for £1,000, if that holding was registered 30 years ago it used to cost about 12/-, but it now costs £5 10s. 0d. Even on a bigger holding, though perhaps they are better able to afford it, say, costing £4,000, the fee is 15 guineas as against £1 2s. 0d. On a £500 scale, which is not very big, the fee has been increased to £2 16s. 0d. from 30/-. A little case came to my notice the other day from Kildare. A poor woman had a small holding containing less than three-quarters of an acre, and she agreed to sell it for £15. The necessary steps under the old regulations that had to be taken would have meant that the Government would have got 17/- out of the £15. I think that was enough; but, under the new regulations, out of the £15 that poor woman will have to pay 38/-. There is no provision in the regulations to meet cases like that.

When this matter was raised in the other House the Minister's whole case was that the increased cost of the Land Registry was the reason for the increased fees. Previously in May last a question was asked in the other House as to the number on the staff of the Land Registry on certain comparative periods. On January 1st, 1937, when the previous rules were brought into force, the total staff in the Land Registry was 104, and on January 1st, 1944, when the new regulations were brought in, when the cost had been more than doubled, the staff in the Land Registry was only 100, actually four less than on the 1st January, 1937. I admit at once that certain staff were added in the last six weeks, but that does not account for the very great difference in the fees between 1937 and now. I suggest to the Minister that in the first case the incidence of the fees and the scheme now proposed are not as satisfactory as the scheme proposed in 1937. In the second place, charges such as are to be levied on the public under the new scheme are excessive. I want it to be clearly understood that this does not in any way affect the solicitor's profession, as such, because it is an out-of-pocket expense which is passed on to one's client. It does not affect me, I am merely the tax-gatherer for the Minister but it is going to be a very distinct drain, especially in the small cases. In estimating the cost of the Land Registry, it is only fair to attribute some portion of the stamp duty which the Minister already gets on transfers, and which is not accounted for in these fees, to the keeping up of a Land Registry. If that were not so, there would be no effective check on the Minister getting his pound of flesh under the heading of stamp duties and his pound of flesh under the heading of fees. This question has nothing to do with politics but it is one which will materially and prejudicially affect tenant purchasers all over the country. I suggest to the Minister that he should reconsider it as soon as possible in collaboration with those who are in touch with the everyday working of the Land Registry from the point of view of the public.

As I am speaking about the Department of Justice, there is another matter which I should like to mention. I refer to a practice which I have heard about on more than one occasion recently and one which I am confident the Minister would not stand over for a moment. I am sure he will take an early opportunity of giving public expression to his disapproval of it. In certain parts of the country, one or two district justices have adopted the habit, when they come into a town where their court is to be held, of calling the local superintendent of the Gárda and, possibly, the State solicitor into conference in their private room before the court cases are heard in public. I want to make quite clear that I do not suggest for a moment that any superintendent or any State solicitor would improperly advise, or has improperly advised, district justices as to the course they should take in regard to any case coming on for hearing. But I suggest that the practice is one which is open to abuse. Quite apart from that, we must, to quote the President of the High Court, make certain that not only is justice done but that justice appears to be done. No person convicted in a district court as the result of a prosecution by the Gárda or the State solicitor would feel, if he knew that the superintendent and the State solicitor had been in consultation with the justice, that he had got a proper and fair deal, even though I am sure that he would have got it. That might lead to a very nasty interpretation being put on the work of that court and would mean that, in the long run, the court might not hold the high reputation it has got in the country.

Senator Counihan referred to the question of fidelity bonds for solicitors and other persons holding moneys belonging to the public. I do not propose to refer to that now except to say that there will, probably, be a Bill before the Oireachtas in due course in which the question of such regulation for the solicitors' profession will be considered—and rightly considered. The sooner it is dealt with the better for solicitors. In New Zealand they have such a scheme as Senator Counihan referred to—a guarantee fund operated by the Minister for Finance.

Senator Baxter mentioned a matter which was referred to at length last year on this Bill—the question of soil surveys. The Minister for Agriculture then defended himself for not immediately introducing a soil survey by saying that it would take a very considerable time to assemble and train the staff necessary to deal with it. The country in which the most complete soil survey has been undertaken is Sweden. They made that soil survey in Sweden with only six trained field operators, and I do not think that it ought to be beyond our power to obtain, without any notice, six trained field operators.

A question which is worrying a certain number of people in areas where there has been, up to now, little tillage is the proper use of agricultural machinery. When the last Appropriation Act was before us, I mentioned a case to the Minister in which a man who was given a tractor under the allocation scheme of the Department refused to hire out that tractor to his needy neighbours. The Minister was to look into that case but the fact remains that that man still refuses to hire but his tractor. He will not allow that machinery to be used to help neighbouring farmers in their job of producing food for our people. This man, when he has finished with work on his own land, leaves the tractor in a shed. It is not a question of any doubt as to payment for the use of the tractor. Lest there should be any such question, I got one man who needed the tractor to go for it with the money in his hand. There is an Emergency Powers Order which enables the Minister to take back machinery which is in short supply so as to ensure that it is used for the general good. I suggest to the Minister that that Emergency Powers Order should be availed of and that steps should be taken to force people who are unsocial, unneighbourly and unhelpful in the national effort to that degree to toe the line.

Liam O Buachalla

Tá roinnt pointí ann a mba mhaith liom tagairt a dhéanamh dóibh. Chím ar an mBille beart ar £70,000 a thabhairt do na hOllscoileanna. Ba mhaith liom a rá go gceapaim go bhfuil an t-am tagtha go gcuirfimís i gcéill do na hollscoileanna go mba cheart dóibh níos mó a dhéanamh i gcúrsaí na Gaeilge agus i gcúrsaí náisiúntachta ná tá á dhéanamh acu le tamall. Is ball d'Ollscoil na hÉireann mé féin agus tá mé chomh dílis don Ollscoil sin le duine ar bith, ollamh nó céimí. Ach ní thig liom a rá go bhfuil mé sásta go bhfuil an Ollscoil ag déanamh an oiread agus ba chóir agus an oiread agus a dfhéadfaidís a dhéanamh i gcúis náisiúnta na tíre. Tá a fhios acu céard é cuspóir an Rialtais agus cuspóir an phobail i dtaobh na Gaeilge. Mura mbíonn na ceárdchumainn ag obair mar is cóir ar mhaithe leis na daoine, cuireann an Stát isteach orthu. Mura n-oibríonn lucht tionnscail agus lucht talmhaíochta i gcoimhréir le polasaí an Stáit, cuirtear isteach orthu, agus is ceart sin a dhéanamh. Measann lucht ollscoile nach ceart cur isteach orthu, ach tá sé in am a chur in iúl dóibh nach déithe iad. Tá súil agam go dtiúrfar aghaidh ar an gceist go luath.

Ba mhaith liom a iarraidh ar an Aire iarracht a dhéanamh le feabhas éigin a chur ar obair foillseoireachta leabhra Gaeilge. Ní féidir liom gan na daoine, an Rúnaí, na hEagarthóirí agus a lucht cúnta, atá sa nGúm a mholadh as ucht a gcuid oibre ach is baolach go bhfuil an cúnamh gann: teastaíonn tuilleamh eagarthóirí agus teastaíonn, dar liom, go ndealófaí brainse na bhfoillsiuchán Gaeilge amach ó gach Roinn eile agus Roinn neamh-spleách ar fad a dhéanamh dhi. Ní ceist ar bheagán tábhachta í seo. Tá múinteoirí ag obair ar a ndícheall ar fud na tíre leis an oideachas a thabhairt i nGaeilge. Ba chóir dúinn cuidiú leo. Ba chóir dúinn údair a chur ag obair le leabhra a ullmhú. Ba chóir an eagarthóireacht a dhéanamh ar na leabhra sin gan aon mhoill agus ansin ba chóir féachaint chuige go gcuirfí leabhra ar fáil do na múinteoirí láithreach. Ba mhaith liom, ar chaoi ar bith, go ndéanfaí machtnamh ar an moladh atá i gceist agam. Dá mbeadh an Gúm neamh-spleách, saor, le deighleáil aisti féin leis na búdair agus leis na clódóirí, is sásúla go mór fada d'éireodh le obair an Ghúim.

An chéad rud eile atá ar intinn agam a lua, baineann sé le cúrsaí sláinte poiblí. Tá mór-chuid daoine sa tír a bhfuil faitíos orthu go bhfuil galraí contúirteacha áirithe á dtabhairt isteach—ón mBreatain Mhóir go mórmhór. Ba mhaith liom go bhfeachfadh an tAire chuige go gcuirfear scrúdú dochtúra ar na daoine atá ag filleadh ar ais go dtí an tír seo. Níl Sasana sásta ár muintir sinne a leigean isteach go Sasana nó Albain gan bheith sásta go bhfuil siad slán ó ghalraí áirithe. Ba chóir duinn féachaint chuige go mbeidh muide slán ar an gcaoi chéanna. Má ghlacann an tAire comhairle le dochtúirí agus údair eile ar fud na tíre, sílim go mbeidh dóthain fianaise le fáil aige gur ceist í sin nach ceart faillí a dhéanamh inti. Fágfaidh mé mar sin é.

The only other point to which I wish to refer arises out of a comment made by Senator Baxter with regard to planning in agriculture. I do not want to be taken as being a defender of the Department of Agriculture—I think they can very well fend for themselves and defend themselves when it comes to a matter of criticism—I think, however, that we ought to be a little bit more objective when we come to consider their work and when we come to consider the work of scientific and educational institutions that are doing a good deal of excellent work in this matter of agriculture. It is true to say that a good deal of scientific research work has been done. The journal of the Department for years contains a number of excellent papers and reports on many aspects of agricultural research. These papers, as I have seen them, cover almost every aspect of agriculture—grasses, stock-feeding, cereals and roots of various kinds, stockbreeding, and so on. Whether they are doing as much as one would wish, is another question. What worries me about it all is this, that so much of the work they are doing is not being taken up and followed by the farming community. I have seen, practically in every county in the State, model silos erected by the Department and I have seen, to some extent, the results of their experiments. While I am pleased to see the number of silos that are being erected, of late, through Government grants, I am to an extent disappointed that the excellent results that are shown through the work of the Department in charge of the demonstration silos are not being followed as they should be. As I see it, there is a great deal of excellent precept and a great deal of excellent example being made available to the agricultural community. I find it hard to argue for a great deal more in the way of research until I see some more definite move being made by the agricultural community itself to take advantage of what is already being done, especially work of such a practical nature as has been done so far.

With regard to a soil survey, I am at one with those who argue for it. One of the first things I did when I came to the Seanad was to make a rather vigorous plea for such a survey. When we were discussing post-war policy, I argued the need for preserving the home market, and were planning for the growing of wheat, a ten-year post-war plan, I argued that we should have a soil survey. At the same time, I know that there is a service of this type, though on a small scale, already available to the farming community that is not being utilised to the extent that it should be. I am not aware that that service has been dropped—I mean the soil-testing section at Glasnevin, formerly run by the Department. The last information I had about it was that, as regards the number of people sending in samples of soil for testing, they were comparatively few and far between. One would like to see a service like that being utilised to a much greater extent. If it were being utilised, one would feel a great deal of hope, and one would feel fully justified in pleading for a much greater expenditure along such lines. That is not to say that I do not agree with those who have suggested that we should undertake this soil survey as soon as we possibly can. I believe the thing is urgent. I also believe it could be done within a reasonable time. I believe it could be done within, say, five years, if we tackled it with energy.

The only other point I might refer to is this: that signs are to be noted recently that the farming community is beginning to feel that it itself must do a great deal more than it has been doing in this matter of agricultural reorganisation. Heretofore, the whole idea was that it was the Department that must do this and the Department that must do that. One of the things that gives me most hope is the extent to which farmers are now turning in to the vocational schools all over the country for advice with regard to seeds, times of sowing, and manures, and many other matters. The House is aware that 12 months ago the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Education agreed that there must be a great deal more co-operation between their respective committees throughout the country, and I should like to take this opportunity again to congratulate both Departments on the excellent joint memorandum that has been issued to agricultural committees and to vocational education committees.

I would like to commend this to the country in general that in County Wexford the Vocational Education Committee and the Agricultural Committee have decided to establish a joint committee to work the scheme outlined in this memorandum as far as they possibly can. I think that with goodwill and co-operation on both sides we can look forward with greater confidence to the farming community itself doing something more than heretofore in their particular industry. Tá rudaí eile ann, go deimhin, go mba mhaith liom tagairt a dhéanamh dóibh ach sílim go bhfuil mo dhóthain ráite agam don iarracht so.

Mr. Hawkins

I do not wish to detain the House. We have had rather a lengthy debate on Finance for the last two days. I would, however, like to avail of the invitation issued by Senator Baxter to come to the bog. Senator Baxter appears to have been very annoyed because a Fianna Fáil cumann, it seems, took over a portion of a bog and proposed to have it allocated to the people of the district in order to enable them to produce turf for their own use. Senator Baxter makes a case and says that no political organisation should do such a thing. Of course, there does not happen to be any political organisation in this country except Fianna Fáil because, no matter what other Party one may belong to, it seems that it is not politics at all. If there was one thing more than another which brought down the last Government it was political preference for employment and for many of the things that were in the gift of the Government. We remember a time when, in order to secure employment on any Government scheme, it was necessary to belong to or have association with a certain political Party. That has vanished and I hope it will not return. Speakers on the Opposition Benches from time to time suggest that everything that is in the gift of the present Government goes to supporters of Fianna Fáil. I only wish we could get those people to come to meetings of our organisation and try to convince the members of our organisation that such is the case. They would be much better able to convince them that it is not the case and that, taking all in all, preference was given more often than not to the Opposition Party. However, I do not wish to go into that.

In regard to the particular bog mentioned by Senator Baxter I would point out that there have been requests for turf development, and if in the district of Ballyhaise there was no other organisation prepared to acquire and to work that bog and to make it available to the people of the district then I say that the Fianna Fáil Cumann which did that deserve the best praise and credit of the people there. We have done much the same thing, not through a political organisation, but through another committee, in Galway. We have taken over bogs from the county council and the Land Commission. We have made these bogs available to members of the L.S.F. and the L.D.F. and to the unemployed. The members of that committee believe that in doing that they were undertaking a good national work, making turf available to people who could not otherwise get it. I believe it was the same spirit that prompted the members of the Ballyhaise Fianna Fáil Cumann.

Yesterday evening, I think, Senator Baxter also referred to the quality and quantity of turf produced for the last few years and was anxious that I should give my opinion on the subject. That is a very big question which would take up much more time than I should like to devote to it this evening. In order to get a proper picture we must go back to the position as it was at the commencement of the emergency. We know that when we were advocating the initiation and development of turf schemes in this country we were accused of throwing the people's money into the bog holes. We know that in that matter, just as in every other part of our policy, we were met with serious opposition. A good deal of work had been done but not sufficient to produce as much turf as would compensate for the loss of coal supplies. People will say: "Why do not the Government have good turf produced?" People who talk in that way know absolutely nothing about bogs and never spent a day cutting turf. Anyone who did knows quite well that you must have a certain amount of drainage work carried out and that it will take from three to five years before a bog is properly drained and you can get a fairly good quality of turf out of it, except perhaps in some mountainy districts.

I agree with Senator Baxter in one of his statements and that is, that it was a mistake ever to have sold turf by weight. But, there again, there would be difficulties in grading it which it would be hard to overcome. If we could overcome them, however, it would be a much better system than selling turf by weight. Buying and selling turf by weight was something new in connection with turf production and should not have been adopted. But, having been adopted, we have to make the best of it now. I am not at all satisfied that sufficient efforts are being made even now to produce all the turf we could produce. We could get more turf produced if we went seriously about organising the workers to do the job. I know that in Galway and in other towns there are workers who could be organised and who are capable of cutting, and willing to cut turf if the people in charge of those schemes were prepared to organise them and help them to do the job. By not availing of these workers, we are losing in two ways, first, by their receiving unemployment assistance, and, secondly, by not having the turf produced. These men may not be able to cut as much turf as men who have spent years on the bogs. But, taking into consideration the money they are receiving in unemployment assistance and putting that against the amount of turf that they would produce, I think one would balance the other. You will have, at any rate, a certain amount of turf produced and you will be making these people more useful and healthier people than they are at present.

Provision is made in this Bill for certain sums for housing. I know that we cannot do very much in regard to housing at present, but it is a matter in connection with which we should make preparations for the future. In regard to housing in rural areas, we have adopted a system up to the present which is entirely unsuitable. The Land Commission take over a big tract of land and divide it into holdings of 20 or 30 acres and build a house at the end of each holding. I think that it would be much better if we had these houses grouped together, so that in future years it would be possible to make available for the people living in them a proper water supply, a proper lighting system and many of the other amenities enjoyed by people in the towns.

If we continue the present system, even in connection with labourers' cottages, of building one a mile away from the next one, we can never hope, except at great expense, to supply these people with many of the things with which we would like to supply them. In devising our new schemes of housing we should bear that in mind. There is also the social aspect of it. When houses are grouped together, people will be more neighbourly and more inclined to help one another. I know that there are great obstacles in the way, but they are there to be overcome and, if we set our minds to it, I think we can overcome them.

The Minister, when speaking to-day on the Finance Bill, and Senator Hayes yesterday, referred to the question of late marriages. I hold that one of the reasons for these late marriages is the lack of housing in rural areas. Many a young man and young woman, living in a country district, when they propose to get married at present have to go to a town to look for rooms and have to live in these rooms for the first five or six years, perhaps, even though they are willing to remain in a country district. The fact is that they cannot get a house to live in. Until we make housing accommodation available both in the country districts and in the towns we cannot hope to have any appreciable increase in early marriages. There is, of course, the other question, that we must see that there will be some prospect of continuous employment both in the urban and rural areas for those people.

We hear a lot of talk at present about plans for the future. We know that in England they are giving great attention to this matter and also great publicity. It is, perhaps, very useful to do that in order to take people's minds off other events which may be taking place. But there is one plan that we should have here, and it is a very simple one. We know that there is plenty of work to be done on roads, housing, drainage, afforestation, and all these things that are advocated from time to time. What we have to do is to organise the people to do the work. That is the greatest plan and the most difficult plan before us at the moment. We know that, in many cases, where such works will be undertaken, we will have to be prepared to arrange to take workers from the towns out to the country districts to carry them out.

An attempt is being made to do something like that under this new scheme of helping the farmers to save the harvest, and that could be enlarged to a great extent, if it is handled properly and if there is not too much red tape about it. In connection with post-war planning, the local authorities will, I believe, have to play a very large part, particularly in urban areas. We know that many of these local authorities are at present seriously handicapped because of the huge debts with which they are saddled. I know that the urban authorities in Galway City are anxious that they should be able to repay the old loans which they contracted in the past and get new money at a rate of interest which will enable them to meet their obligations and start off with the new schemes which may be necessary when peace returns and the necessary materials are available.

Then there is another matter that I often thought of mentioning and that is, that the time has come when we should remove from our Statute Book or, if not remove entirely, have amended, the Malicious Injuries Act. From time to time we hear of damage being caused to property, particularly in towns. In a large number of cases, the property damaged is insured. But even though the property is insured and the owners are paying big premiums on their insurance policies, when the damage is caused, very often the rates have to make it good. I think it was Senator O'Donnell mentioned that he regretted that the advice tendered to the Government some years ago in regard to having more ships of our own was not taken. That is one of the complaints that we hear from time to time. But there is another aspect of the matter. I know that in Galway there were meetings held of people interested in this project of procuring ships. But there was always the question of whether we would be able to keep these ships going and compete with other people for the carrying of our goods. We should not forget that that is an aspect of the matter which we will have to face in the future. If we are to have Irish ships carrying Irish goods then, although some people may not like it, we will have to subsidise these ships or give them some protection; otherwise I do not see how we will be able to maintain them because, when peace returns and when the nations that are at war resume their shipping operations, they will compete with us as they did in the past. When that time comes, notwithstanding all our pious aspirations, I think we will very soon forget them and, probably, some of the people who were advocating the purchasing of ships, when they find that they can get their materials in cheaper on foreign ships, will be the first to urge that they should be allowed to do that.

In conclusion, I shall say, as I said before, that one of the most important things we need to do is to try to get our people, and particularly our young people, interested in the Government and in Government institutions, and, if you like, in politics in this country. If we do not do that, the time will come when, probably, there will be so little interest taken that all our democratic institutions could very soon cease to exist.

Mr. Kingsmill Moore

First I should like to associate myself with the complaint of Senator Baxter that the Vote, in so far as it is devoted to agricultural research in the wider sense, is not sufficient. There are certain matters which are so big, so obvious, and so close that one is apt from familiarity to forget their importance, and one of the matters that we are apt to forget is that, as far as Ireland is concerned, agriculture must be the beginning, the middle and the end of all our economy. We are a country relatively destitute of profitable minerals. Turf, classing it as a mineral, is about the only profitable mineral that we have, and though we have a certain amount of very good land, we have not got enough of it. So that it is absolutely necessary to make use of the very best and most modern methods for squeezing everything that we can out of the land we have got, and I agree with Senator O Buachalla that it lies not merely in the field of scientific research to determine as to how that may best be done, but in the field of social research as to how we may impress on all our people the results of that scientific work so that they may adopt it and profit by it.

I am afraid that Irish agriculture is going to be hit by a number of flying bombs. We are going to face I fear, very shortly, a situation in which it will be exceedingly difficult for our agriculture to keep its place. The best customer for our agricultural products has always been England, and I think it will be so in the future, but after the war is over we are going to labour under three disadvantages. First of all, the shortage of manures, synthetic and natural, will have left our land very appreciably impoverished, because we have had to turn to tillage and have not been able to put back what we have got out of the land. Secondly, on the other side of the water, England has become alive to the possibilities of its own agriculture and to the possibilities of increasing enormously its own total agricultural products as a result of scientific investigation of the best methods of agriculture. Lastly, whether we like it or not, we have to admit that alliances are cemented by blood, that alliances between England and those countries who have been fighting with her will have been cemented by the blood of the battlefield, and that this will be reflected after the war in that, other things being equal, the tendency will be for the English to give favourable terms, or preferences of one kind or another, to those who have fought with them.

So that Irish agriculture will be faced with its own difficulties, arising from an exhausted soil, with a customer which will be producing more than it did before, and with rivals in competition to supply the demands of that customer, who will start on terms of most-favoured nations. If we are to keep our agricultural market, I think everything must be done, by investigation, organisation and teaching, at the very earliest possible opportunity, because I do feel that Irish agriculture, as our chief industry, if I might put it that way, is going to suffer a positive typhoon after the war is over, and unless we take steps now it will be reflected in a general impoverishment of the country of, possibly, a very disastrous nature.

I pass from those considerations which I have mentioned as being so obvious to all of us that we are sometimes inclined to put them aside, as if, because everybody knew about them, nobody should bother to think about them. Another matter—a matter which I have been told is a hardy annual here or, certainly, a hardy biennial—is the condition of the secondary teachers throughout Éire. It is unnecessary to stress the supreme importance of getting the best men, in character, brains and teaching ability, for our secondary teachers. We are all aware of the truth of the old saying that, as we sit here, all the professional men of the future, the future Ministers, even future Senators, the future leaders of industry, are being taught at the present time in our schools, and the majority of them, probably, in our secondary schools, and that there can be no more profitable way of spending money than to ensure that the teaching they are getting, both from the point of view of their intellect and their morals and the development of their initiative, is of the highest quality it is possible to obtain. Unfortunately, we find that we are being out-bid in the market because the emoluments now available for our secondary teachers are very much below those which they can obtain in England, in Scotland, or in Northern Ireland, and as the result of that it is becoming increasingly difficult to get proper secondary teachers, and a greater proportion of them are leaving this country.

I could wish that the Minister for Education were here, because I think I could call upon him to support me and to be my ally in this matter, for I note when a deputation waited upon him recently, he professed himself in sympathy with nearly all their demands but complained that this was a matter which ultimately lay with the Minister for Finance, and that he could not be answerable for the attitude which would be taken up by that Minister. Although he did not say so, I suppose he implied that the Minister for Finance is in the position of a person to whom a number of people come clamouring for money, who make out an excellent case for each of them receiving five shillings and to whom the Minister would say: "Gentlemen, there is only £1 in the till between all of you." I am going to appeal to the Minister to listen to the position in which the secondary teachers are put, and to see if he cannot lend a willing ear to his colleague the Minister for Education when his colleague approaches him on the subject. It is all very well to say that teaching is a vocation. As one who is the son of a teacher, and both whose grandfathers spent their lives in teaching, I subscribe to that, but at the same time it must be realised that when people are choosing a profession they cannot be entirely blind to the relative remunerations which they can receive from one profession or another. It is because the secondary teachers in Éire, taking into consideration their attainments and the length of time they have spent in qualifying themselves, are hopelessly underpaid, that I want to bring the matter prominently before this House.

A secondary teacher first of all must get a university degree. That takes from three to four years. At the end of that period he is expected to take out his Higher Diploma in Education, which takes approximately another year. Having spent between four and five years in qualifying himself, he is then entitled to start on his career as a secondary teacher. He is entitled only to start; he is not then entitled to get anything. He has to serve another three years before he is even registered as a teacher. So that it is a matter of eight years after he has started to qualify himself before he can receive from the hands of the State, as a matter of right, one single penny. Once qualified, he is entitled to receive from the schools that employ him a salary of £200, that is to say, if he is employed by a school which has the requisite number of pupils eligible for receiving the Government capitation grant. Roughly speaking a school is bound only to employ one qualified teacher for about every 40 pupils it has, but if he is fortunate enough to be among the number of teachers at a school who are not in excess of the number qualified on this basis of pupils, he gets £200 and at the end of the three years, having spent eight years in the profession, he is entitled to the princely rise of £12 a year. The State then says that in addition to the primary salary of £200 he shall receive increments of £12 a year for ten years, and £15 a year for the next six years, and so, after he has served for 19 years as a teacher, he is entitled to receive from the State a sum of £210 a year. The maximum that a secondary teacher can ever receive, even assuming that he has an honours degree which entitles him to two other bonuses of £20, is £450 for a man and £340 for a woman. That is the maximum which he or she can ever claim to be entitled to, and that after 19 years' teaching and five years' preliminary training. As against that in England there is no difficulty in getting a salary of £600 or £700. Can you wonder that there is a drain from this country of the best qualified secondary teachers?

It is not only in that respect that he is relatively worse off than his brethren in other countries. When he retires his terms are worse and if, before he has served his full period, he has to go, he will not get the grants which would be available in other countries. That is the position of secondary school teachers. At a time when the cost of living has advanced a matter of certainly not less than 60 per cent.——

Sir John Keane

One hundred per cent.

Mr. Kingsmill Moore

That is true, 100 per cent. I am corrected and I willingly adopt the correction. It is true that he has received a bonus, a princely bonus, of £18 a year in respect of the cost of living, but that is only available to those who are not already receiving more than £398 a year. Forty per cent. of the male teachers are receiving just over £400 a year. They are men who are married and who have children, who have budgeted with regard to their family responsibilities, and these have got no bonus whatsoever because of the cost of living, which has risen so steeply since the beginning of the war. Is that a position which can be tolerated if we accept, as I ask you to accept, that there can be no more important thing in a State than to secure that the best men take up the work of secondary teachers? The House will, of course, appreciate that I am dealing with secondary teachers who are lay teachers because, of course, the vocational aspect comes in very strongly and assists the position where the teachers are not lay teachers but are teachers belonging to Orders who will look after them and who are not so dependent upon the matter of State grants. I do put in this plea, that the Minister for Finance, when the Minister for Education next comes to him and points out to him that secondary teachers are probably worse paid, having regard to their intellectual attainments and the strain and standard of their lives, than any other class of the community, will realise that, no matter how deficient the till is, one of the primary demands on it should be to increase the emoluments and position of the secondary school teachers to a pitch which will attract the best men and save that drain, which at first may not seem obvious, but which is only realised when its results are shown and it is too late to remedy them.

Mr. Maguire

I do not propose to raise anything in the nature of a national or an international issue, but I want to raise a matter of very great importance not to the State but to one individual in the State. It is a matter connected with the State doing ordinary justice to an Irish workingman. I had hoped it would not be necessary for me to raise it here. I had hoped to have it settled quietly, but, although I did my best, I never got the opportunity. I always understood that where a Senator wished to make representations to a Minister, the Minister acceded to the Senator's request to meet him. In this case, I regret to say the Minister in question did not do so, with the result that I have to bring the matter to the notice of the Minister for Finance.

Some months ago, an overseer in the Phoenix Park, a man drawing a small wage of 2d. per hour more than an ordinary carpenter, was on holidays. He was paid not by the week, month or year, but by the hour, and while he was on holidays, a report was made to him in confidence that a certain amount of coal was alleged to have been stolen from the house of President Hyde. That report was made to him in confidence, but since then we have come to know that it was a lie. No coal was stolen and no attempt made to steal any coal. It was simply a cock-and-bull story told by an individual for the furtherance of his own ends. It was reported to the overseer that a carter was seen taking coal from the house of the President. The carter was supposed to have been stopped and to have brought the coal back, but the carter, when questioned subsequently about it, denied that any such incident took place.

The remarkable thing about it is that although the carter would have had to go past policemen, workers and soldiers outside the residence of the President and past the Gárda Depot in the Park, no person saw him either coming from the house or bringing the coal back to the house; but because the overseer was alleged not to have reported a cock-and-bull story which he heard while on holidays, he was reduced. When the Board of Works heard about it, they did nothing. The Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy Smith, in charge of that Department did nothing. If he thought a felony had been attempted, it was his duty and the duty of the commissioners to report it to the Gárda, the Attorney-General and the Minister for Justice in order to have the matter properly investigated and dealt with in the courts. There was a common law duty on the commissioners and on the Parliamentary Secretary to do that, but what did they do? They proceeded to reduce an unfortunate workman who is paid 2d. an hour more than an ordinary carpenter while they themselves are paid thousands a year too much, judging by the way in which they handled that case.

If they thought a felony had been committed, why did they not bring it to the notice of the Gárda authorities, of the Attorney-General and of the Minister for Justice? That is a duty which rests not only on them but on every citizen. If a citizen believes a felony has been committed, it is his duty to have it investigated by the proper authorities. The commissioners and the Parliamentary Secretary declined to do so, but they reduced the unfortunate workman who was on holidays. If that man had been a member of a trade union, if he had been a railway or a tramway worker, every man in the company would have been out on strike in ten minutes against such unjust treatment, but that was not the case. He was a carpenter and he was reduced for failing to report a cock-and-bull story which he had heard on holidays. If every member of the Seanad reported all the cock-and-bull stories they hear, they would be kept very busy, but if they were to be dismissed for not doing so, none of us would be here five minutes.

Another remarkable feature of this matter is that when the coal was weighed, instead of being short, it showed a surplus. That has been proved beyond yea or nay. The place from which the carter was supposed to have taken the coal is a public yard in the President's house. It is overlooked by windows from which the nurses attending the President and the servants can look out but nobody saw any cart coming in or going out.

Mr. Quirke

Is it the Senator's suggestion that the nurses should also be sacked for not reporting this matter?

Mr. Maguire

I am not suggesting any such nonsense. The nurses and servants attached to the place could see this yard and they saw no sign of a cart coming in or going out, but, on a cock-and-bull story unsupported by a title of evidence, this unfortunate man has been reduced.

As I have said, I had hoped to have this matter settled, but I found myself up against a stone wall. The Parliamentary Secretary would do nothing at all—the matter was closed, so far as he was concerned. Even if the Taoiseach himself came to him, he said he would do nothing. Then, we have the Minister for Finance who holds up his hands, metaphorically speaking, and says: "This is a matter for the Parliamentary Secretary. I do not deal with it, as it is a Board of Works matter."

What is the unfortunate man to do if he can get no justice from the Parliamentary Secretary, and if the Minister for Finance says: "Oh, that is a matter for the Parliamentary Secretary; I do not interfere with those things; that is not a matter for me?" What is this country coming to if a man cannot get justice?

There is another matter which I intended to raise—a very serious matter—but I am not going to raise it to-day. I should like an assurance from the Minister, despite the fact that he does not interfere in this Board of Works department, that in this particular case, in the interests of justice——simple, common or garden justice— he will cause an inquiry to be made or inquire into it himself. It is alleged, I understand, that one of the reasons why this unfortunate man could not get justice is that he received his appointment originally because he was politically minded. Which of us, from the Minister down, except perhaps a man like Senator Sir John Keane, is not here because he is politically minded? We are all here through politics. The only difference between us and that unfortunate man is that he had to pass an examination to get his job. He had to go before a board of inquiry and prove that he was qualified before he got his job. It is said now that he got his job through political influence. He got his job through his brains, and if he had a bit of political influence so much the better —that did him no harm, apparently. But that is no reason why he should not get justice. I should like an assurance from the Minister that he will look into this case and see that justice is done. Since that overseer left the Park I understand that the work has not been satisfactory, and that the architects have been complaining. Recently, a long wall was built, and it had to be pulled down and rebuilt at the public expense. That would not have happened if the overseer, poor Bob Collins, had not lost his job. No walls had to be rebuilt in his time. Now, that rebuilt wall is there as evidence, and there is no evidence about the coal having been stolen.

I am very sorry to have to raise this matter here. I would not have done so only that I have made vain and valiant attempts to get in touch with the Minister or someone else to discuss it. If I am returned to this House, I will keep harping on this matter as long as I am here. If necessary, I will put down a motion asking for an inquiry, because I am satisfied in my heart and soul that a gross and rotten injustice was done, and that his removal gave an opportunity to promote another gentleman, the brother of a certain private secretary. If I am re-elected, I will come back in October or November and harp on this matter again unless the Minister looks into it in the meantime and sees that justice is done. Since losing his job, this unfortunate man fell off his bicycle and hurt his shoulder. He has not done an hour's work since, and is not likely to do any for a long time to come. He has not earned a penny for five months, and he has a home to keep. He is a respectable, decent, sober, hard-working tradesman. I would ask the Minister to depart from his usual practice and look into this matter to see that substantial justice is done in this case.

Sir John Keane

It has come as a shock to me to hear of the case brought up by the last speaker. Of course, I have only heard one side of it, but I do hope that something will be done to get to the bottom of it, because it does shock one's conscience to feel that that kind of thing is possible. I would not like to form a judgment on it without inquiry.

I rose to deal with one matter, which arises out of what Senator O Buachalla has said about the failure of farmers to take advantage of experiments and scientific discoveries made by the universities. I think I can explain that failure, having some knowledge of practical farming. The farmers say that those people are working entirely without regard to profit and loss. A professor working on an endowment can no doubt demonstrate certain developments in agriculture, but there is no assurance that those are economic. I know that, in the case of silos, that is certainly the case. I feel that the Government should consider what I have frequently advocated—in fact I advocated it at the first agricultural commission—that there should be profit and loss demonstration farms throughout the country, and they might very well be under the supervision of the county instructor. There has been a welcome development lately; the cooperative societies are taking farms, and I hope they will use them for demonstration purposes. It is not a bit of good asking the farmers to adopt experiments merely because the work is done in some agricultural college which has to have no regard to the economic aspect of farming. In order to convince the farmer, the experiments must be carried out on a practical farm which can show a healthy balance sheet and profit and loss account.

Mrs. Concannon

I feel sure the Minister for Finance, when he concludes to-day, will pay his usual compliment to the Seanad—that he has spent a profitable and interesting day. Certainly I do not remember a discussion that I enjoyed more than that which we have heard to-day. I wish to speak only on two small Votes in this Appropriation Bill. They might be overlooked, and they are very important. They deal with the forsaken people of our community. One of them is Vote 34—Prisons. We start with a great advantage in this country, that so many of our Ministers and politicians know prisons from the inside. We have that advantage from our history. Therefore, they will be inclined to take the modern view of what prisons should be. In other countries, great strides have been made in a change-over from the old conception of prisons as a place of punishment and detention to the more modern idea of them as places of education and reform. I feel sure that this important subject is occupying the attention of the Minister for Justice and the other members of the Government, and I want to make only one small suggestion with regard to women prisoners. There are not so very many of them now, and their offences are usually of a certain type.

Now, these would be especially susceptible to treatment. It might be possible that, in our scheme for prison reform, we could bring into association with the prison authorities some religious orders of women who have been trained for this kind of rescue work. I think that is an idea that should be investigated. As a matter of fact, the idea has been implemented to some extent because one finds that when girls come before judges or district justices for certain offences they are allowed off if they go into one of these rescue homes. That, I think, is a good idea, but these rescue homes have no special funds. They have to depend on charity. If that idea were to be adopted more generally, I think there should be some sort of a grant from the State to help the religious communities to carry on that class of work. At a later date I would like to go more fully into this question of prison reform, and to speak of the results that have been achieved in other countries. We could do much better here because we have the machinery ready to hand.

Another question that I want to talk about concerns reformatories and industrial schools. The Minister for Finance and the Minister for Education adopted a very heartening view when the question of industrial schools came before them on the Children's Bill. They took the view that the children in those schools are, to some extent, the wards of the nation, and they gave a grant towards the teachers in the schools so that the wards that we take over will not suffer in the matter of an inferior education: that we will do the best we can for them. The system, however, has this defect, that it stops too soon. I can speak with more intimate knowledge of industrial schools for girls. We have one in Galway, with which I am very well acquainted. I often go there to see the Reverend Mother, and I have learned a good deal from her as to what has to be done and what could be done, if certain suggestions could be accepted. The girls leave the school at the age of 16. That is a dangerous age at which to send out a girl if she has not been properly trained. Let me take a concrete case. If, say, there was another school to which the girls, when they reach the age of 16, could be sent from the subsidiary industrial schools to be trained for domestic or other work until they had reached the age of 18, it would be a very good thing. They could get in that school a specialised training, and at that age would be well equipped to go out and face the world. Girls with that training would be saved from a great many of the dangers that befall the other poor creatures who leave industrial schools at the age of 16. They have to live from day to day, sometimes under the most hapless conditions. I would like if the Minister, when he has more time and more money, would think over these suggestions, and above all, that the question of prison reform should be taken vigorously in hand.

Mr. Quirke

There are just a few matters I would like to refer to. In connection with turf, I understand that certain Senators took it on themselves to criticise the way in which the work of turf production has been carried out. I have been waiting for a long time for someone to attack the policy of the Government in connection with turf. I would like to compliment Senator Baxter, because I did not think that anyone, at this stage, would stand up and criticise the manner in which turf is being produced. The fact of the matter is that rather than criticise those who have been responsible for the development of turf, this House or some such body should definitely put on record its recognition of the services rendered by those people to the country in its hour of need. I do not want to mention any names, but there is one who did more than one man's part in connection with the drive to produce turf and thereby render the country safe during a very dangerous period. That man was the late Deputy Hugo Flinn. The work that he did will stand as a monument to him for all time. I believe that future generations, when they come to read up the history of this country during the terrible years through which we are passing, will give due credit to Hugo Flinn for the work that he did. We should also, I think, pay tribute to the managing director and staff of the Turf Development Board, the people who are in control of Fuel Importers, Limited, and the Minister and officials in the Department of Supplies who have had a considerable lot to do in connection with turf production. We should realise that those people have not been doing just an ordinary day's work in connection with the production of turf. They have been working like slaves. I have been in contact with most of them, due to the fact that I am a director of the Turf Development Board. I know for a fact that they have not paid any attention to hours or to regulations so far as their work is concerned. They have travelled day and night in the effort to get turf produced. I know, of course, that the best hurlers are on the ditch, but at the same time we should be reasonable in our criticism and realise that, no matter how well a job is done, it is probable that it could be done better.

The suggestion has been made that turf should be graded and that better turf should be produced. I am in full agreement with that. In the balmy days which, I hope, are ahead of us, when there will be plenty of time to do the work and plenty of alternative fuel available, we should get some of those people who consider themselves experts on the matter to come together and try to develop a scheme whereby turf could be graded and better turf produced. The job that faced the people who are in charge of this work at present was not to produce a sod of turf of a certain size, but to produce turf. If we were short of 100 tons of turf at the end of last winter or the winter before, or were to be short of it at the end of the coming winter, it would not be a question of deciding how good or bad the turf was, but what was the alternative, and I hate to think what the alternative would be. I can say that a good job has been done. No doubt, mistakes have been made, and that there has been a certain amount of wastage so far as transport is concerned. But what was the alternative?

The fact of the matter is that if, five years ago, any man made the suggestion that the City of Dublin could be supplied with turf, and that the only fuel was to be turf, he would be locked up somewhere and would have an awful job to get free. In any event, everything that could possibly be done was, in my opinion, done to eliminate this question of wastage of transport. At the present time, in the County Kildare camps alone, 116,000 tons of turf have been cut this year. Were it not for the work that was done by the managing director, the engineers and by everybody else concerned, including the workers, all of whom threw their full weight into the work—in fact they approached the job more like soldiers than workers—it would not have been possible to make that Kildare scheme the success it is to-day. Those people do not want bouquets from anybody, but it is only right that the public should realise what has been done. If that work had not been done, we all know what the alternative would be, but there is no necessity to go into that now. Senator Kingsmill Moore used many nice phrases about "blood, battlefields", and so on that there is no necessity to go into now. While he was rather complimentary on the one hand, he was not so complimentary about some things. The Senator stated that turf was the only mineral we had. That is not so.

Mr. Sweetman

Gold.

Mr. Quirke

Yes, we have gold, we have coal, we have lead and numerous other minerals, and I advise Senator Kingsmill Moore to look into the question again and he will find that these mines are operating successfully. Were it not for the fact that that is so, other industries here would be in a bad way. I agree with him that sufficient money has not been devoted to certain branches of agriculture. While this is not the time to deal with the various branches of agriculture, I wish to draw the Minister's attention to the position of the National Stud, for which a sum of £16,000 has been allocated this year. That may be an indication to some people that activities are about to commence there, but to me it is an indication that there is very little notion of doing anything in the coming year, because £16,000 would not go very far in getting the foundation stock for a proposition of that kind. I appeal to the Minister for Finance to interest himself in the matter, because we are gradually—if I should not say rapidly —passing through a time when foundation stock for an institution like that could be bought at anything like reasonable prices. Prices of bloodstock are going up by leaps and bounds, and if this war was over I believe it would be very difficult to stock a place like the National Stud. For that reason a start should be made now. I understand the place is in the same state of repair as when it was handed over, if not better, so that a definite effort should be made to put in foundation stock. I believe that the National Stud will prove to be a very important item in our national economy. The Minister would be wise to look into the matter, even from the point of view of Minister for Finance. I do not know whether anybody has been put in charge to run the place, but it is important that he should be carefully selected. I have no doubt that that will be done, and that the man selected will look on his job, apart altogether from the economic aspect, as a patriotic Irishman who will ensure that our National Stud in years to come will be a credit to this State in every country that buys its produce.

Mr. Ruane

The first matter I want to raise on this Bill concerns the Office of Public Works, in so far as it is responsible for the pigeon-holing of schemes which if put into operation would confer immediate benefit on many people. I wish to endorse the remarks of Senator Quirke regarding the credit due to those responsible for seeing that the fires of this country were kept burning when fuel supplies from Great Britain were cut off. The best turf in many parts is still under water. I am aware of districts where there are from 200 to 300 acres of cutaway bog that have not been reclaimed. That stretch of bog lies in the basin of a drainage area and a scheme to deal with it was drawn up by officials of the Department of Public Works 14 or 15 years ago. It was submitted to the county council and approved of, but is still in cold storage at a time when turf is so badly needed. If the scheme had been put into operation people who are in a position to express an opinion on the subject, consider that an excellent supply of turf would be available not only in the vicinity but for miles around during the next 100 or 150 years. When an effort was made recently to direct public attention to the necessity for going on with the work various arguments were advanced, such as the employment that would be provided when many people are in receipt of the dole, as well as the necessity for supplementing the turf supply. All these arguments were shelved with the excuse that a Drainage Bill has been introduced and that it must take precedence. I think it is most unfortunate that a scheme upon which a considerable amount of public money was spent in sending officials over the area to value the land that would be drained and to assess responsibility on those who would benefit, should be left in cold storage. I believe that the Government is serious about the necessity of maintaining a supply of turf of the right quality, and not the kind of turf that I saw coming to Dublin. The turf in the area I am referring to is of excellent quality, hard black turf. The Government can supply good turf in no better way than by putting such schemes into operation pending the enactment of the larger Bill.

Another matter concerns the increase given recently to old age pensioners because of the rise in the cost of living. These people form a considerable section of the community, and they felt the increased cost of living as much as any other section. The relief given them gave satisfaction. That did not happen, however, without meeting with a certain amount of disapproval on their part. It is known to everybody that when an old age pension is awarded the means of the applicant is investigated by a pension officer and, as a result of his report, the amount of the pension is fixed. Another officer has been brought in to investigate the emergency increase given to certain pensioners, and it is the operations of this officer that created a great deal of trouble.

Old age pensioners who should qualify for the increase must have their cases reported on by the home assistance officer, heretofore referred to as the relieving officer. It is all very well to give him the new title and refer to the relief he gives as home assistance, but the vast majority of the people still speak of him as the relieving officer and of the relief as poor law relief. The fact that certain people who are entitled to the increase and are deserving of it must submit to the investigations of that officer leads them to feel that there is the stigma of pauperism connected with it, and they resent that very much. As a result, many of them have not made application in the necessary form.

Other objections have been raised on account of the extra tax it puts on the local rates. I have no use for that argument: I do not mind how the rates may be increased in order to give the necessary relief to those people who are entitled to it. However, I object to the manner in which the relief is given. There is no earthly reason why the officer who deals with the first application of old age pensioners—the pensions officer—should not be made responsible for the further investigation necessary to satisfy the authorities that the people concerned are entitled to the extra 2/6. The vast majority of those people are proud people and have a decided objection to seeking relief. It was most unfortunate that it was decided to introduce this form of investigation. I am afraid it is too late now to effect that very desirable change, which will be necessary in order to give the full benefits of the increase to those for whom it was intended. However, I hope the fact that attention has been drawn to it will be of some assistance. I also hope that something will be done in regard to the drainage schemes which have been left aside pending the bigger scheme, and that they will be carried into effect.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Seanad has had a long sitting to-day and I am partly responsible for that, on account of the length of time I took in addressing the House this morning; so I hope not to infringe on Senators' courtesy by keeping them too long now. It will not be necessary for me to do so, particularly as very many of the matters raised were matters over which— directly, at any rate—I have little or no control. There was a wide range of subjects—cattle stealing, social reform, turf production, improvement of cattle—on which I am not competent to speak; but almost all of them will come my way at some time or another when I am asked for more money.

Many of the schemes brought to my notice to-day were schemes for which I would like to find money, but one has to decide between the importance of the various schemes and make a decision. In making that decision, as the depth of the purse is limited, I must put aside some schemes which, perhaps, are excellent in themselves and hope for better days when more money may be available to do justice to them. I do not intend to deal with many of the topics which were mentioned, but I will see that the various items mentioned will be brought to the attention of the Ministers concerned.

In connection with one or two matters, I have, perhaps, some information which might be of value to the Seanad. In regard to soil survey, mentioned by Senator Baxter and others. my information is that—though it may be a very small amount—some work is being done and has been done for years on that subject. I think it is not an exaggeration to say that not a day passes without the soil being analysed for somebody. Therefore, it is not true to say that it has been completely ignored, as was suggested by the Senator. I understand that any farmer who wishes can have part of the soil on his farm examined, by calling the attention of the local agricultural instructor, who will see that it is sent to the Department for analysis. That opportunity is not availed of as widely as it might be and, if it had been availed of more, the necessity for more staff would have arisen and would have been pressed on me by the Minister for Agriculture before now.

Mr. Sweetman

The Minister might not be aware that, on a previous occasion, I instanced a case where a man did go to the Department of Agriculture and was shoved off. There is ample scope and ample desire on the part of the technical officials, but not on the part of the Department.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

There might be good reason for that. There might also be a disposition on the part of some of the officials, who may not want it.

Mr. Sweetman

That is what we allege.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

That might be brought to the attention of the Minister for Agriculture. No one is in closer touch with the farming community and with agriculture than the officials of the Department of Agriculture. There is no more conservative body in Ireland than the farmers. Senator Baxter talked to-day about wanting a revolution. He will not get it, no matter how he may try, even if he lives as long as Methuselah. We may get reforms very slowly in methods of agriculture and may get the farmers to change their habits very slowly, but it will not be done by revolution. I am not speaking now as one intimately associated with agriculture, but that is the result of my observations.

Senator Baxter also spoke at length on the necessity for developing scientific research, particularly in relation to agriculture, and spoke of the necessity for developing plant biology as being one aspect of scientific research which would help agriculture. It is rather a coincidence that, at luncheon to-day, I had brought to my notice a special article in the Daily Mail calling attention to the wonderful progress being made in Ireland in that very subject—research in plant biology. It told us how far we were in advance of what was being done even in America and England.

Mr. Baxter

You should have brought the paper in.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

That is one in the eye for Senator Baxter.

Mr. Sweetman

The Minister accepts everything the Daily Mail says as gospel.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I do not, but I accept that because I happen to know it is true. I know that two persons in the College of Science have done marvellous work in that very subject. They are being asked from America for advice with regard to special aspects of plant biology. All sides of the House should be, and are, I think, proud that the foundation of the success of these two great, young scientists—products of the National University, working in the College of Science—in connection with the more rapid and more extensive production of penicillin was made in Galway College by the discovery of agar-agar by the daughter of the Taoiseach. That is to our credit. I am glad of the opportunity which the Senator gave me by decrying and runing down our country and our scientists——

Mr. Baxter

I did not.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

My goodness! The Senator spoke for half an hour and said that we were not worth a damn, that in research we had done nothing.

Mr. Baxter

I said nothing of the kind. I said that we had built up no organisation. I had no fault to find with the people who were working, but I said that we had built up no organisation to do anything with regard to research in agriculture.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I agree that the Senator did not find any fault with the people who were working in connection with these matters, but he said that we had built up no organisation. How could we produce two scientists whose names are world-famed—though they are merely young fellows—in research relating to agriculture and botany if we had built up no organisation?

Mr. Baxter

Two?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Two. This work has gone on for a long time. It is not every day that discoveries are made. We found a new way of producing the material for that wonderful discovery made in England not so long ago—a discovery which has effected marvellous cures during the war. We discovered new methods of making that material. When we could not get from abroad the necessary raw materials, one of our own scientists— the young lady to whom I referred— helped us to produce it from our own seas—the seas around our own coasts. These things appeared in the papers during the past fortnight, and Senator Baxter must have seen them.

Mr. Baxter

I did not see them.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

We have had that emblazoned in a newspaper not anxious to shower praise on us or to shout our merits. For the benefit of their English readers, they say that we are far in advance of other countries in our development of scientific research in relation to agriculture.

Mr. Baxter

Nobody believes that either here or outside the country.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Senator Baxter will not believe the Daily Mail when even it gives us a word of praise. I read of this matter during the past fortnight also in the Irish Times, and they returned to it either yesterday or to-day in order to pay tribute to these young men, one of whose parents I knew very well. His mother was a distinguished actress in the Abbey Theatre. She is the mother of Doctor Roberts, one of the young scientists who was mainly responsible for this discovery. Credit should also be given to their teachers, particularly Professor Doyle, of University College, professor of botany. He was responsible for the scientific bringing-up of these young men, who are a credit to the country and to him as scientific workers. That is what I want to rub in so far as Senator Baxter is concerned.

Mr. Baxter

I did not want to take credit from anybody. I say that there are not enough of these men.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Senator said that other countries were far in advance of us in scientific research, in particular. I do not deny that at all. How can we make a comparison, considering the resources at the disposal of the research workers of the United States of America and Great Britain? We cannot compete with them and there is no use in our attempting to do so. Great Britain has a population of 40,000,000 and is the richest country in the world. The United States of America is, probably, the next richest country, with a population of 120,000,000. We cannot compete with those countries, but we have brains far in excess of the average of either country and what we can do is train as much of this brain power as our resources will permit.

Mr. Baxter

That is all I want.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I do not say a word against the Senator's advocacy of increased research, but there must be some limit to the amount of money spent on those things. We have not ignored research and that recent discovery is evidence that we have not done so. I should like to see more research into animal diseases but, again, we have, probably, the best veterinary surgeons in Europe in the Dublin College—small as it is. That is a big claim but I believe it to be true. There are no better qualified scientists in that line than the small body of men to be found in the Dublin Veterinary College. I am sorry that the college is not bigger and that more money is not being spent upon it. There are plans in existence for extending the college and making it more useful. I hope that some of that money will be spent in the way the Senator suggests —in research into animal diseases. There is nothing known about animal diseases at present which is not known to the professors of that college. Those interested in horse-racing are aware that, a few years ago, when one of the greatest race horses ever bred had to be operated on for brain disease—"Windsor Lad," which was owned by Dan Sullivan, a Dublin man, was the name of the horse—it was the head of the Dublin College who was sent for to do the operation. Not a veterinary surgeon in England would be chosen to do the job. They sent for the head of the Dublin College, Professor O'Connell, who has since retired. That shows that people who know something about the matter have a higher opinion than Senator Baxter has of the capabilities of our veterinary surgeons.

I believe, too, that research is being daily done—perhaps not to as great an extent as I should like, and, certainly, not to the extent that Senator Baxter would like—in Albert College in respect of plant life and the improvement of our stocks of wheat and oats. They have made discoveries there which have been praised in the agricultural magazines and reviews of many countries. Those discoveries related to types of wheat and diseases in wheat. If the Senator will consult somebody who is specially interested in that aspect of research work, he will find that what I say is true. I do not deny that we might usefully spend more money on research, but it is not easy to find money for all the excellent projects, including Senator Kingsmill Moore's project, put forward for the consideration of different Ministers, and, ultimately, for the consideration of the Minister for Finance.

I am not old enough, old as I may be, to get into the type of mood that all in the garden is lovely, and that we ought not to make any changes. I do not believe in that at all. This State has not reached man's estate yet —hardly, anyhow. It has been in existence for about 22 years, and during that time we have made wonderful progress in every direction. The condition of our people, social life here, the state of the poorest classes of the people, is very different to what it was 25 years ago. Our people are better off; they live better; they are better opportunities of all kinds for the people, but we have a long way to go. We spend a big amount of money on education in proportion to our whole resources. Perhaps we are not spending enough. Senator Kingsmill Moore says the worst paid people in the State are the secondary teachers—that they are the worst paid classes. I think we could find half a dozen Senators here who, if they got any encouragement, could tell us about other classes that might be described as the worst paid in the State.

Mr. Kingsmill Moore

But in proportion to their attainments.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Even taking that into consideration. All my life I have had a close association with teachers, and particularly with secondary and university teachers. I know the conditions under which they work and I do not think our university teachers, any more than the secondary teachers, are well enough paid. I do not think they are—that is my belief. Again, the value of money has changed so much in the last 20 years. When the National University was established, the salary of £1,200 a year was supposed to be an enormous one. The best men—and there were only two or three of them— were paid £1,200 a year. The majority of the university teachers got £800 or £900 a year and the people who got those salaries were regarded as people who were extraordinarily well-favoured. What would those salaries amount to now? What could you buy for them? I see all that; I see the position of the national school teachers and the secondary teachers, and I have to recognise the position of the old age pensioners. I have to try to be just between all these classes, and it is not easy. I do say, however, that great progress has been made in the last 20 years, since this State was established. If we could only go on at the same rate—I would like if we could go at a more rapid rate—in the next 20 years, then this country should be well worth living in. We should not have any emigrants.

Senator Baxter mentioned something about a bog in Ballyhaise. I do not know anything about it. I do not think it proper that the State should dispose of any of its rights or properties on a political basis. I think that would be entirely wrong, and it certainly would be against the wishes and the spirit of this Government, or any member of it. But there may be another side to the story that Senator Baxter did not tell us. I will certainly have the matter looked into. Senator Baxter also asked about the relationship between University College, Dublin, the College of Science and the Albert College. The College of Science and the Albert College are part and parcel of University College, Dublin. They are under the control of the governing body there. The professors of the College of Science are professors of University College, Dublin, and the same applies to those attached to the Albert Agricultural College. They are all on the staff of University College, Dublin.

Senator Sweetman asked about law charges. He gave notice of his question and, in consequence, I got a note from the Minister for Justice on the subject. I do not know anything about the matter myself, but I have the note from the Minister for Justice and, with the permission of the Seanad, I shall read it out:—

"The object of the recent Order is to make the Land Registry self-supporting or, at least, to get much nearer to that position than we have been in the past. The relevant Act (Registration of Title Act, 1891) does not say directly that the Registry shall be self-supporting, but it gives a strong hint in that direction by saying that the fees shall be revised from time to time and shall not be higher than will produce an annual amount sufficient to pay all expenses. Even apart from the Act, the Minister for Finance might well insist on the fees covering the expenses, because it is hardly fair to expect the general taxpayer to contribute to the support of an institution in which he has no interest. The Registry serves over 350,000 land owners, and gives each of them a guarantee of title and an indemnity against mistakes. The Registry costs about £40,000 a year.

The average income from fees under the old Fees Order has been about £20,000, leaving the general taxpayer to put up another £20,000. (Last year the fees rose to £25,000, but this was a "freak" year). The new Order was designed to wipe out the deficit, but not to make a profit. If it is found that a profit is being made the fees will be correspondingly reduced.

Criticism has been mainly on the lines that:

1. Some of the fees have been much more than doubled.

2. The whole system is so costly that it would be better to drop it, notwithstanding its advantages.

The Department's comments are:

1. The average increase is intended to be about 100 per cent, just enough to bring the total from £20,000 to £40,000. If certain items are increased beyond double, that is because those items were considered to be too lightly charged under the old Order in comparison to other items. In particular, certain transactions escaped with half-fees under the old Order. That privilege was thought to be unfair to the others and has not been continued.

2. To abandon a system which is so useful, if not indispensable, in order to avoid an increase of £20,000 a year, distributed (in the long run) over 350,000 persons, would be folly. The saving would be absolutely insignificant compared to the additional cost and risks involved in reverting to a system under which the whole title has to be examined from the root whenever there is a new transaction. But such a change would make more work for lawyers and it is natural that lawyers should suggest it.

3. The clearest way of showing how little is paid for the security and convenience of the system is to say that if every registered landowner paid 2/6 a year to the Registry, it would more than cover all the cost. The reasons why the fees run into £2, £3 and occasionally sums over £10, are: (a) Nobody pays fees more than a few times in his life, so he has to make up then for all that he would have contributed if there were an annual fee; and (b) the big men pay more than the little men. The Act provides that the fees shall be so arranged. Thus a really big owner who, on an annual fee basis, would pay £1 a year, may instead pay three fees of £10 each in the course of his life.

4. From some of the comments, one would imagine that fees of £8 or more were common. They are quite uncommon. The average fee taken since the Order was made is about £2.

5. The Minister for Justice is quite willing to discuss the matter and to agree to any alterations for which a good case can be made. He has, in fact, agreed to receive a deputation from the Incorporated Law Society on the subject."

That is what the Minister says in his message to me.

Mr. Sweetman

Will the Minister direct the attention of the Minister for Justice particularly to my remark that it is fair to consider some portion of the stamp duty as being applicable to the cost of the Land Registry?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I will not undertake to draw his attention particularly to that aspect of it, as it might mean some loss of revenue to the Minister for Finance, but I will call his attention to the Senator's statement in general.

Mr. Sweetman

I shall do the other part.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

And to the other matters the Senator mentioned. The same applies to subjects mentioned by Senator O Buachalla with regard to the Local Government Department and the Gúm. Is máith liom go ndubhairt an tSeanadóir an méid a dubhairt sé i dtaobh an deontais a thugamar do Choláiste Daile Atha Cliath de'n Ollscoil Náisiúnta mar is dóigh liom gur mithid do'n Choláiste sin Cuimhneamh go bhfuil dualgas don tír ann agus go mba chóir dóibh smaoineamh air sin ó am go h-am. I hope the future for agriculture will not be as black as Senator Kingsmill Moore has forecast for us. After all, what he said is quite true. In human nature it is likely that those who have fought together and shed their blood together for a certain cause are likely to be drawn closer for that reason. The Senator is not overlooking the fact that very many young men from this country have also offered their services and have shed their blood.

Mr. Kingsmill Moore

Indeed I am not and we may have to profit by that in the future.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Great numbers of them. Their names very often appear in the lists of dead that are published from day to day. On the question mentioned by Senator O'Donnell of cultural objects on which the Minister is advised to spend more money, I have not got a complete list of the items that might be included in a list of cultural objects if we had time to draw up such a list, but I have here a list of a few of them and they include universities on which we spend £162,000 a year. Maybe that is not enough but we spend that considerable sum of money. Then there is a variety of small items, some of which Senator O'Donnell mentioned to-day, which total £12,500. The Museum and National Library cost between them £54,800. The Institute for Advanced Studies costs £18,300. That does not include the Manuscripts Commission and the Gúm and the Publications Department but, without these and other items which I have not included, we are spending £247,600 on these cultural objects. Out of our annual bill, it is not a small item.

There is just one other matter which was mentioned by Senator Maguire. I think the Senator emphasised cock-and-bull stories several times in the course of his remarks, and I think that is the best title I could give to the statement he put before the Seanad.

Mr. Maguire

Will the Minister have an inquiry made? I will pay the cost of it if I am found to be wrong.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Senator is not in order. The Minister is on his feet and the Senator has no right to interrupt——

Mr. Maguire

I will pay the cost.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

——even shaking his money bags around here.

Mr. Maguire

I say that I offer to pay the cost of the inquiry.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

He does it again. I am quite satisfied that the Commissioners of Public Works and the Parliamentary Secretary do their duty conscientiously and well. They have thousands of men to deal with and I am not going to take on myself— though I have been often asked to do it—to examine into every case of the dismissal of a man on their staff. The commissioners, their senior staff and the Parliamentary Secretary are hard-working, conscientious, honest people. I have the fullest confidence in their decisions and I do not propose to review them. In this particular case I was asked to look into the matter by somebody in high authority here. I did it and I am fully satisfied with the decision that was taken.

Mr. Maguire

Will the Minister have an inquiry made into the matter by some independent authority? I have already intimated to the Minister that, if I am wrong, whatever the cost is, I will pay it.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take the Committee Stage now.

Bill put through Committee, and reported without recommendation.

Agreed to take the Fourth Stage now.

Question—"That the Bill be received for final consideration"—put and agreed to.

Agreed to take the Fifth Stage now.

Question—"That the Bill be returned to the Dáil"—put and agreed to.

Mr. Kehoe

At this stage I wish to say a few words. I was not here for the last hour, but I will be mercifully brief——

Cathaoirleach

The Bill has been passed, Senator, and there is no further business, other than the motion for the adjournment, before the House.

The Seanad adjourned at 6 p.m. sine die.