I move the following motion, which stands in the name of Senator Fearon and myself:—
That this House views with concern the reports of malnutrition and starvation in many countries as a result of food shortage due to the war, and requests the Government to investigate the possibility of this State making some contribution in kind towards the alleviation of distress in Europe, if necessary by the rationing of commodities, of which quantities may be available in excess of our essential national requirements.
This motion was handed in about three weeks ago, and since the Minister for Finance has indicated the Government's acceptance of the principle, and has stated that the Government has appointed a committee to investigate what can be done, if this House should pass this resolution, it will, in effect, be support for the Government's action as far as it goes. The only thing that I wish to say, in relation to the Minister's announcement in his Budget speech, is that I hope the committee will act speedily, as the sooner help in kind can be sent the more value it will be.
It is, I think, however, rather appropriate that this motion should be taken to-day, when the nations that were victorious in this war are celebrating their victory, and when so many of the smaller nations are thanking God for their liberation.
This country has been a non-belligerent in this terrible war. There may be room for honest differences of opinion as to whether that was or was not wise, but I do not think there is any possible room for a difference of opinion on the undoubted fact that the overwhelming majority of the people desired to keep out of the war, unless we were attacked. I heard an ex-Senator say at a meeting some time ago that neutrality was not something to boast about, but rather something to be profoundly thankful for. That is largely my own point of view.
As a non-belligerent State, we, of course, cannot have any part in victory celebrations, but we can and should express our joy and thankfulness at the end of the war in Europe, and our thankfulness to Almighty God for the extent to which our country has been preserved from the worst results of war. We can, I think, also on this day join in the feelings of relief, joy and thanksgiving felt by so many of our people who have relatives and friends who are in the armed forces of the nations at war, or who, as civilians, have been abroad and have been bombed or otherwise suffered the horrors of war. Apart from the Irishmen who left home as volunteers of their own free will to take part in the war in one way or another, our very close connections with the United States and with Great Britain mean that a very large number of our own people have known years of anxiety, and have lost their loved ones. Whatever our political opinions, I believe every Irish man and woman feels deep sympathy for the bereaved for whom the ending of the war in Europe means bitter memories and much personal sorrow. As a nation we have had to suffer a number of hardships and privations, and these have been felt mostly by the poorest sections of the community, but compared with the horrors which other people had to suffer, ours have been as nothing.
I cannot think of any better way of expressing our sympathy with those who have suffered and our profound thankfulness that our own country has been preserved than by trying to do something to relieve the acute distress now existing in many parts of the world.
I am particularly glad that since this motion appeared on the Order Paper the Government has accepted the principle, but I think that a discussion in this House, if it is reported in the Press, will help to gain support for the Government in this matter, which, I think, would be highly desirable. After all, if food is to be sent to Europe, it will be at the expense of our own people. Any sacrifices made will have to be made by them. It is, therefore, highly desirable that the people generally should be convinced of the rightness of our sending food, if it is possible to do so, even if it does mean some additional rationing or more strict rationing here.
It is, I think, also most important that it should be realised that at the present time it is only contributions in kind that can be effective immediately. I do not want to belittle in any way money contributions which, I am perfectly certain, will be needed if the Red Cross and other relief organisations are to do the work which they have planned. But just now, the plain fact is that in some places people are actually starving, and in many places there is widespread malnutrition, and in these places money by itself is practically useless.
Now that the war is over, I do not think that the various countries in Europe—few of them, at any rate— will have any serious difficulty in raising loans for rehabilitation purposes. I saw it recently announced that the Dutch Government had obtained a loan of 100,000,000 dollars from the Chase National Bank at 1½ per cent. for three years—I think it was backed by gold—and that the Norwegian Government had obtained a loan of 16,000,000 dollars from a group of New York banks at 2 per cent. for two years, and 2½ per cent. thereafter. I do not know how other countries stand, but I am convinced that the most urgent problem will be supplies, not money.
I do not propose to take up much of the time of the House by giving figures or quoting reports to show the extent of the need. It is, I expect, pretty well known to members of this House. As an illustration, however, I propose to read the following extract from a report on the position in Holland, which I have taken from Keesings Archives:—
"Reports from occupied Holland during December said that in the big towns communal kitchens were issuing about a pint of watery gruel to long queues of hungry people; that bread and meat rations, when available at all, had been cut drastically (in the case of meat to 75 grammes—under 3 ozs. a fortnight); that butter, sugar and fats had virtually disappeared; that private household stocks were almost exhausted; that men, women and children were going into the countryside in bitter weather searching-for potatoes, beans and other vegetables, frequently dying on the road from exhaustion and hunger; that in the rural areas themselves supplies of these vegetables were seriously affected in view of the German policy of inundation and deportation of farm workers; that with the exception of Rotterdam (where there was still a limited supply of electricity) both electricity and gas had disappeared from western Holland; and that the health of the people (of whom some 6,000,000 were still in occupied territory) was in consequence deteriorating rapidly, with a growing incidence of deaths and illness, particularly from diseases of malnutrition."
"In South Holland"—
I again quote from Keesings Archives—
"daily rations dropped from 780 calories at the end of October to 460 at the end of December and to 320 during March, i.e., just over one-tenth of the amount considered by experts of the League of Nations as necessary for normal human beings. Concurrently black-market prices in occupied Holland rose to astronomical heights; reports reaching the Dutch Government during March stated that people were paying the equivalent of £10 for a loaf of bread, £1 for a pint of milk, and 2/-. for a potato".
Since that report the position has become worse, and on April 26th a Dutch Archbishop sent a message to the Archbishop of Canterbury that only five days' food (at the minimum rations) remained for 3,500,000 people in Western Holland. Since then food has been sent to Holland by Allied Governments and by some neutral states. I read recently that Sweden had placed 4,000,000 Krone worth of food at the disposal of the Dutch Government, and that they had actually sent 13,500 tons of food by air. The Swiss Government also sent 5,000 tons of food, I think also by air.
The position in Holland is appalling, but it is not by any means the only country in which there is serious malnutrition. A few days ago I was speaking to a co-religionist of my own who had recently been in France in connection with relief work there. He stayed with a civilian family and told me that the three daily meals consisted of a piece of bread and boiled vegetables. He thought France was not as badly off as some other countries.
That we ought to do something, if we can, every right-minded person will agree. But is there anything effective that we can do? Only the Government can answer that question. It is easy to pass a resolution, it is easy to talk, but we must face the difficulties. We cannot send food of which our supplies are short and which is essential to the poorer classes of our own people and which is the only kind they can afford. To do so would be wrong and foolish, and it would only create conditions here that we wish to prevent elsewhere. But the fact remains that many of us could do with less food than we are getting without any danger of malnutrition. I do not propose to deal further with this because Senator Fearon, who will be seconding the motion, is much better qualified to speak on this aspect of the question than I am.
I have been told that tinned or frozen meat and dried milk would be the best articles of food we could send. I do not know whether or not it is practicable to send these foods. I have been told that we could send tinned meat in substantial quantities, if we could get the tins. I do not know exactly what we could send, as I have not got first-hand information, but I am sure that it is our duty to examine every aspect and to do what we can. It may only be a drop in the bucket, but every little helps.
I and, probably, most of you have read a great many of the reports of the position in various countries, but I can tell you that nothing I have read moved me as much as talking to people who had seen the actual conditions.
I am convinced that it is our duty, first of all, as Christians, to make every effort to do something. The late President Roosevelt said that he desired for his country the policy of the good neighbour. When Our Lord was asked Who is my neighbour, He replied with the parable of the Good Samaritan. The neighbour in that parable was one with whom the Jews had no dealings and he had fallen amongst thieves. I do not wish to press the analogy too far, but the worst suffering seems to be amongst the smaller nations whose people have fallen amongst thieves.
I feel that we in Ireland have a peculiar and special duty towards the people of the smaller nations. Norway, Denmark, Holland and Belgium—to mention only some of them—were just as desirous of remaining non-belligerent as we were, and it was not the fault of their people that they were involved in the war. Like us, they wished to remain neutral, and like the majority of our people they preferred democracy and had no sympathy with totalitarianism. I hope and pray that the end of the war means the end of totalitarianism in Europe, but I am by no means certain of it. I think all the small nations should co-operate and make common cause in the future as far as possible. Our first step in this direction should be a genuine effort to send food as proposed in this resolution.
I do not suggest for a moment that our duty or our desire to help should be confined to any one nation or group of nations. If we had plenty of food to spare, I would send it anywhere that it was urgently required, but I feel that even our best effort will be relatively small as compared with the total need. One thing that the war has taught, or should have taught, every nation is that isolationism is impracticable as a national policy for any State, small or large. We could not have got through the last five years as well as we have done if we had not been able to continue international trade to the limited extent in which it has been possible.
We are vitally interested in the maintenance of peace in the future. We may have no say in the political plans for world co-operation which are being made, but, like every other nation, we will have to pay our share of the price if these plans are a failure. I believe that the future peace of Europe depends just as much on the efforts which will be made to save peoples everywhere from malnutrition and to enable them to live decent lives as it does on any plans which may be made at San Francisco. You cannot build up an ordered society if large sections of the people are undernourished. Starvation or malnutrition is therefore our concern whether it be in the slums of Dublin, in Holland or in Germany, or anywhere else.
The resolution does not refer to clothing which is an urgent problem in many places. By next winter, I think, the shortage of clothing may be almost as serious as the shortage of food in some parts of Europe. I am afraid that our own position is such that we cannot do very much in this direction. Even second-hand clothing would be appreciated in many places, and if individuals here are prepared, especially while we continue rationed, to give their surplus clothes to be sent to Europe, I think the Government should make it easy for them to do so by giving them the necessary export permits.
In conclusion, I wish to emphasise that this resolution means that we are asking our people to give up some of their own comforts to help other countries. The sacrifices will be nothing like those we would have had to make if we had been in the war, but they will be sacrifices. It does not require much imagination to realise what this country might have suffered if it had been invaded and occupied. I do not believe that war will ever be abolished until all nations realise their mutual dependence on each other and until people are willing to make sacrifices in time of peace with the same willingness that they make them in time of war.