Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 16 Jul 1947

Vol. 34 No. 5

Appropriation Bill, 1947 ( Certified Money Bill ) —Second Stage.

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

Minister for Finance (Mr. Aiken)

During the passage of the Finance Bill in the Seanad, Senators Sir John Keane, Ryan and Baxter raised the question of the effect on the residence agreement of the provisions of Section 52 of the British Finance (No. 2) Act, 1945; they asked to be informed of the attitude of the Government to this legislation as affecting the residence agreement. I am taking advantage of the Second Reading of the Appropriation Bill in order to make a statement on the matter.

The residence agreement made with the British Government on the 14th April, 1926 (as amended by a further agreement made on the 25th April, 1928) secures, inter alia, that a person residing in this country and not residing in Britain shall be exempt from British income-tax in respect of British income.

As a result of a double taxation convention made between the British Government and the Government of the United States of America in 1945, and of similar agreements subsequently concluded with Canada, South Africa, Australia and other countries, the British Government now limits its income-tax charge on incomes derived by British companies from these countries to the excess, if any, of British tax at the standard rate over the rate of tax paid on such income in these countries. The method thus employed for the avoidance of double taxation of trading profits, etc., is, I understand, based on the credit principle recommended by the Fiscal Committee of the League of Nations.

In the case of a British company which now, by reason of double taxation relief (or tax credit), pays British tax on its profits at a reduced rate, Section 52 of the British Finance (No. 2) Act, 1945, while authorising deduction of British income-tax at the standard rate from dividends paid out of these profits, restricts the rate of tax at which repayment may be made in respect of such dividends to the reduced rate in question.

The Government is about to conclude with the British Government an amending agreement which will recognise as from 1948-49 the restriction referred to as applying to claims by Irish shareholders, under the residence agreement for repayment of British income tax in respect of dividends received from companies affected by the British legislation.

The question may be asked whether Irish shareholders will suffer a hardship by reason of the fact that they will not receive in repayment the full British tax deducted from the dividends in question. This aspect of the matter has been fully considered and I am satisfied that no hardship should in fact arise to Irish holders of ordinary shares in the companies referred to. These companies have now received a benefit by way of double taxation relief which they may utilise either in increasing the ordinary dividend or in expanding the companies' business; in either case it is the ordinary shareholders who benefit.

In the case of preference shares Irish shareholders will in future receive a diminished return, but in this respect they will be in precisely the same position as exempt shareholders in Britain. Prior to 1945 all the burden of foreign or British Dominion tax fell upon the ordinary shareholders, but under the recent British legislation preference shareholders will suffer the foreign or British Dominion tax applicable to the fraction of the gross profits utilised for the payment of their dividends. The position will, therefore, be that while British income-tax at the standard rate will be deducted from preference dividends, repayment of British income-tax cannot be made at a rate greater than that received by the British Exchequer in respect of the profits out of which dividends are in fact paid. Our shareholders could not, of course, expect to receive indefinitely repayment of British income-tax at a rate in excess of that received by the British Exchequer. As preference shareholders are entitled only to a fixed rate of dividend the company cannot make good their loss by increasing the gross dividend.

The alteration in the British law would point to the conclusion that this type of preference shares may have no further attraction for Irish investors after the financial year 1947-48. I understand that the British authorities will repay to Irish residents the full amount of the tax deducted from their dividends upto and including 1947-48, but as accounting arrangements are difficult it may take some time before repayments are effected.

I should add that the charge to Irish tax will not exceed the amount of the net dividends received from the companies together with the amounts of the British repayments and that the amending agreement will not result in any loss of revenue to the Irish Exchequer.

After signature the agreement will be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas and will, of course, be subject to ratification. The necessary legislation confirming the agreement will be introduced in due course.

Mr. Douglas

I am sure that every member of the House will be glad to know that an agreement has been reached. I doubt if many Senators, following the Minister, will be able to grasp exactly the significance of what he said. He did not tell us in plain English whether he regarded it as fully satisfactory or not. At a quick glance, it would seem to be, not perhaps wholly satisfactory, but very much better than the present condition. It is extremely difficult to follow a complicated document of that kind and most of us will feel it cannot be debated now. As the Minister has pointed out, it cannot be ratified without legislation, so it will have to come before both Houses at a time when it can be fully debated and understood.

The Appropriation Bill provides the only occasion when Senators can deal with general subjects affecting administration. We take advantage of the Bill in order to debate many matters which might not come before us in legislation. It is tempting to deal with a very large number of subjects, but I personally propose to confine myself to one or two matters which were debated on the Estimates in the Dáil.

I would like to express my satisfaction at the fact that Ireland was invited to take part in the conference in Paris on what is usually called the Marshall plan. In their efforts to co-operate in plans for European economic recovery, our representatives in Paris have behind them the goodwill and best wishes of the majority of the people at home, irrespective of their political or Party opinions. I think it is important that when political opponents of the Government approve of its external relations policy they should express that approval in public. We in Ireland know quite well that a change of Government, if and when it does occur, will not affect in any way our desire for close relationship with the States of Europe, and with the United States of America, but this may not be widely appreciated outside the country. Now that we are getting a higher place in international affairs, it should be made clear when we are unitedly behind the Government in these matters.

I doubt if it is realised as widely as it should be that we are a European nation, and that our economy is closely linked with that of other European nations. The Minister for Industry and Commerce was right when he said in Paris that to neglect the chances of an all-European plan would have been inexcusable on mere grounds of political consideration. I also agreed with him when he pointed out that

"...the repercussions of economic decline in other countries are particularly felt by small nations, who cannot solve their problem by temporary patching up of their own economies."

I am quoting from the report in the Irish Times.

I am personally glad that the Government applied on behalf of the State for membership of the United Nations Organisation and that our application still stands. We regret that it was not immediately successful, but I do not think it did us any harm and even if it is not successful later, I do not think it will do us any harm either.

The subject of Partition was amongst those discussed in the Dáil on the Estimates. I was glad that the Taoiseach once again repeated his statement that there could be no question of attempting to coerce the people of the Six Counties to unite with us. Every thinking person will agree that the use of force by us or with our approval against our fellow-countrymen in the north-eastern counties is unthinkable, but if force is ruled out the only alternative is persuasion.

Persuasion will take time, and it will succeed only if it is continuous and is the result of a united and well-thoughtout policy. I do not believe that the majority of the people in the Six Counties will ever be convinced of the desirability of a United Ireland by the present policy, which seems to me to consist solely in talking about the wrong of a divided Ireland and explaining that England is largely to blame for it. As a historical fact, this may be true, but simply stating it will not get us anywhere. It only aggravates the English people, who are not interested in the past, and who believe that the only reason why Ireland is partitioned is that the majority in the Six Counties want to stay out. I may be wrong, but I cannot help feeling that it is a mistake to keep on saying that our relationships with Great Britain can never be as friendly as they should be until Partition is ended. I do not doubt that it contains an element of truth, but it is not always wise to keep on making a statement that can be misunderstood simply because it happens largely to be true.

All Parties in this State are convinced that Partition is a bad thing; all are desirous of ending it, but there is no united policy, except a policy of talk, which seems to me to have no effect whatsoever on the majority in the Six Counties—or, if it has any effect, it only makes them more hostile. In my opinion, we should stop talking about the Border and commence an active policy of conciliation and co-operation, especially in economic affairs.

The first step towards persuading another person to your point of view is to understand his mind and outlook, however much you may disagree with it. To understand the mind and outlook of another person, you must meet him and, if possible, work with him. We already co-operate with our fellow-countrymen of the north-east in many ways. None of the Churches or religious denominations in Ireland has been partitioned. This is a fact of more importance than is generally recognised. In the field of sport, there is much co-operation also, and even if this is not perfect, the position is fairly satisfactory.

If we are at some future date to persuade—I want to emphasise the word "persuade" as I am advocating a policy of persuasion—it being agreed that you cannot force the people of the Six Counties to join us except of their own free will, we should seek active co-operation with them in all matters, including politics and economics, and the first steps should come from this side of the Border.

Take the realm of economics first—I think we should aim at removing any cause of irritation which can be removed by unilateral action on our part. First of all, I would like to see an announcement by the Government that it will not encourage any industrial development in the Twenty-Six Counties which would seriously compete with any industry in the Six Counties. Where there happens to be an industry in the Six Counties which, either alone or together with the present production in the Twenty-Six Counties, could supply the whole of Ireland, I think it would be foolish to protect any new industry here which would compete and which might therefore create a new economic interest in the maintenance of the Border. I do not, of course, suggest that we should interfere with private enterprise. If anyone wants to start a new industry here, they know, or at least they ought to know, that some day the Border will disappear, and if that does not interest them from an economic point of view it is their own look-out but it is a very different matter from the Government encouraging such action or protecting such industries.

Next, I think that where there is a protective duty on goods imported into this country, we should provide a special preferential tariff for goods which are certified to have been manufactured in the Six Counties. The more trade we do with the north-east, the more they will understand us and we them. I recognise that this proposal might involve an adjustment or amendment of our trade agreements with Great Britain and possibly Canada, but I do not believe that either of these countries would create serious difficulties.

Our Control of Manufactures Acts should be amended so as to make it easy for citizens of the Six Counties to take part in industrial development on this side of the Border. The more money they have invested here, the more they will be interested in our prosperity and the less they will like the Border.

It has always seemed to me strange and somewhat absurd that we should state in our Constitution that our national territory is the whole of Ireland, and then proceed by legislation to provide that residents in one part of Ireland are not to be regarded as Irish nationals when they invest their money in another part of the national territory. That is the present position. I also think that co-operation between manufacturers in the Six Counties and in the Twenty-Six should be encouraged actively where it is possible. I think if goods have to be finished that are made here they should be sent there in preference to Great Britain, if it can be done, etc. I need not go into the details.

In the realm of politics as distinct from economics, it is not so easy to propose or to suggest unilateral action, but we might at least actively seek cooperation. At first our advances may be coldly received or may even be ignored, but if our deliberate and considered policy is one of persuasion we need not be discouraged and should keep on trying.

I would like to see our Government approaching the Government of Northern Ireland as it is called, and saying in effect—"You know our attitude towards the Border and we know yours. As we have agreed that there can be no question of the use of force against you, is there any reason why we should not consult on matters of common interest without prejudice to our opinions on the question of the Border?"

I would like to see the Minister for Agriculture, for instance, inviting the Minister for Agriculture in Northern Ireland to a conference every year for the purpose of consultation and seeing how far agricultural policy in the whole of Ireland might be coordinated and made uniform where agreement is possible.

The Ministers for Industry and Commerce, Education and Health might seek similar conferences, and if and when these began to meet with some success, as I believe after a time they would, the idea might be extended to almost every Department of Government.

I will probably be told that this is impracticable and would never work. I do not think so, and surely it is worth trying if we are sincere about a policy of persuasion. It may be that the present Government in the Six Counties would refuse at first, but if we repeated our invitations every year in friendly terms I believe the effect on the people of the Six Counties would be considerable, especially on the younger generation. And remember that just as the generation which is now grown up is not much interested in who was out in 1916 or what happened 25 years ago, not nearly as much interested in it as we of an older generation are, so in the Six Counties and amongst what we call the majority there, I know perfectly well that the younger people —and I know quite a number of them and have relatives amongst them—are not a bit interested in the time when "No Surrender" was almost the only thing which one talked about. That may still be used for Orange meetings on the 12th but it does not cut much ice with the younger generation.

I agree very strongly with the Taoiseach when he said that the opinion of the people of Great Britain in relation to Partition is important. It might well be that repeated efforts at co-operation, even if repulsed, might have a very great effect on the people of England and convince them, as they could be convinced in no other way, of our sincerity in desiring the unity of our country.

It may be objected that this would mean the full recognition of the Government of Northern Ireland at least as a de facto Government, and that it would mean at least a tacit acquiescence in Partition. I admit there may be something in that argument, but I would point out that in fact we do recognise Partition by our customs posts on the Border and in many other ways just as theoretically objectionable. We put up notices on our roads by which visitors think they are entering Eire when they cross the Border, when in fact we claim that Eire is the whole of Ireland. While Partition continues it will be impossible to be consistent, and we may as well face this fact.

The Minister for Local Government was reported in the Sunday Independent to have issued an invitation to the people of Northern Ireland to cross the Border and enter a free Ireland. I find it difficult to believe that he was correctly reported, but if he did say this I disagree with him. I would say to our friends in the Six Counties: “Stay where you are and help us to develop a prosperous and contented Ireland, both North and South, and ultimately to abolish the Border by mutual consent.”

If I had my way I would go much further in an active policy to end Partition. I would like to see a Bill introduced amending the Constitution so as to enlarge the Dáil and provide that every elected member of the Northern Parliament who had taken his seat would be allowed also to attend the Dáil as a full member and take part in the Government of the Twenty-Six Counties. This would in effect be to say to the people of the Six Counties: "You are part of our national territory—we cannot force you to let us share in the Government of your area because of the partition of our country but because we wish to create a situation when no one will want Partition we are willing to let your elected representatives share in the government of the Twenty-Six Counties. If you do not like what we do, come and tell us why—there is free speech in our Parliament and you will be welcome."

I am well aware of the arguments that can be advanced against this suggestion. Theoretically it is all wrong to allow people to vote on legislation which will not immediately apply to them or their constituents. It is probably theoretically more objectionable still to allow people to vote on expenditure which their constituents may not have to pay for. I honestly believe, however, that it would be worth overriding these objections, and that if we admitted Six-County representatives to our Parliament as part of an active policy of conciliation and persuasion, it would ultimately result in the abolition of the Border by common consent.

I would not allow elected members of the Northern Parliament to take their seats in the Dáil unless and until they had taken their seats in the Northern Parliament. Unless they had done so, they would be of little value in a policy of conciliation. The ultimate aim would be to secure a majority in the Northern Parliament of members who had also taken their seats in the Dáil, so as to make it possible to have uniform legislation passed for the whole of Ireland.

How would this idea work if it were adopted and a Constitution Bill was introduced and passed by referendum? I think that at first only a few members of the Northern Parliament would take their seats in the Dáil, but at the first election thereafter it would become a question for the electors. Candidates would, I believe, be found who would fight the elections in every constituency on a pledge that if elected they would take their seats in both Parliaments, and it would very soon be the people and not the present Party leaders who would decide the issue.

I believe that every election in the Six Counties would increase the number of members who would sit in the Dáil and in the Northern House of Commons. If I am right in this we would very soon see that it would be impossible for members of the Northern Parliament to sit in the Dáil without making personal friends amongst members representing constituencies on this side of the Border. The value of such friendships would be much greater than years of talking about the evil of Partition. We know perfectly well that although we have amongst us very strong and sometimes violent differences of opinion, personal friendships are in no way confined to Parties. I have heard it said that the only real political enemies one is likely to meet are to be found in one's own Party. We do know that you can have the closest friendships even though there may be disagreements on many matters. That could operate to a very great extent if you only got a small number of representatives of the Six Counties to join with us here. Personally, I would be surprised if, after a very short time, you did not have all Parties in the North divided on the issue as to whether or not they should take their seats in both Parliaments, provided, of course, there was no question of being coerced and no threat of force.

The suggestions I have made may not be practicable in the near future. They could not be carried out unless adopted by the Government and supported by a considerable volume of public opinion. I put them forward here in the hope that they may be discussed by members of all Parties, and that some day a Government on this side of the Border will think out and adopt a policy of active friendship towards the people in the Six Counties as part of a plan for the ending of Partition by persuasion and consent.

I do not, of course, suggest that we should cease to criticise things in the Six Counties, of which we disapprove, or pretend that we do not differ from the majority there on many issues beside that of Partition. I do, however, suggest that the rejection of force as a method of ending the Border and the adoption of a policy of persuasion means that our criticism should be friendly as well as frank, and should, where possible, be done in conference between Ministers from each side of the Border.

A few days ago I was reading through some personal letters I received from Michael Collins in 1922. Some documents and papers belonging to the White Cross, of which I was the treasurer, had been seized in St. Mary's Hall, Belfast, by the then Craig Government. I asked Michael Collins to see if there was anything he could do about getting the papers back. He promised to get in touch with Sir James Craig, as he was then, and in the letter which I still have, Michael Collins informed me that he had received a promise from Sir James Craig that the papers would be handed over to the White Cross.

If it was possible to have a delicate matter like that put right in 1922 by personal contact between the head of the then Irish Government and the head of the Government of the Six Counties—is it unreasonable to hope that in 1947 similar methods might not produce similar results? Persuasion, if it is to succeed, will mean not only patience and perseverance, but also a considerable amount of Christian forbearance.

When asked by the Apostle Peter: "How oft shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him—until seven times?", Our Lord replied: "Until seventy times seven." The advice given by Our Lord might very well be adopted on both sides of the Border. It should be remembered that if we think we have been sinned against by the Six-County Government in the treatment of minorities and in their determination to continue the partition of our country, they are equally convinced that we have sinned against them by rejecting many things which they hold dear such, for instance, as retaining the King for external purposes only. I understood from reading—I thought carefully— the speech made by the Taoiseach in the Dáil recently that he would not favour any further constitutional or legal changes in our relationships with the King or with the Commonwealth unless and until such changes could be made by a united Ireland. However anomolous and open to theoretic criticism the present position may be, I felt that the decision of the Taoiseach was a wise one—to leave well alone. I was, therefore, somewhat astonished to read in yesterday's Irish Press that President O'Kelly told the Ballina branch of the Gaelic League that: “Every man and woman of them could play their part to put an end to the last link of the British Empire within our land.” Most people I think will assume that this statement was made on the advice of or with the knowledge of the Government. Without some further explanation it may be regarded, perhaps, as a reversal of the policy announced by the Taoiseach. All the suggestions I have made to-day are on the assumption that that is not the case, and that the policy of the Government is to continue such links as do now exist with the British Commonwealth.

I hate the term "British Empire"— and I always did—but I believe that, as far as this country both North and South is concerned, the old British Empire died and was buried when the Statute of Westminster became law. The representatives of this country played quite a considerable part in the killing and also, I think, in the decent burial of it.

It is my considered opinion, based on a fair amount of contact with people in the Six Counties, that there are a large number of persons in the Six Counties more or less supporters of the majority party there, who would be ready to co-operate with us in the building of a prosperous Ireland if they could do so without feeling that they were sacrificing opinions which they hold honestly and sincerely. But they will not do so if their actions can be taken as helping to put an end to the last link with the British Empire or the British Commonwealth.

If we really hope to end Partition some day by "persuasion", this kind of talk by responsible persons should cease. Instead of talking about ending the last link, we should say to the people of the north-east counties: "We are now recognised by the world as an independent State and are free to act as we think right. It is our interest as well as yours that we should have the friendliest possible relations with Great Britain and the Commonwealth. If we had your co-operation, we believe the relationships could be put on a more permanent and satisfactory basis. Why not help us to do this?"

Mr. Counihan

It is very difficult to come down to commonplace subjects after the speech of Senator Douglas; but I very rarely take any part in high politics. Agriculture and the cattle trade are my only consideration. Senator Sir John Keane thought that in discussing these Money Bills we should have a free-for-all discussion. I find that on all Money Bills in this House consideration is given to income-tax, supertax, excess profits tax and import duties tax. No consideration is given to the adverse trade balance which this country is piling up and how the money is to be found to meet that adverse trade balance, a matter which is so essential in order to maintain the standard of living of our people. Our adverse trade balance in 1946 was over £33,000,000. I saw in the newspapers a few days ago that the value of our imports for the month of March was two and a half times higher than the value of our exports for that month. I feel that that is a serious matter when last year we were only able to import a quarter of the goods we require—if we could get them—and our adverse trade balance was £33,000,000. What would the adverse trade balance be if we could get all the goods which it is necessary to import?

Ninety per cent. of our exports consist of live stock and live-stock products. These exports are decreasing to an alarming extent. When the cattle trade draw the attention of the Government to that fact, the Minister for Agriculture says that our statements are only half-truths, but official returns prove that our statements are whole truths. We have pointed out that calves were slaughtered by the thousand and that, if something was not done to encourage farmers to rear more calves, in a very short time beef would become as scarce in this country as bacon and be sold from under the counter. We pointed out that it was wrong policy to allow the creameries to sell their separated milk for manufacturing purposes, for making chocolates, cheese and dried milk. We recommended very strongly that the separated milk should be given back to the farmers for the rearing of calves, pigs and poultry. No notice was taken of that recommendation.

We pointed out that the cattle population of the world has very much decreased and that calves were slaughtered in Great Britain and Northern Ireland as well as in our own country; that the number of calves killed in Northern Ireland had risen from 500 in 1945 to 32,000 in 1946; that the cattle, sheep and pig population of England and Wales was down this year by 1,343,000, and that the position in Scotland did not show any improvement on that. Although all those figures were taken from official returns, the Minister still contended that they were only half truths.

Farmers outside the dairying districts are now anxious to get calves to rear, but they cannot get them. Because of the slaughter of calves, a calf which a month ago could be bought for a few shillings in the dairying districts is now costing £5. The Minister for Agriculture says our dairy cattle are bred on the wrong lines. I suppose he is out to scrap the Hogan Live-Stock Breeding Act. If he does that, he is out to ruin our live-stock trade. He believes that by introducing Friesians, Jerseys and other milk breeds he will transport our dairy farmers to the Milky Way. I think he will be supported in that proposal by his countyman, Senator Baxter, and some members of the I.A.O.S. who have also their eye on these constellations.

We produce in this country the best cattle in the world and I believe that the milk yield could be increased to the standard of either the Friesians or the Jerseys if the farmers had money to do it and got some encouragement and advice from the Department of Agriculture and the I.A.O.S., which was definitely proved at the last Royal Dublin Society's Spring Show. The best cow in that Spring Show was a non-pedigree dairy Shorthorn. She produced one gallon of milk more in 24 hours than the Friesians and the little miniature Kerry produced only one pound of milk less than the famous Ayrshire. That shows that if any attention was given to the matter, the breed of cattle in this country at present could be improved to the standard of these foreign breeds which are so much praised in this country. When I hear some people in this House talking about what they are doing in Holland, New Zealand and Denmark, I am reminded of tales like that I used to hear in my native county of Kerry. There was an old friend of mine who always quashed the discussion by saying: "Bíonn adharca fada ar na buaibh thar lear." I think that would be very appropriate to those people who praise what other countries are doing.

Sir John Keane

Give us a translation.

Mr. Counihan

If Senator Sir John Keane, who is a descendant of Conn of the Hundred Battles, asked me something with regard to banking or currency or the cattle trade, I would advise him and enlighten him; I think that Senator Sir John Keane has as good a right to know Irish as I have, and if his illustrious progenitor knew of his asking such question in an Irish Parliament he would turn in his grave.

The Taoiseach, in a recent statement in the Dáil, said that, for the purpose of facilitating the early marriage of farmers' sons, he favoured dower houses. He was very pleased that he got a farmer Deputy to agree with him in that proposal and I should be glad if the Minister would tell the Taoiseach that there is a farmers' representative in this House who also agrees with him. Dower houses are nothing new in this country. They were in existence long before the British invasion, I understand. There were always dower houses, but they were the property of landed proprietors. Since the late Mr. Paddy Hogan's Act, we are all landed proprietors, and it would be well for the Taoiseach, if he is serious about it, to call a conference to consider the whole question. That conference might also consider the possibility of having our land entailed. It would be a good policy to have the land of the larger farmers entailed, so as to make certain that the heir at law, the farmer's son, would come into the property and would not be dependent on the whim of, perhaps, a contrary father who might cut him completely out. If the Taoiseach wants dower houses, there are a great many factors from the farming point of view to be considered. I think it a very wise and sound policy, and, if the Taoiseach is anxious about it and calls the conference I suggest, I am sure he will get the support of the farmers for it.

I want to make one final point, because I know that the cattle trade is not a very pleasant subject for professors and many of the people here.

Mr. Hayes

A monstrous suggestion.

Mr. Counihan

During the 1914-18 war, farmers made some money. The banks shovelled out to them all the money they wanted. At that time, the rate of interest was 5 per cent. and it was possible for us to pay the interest on £100 with two barrels of barley. As soon as the depression came, the rate went up, after 1920, to 5¼ per cent. It rose within the six months to 5½ per cent., and, in the following year, to 6 per cent. and later to 6½ per cent. The greater the depression amongst the farmers, the higher the banks raised the rate, until finally, in 1925, when we went off the gold standard and our money was deflated to an enormous extent, they raised the rate to 8 per cent.

Professor Johnston

In 1931.

Mr. Baxter

They went back to gold in 1925.

Sir John Keane

Might I ask the Senator what the deposit rate went up to?

Mr. Counihan

Farmers had not got such a lot of deposits. They were concerned with paying the interest on their enormous overdrafts. I do not want to have any slap at the banks, but I think they were very foolish in doing that. The greater the depression in the agricultural industry, the higher the banks raised the interest rate, instead of saying with regard to the thousands of pounds they had given out to the farmers: "You can have this money at 2½, 3 or 4 per cent", or at the rate at which they had borrowed it. Instead of doing that, they raised the rate to 8 per cent. in 1925. I notice that Senator Sir John Keane agrees with that.

Sir John Keane

No.

Mr. Counihan

I know what I am talking about—I paid it. These are facts. The farmers now have got back a little money after the recent war. They did not get it back on the tillage business, but any farmer who had some cattle grazing got some money back. If the banks, however, now adopt the policy they adopted after the 1914-18 war, when they cleaned out every form of working capital the farmers had and left them with nothing to carry on with —they paid up to the last until they found they could pay no more—they will find that, as in the case of the 1914-18 war, there will be a loss to the banks. The banks were paying dividents of 12 and 15 per cent. and putting thousands to reserve at that time. They apparently felt that to pay more than 12 per cent. to the shareholders would look bad, so they put thousands to their reserve fund. I do not know whether the Minister has power under the Central Bank Act to regulate interest rates, but, if he has not, he should take power to see that the banks do not fleece the farmers as they did after the 1914-18 war.

Mr. Baxter

Senator Counihan was unusually versatile this evening. He claimed that it was not his intention to ascend to the plane to which Senator Douglas raised the debate, but I think he had flights of fancy which rather tickled the House. The difficulty for the House and for the Minister is that the possibilities of this debate are so wide and the opportunities for the House to survey Government policy so few that one is tempted to address oneself to a great many issues at the same time and perhaps suffer a handicap as a consequence. I should like to hear from the Minister some statement with regard to the position in which this country finds itself now after the fateful date, 15th July, when the Washington Ageement becomes operative. There has been no public indication of what the results of the coming into operation of that agreement will be for us.

I think the public are entitled to know, and I hope the Minister will, however briefly, address himself to that situation. The consequences for the nation are very considerable. This is really a vital matter. It is very important that we should know what the policy of the Government is. We know that agreements have been entered into, some of them of a temporary nature. A statement was made yesterday with regard to the holding over of the operation of agreements in the case of some European countries. Where do we come in? Has any agreement been made between this country and Britain in regard to this matter? I hope the Minister will enlighten us.

Senator Douglas addressed himself to the representation of this nation at the recent talks in Paris. We were all gratified that our country was represented there by An Tánaiste. So far as we can gather from Press reports and radio broadcasts, we have no reason to be dissatisfied with the results. I suggest, however, that in international conferences of this nature it is of the greatest importance that the Government should give consideration to broadening the basis of our representation. I have no desire to be critical of the manner in which we were represented, or the competence of our spokesmen and their advisers, but it must be noticed that next in command to the British Foreign Secretary in the British delegation was an economist from Oxford.

I am convinced that, small as this country is, it has a very vital part to play in these conferences and it would be quite competent to play that part if we made a selection from the talent available to us. I believe that the prestige of our nation could be raised among the nations and carefully selected representatives would give our leaders great assistance and great encouragement. They would be much better informed. I am satisfied from recent experiences I have had, that that is a most important factor.

At the Paris conference we were definitely at a disadvantage with regard to any statements that might be made about our agricultural plans or the possibilities of our agricultural production. I have again to express my disappointment that we have not yet any clear indication of the policy to be pursued here in agricultural matters. I recognise there is a short-term and a long-term policy. I hope the experience gained by our Minister for Agriculture—for him a new experience—from foreign contacts, the experience of learning what other nations are doing from some of their leading spokesmen, will bring home to him some appreciation of the necessity in this country of facing up to agricultural problems in a way which we have not so far attempted.

Members of the House will feel that I am harping too much on this matter. If I were satisfied, I would not speak of it. No member of the House would be more willing than I to subscribe to something that is progressive. I have done it in the case of other Ministers. I have to confess, however, that as regards agriculture we are behind Europe. We are definitely behind the people in the Six Counties, and in that connection I challenge the Minister, who knows the conditions as well as I do, to contradict me. I have some experience of the conditions there and so has he. I will point to the report issued by the Minister of Agriculture in Northern Ireland recently and I ask Senators to compare the survey made by the Northern people with the report recently produced for us by a number of competent people. When one measures the dimensions of the Northern survey with the restrictive survey, the narrow approach, made in the Twenty-Six Counties, one must recognise that there is something lacking here in drive and initiative.

There is definitely something that is holding us back. I do not know whether it is the responsibility of the Government as a whole or the Minister, or where the weakness really lies, but as a farming community it is beyond all question that we are not doing anything comparable to what we might do if our plans were more soundly laid. I do not want to dwell on this matter unduly, but I deplore the fact that a long-term agricultural policy is being so long delayed.

We know quite well that the best we were able to do during the war years was to maintain our production at the pre-war level. Measure our production against the production of other countries, such as the Six Counties, England, Scotland and Wales or any of the Americas, especially those portions that were doing battle at the same time as they were working their land, and you will find that our seat is a very backward seat indeed. That is due to a variety of causes.

I said on the Finance Bill the other day I was very disappointed with the expenditure in the Department of Agriculture. I do not see our Minister for Agriculture doing anything new. I am a member of the committee of agriculture in my own county. I recollect what was being done by the agricultural instructor there 20 years ago and the man who occupies that position to-day is doing hardly anything new. Let us admit that is the situation and let us try to get on from that. If the Minister for Agriculture appreciates that fact and makes an effort to progress he will get the enthusiastic backing of all farmers, irrespective of Party. There is nothing more depressing for intelligent farmers than the knowledge that our agricultural production is low and our methods are far behind those of progressive countries.

Senator Counihan has left the Chamber, but he has fired his shots. He referred to our live-stock industry. I think he was speaking for the cattle trade more than for the cattle producers. He talked about breeds of cattle and about a beast at the recent Ballsbridge Show. I was on a small farm in Holland not very long ago. There were 18 cows there and the average yield for the 18 cows was over 1,000 gallons of milk per year. At a shilling a gallon that meant £50 for each cow. That was on a 100-acre farm. I was on another farm and the farmer there had a silo filled with grass. He was making silage on the A.I.V. method. These are factors that have made a tremendous impression on the economic lives of many European countries. We have been blind to them and it has been rather disastrous for us.

I am not going to hold the House much longer but I should like to hear the Minister on one or two matters. I do not know what the experience of other country Senators is but, without being an alarmist, quite frankly I am rather frightened at the prospects for this season. I suggest to the Minister that unless a very great miracle happens, fuel stocks and fuel supplies will not this year be anything like adequate to our needs. In my own county, where the local authority has been attempting to provide fuel for the county institutions, the grass is growing over the footings of turf in the bogs. I do not know what conditions are like elsewhere but that is the position in regard to fuel supplies in my county. Other Senators can speak for their own areas. I believe that it is a prospect about which there should be genuine alarm. I do not know what the Ministry are doing about it, but I definitely feel that they must do something and they must do it quickly. I know they cannot improve the weather and you cannot dry turf in bad weather, but if you are not going to have turf you must do something to build up reserves of other fuel.

Some of the southern farmers tell me that the crops in their areas are looking well. I came by train from my own home town yesterday through portion of my own county, Monaghan, Louth and portion of County Dublin. I should like to hear what the Minister has to say about conditions in his own constituency but in my observations, I saw many poor, ragged, miserable potato crops. The condition of the potato crop in County Louth is much worse than ever I have seen it in my life. In many fields the stalks are only just coming over the soil. The oat crop is standing still, not doing a thing. With a prospect like that, I think we should not blind ourselves to the facts and the dangers ahead. It behoves us accordingly to face up to that situation and to know what Government policy is in the circumstances. Miracles happen, the weather clears up and we forget our troubles but in a variety of ways the output from our bogs and our fields this year as far as one can see will not be anything like adequate to our needs or anything like what we were able to reach last year. In a situation like that a serious responsibility devolves on the Government to meet the crisis. We may be facing a crisis and it is important that we should hear from the Minister what the Government's view of the position is and what steps are being taken by them to meet the situation.

Professor Johnston

So many things are in order for discussion on a Bill like this that one is tempted to say quite a lot about a number of very different topics. I should like to refer quite briefly to some of the matters that have been mentioned by former speakers. If I did so in the order in which I noted them down, the result would be probably somewhat incoherent, but if I attempted to deal with them in their logical order, I should probably miss some of the things to which I should like to refer. I should like first of all cordially to approve of the idea recommended by the Taoiseach and by Senator Counihan that some serious attempt should be made to finance the provision of dower houses on all but the very small farms throughout the country in order to facilitate the release of our agriculture from the dead hand of ageing people and to encourage the young to get married and to take effective control of these farms while they are still young and enterprising. I am not quite so sure about the Senator's other suggestion about entailing property, especially of the larger farms. It might have results which would not be desired by Senator Counihan. It would certainly tend to undermine the value of a holding as a possible source of mortgage credit. Whether that is something which the Senator would desire I do not know. If the idea is worthy of consideration, as it probably is, I hope it will receive such consideration from people who are competent to judge of its feasibility.

I should like to say that I, too, was very glad that our Government was able to take part in the recent European conferences. I am sure that the part our representatives played there is disproportionally more influential than the size and the population of our country would appear to justify. I know that we are only a small country but we have a contribution to make to the various international problems which now threaten the safety of the world. It is only right and proper that we should approach these problems with a desire to co-operate, to contribute as well as to receive. We can contribute to the solution of such problems with profit to ourselves, both morally and economically. We may even draw a greater measure of profit from them than we can contribute to the needs of others.

It is tempting to make some remarks about the very large issue which was raised by the first speaker, Senator Douglas, on the somewhat thorny problem of Partition. It is easy to say something in that connection which might do more harm than good and I should hate to be the person guilty of any such crime. But I think it is only fair to say that there is at present a good deal of de facto friendly co-operation going on between North and South, between officials of the Government of Northern Ireland and officials of the Government in Eire and even a good deal of friendly personal intercourse at a high level between prominent political personalities associated with our Government and prominent political personalities associated with the Government of Northern Ireland. That is altogether as it should be and it is very desirable that it should take place. If I have any criticism to make, it is that in this matter we appear to be rather ashamed of our virtues. We do not hear enough about these friendly contacts that take place between prominent personalities North and South and we do not take enough credit for the fact that it is our policy to work in a friendly atmosphere to arrive at a solution of the various problems common to both areas. That is not to say that that degree of friendly co-operation is not capable of improvement.

One suggestion that occurs to me is that there might be an exchange of Blue Books about problems which are in fact common to both areas. We lately produced a report on post-emergency agricultural policy. I have no doubt that that report was studied by the people who were investigating a similar problem in Northern Ireland. They have lately produced a report which has been very highly spoken of I have no doubt that that report could be studied with profit by us but it would be, I think, altogether preferable if there was an arrangement between both Governments that they should automatically circulate to members of Parliament both North and South Blue Books and reports of that kind which relate to problems which, though technically confined to one area, are in fact of common interest in both areas. I make that suggestion for what it is worth in the hope that some arrangement along these lines will be adopted. To mention some of the matters in which there is de facto co-operation between North and South, we have here in Dublin a veterinary college which caters for students from North and South as well as perhaps for a limited number of students from other parts of the world. I think that it is Government policy that we should continue to educate students from Northern Ireland in our veterinary college. Certainly, the people up there have not found themselves under any necessity to establish a veterinary college of their own. That the veterinary college is common to all Ireland ought to be a source of profound satisfaction to us all, for not only is it evidence of an existing desirable relationship between North and South but it is a guarantee of co-operation in education dealing with veterinary diseases.

Any public policy concerned with the elimination of tuberculosis or the various other diseases to which cattle are liable must treat the Border as simply non-existent because disease germs have no respect for customs posts and are quite capable of crossing the Border in either direction. Consequently, any effective, long-term policy for the elimination of veterinary diseases in Ireland must be one that is common to all Ireland. The fact that the veterinary college is already common to all Ireland is a guarantee that such a policy will have nation-wide application.

Then, we have the well-known fact that our Government contemplate the harnessing of the River Erne for the provision of hydro-electric energy, and the fact that co-operation with the North was sought and was forthcoming for that very desirable object to such an extent that a Bill was promoted in the British House of Commons to make it possible for the Northern Government to co-operate with us in that project. The fact that that was done, and is going to be done on that scale, is a thing which we might very well regard as highly satisfactory and one about which the Government should be very proud and pleased. The difficulties between North and South do not concern the personal relations between high-level personalities, either political or administrative, in that area and in this area but belong to a lower stratum of society in Northern Ireland. I happen to have been born and brought up in that part of the country and only a person who really knows the tough characters that exist in that part of the island can have any conception of the kind of human problem you are up against in trying to educate the whole of my co-religionists in Northern Ireland into a more tolerant outlook on the national ideal. I might, in a sense, describe myself as having been born in the strictest sect of the Pharisees but that would not mean that I was born in an Orange atmosphere.

On the contrary, my particular environment was one which had inherited a great deal of the Ulster liberal tradition and, in particular, the tradition of association with our Roman Catholic countrymen in opposition to the old landlordism. Yet, I was perfectly conscious of the influence of the more extreme form of Orange mentality some 40 or 50 years ago. Although, in the environment in which I found myself, it was considered not quite respectable to belong to the Orange Order, nevertheless, the ideas associated with the Orange Order were even then very influential. I regret to say that in the decades which have passed since then the tide of that ideology has risen and practically submerged the whole of Protestant Ulster, so that I do not know to what extent the particular strand of Protestant community I belong to can still be regarded as having retained its tolerant outlook on things religious and political. The people who are the real difficulty in the Northern Ireland situation are not the leaders. They are the ordinary people in factory and field who regard their Roman Catholic countrymen in all parts of the country as one of the most regrettable mistakes of the Almighty. I just do not see what we can do to change that beyond leaving them to the slow processes of time and to the developing educational effect of local self-government and gradually-increasing contracts with their countrymen, both in North and South. That will take time. It will be a slow business to get those people to take a more Irish outlook on things.

Meanwhile, if their leaders were to take a step in the direction of closer friendship and political co-operation with the rest of the country, they would probably find themselves deserted by their followers and would lose their function as leaders, because these northerners are extremely independent and, if the leaders behaved as they consider a certain Colonel Lundy behaved on a certain occasion, they would have no hesitation in changing those leaders and finding other leaders more to their liking. I do not know whether or not that is an accurate description of the present state of feeling in Protestant Ulster. It was, probably, true enough 10 or 20 years ago and, if it is not quite so accurate now, I should be glad to know that that is the case. I think that the real problem in dealing with the North is not leaders but followers. Neither Senator Douglas nor I can be regarded in any sense as typical Northern Protestants. We both have a liberal tradition, a liberal outlook on life and are not in any way influenced by the kind of ideology that is all too prevalent amongst the majority of our co-religionists in Northern Ireland.

That brings me more closely into contact with the subject-matter of the Appropriation Bill. As to that, there are a couple of points which I should like to discuss. I notice that the Minister has made provision for subsidising the provision of greenhouses in the Gaeltacht with a view to the cultivation of tomatoes and the like in that area. I should like to give my strongest possible support to the general idea underlying that proposition. More money can be made in a few square yards of tomatoes in the Gaeltacht than can be otherwise made in many square acres of the poor land most of these people happen to possess. Tomato culture is ideally suited to the conditions of the Gaeltacht.

To be really profitable, it is desirable that the greenhouses should be heated during certain seasons of the year. They do not require a great deal of heat but it is highly desirable that the temperature should be prevented from falling below 55 degrees Fahrenheit. If you can achieve that result, you can have early tomatoes for which you can command highly attractive prices, as at present. We have difficulties in Dublin in heating greenhouses. I myself was overcome by these difficulties when I attempted to provide heat in my greenhouse in the early part of the year. All the fuel I could raise in any legitimate way was required for other purposes. The people of the Gaeltacht suffer from no such disability because they have quantities of turf available all around which can be had for the labour of digging. It has not to be transported any great distance. It is perfectly feasible to heat a greenhouse or, at all events, a small greenhouse by using peat mould—that by product of turf which cannot be burned in ordinary grates and which is frequently thrown out and wasted. I know, because I myself built a kind of fireplace in my own greenhouse which quite efficiently burns peat mould and which can be kept alive night and day. A final stoking about bedtime will keep it alive until the morning and in that way the temperature can be prevented from falling below the critical minimum. Of course, there may be better methods for the utilisation of peat mould than the stove which I myself constructed. I know, for instance, that there is a kind of slow combustion stove, made of metal, which costs about £4 or £5 and which will burn peat mould quite efficiently and keep alive all night and prevent the temperature from falling too low. For these reasons the Gaeltacht is ideally situated with a view to the large-scale production of tomatoes. The more the people of that area can be encouraged to grow tomatoes and to heat the greenhouses in which they grow them the better for themselves and for the country as a whole.

Strawberry culture, also, is something which is entirely appropriate to the climate and soil of the Gaeltacht or, at all events to the County Mayo. I understand that strawberry plants in any other part of these islands are liable to a virus disease which sooner or later destroys them and the stocks have to be replaced. The climate of County Mayo is such that the insect or whatever brings the disease cannot survive in that climate. Consequently the strawberries of County Mayo are free from virus disease. Elsewhere in these islands strawberry stocks have to be renewed and plants have frequently to be got from County Mayo. That being so, obviously, strawberry culture is another economic activity that should be encouraged by every method of Government policy and persuasion that can be brought to bear on the people of that area, not only for the provision of fresh strawberries but also for the provision of strawberry plants to be exported to other countries. Again, I will say that there is more money in a few square yards of strawberries in County Mayo than might well be found in a few square acres of otherwise very indifferent agricultural land.

Controversy exists with regard to the doing of things through the medium of Irish. I can see no objection to the cultivation of tomatoes or strawberries through the medium of Irish. I would like to know if it is possible for a County Mayo man or for any other person who speaks and thinks in Irish naturally to acquire a leaflet in the Irish language telling him how to grow tomatoes and strawberries. I would like to know if Department leaflets are printed in Irish for circulation in the Gaeltacht which tell the inhabitant of the Gaeltacht how to go about the cultivation of tomatoes and strawberries and, if not, why not? I speak without knowledge, but for the purpose of acquiring information. The policy implied in this tomato-house business and I hope also in the encouragement of the growing of strawberries is one with a larger application than, perhaps, appeared to the Minister at the time. It may have spiritual and cultural aspects as well as merely material aspects. If a genuine economic foundation can be put underneath the people of the Gaeltacht thus making it possible for them to flourish in that environment more will be done for the preservation of the Irish language and the particular type of culture associated with that language than anything we can do by way of purely intellectual activity in the schools.

I think also it would be well to approach the Gaelic question from the point of view of whether Gaelic can become a bond of union between the North and South and between the various elements in this country as a whole on this side of the Border rather than a source of division. In that connection I recall again certain ancient memories. I remember the time when the Gaelic League was founded. I remember that even in the atmosphere in which I then lived in the County Tyrone it was a thrill to come across the first volume of O'Growney and to discover that there was actually spoken by people in the same island a language which had many points of interest even for us in the "Black North". We were, naturally, interested in the names of places. It was quite interesting to us to be able to translate the names of different places into something that had a meaning. That is only one aspect of the appeal which some knowledge of Irish makes even to people completely lacking in any direct contact with the Gaelic tradition. The fact that the Gaelic League set out to preserve the knowledge of Irish in the country was not without awakening a sympathetic reaction even in the most unexpected quarters in Northern Ireland. Whatever may be the matters of controversy—and I want to ignore them completely in this connection—I think one might emphasise that there are perfectly good reasons of a cultural character why we should desire that the Irish language should continue to be spoken in the Gaeltacht and even that the frontiers of the Gaeltacht should, if possible, expand. The Irish language is the repository of a folklore and a tradition which goes back not only to the beginning of Irish history but right back beyond the times of Roman invasion in European history and even to pre-Christian times too—right back to the dim recesses of the very beginning of human civilisation on this continent.

The fact that Ireland escaped the conquest and invasion of the Roman Empire gives that particular tradition a value which it would not otherwise possess and makes it an object of profound interest to scholars, who are interested in these matters, from the most diverse countries in Europe. We are, or we ought to be, familiar with the fact that scholars of European fame come over here to study Irish in the Blasket Islands and elsewhere. They have very good cultural and archaelogical reasons for that interest. It would be a disaster, not only from a national point of view but from a European point of view, and from the point of view of human civilisation in general, if the Irish language ceased to be the spoken language of the people of the Gaeltacht. Therefore, I personally hope that that language will continue to be spoken in that particular area and even in a wider area than the present Gaeltacht. Yet I see the immense difficulties that are about to confront that language if any attempt is made to spread the knowledge of the spoken language throughout the whole of Ireland. It might be possible to secure substantial agreement about the ideal of establishing or preserving a geographically bilingual civilisation in much the same way as in Canada where you have French-speaking Canada and English-speaking Canada, or in South Africa, where you have Dutch-speaking South Africa and English-speaking South Africa, and between the two there is more or less a perfect state of social and political equilibrium.

The real danger is that Gaelic will disappear completely from the parts of the country where it is the natural and inherited language of the people. If that happens, it will be a poor substitute if the rest of the country, once the link with the past is broken, could establish some kind of spurious modern Gaelic based only on the learning of the schools. We ought to concentrate on preserving the language in the Gaeltacht and if that policy is pursued with success—and the provision of economic assistance for the Gaeltacht is an essential feature of the policy—you will do quite a lot to develop an interest in and a desire to learn the language on the part of the people living in the Galltacht, as they would naturally desire to be able to hold social intercourse with their fellow-countrymen in the Irish-speaking regions. The more important the Gaeltacht can become from that point of view and the more vitalised it can be, from the point of view of the part it plays in the life of the nation as a whole, the greater the desire of the people in the Galltacht to acquire that knowledge because of their natural desire to use it in intercourse with their fellow-countrymen when paying a visit to the west.

The fact that the Gaeltacht does contain a language and civilisation so different from the rest of the country and, indeed, so different from anything else in Europe, is one of the attractions of this country to the best kind of visitor and tourist. I have often come across a most interesting type of English tourist in the most outlying parts of Donegal or the West of Ireland quite different from the kind of "trippery" person you might meet any day in Skerries or Bray. The fact that the West has this traditional Irish culture, as well as other attractions of scenery and so on, is something which appeals to that particular type of tourist and visitor and one would like to continue to encourage them.

As I see it, then, the real problem is to preserve the Gaeltacht in an economic and cultural sense and to concentrate on that particular kind of policy which ought to arouse no controversy in any part of the country, on this side of the Border or the other. Let the problems that agitate us so frequently, and which arouse such acute controversy, await a solution in the course of the next decade or two, when we will be in a better position, if we are still alive, to solve those problems.

Sir John Keane

I do not intend to follow the previous speaker very closely, but I would like to congratulate the Minister on this dual taxation agreement which has been reached. I do not pretend to understand it in detail.

Mr. Sweetman

If you did, you would not congratulate him on it.

Sir John Keane

It is not satisfactory?

Mr. Sweetman

Not at all.

Sir John Keane

Then I do it with due reservation. Anyhow, it has this aspect—that there is no longer any suggestion of a breach of agreement; whatever is done now is agreed between the two Governments. I understand that any taxation which has been deducted hitherto, up to the present, will be made good. Am I wrong? That is the result of my cursory examination of this statement the Minister has made. I must await further examination before I put forward any considered conclusion.

I hope I am on safer ground when I congratulate the Government on being so prompt in accepting the invitations to the Paris Conference. It is very gratifying to feel that we are associated in world affairs through our presence at that conference.

I was interested and somewhat startled to hear the proposals made by Senator Douglas regarding closer union with the North. I was in complete agreement with him in regard to his economic proposals and I think it would be very satisfactory if, before we protected any industries here, we should see whether there is any similar industry in the North that might serve the whole of Ireland and come to a reciprocal agreement on those lines. With regard to the proposal that members of the Northern Ireland Parliament should be eligible to sit in the Dáil, I can see very serious repercussions. Fancy the Government being turned out of office by the vote of the Northern members. It would raise a curious constitutional position. I am all for the exercise of the utmost imagination in political developments, but I think the practical application of the doctrine of the Sermon on the Mount to politics might have curious results. In any case, it would necessitate a complete revision of our own Constitution.

I do not believe the right approach is to be calling constantly on our Government to improve our agriculture. There is a lot the farmers might do by their own association and initiative. The co-operative movement has largely developed agriculture in Denmark and we have here to a gratifying extent a co-operative movement, the extension of which is the most important step that could be taken in the revival of our agriculture. There is a great danger in the Government coming along and holding people's hands when they do not understand what is being done. There is a tendency to rely on the Government and exploit the Government. These grants the farmers are getting at cheap rates are very often not appreciated and do more harm than good. There is an old saying: "If you get money for nothing, you will get nothing for money."

With regard to separated milk, Senator Counihan seemed to think the Government should intervene to direct the farmer what to do with it. Surely the co-operative people are free agents and can be trusted to do the best thing? If they choose to sell it for chocolate or other by-products, it is not the business of the Government to interfere. Education is the real solution of the farmers' problem. High on the priorities is a practical demonstration of an economic farm. Ever since I have been in public life, I have implored the Government to encourage demonstration farms on a proper profit and loss basis, where the farmer could see in his own district a farm somewhat similar in size to what he works himself, with a balance sheet showing the amount of profit on capital. That would be better education and a better thing for agriculture than any of the spoon-feeding which seems to be called for from all quarters.

There is one small parochial matter I would ask the Government to consider, that is, to use all their influence to preserve the amenities of our cities. The Government gives grants to local authorities and I think it is to be deplored that, in Dublin, one of the city's greatest charms, the verges of grass on the canal banks, has been swept away. Long lines of concrete are being put in their place. There is no attempt in many cases to replace trees. Certain of the modern frontages in our city, surrounded by Georgian architecture, are deplorable. As the Minister may know, an atrocity has been perpetrated in the form of an enclosure on the canal bank in the region of Harcourt Terrace. Some 80 yards in length of the canal bank have been enclosed by ugly, old corrugated sheeting. Formerly the public had access to the canal bank where there is now this horrible enclosure. These are outrages on the amenities of our city. I do not know who is responsible. Apparently, in the case of that enclosure there is divided responsibility between the canal authority and the corporation. I am not going to pursue the matter but I do think that the Government should be concerned to preserve in any way it can the amenities of our city.

Liam Ó Buachalla

Is mór an sásamh teacht isteach go dtí an díospóireacht seo agus a bheith ag éisteacht leis na hiarrachtaí atá déanta ag na Seanadóirí ar chabhair éigin a thabhairt don Aire Airgeadais. Is mór an chúis sásaimh é sin i gcomórtas leis na hiarrachtaí a rinneadh sa Teach eile le dímheas do chaitheamh ar a chuid oibre agus gan cabhair ar bith a thabhairt dó. Im thaobh féin de, nil mórán le rá agam ach amháin mo bhuíochas a ghlacadh leis an Aire Airgeadais go speisialta as ucht an méid suime atá léirithe aige i gcúrsaí na Gaeltachta agus as ucht an méid atá déanta aige agus atá beartaithe aige le cuidiú leis na daoine sna dúthaí sin. Ba mhaith liom go háirithe a chur in iúl dó chomh mór agus atá muintir na Gaeltachta faoi chomaoin aige, mar is aige atá siad faoi chomaoin, mar gheall ar an scéim a bhí i gceist ag an Seanadóir Mac Eoin anois beag, scéim na dtithe gloine. Is fada daoine ag caint ar an nGaeltacht agus is ró-fhada go leor againn ag caint agus gan aon mholadh cinnte indéanta dá léiriú againn ach sa gcás seo, maraon le cásanna eile, ní caint atá déanta ag an Aire ach gníomh.

An méid adúirt an Seanadóir Mac Eoin mar gheall ar thábhacht na scéime, aontaím leis agus ní dóigh liom gur gá dom aon ní a chur leis. Tá muinín mhór agam as muintir na Galltachta agus mura n-éiríonn leis an scéim ní horthu a bheas an milleán.

An méid a luaigh an Seanadóir Mac Eoin i dtaobh sú talún a chur ag fás sa nGaeltacht, tá mórán brí ann, dar liom. Blianta fada ó shoin a chuir ceann de na comhluchta sú i mBaile Atha Cliath, Muintir Lambe, sílim, triail ar bun sna ceantair mhóna féachaint an bhfeilfeadh dúiche mhóna do bharr mar sú talún agus ba é toradh na trialla sin gur fheil an talamh an cheantair sin níos fearr ná aon talamh eile ina chóir. Agus b'fhéidir go mbfiú dhúinn agus sinn ag smaoineamh ar sheift eile a thiubhras cabhair do mhuintir na Gaeltachta cuimhniú ar an moladh a rinne an tSeanadóir Mac Eoin i dtaobh na sú talún. Is barr an-luachmhar é agus b'fhéidir, mar adúirt seisean, go bhféadfaí bhfad níos mó airgid a dhéanamh as cúpla slat cearnach den talamh sin ná d'fhéadfaí a dhéanamh as na mílte cearnacha agus é úsáid i chun críche eile.

Ba mhaith liom freisin a rá chomh mór agus atá orm mar gheall ar na tionscail nua atá bunaithe le gairid, i ndeisceart Chonamara, tionscail déantóireachta bréagán luaidhe. An té adéarfadh bliain ó shoin go bhfeilfeadh an tionscail sin don Ghaeltacht, cheapfaí nár thuig sé an scéal. An duine adéarfadh go bhféadfadh muintir óg na Gaeltachta a bheith comh stuama agus chomh ceardúil in obair mar sin, bliain ó shoin, ní chreidfeadh mórán é. Ach ina dhiaidh sin, tá an tionscail ar bun le sé mhí anois. Tá stróinséar, Sualainneach, i bhfeighil na hoibre mar chomhairleoir. Tá tuiscint aige ar an tionscail céanna ina lán áiteacha i gcéin. Ina dhiaidh sin, is é an bharúil atá aige nár casadh air oibrithe chomh cliste nó chomh stuama leis na hoibrithe na atá faighte aige i measc mhuintir na Gaeltachta. Is mór is fiú an moladh sin. Is mór is fiú do dhaoine lucht gnótha sa tír a mbeadh fúthu tionscail nua, tionscail éadroma go háirithe a bhunú cuimhniú ar an nGaeltacht, thuaidh, thiar agus theas, mar ionad le haghaidh na dtionscal sin. Is mór, mar adeirim, is céart dúinn a bheith buíoch den Aire mar isé, is dóigh liom, sa chéad áit ba údar le smaoineamh ar a leithéid seo de thionscail a chur go dtí an Gaeltacht agus iad do chur chun cinn ann.

Ba mhaith liom freisin tagairt a dhéanamh do mholadh eile atá le chur i bhfeidhm i mbliana agus sé an moladh é sin go ndéanfar iarracht ar níos mó caidhrimh a bhunú agus a chothú idir muintir na hEireann sa mbaile agus muintir na hEireann i gcéin. Is dóigh liom gurb shin é ceann de na molta is tábhachtaí agus ceann de na molta is tráthúla dar cuireadh os comhair an Oireachtais nó os comhair na tíre le fada an lá. Nuair a smaoiníos duine ar an méid Eireannach atá i gcéin nil aon amhras go mbeidh íonadh air go bhféadfadh sé a bheith amhlaidh níos mó do mhuintir na hEireann a bheith ina gcónaí i gcéin ná mar atá ina gcónaí sa mbaile. Ach sin í an fhirinne. Tráchtamuid go minic ar thábhacht na hEireannach i stair na dtiortha éagsúla agus níl aon amhras ná gur mór an pháirt a bhí ag Eireannaigh ina gcúrsaí síud. I ngach tír agus i ngach brainse oibre agus léinn agus i ngach gairm beatha is mór an tairbheach an bhaint a bhí ag na hEireannaigh leofa. D'fhéadfaí a rá gur mór atá an domhan faoi chomaoin ag Eireannaigh. Ach ina dhiaidh sin is fíor é le blianta anuas ná fuil, dar liomsa ar chor ar bith, an oiread spéise á chur ag muintir na hEireann sa tír máthrach agus ba mhaith linn. Tá fáth leis sin. D'éirigh an saol i gcéin an-achrannach le blianta. Thairis sin, tá cúrsaí móra polaitíochta ionann is socraithe in Eirinn. Mar a bé scéal na Sé gContaethe, is ar éigin go bhfuil anois aon cheist mhór pholaitíochta le réiteach againne a measfadh ár muintir i gcéin gur ghá dhóibh aon spéis mhór a chur inti. Ar an abhar sin, ní mór dúinn sa mbaile iarracht faoi leith a dhéanamh leis an gcaidreamh a chothú agus a chur chun cinn idir muid fhéin agus ár muintir i gcéin. Is ar an abhar sin go bhfuil áthas faoi leith orm gur cheap an Rialtas go mba cheart an iarracht a dhéanamh ar an gcaidreamh sin a neartú. D'fhéadfadh Eire a lán a dhéanamh i gcúrsaí eadarnáisiúnta i gcúis an chultúra agus i gcúis an charadais agus an tsíochána go háirithe. Tá mórán slí ann i gcúrsaí eadarnáisiúnta ina bhféadfadh Eireannaigh an dea-thionchur a chur i bhfeidhm agus cruth níos fearr a chur ar chúrsaí agus ar imeachta sibhialtachta. Is ar éigin atá aon tír ann is feiliúnaí chuige sin ná an tír seo.

Ach ní éireoidh linn mar is cóir go dtí go mbeidh dlúth-cheangal idir clanna na hEireann gach áit agus iad ag obair as lamha a chéile chun an chuspóra sin. Ar an abhar sin amháin, ba cheart dúinn a bheith riméadach go bhfuil an moladh seo ceaptha amach ag an Rialtas, agus tá súil agam, nuair cuirfear i bhfeidhm é go mbeidh an rath sin air ba cheart a bheith. O tharla go bhfuil sé socraithe go bhfágfar ceapadh na scéime faoi choiste speisialta a cuirfear le chéile chuige, is dóigh liom nach ceart dom féin aon rud a rá anseo faoi cén chaoi ba cheart an moladh féin a chur i ngniomh.

Rud amháin eile a bhaineas leis an mBille atá os ár gcomhair; baineann sé le scéal na Gaeilge agus arís is scéal é a thugas an-tsásamh dom. Scéal é sin go bhfuil scéim faoi leith beartaithe, agus le cur i ngníomh i mbliana, le go mbeidh scoláireachtaí fiúntachta le fáil ag cuid mhaith daoine óga chun dul go dtí na coláistí Ollscoile sa tír agus a gcuid cúrsaí léinn a dhéanamh i nGaeilge. Nuair bhí mé ag caint anseo tamall ó shoin, luaigh mé leis an Seanad nár thaithnigh liom ceann de na moltaí a bhí déanta nuair a bhí airgead dá chur ar fáil do na Coláistí Ollscoile, go n-ardófaí na taillí ar na daoine a bheadh a freastail ar an Coláistí Ollscoile i nGaillimh agus ag déanamh a gcúrsaí i Gaeilge ann.

Caithfidh mé a admháil nach raibh eolas agam, nach raibh tuigsint agam, nuair a bhí mé ag caint an uair sin, ar comh mór leathan agus a bhí na moltaí i dtaobh cur ar aghaidh na Gaeilge san Ollscoil in san am. Ní amháin go mbeidh na scoláireachtaí luachmhara le fáil ag daoine óga as an nGaeltacht ach beidh siad le fáil ag daoine óga ón nGalltacht agus, ina theannta sin beidh duais luachmhar le fáil ag mic léinn in aon cheann de na Coláistí Ollscoile a shásós lucht ceannais na hOllscoile go bhfuil siad ábalta ar scrúdú a sheasamh agus a gcuid oibre a dhéanamh i nGaeilge. Feicthear dom anois gur fearr na moltaí nua seo ná aon scéim dá raibh ann roimhe.

Anois, leis an taobh sin den scéal, scéal na Gaeltachta, scéal na Gaeilge agus scéal na cultúra, d'fhagaint im dhiaidh, níl le rá agam ach go raibh áthas orm a chloisteáil ón Seanadóir Baicstear go bhfuil muinín mhór aige as an síláiste le cabhair a thabhairt don tionscail talmhaíochta sa tír. Tá ceist ba mhaith liom cur air maidir le sin agus cuirim an cheist anois d'ainneoin nach bhfuil sé is lathair. Céard eile a d'fhéadfaí a dhéanamh sa tír le cúrsaí síláiste a chur cinn thar mar tá déanta go dtí seo? Tá ar fud na tíre, i ngach condae foirgintí móra síláiste tógtha ag an Roinn Talmhaíochta agus tá siad sin ann mar shampla do na feilméaraí i ngach condae, ar cén chaoi iad a thógáil agus ar cén chaoi iad a líonadh, ar cén chaoi an síláiste a dhéanamh agus a shabháil. Chomh maith leis sin, tá deontas—deontas réasúnta, is dóigh liom—le fáil ón Roinn Talmhaíochta a chuireas ar a chumas feilméara ar bith an "silo" féin a dhéanamh, agus na foirgintí féin is furasta do na feilméaraí a ndéanamh má tá stuaim iontú, as an airgead a gheibheann siad. Sin rud ba mhaith liom eolas a fháil air céard eile d'fhéadfaí a dhéanamh, thairis sin, le cuidiú le feilméaraí na tíre na buntáistí atá ag baint leis an saghas seo oibre a sholáthar dóibh féin? Céard eile d'féadfaí a dhéanamh thar an méid atá déanta cheana?

Tá ceist amháin eile go mba mhaith liom do chur ar an Seanadóir Baicstear, go háirithe, ó tharla go bhfuil baint aige go speisialta leis an tionscail déiríochta. Cén fáth nach bhféachann an cumann a bhfuil baint aige leis le rud éigin a dhéanamh chun feabhas a chur ar an modh atá ag na huachtarlanna an bainne a chruinniú ó na feilméaraí? Is dóigh liom nach bhfuil aon tsompla ann is fearr ar bhásta agus ar mhí éifeacht tionscail ná an modh ar a gcruinnítear faoi láthair an bainne i gcóir na n-uachtarlann, sé sin, na feilméaraí iad féin teacht go dtí an t-uachtarlan gach maidin. Cuireann sin am agus saothar na bhfeilméaraí amú. Cuireann sé a lán de thairbhe capall agus trucall amú freisin. B'fhéidir go bhfuil sé ceart go leor do na feilméaraí a chónaíos i bhfoigseacht cúpla míle féin don uachtarlann, ach má bhíonn ar an bhfeilméar ceithre mhíle—agus tá a fhios agam go bhfuil cuid mhór feilméaraí ann a chaitheas 5, 6 agus suas le 7 míle a chur díobh gach maidin go dtí an t-uachtarlann— is dóigh liom gur mór an bhásta é sin agus gurb é ceann de na rudaí is mó atá ag cur cúl le éifeacht an tionscail déiríochta. Is é ba mhaith liom iarraidh ar an Seanadóir Baicstear, ó tharla gur ionadaí é anseo ón gcumann is mó sa tír atá ag freastal ar lucht na déiríochta, go scrúdófaí an scéal sin agus go ndéanfaí iarracht ar scéim níos rathúla a ceapadh agus do chur i bhfeidhm, thar mar atá ann faoi láthair.

Maidir leis an méid a bhí le rá ag an Seanadóir Ó Dubhghlas, níor chuala mé ar fad é mar bhí moill orm ag teacht isteach, ach maidir le caidhreamh idir an pháirt seo den tír agus na Sé Condaethe, sé an rud a bhí ag rith trí m'aigne le cupla seachtain ná ceist a chur ar an Aire ar bhfiú dó rud éigin do dhéanamh le cose do chur leis an oiread sin daoine ag teacht isteach anseo ó na Sé Condaethe. Maidir le daoine a theacht isteach anseo ó na Sé Condaethe, tagann siad go líonmhar, ró-líonmhar bh'féidir. Bhíos thíos i nDáilcheantar an Aire féin le gairid agus d'innsigh duine de na Gárdaí dom go dtagann suas le céad no céad go leith busanna speisialta isteach anseo ó na Sé Condaethe gach deireadh seachtaine. Ach do réir mar thuigim, tagann anchuid busanna speisialta isteach gach lá sa tseachtain gan trácht ar na mílte daoine a thagas ar na traentacha. Cheapfá go raibh caidreamh go leor ar an mbealach sin agus ceapfaí go mbeadh tuigsint mhaith ag na daoine údain ar an aigne atá againn ina dtaobh agus ar an saghas saol atá againn. Ba chóir fios a bheith acu gur mian linn a bheith cairdiúil leo agus go bhfuilmuid sásta dul as ar mbealach le cuidiú leo.

Is cosúil go dtaithníonn sinne leo agus is cosúil go bhfuil meas acu ar an saol atá againn. Is cosúil nach bhfuil an saol anseo chomh dona agus a deirtear amannta. Mar a dúirt an Seanadóir Counihan, "is glas iad cnoic i gcéin", ach mar a dúirt fear eile ina dhiaidh sin, "ach na féarach". B'fhéidir nach bhfuil an scéal chomhhíontach in sna Sé Condaethe nó in áiteanna eile agus adeir daoine áirithe. Bíodh sin mar atá, tá mé go láidir ar aon aigne leis an Seanadóir Ó Dubhghlas mar gheall ar an oiread seo caidrimh agus cairdeasa a chur chun cinn idir na daoine anseo agus muintir na Sé Condaethe, ach níor mhiste, má abraim an méid seo, gur truaighe nach bhfuil an dúil ceanna le tabhairt faoi deara ar an taobh eile agus atá orainn.

Mr. O'Callaghan

I should like to draw the attention of the Minister and the House to the extreme scarcity of feeding stuffs for the feeding of pigs and poultry. The bad harvest of 1946 is now telling its tale. The farmers cannot get feeding of any kind from the shops or the mills. The situation is very serious. I cannot make any constructive proposal as to how that situation is to be remedied. Perhaps somebody may devise some scheme whereby we may get in some feeding stuffs from outside. That may or may not be possible. They are very necessary if they can be got. Senator Baxter contrasted the position of Irish agriculture with continental agriculture and said that we were very much behind the times. I agree with him on that. It has to be remembered, however, that they were growing beet on the Continent 150 years ago. We started to grow it in a small way in 1925. That, I think, represents the position generally with regard to agriculture here and in continental countries. The people in those countries were forging ahead at the time that the people of this country were engaged in fighting rack rents and bad landlords. Agricultural education did not begin in this country until within the last 40 or 50 years, whereas they were progressing in it in Continental countries 150 or 200 years ago.

Senator Counihan referred to the question of separated milk, and suggested, I think, that he would compel farmers to take it back from the creameries to feed it to calves and pigs. It would be desirable, of course, to have big stocks of cattle and pigs in the country, but I object entirely to the principle of compelling the farmer to be the fool of the family and to be what he has been for many years, the pack-horse of the community. I think that the farmer should be allowed to sell his produce wherever he can get the most money for it and I am sure everybody will agree with that.

Senator Counihan referred to Shorthorn cattle, and said that the yield of the Shorthorn cow, as seen at the Ballsbridge Show, was a gallon of milk per day more than out of any other breed. Senator Baxter referred to the Friesian breed of cattle that he saw in Holland. It looked as if we might have a battle of the breeds here between the two Senators. I think a good deal can be said for both breeds of cattle. Personally, I am inclined to favour the development of the native breed, and I do so from the practical and commonsense point of view. The Minister for Agriculture is now to have the advice of a consultative council on agriculture. I am sure that the members of that council will deal with the question of the breed of cattle and that the Minister will get very good advice from them. I think that our cattle are fairly all right if only we could get more milk from them.

The Minister for Agriculture has announced a new policy for the growing of tomatoes in glass houses in the Gaeltacht areas which are generally referred to as the West of Ireland. I do not know whether that is strictly accurate or not. My view is that we have a milder climate in the south, and that experiments in the growing of tomatoes in the southern areas would be likely to be more successful than in the western areas. I am informed that in Jersey tomatoes are grown out door all over the island. I think there are some places on our coast where that could be done with equal success. It is a matter on which expert opinion might be got. The Minister's idea is an excellent one, and I congratulate him on it. I am sure that this scheme will mean increased activity so far as horticulture generally is concerned. I have no doubt that the scheme outlined in connection with the glass houses will be successful. I am certain, however, that if it were tried in some of the southern areas there is a chance that it would be even more successful. I do not want to say anything against the West because, I want to see this scheme a success, and I prophesy that it will be a great success. I congratulate the Minister on having thought of the idea.

There was a reference to dower houses. That is a matter to which the Taoiseach has made reference on many occasions. He said in the Dáil that, when he urged something on that line some years ago, people laughed at him. I believe that up to quite recently people laughed at him when he mentioned it, but a big change in regard to that matter has since taken place, and I think everybody agrees with the Taoiseach now that if the proposal he referred to were taken up that it would be a step in the right direction. The greatest need in carrying out a scheme of that sort would be of course to find the money required.

I may say in that connection that there is a great need in the matter of providing more houses in the rural districts. It is the greatest need that we have. There is no labour problem in those districts in the country where there are cottages and workers' houses, but in those districts where there are no such houses the labour shortage is very acute. There is an urgent necessity to build more houses in the rural areas. I think that if we had more houses it would help to settle the rural labour problem.

Senator Baxter also referred to the making of silage, and referred to the fact that on some farms in Holland he had seen as many as eight silos. The making if silage has been a great problem in this country for many years. I think that if the weather we had during the present season will not succeed in getting our farmers to make silage well then nothing will ever make them make it.

The fuel position is a very serious one. The people who live near the bogs say that the situation is very bad. I am afraid that the position in the coming winter is going to be very serious, and that people will have to rely on supplies of firewood. If that should happen, then it will mean that all the firewood in the country will have to be cut down. If the Minister could do anything about the weather he would be doing a good day's work for the country.

Mr. Sweetman

Apparently, from the last Senator's speech, down in Cork they always feel that people in glass houses should not throw stones, because I saw that the Senator was getting some very nearly dirty looks from Senator O'Dea on the subject of the west and the south. I do not propose to follow on that line but, having interrupted Senator Sir John Keane so rudely on the question of the double income-tax agreement which the Minister announced, I feel I must say a few sentences on the subject. As I understand the position, it is far from being as satisfactory as Senator Sir John Keane would think. The position is that on the 5th April we will have three financial years to which these provisions will apply—1945-46, 1946-47 and 1947-48, which is at present current. As I understand the announcement that the Minister has made, the effect of the agreement is that as from 6th April, 1945, he accepts the British contention that their Section 52 of the 1945 Act was not in any way a breach of the double taxation agreement operative since 1926 between us. In respect of preference shares that is a small temporary alleviation for the purpose perhaps, as the Minister indicates in his memorandum, of enabling those preference shareholders to get out of the shares in which they are at present interested.

I do not intend to argue at any great length whether the 1945 British Act did or did not infringe the 1926 agreement; but I do think that there was certainly an argumentative case for suggesting that it did, for suggesting that it was, at any rate, desirable that there should have been in respect of ordinary shareholders and ordinary dividends the same opportunity for the three years mentioned to enable them to adjust the position so that they would not suffer. It is unfortunate that the Minister has not been able to achieve that, and it is, perhaps, unfortunate also that the relief in respect of preference shareholding has only been so temporary as he has indicated.

I am not quite clear as to whether the Minister meant the second last paragraph of his memorandum to refer exclusively to preference dividends or to refer to preference and ordinary dividends, where he said that the charge to Irish tax will not exceed the amount of the net dividends. The Minister did not indicate in his speech whether in any way this was to be retroactive. The situation has been since 6th April, 1945, that British dividends received in that year were liable to assessment in the 1946-47 year and that for 1946-47 there was in respect of those dividends an assessment to Irish tax on an income that was in fact not received.

The arrangement which the Minister is proposing in respect of his own revenue is a very proper one. I suggest to him, however, that in fairness it should operate as from the first year in which these dividends came into Irish assessment, which would be the 1946-47 year in the case of any ordinary person and only up to the 1945-46 year in the case of a person who was liable to be assessed on British or other untaxed interest for the first time during that year. No doubt, as the Minister indicated, we will have a very much detailed opportunity of considering the whole question when the legislation is introduced, but, having rather rudely interrupted Senator Sir John Keane, I do think it was reasonable that I should make that comment.

Mr. Aiken

The Senator's comment is inaccurate.

Mr. Sweetman

From my knowledge of the Minister, there is nothing that he would like better than to be able to knock down something which is inaccurate, because he is very fond of suggesting that something has been said which has not been said and then knocking that ninepin down. I am delighted if I have given him the opportunity of knocking down a correct ninepin on this occasion.

Curiously enough, the next thing I wish to refer to is something that, in my view, is probably inaccurate. Senator Sir John Keane congratulated the Government on the manner in which they so promptly accepted the invitation to the Paris Conference and I reiterate the congratulation. There appeared in last Sunday's paper a statement attributed to the Minister for Industry and Commerce, who is the senior of the two Irish representatives there, that I feel quite certain is inaccurate. I mention it now for the purpose of asking the Minister to make certain that his colleague when he returns will take an early opportunity of contradicting the report that was put out.

Notwithstanding all the things I say about the Government from time to time, I do not think that the Government would have subscribed to the principles that were ascribed to the Minister for Industry and Commerce. I do not think the Minister for Industry and Commerce, or the Government would have made, by inference or in any other way, the suggestion that was put in the mouth of the Minister that they were, so to speak, supporting any case against that conference that was made from Moscow. I do not believe for a moment that that is true, and I think it is intensely desirable in the national interest that the very moment an opportunity arises there should be a contradiction by the Minister for Industry and Commerce. I mention the matter to-night so that the Minister we have here can ensure that his colleague deals with it in that way as soon as possible. It was, of course, a report which was not furnished by any newsagency or newspaper in this country. It was a report supplied by a foreign newsagency in the ordinary way of business and no blame should attach to any paper here. But I hope, and I believe, that it was inaccurate and for that reason I feel that it should be contradicted.

This is a Bill on which members of the House get an opportunity of dealing with various small points of Government administration that may arise from time to time. It is sometimes, perhaps, dealt with in a more detailed way than it has been this evening. I do not want to delay the House very long on it, but there are a couple of matters which I think are absolutely essential to be dealt with. One is a matter that appertains to the Minister's own Department, or a section of it, namely, the Revenue Commissioners.

There is at present a necessity, owing to shortages, to ensure that people coming to this country do not take out of this country goods which are in short supply. The Revenue Commissioners have seen that there are at various ports of arrival appropriate notices setting out lists of banned goods, etc. Notwithstanding that, it is the practice, unfortunately, in certain establishments in the country, that visitors are advised that they are able to purchase and bring out goods without licence and with perfect freedom. The result is that when they are leaving and they arrive at the port of embarkation, the goods in question are confiscated.

I suggest that this matter should be approached from a slightly different angle, from an angle of which I had personal experience when I had to go to Switzerland recently. The angle from which it is approached there is that as every visitor arrives in the country, he is given a small, official pamphlet, about half the size of an Order Paper which sets out specifically, not what we do here—"You cannot bring out X, Y and Z," giving a huge list of banned things—but that you can bring nothing out of Switzerland except a few items, which are named. In the existing situation, with so many things short, that is more or less the position we are bound to be in here and that method puts a visitor in a more understanding position than if you present him with a very long list of banned articles which, quite frankly, few people will ever read.

I suggest there should be a similar method adopted here. When you file into the customs shed in Switzerland you are given an authoritative, Governmental slip indicating that you are not entitled to bring out anything except the items named and that for everything else you must get a licence. The same thing could be done here without much expense or difficulty. It would mean that there would be much less trouble for visitors here who are, perhaps, persuaded by establishments anxious to consider their own profits into purchasing articles, and when they try to take those things away, they find they are not permitted by the regulations to do so. I want it to be quite clear that I am not making any suggestions against the Revenue Commissioners. The shortages are there, the law is there and it is being carried out. It is purely a matter of the method of approach.

Another suggestion I will make to the Minister, and which I hope he will convey to his colleague, the Minister for Local Government, is that there should be, at an early date, a considerable change in our housing regulations. I came across a case the other day which, I understand from the local official concerned, is somewhat common in the country, and represents a position which will have to be remedied sooner or later. The regulation relating to houses built by local authorities and which have received the subsidy is so rigid that it is almost unworkable. The case I have in mind is that of a tenant of a county council cottage. She was evicted under a court order because she was grossly in arrears with her rent. When the county council took the cottage over they found that it had been damaged considerably. The timber in the cottage had been used as firewood and the house generally was broken up in a most wanton and destructive fashion. The tenant was put out and about a fortnight afterwards another house in the neighbourhood became vacant.

The tenant meanwhile had moved into quarters that were grossly overcrowded. She had a family and, under the regulation, the county medical officer of health had no option but to recommend that the tenant who had just been put out of one cottage should be put into the cottage that had fallen vacant, because he had, on health grounds and under the subsidy regulation, to rule that she was the most deserving case, because of the circumstances in which she was residing. That appears to me to be a type of case that was not envisaged at the time the regulation was made and, if the regulation is correctly interpreted, I think everyone will agree that it is one that should be changed as soon as possible and there should be more elasticity so as to enable the local authority to differentiate between one case and another.

There have been a number of rumours in the city and references in the newspapers with regard to petrol rationing. This does not come under the Minister's Department, but the responsible Minister is away and perhaps the Minister for Finance will be able to make some statement as to whether those rumours are correct or not. Many people are at the moment making arrangements in respect of holidays next month and, as they may have very substantially to alter these arrangements if there is to be any alteration in the petrol rationing, it will be very much appreciated if the Minister would make some statement. Any alteration in relation to the supply of such an essential commodity as petrol is a matter of very great importance from the point of view of the country as a whole.

Pádraig Ó Siochfhradha

Bhíos ag éisteacht leis an Seanadóir Mac Eoin ag caint faoin nGaeltacht agus an chabhair is féidir a thabhairt don Ghaeltacht. Is é an imní atá orm ná go mbainfí mar bhrí as na cainteanna a bhí ar siúl ag daoine anseo gur chóir do lucht na Gaeltachta an Ghaeilge a choinneáil beo. Molaimse an chomhairle agus an teagase sin, dar ndoigh, agus molann lucht na Gaeltachta an teagasc céanna Ach ba mhaith liom go dtuigfeadh an tAire agus gach aoinne go ndéanfar sin sa Ghaeltacht má thuigeann an Ghaeltacht go bhfuil an chuid eile den tír dáiríribh faoin chuspóir cheanna.

Níor cheart dúinn bheith i gcomhnaí á iarraidh go ndéanfadh muintir na Gaeltachta beart laochta ar son na teangan, má braitheann siad an chuid eile den tír ag tréigint na teangan sin. Tá sé riachtanach cabhrú leis an nGaeltacht, le tionscail, le scoláireachtaí, le moladh, le dea-mhéinn, chomh mór agus is féidir don Rialtas é dhéanamh. Tá rud eile riachtanach agus is é sin, é a chur ina luí ar an nGaeltacht go bhfuil Baile Atha Cliath agus an Ghalltacht agus an Rialtas agus lucht ceannais na hEaglaise agus lucht ceannais agus cumhachtaí an náisiúin ar fad i ndáiríribh sa cheist seo; agus ná fuilimíd á fhágaint mar dhualgas ar mhuintir na Gaeltachta amháin agus ag ligint dúinn fhéin greadadh ar aghaidh chomh Gallda agus riamh. Tá muintir na Gaeltachta istigh i gceantair bhochta anacracha, gan tionscail mhóra iontu, agus ní féidir leo maireachtaint ar a gcuid dea-mhéinn don Ghaoluinn.

Molaimse an Rialtas ar son an méid a thuigeann siad gur chóir cabhair a thabhairt sna ceantair sin. Tá aigne bheo acu ar an scéal agus tá méadú ar na beartanna ar aigne acu. Is abhar misnigh dom fhéin agus do na daoine eile a bhfuil suim acu sa Ghaeltacht go bhfuil an Rialtas ag déanamh an méid seo.

Maidir leis an méid adúirt an Seanadóir Mac Eoin, níor cheart go n-abróimis gur orthu féin sa Ghealtacht atá sé mar dhualgas an teanga a chothú, i dtreo is go mbeadh áit againn chun dul ann ar laethe saoire, go mbeadh a fhios againn go bhfuil cultúr ar leith ann agus teanga ar leith acu—ach nár chóir dúinn ligint do na rudaí sin cur isteach orainn fhéin ná ar na daoine Gallda sa chuid eile den tír.

Chomh maith le tionscail nua a chur ar bun, béidir nár mhiste iarraidh ar an Rialtas cúram a thabhairt do thionscail atá cheana ann, agus i leith an scéil sin, tá rud a bhaineann go cruinn díreach le tionscail sa Ghaeltacht. Le 4 nó 5 mí, tá an ceantar Gaelach, Corca Dhuibhne, gan traen ar bith agus tá baol ann go mbeidh sé amhlaidh feasta mura gcuirfidh an Rialtas ina luí ar Chóras Iompair Eireann gur cheart dóibh freastal ar Chorca Dhuibhne, príomh-Ghaeltacht Dheiscirt na tíre. Sin rud is féidir leis an Aire a dhéanamh ar son na Gaeilge amáireach, más fonn leis é.

Tá súil agam nach é an tIarthar amháin áta i gceist faoi scéim na dtrátaí. Tá scéim na trátaí triallta cheana fhéin ag daoine priomháideacha in áit nó dhó sa Ghaeltacht i gCiarraidhe agus tá éirithe leis. Is dóigh liom gur cheart go leathfaí na nithe sin—ceann san Iarthar agus ceann nó dhó sa Deisceart agus bheith cinnte go bhfuil an t-eolas iomlán ag na daoine a bheith i mbun na h-oibre. Measaim go mbraitheann toradh na scéime ar éifeacht na ndaoine sin.

Ba chóir don Rialtas feidhm a bhaint as an sluagh mór Gaeilgeoirí atá glactha isteach sa Stát-Sheirbhís le cúig bliana déag. Tá an Stát-Sheirbhís lán de Ghaeilgeoirí faoi láthair. Tá siad le fáil go mór mhór imeasc an dreama óig sa tSeirbhís, ach ní tuigtear domsa go bhfuil feidhm á bhaint as Ghaeilge na ndaoine sin laistigh den tSeirbhís, ná sa chuid sin den tSeirbhís a bhfuil baint aige leis an bpobal taobh amuigh nó an cuid a bhíonn i bhfeighil an phobail. Ba mhaith liom go dtiocfadh an lá go ndéanfaidh Roinn éigin den tSeirbhís a fhógairt "go ndéanfar an gnó anseo feasta i nGaeilge amháin." Is chuige sin atá ciall le bheith ag toghadh Gaeilgeoirí ina gcéadtaí gach bhan don tSeirbhís phoiblí. Caithfidh an lá teacht go mbainfear feidhm as mar sin, agus sílim go bhfuil an lá sin druidte linn. Ba cheart don Rialtas tosnú in áit éigin agus a rá: "Ó Lá Fhéile Pádraig sa bhiian seo chugainn, ní raghaidh aon chomhfhreagarthas nó aon litreacha amach ón Roinn seo ach i nGaeilge amháin." Ba mhaith liom go dtosnófaí air sin i Roinn an Aire féin, mar sin é an Roinn mháistriúil agus dá dtosnófaí úsáid na Gaeilge amháin laistigh den tSeirbhís sa tslí sin, bheadh toradh torthúil ar fad ar dhaoine sa tSeirbhís agus dheimhneodh sé don Ghaeltacht go bhfuilimidne anseo i mBaile Átha Cliath i ndáiríribh.

Fógraíodh cúpla lá ó shoin i dtaobh scoláireachtaí nua i gcoir lucht meánscol go dtí na hOllscoileanna, Molaim na scoláireachtaí sin agus is dóigh liom go mbeidh tionchur ana-fhónta orthu. An bhfuil aon tsocrú déanta nó á bheartú chun go bhfreagróidh na Coláistí Ollscoile don rud fónta sin? I gcás na nOllscoileanna in nGaillimh, i gCorcaigh, i Mághnuadhat, i mBaile Atha Cliath, i gColáiste na Tríonóide, beidh tuairim 50 scoláire ag dul isteach gach bliain. Is é an gnáth-chúrsa ná trí bliaina agus sin 150 sa tríú bliain. An amhlaidh a bheidh an scéal sa chuid is mó de na hOllscoileanna, go mbeidh iachall ar na scoláirí suí síos agus Béarla d'fhoghlaim, chun glacadh leis na leachtaí agus an oideachas? Ní dóigh liom gur ceart é sin ar chor ar bith, agus ba mhaith liom tuille eolais d'fháil ón Aire faoin bpointe sin.

Mr. Duffy

If all the Senators who participated in the debate did not keep too closely to the subject, the discussion at least has had a fair share of idealism, if punctuated at times by surprises. One of the surprises, so far as I am concerned, was the rôle which Senator Douglas adopted. Before he spoke I did not know that he was the official spokesman in this House of Clann na Poblachta but evidently he is, because I noticed that he argued the case for the admission to this House of the public representatives elected to the Six County Parliament. Probably there is nothing wrong with that but coming from Senator Douglas it was one of the surprises of the debate. I must admit, too, that when I heard Senator Johnston professing a desire that we should Gaelicise the West Britons I got a bit of a shock.

Professor Johnston

Not all the West Britons. I was referring to parts of the country where Irish is spoken.

Mr. Duffy

I understood that the Senator wanted to Gaelicise the West Britons of the hinterland of Dublin so that when they go to Mayo and Donegal on holidays they would be able to converse with Gaelic speakers there. Perhaps the Senator will, on another occasion, elaborate the difference between my interpretation of his speech and what he actually said but that is the way it appeared to me.

Another surprise in the debate was the suggestion of Senator Sir John Keane which must have shocked the Minister. His suggestion was that if we were to bring the Sermon on the Mount into our politics we must scrap the Constitution.

Sir John Keane

Amend the Constitution.

Mr. Duffy

It must have been a surprise to the Minister to discover that the Constitution is repugnant to the Sermon on the Mount.

Sir John Keane

I said that the practical application of the Sermon on the Mount would mean an amendment of the Constitution.

Mr. Duffy

I am glad of the correction but I think still that the suggestion underlying the Senator's statement must be embarrassing for the Minister—not for me, of course.

I must say, too, now that Senator Counihan has returned, that his speech, I thought, was delightfully realistic. Senator Counihan has his mind firmly fixed on the cattle trade and he does not miss many opportunities to tell us of its trials and tribulations. As a matter of fact when he was speaking my mind went back to a prayer which was attributed to a member of the British House of Parliament in the early days of the 18th century. The prayer ran something like this:—

"Oh Lord, Thou knowest I have nine houses in the City of London and that I have lately purchased an estate in fee simple in Essex. Therefore, I beseech Thee, Oh Lord, to preserve the two counties of Middle-sex and Essex from fire and earthquakes."

Senator Counihan, I am sure, will ask me to give him a copy of the prayer which he can suitably alter to suit the circumstances of the cattle trade. I shall be glad to help him.

I was also wondering whether, if I had delayed my intervention, we might not have completed the circle if Senator Mrs. Concannon were to intervene to give us a dissertation on the Old Orange Flute and perhaps Senator Lord Longford might give us another dissertation on The Sins of Society. Had we got that far we probably might have considered that no matter was too irrelevant to debate because at least we would have been translated to Tir na nOg.

I am very sorry that I do not feel at all qualified to participate effectively in a debate on this idealistic level because I want to talk mainly about mundane things, things that affect the lives of very many simple humble people. I am just wondering at this moment whether, in fact, my theme is related to the motion for the Second Reading of the Appropriation Bill. If, however, I happen to be out of order I submit I am not the first offender to-night. It is no disparagement of the Chair, in fact I think it is a tribute to the benignity of the Chair, that we can be all so delightfully irrelevant without raising the suspicions of the Cathaoirleach or causing him to lose his temper.

I was going to suggest that perhaps one of the things that is of very great concern to a large body of people is the price we are asked to pay for ordinary commodities that enter every humble home. I have a feeling that I may be permitted to refer to this subject because there appears to be an amount of money in the Appropriation Bill for administration referring to prices including subsidies and all these other devices which are adopted so ineffectively to stabilise or control prices and which I think have completely failed in their purpose. I move the adjournment of the debate.

Debate adjourned.

The Seanad adjourned at 10 p.m. until Thursday, 17th July, 1947, at 3 p.m.