FROM THE ARCHIVES: JANUARY 18th, 1955:Fianna Fáil found itself in opposition again in the mid-1950s, for the second time in 10 years, and announced a comprehensive re-examination and revision of all its policies. Speaking at a party event in Dublin, its former minister for industry and commerce, Seán Lemass, made the following speech, suggesting that he still favoured restrictions on capital and that his thinking was still some way away from the policies which he later pursued as taoiseach in the 1960s
REFERRING TO industry, Mr Lemass said: “It is, it must be confessed, disappointing that national economic progress still requires a great deal of Government stimulus and help. We had believed earlier that once Fianna Fáil got progress started it would continue of its own momentum and that the task of Government would be limited to keeping general conditions favourable for it and dealing with special problems if they arose.
“Why has it not proved to be so? Part of the answer lies, no doubt, in the character of the earlier political opposition to the specific plans which Fianna Fáil advocated for development in manufacturing industry and in agriculture, and the discouraging effect of the propaganda which accompanied that opposition, but by and large that is no longer the position, as the other political parties are now proclaiming their acceptance of Fianna Fáil’s viewpoint and policy.
“Part of the answer may lie far back in history, and we may have discounted unduly the continuing effect of restrictive foreign rule on the self-confidence and initiative of our people.
“The answer may be in the fact that, in the past, Irish business leaders were not, as a class, in sympathy with the national struggle and, when British rule ended, were reluctant to avail of the new opportunities which native government opened for them.
“It may be that part of the answer lies in the restrictions which were, for good reason, placed on the participation of foreign capital in Irish industrial expansion when the industrial drive was first launched, and it is now an open question whether these restrictions need be retained any longer in their present form.
“Although the position is vastly better than it was 20 years ago, we just have not yet got throughout the business community of the State that vigorous searching for new openings and possibilities which characterises other progressive states. The attitude of Irish investors, led by the Irish banks and other financial institutions, to Irish development is still negative in the main. They have to be induced and attracted to invest in Irish projects instead of being on the look-out for projects to support.
“An explanation of that attitude lies in the situation that allows investment by Irish citizens in Britain to be as free – and often easier and less risky – as it is in Ireland. New Irish industries are in competition for Irish savings with the old-established and often very profitable enterprises of Britain . . . If that free access to British investment were withdrawn or restricted, what would be the effect?
“Can we create a situation in which Irish savings would have to seek an outlet in Ireland or go unemployed? Would the effect be to produce here that vigorous exploration of Irish possibilities and the ready availability of resources for any project that seemed worthwhile, such as is evident in other countries? Would there be adverse effects which would outweigh the advantages? These are all questions worth examining.”
http://url.ie/4ndu