The amount of the Estimate for the Ministry of Agriculture is £407,949. I beg to move that.
DAIL IN COMMITTEE. - MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE.
In connection with this Vote I wish to focus the attention of the Dáil on the tremendous sum which is considered necessary to promote agriculture in this country—one four-hundredth part of the amount of money raised in taxes in Southern Ireland. This Department is supposed to control, develop, and educate the people engaged in agriculture in Ireland. Four hundred thousand out of forty millions! We are an agricultural country, and we are living on the proceeds of agriculture. It is common knowledge that the system pursued by the Department of Agriculture in the past has ruined the dairying industry in this country, and now the stores which we developed under the aegis of this Department are finding rivals coming from Canada, and on next April every beast raised in Ireland will have to contend with the beast brought over from Canada. Our industry, based on that arrangement, will be ruined, and we have nothing to fall back on but milk. In this Estimate the sum of £10,000 is put forward for the development of the only section of agriculture we can ever develop in the future, and I say that advisedly. The whole country has been dotted over with beef-rearing sires—Polled Angus, Scotch Shorthorns—and our dairy cows, which in a normal country would be yielding milk to the extent of 1,000 gallons per year, are yielding only 360 gallons and are not paying their way. Now, the Minister comes forward with the noble vote of something like £10,000 to revive this industry, which has been lost by mismanagement. How is he going to establish Milk Testing Associations, how is he going to dot the country with sires calculated to improve the breed, with this money? He must be a superman, although we are told they are not supermen. If that is their idea of promoting agriculture in this country, I am afraid that they are very far short of vision and are neglecting the opportunity which this country gives them now of putting agriculture on a proper basis.
There are just one or two points I want to raise in connection with the subject of Fisheries, which is also under the control of the Ministry of Agriculture, for which an estimate is provided here. I notice that the grant for the Fishery development is reduced by £3,393 this year. I regret that very much, for I think this is an industry in which there is room for great improvement. Many complaints are being heard from people interested in fishing that the Government is not giving them that aid which might be reasonably expected from them in the development of the fishing industry. I think it would be possible that something could be done in the way of providing better boats and better fishing gear. Then there is the question of curing stations. In some parts of the Western and Southern coasts they are not able to get their fish to market when there is a large catch, and the result is that on several occasions the surplus catch has to be dumped into the sea. Now, it would be well if some arrangement could be made to help on the provision of curing stations. I do not know whether it would be the duty of this Ministry or the Ministry of Industry and Commerce to look after that, but as I see there is a grant here for Fishery Development, I raise that point now. There is also the question of the provision of markets for fish, but I think that would come more under the Ministry of Industry. A short time ago I raised here the question of the protection of fishing grounds from illegal trawling, and the Minister for Agriculture was good enough to send me a letter in which he stated the provision he was making, and that will go some distance, no doubt, to prevent illegal trawling on the western coast. Generally speaking, I think, that one fishery cruiser was never sufficient to meet or to prevent the trespassing of foreign trawlers on the fishing grounds. I hope that when the opportunity offers the Ministry will see that steps are taken to give the necessary protection, and to do everything that is possible to develop this industry, which, I think, could be made a very profitable and valuable industry for the country.
At the present time it is only natural that all the estimates and provisions made in respect of a department such as this should be examined from the point of view of the state of the country. Probably in regard to administration this Department affects the ordinary life of the people of Ireland more than any other department in the Government. Undoubtedly, if times were normal, I think, all these proposals would require very much greater consideration by the Dáil than is either reasonable or natural to expect in the present circumstances. At the same time, I think it is regrettable that a debate on Estimates of this kind, which cover so many phases of national activity of the ordinary life and industrial work of the people, and which in detail run into anything like 50 to 100 different items and headings, has not been put before the Dáil with some sort of general statement of the views of the Ministry, particularly the Minister for Agriculture, in regard to the way in which he thinks it best that his Department could be worked and administered at the present time. Deputy O'Connell has referred to the question of the Fishery Development Grant, and I think it would have been very useful for us to know what particularly led to the reduction of that estimate. I should like to know also, in regard to the salary, wages, and allowances, what prospect there is, if any prospect, of the reduction which is referred to as a possibility in regard, for instance, to the item of Secretary's salary, which is very high, £1,800, and also the salaries of the Assistant Secretaries, £1,200. It will be noticed that there is an enormous saving in one respect. On page 2 we have a saving shown this year of £86,000; that, of course, includes the reduction of the fisheries grant, and a great deal of saving is also effected by what seems to be the practical abolition of the Agricultural Wages Board, which seems to have gone altogether. I do not think it is reasonable at the present time that the Minister should be expected to go into very heavy expense in regard to the improvements suggested by the Commission, which was set up by the Dáil a few years ago, in regard to the stock and dairying industry, the horse-breeding industry, and other agricultural industries of the kind. These are matters which undoubtedly will receive attention when we get to a more peaceful state in the country. I, for my part, will certainly support the Ministry in refusing at the present time, until we can get the co-operation of all the interests in the country that are concerned, to ask the Dáil to make grants in aid of what would undoubtedly be improvements if they could be carried into effect. I would like to see them carried into effect, but I do not think that is possible in the present state of the country. For that reason I think the criticism of Deputy Wilson is hardly fair, considering the circumstances under which the Department has attempted to carry out improvements, and do its work in the existing conditions.
We recognise the difficulty of the Government in doing anything in face of the state of affairs that obtains in the country at the moment, but we do hope that the country that is going to subsist for a long time on one thing alone, and that is Agriculture, will treat it differently from what it has been treated in the past. We know that any schemes that have been thought out at the moment, if they have been thought out, by the Government and the Department cannot be put into operation. We believe in the country that this Department ought to be re-organised altogether from top to bottom, and that its policy should be reconstructed. Deputy Wilson is perfectly right in what he said, that the feeling of the country is that they do not think that the cattle schemes were carried on in the right lines. Most men in the country do not think we have improved our stores as beef animals. We certainly have ruined them as a dairying proposition. You have got to go to the counties of Limerick and Clare, South Tipperary, Waterford, and perhaps part of Cork, for decent dairy cattle. They are practically speaking, unknown in the other counties. Deputy O'Connell refers to having to dump fish back into the sea again for want of a market. Now, my information is that there were plenty of markets, but that the trouble was that they could not get a certain price.
That is wrong.
That when they could not get a certain price the fish were thrown into the sea.
They could not get any price.
On a point of order, the fish were caught and landed, but could not be sold.
That is not a point of order; it is a statement of fact. The Deputy can make a statement afterwards.
He can make any statement he likes. I believe it is true. I know it is true. In Waterford and other districts fish was thrown into the sea, as they could not get the price.
They could not get any price.
I remember, not many years ago, that fresh herrings, the most valuable article of food, could be sold at 2d. or 2½d. a dozen forty miles from the coast. To-day they are 2s. 6d., and you cannot get them at that. Now, there is a serious question about fish, and that is the destruction of the spawning fish in Ireland. The fresh water rivers have been depleted of their spawning stocks, salmon have been destroyed wholesale, trout have been destroyed, young fry have been destroyed, and this is one of the greatest national assets this country has ever had. It gives you a great supply of food, it gives you a considerable amount of money's worth annually running into millions, and this want on destruction has been going on long before this war, and long before any war. It has been continuously going on, but at the present moment it has arrived at such proportions that there is great danger of the whole stock being exhausted and destroyed. I do not know what the Government can do to stop this. In some districts it is not as bad as in others; but if the Government can do anything, it is one of the things I desire to draw their attention to. At the moment we do not want to criticise the policy of the Government in regard to agriculture. If the times were normal, we would criticise them more severely, perhaps, unless they conformed with our views, but at the moment I do not like to use destructive criticism.
I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to the item of £8,000 for a fishery cruiser. Is it denied that the Helga has been taken off that very important work, and no other boat put in her place? Deputy Gorey has referred to the destruction of spawning beds. Those beds were mostly destroyed by foreign trawlers, and if the "Helga" is taken off they will take advantage of that. As regards the question of looking for exorbitant prices for fish, I may point out that fish was landed within 8 miles of Dublin, and that no price whatever could be got for it. The fishermen were out two nights and brought their catch in. They did not throw them into the sea, but gave them to anyone who would take them, anyone who knew how to cure them. It is the want of the knowledge as to curing of fish—that is what is wrong in this country. A case happened, not very far from a certain Deputy's own place, where fish were brought home, and the way they were cured was to cook them together. That was the knowledge.
When the Minister is replying I hope that he will tell us how he is proceeding with the reorganisation of the Department of Agriculture. I asked some time ago about the reorganisation, and I think there is very little use in spending money on any Department until it is properly organised, and as one who has very little belief in the working of the Department of Agriculture, as done in the past, I hope that there will be no additional money spent on it until it is properly organised and capable of getting some practical results.
I may not know as much about fisheries as a number of the Deputies who have spoken about them, but this I know, that it has been the policy in Ireland for a good number of years to discourage curing, and if you want fisheries to progress in Ireland you must encourage the curers to work. They will go in for the profit themselves, just the same as any other men. In recent years since the war the fishing industry has been very poor, not only in Ireland, but in England and Scotland, and that has been due to the state of the exchanges. Germany and Middle Europe is really the market for herrings, and on account of the exchanges they cannot very well buy as much as they were able to buy formerly. I think in 1913, from Scotland alone four million barrels of cured herrings were sent to Middle Europe, and that is practically 250,000 tons. Of course, a great deal could be done, and the Ministry of Agriculture, I am sure, will do it, to encourage the fishing industry, but you need to have fishermen grow up in the country. Fishermen, as a class, have been dying away; they have been going to other countries, and they have been giving all their attention to the land when they get larger farms than they had originally, and, as a result, the fishing population has become less and less all the time. I would like to know really the amount of money the fishery development gets. Now I would like to tell my friends of the farming party something because they are always lecturing the Dáil about farming, and it is this, that they should advise the Minister for Agriculture not to allow any bull to serve in this country without licence, and that is the way to improve their stores.
I notice that the item for the improvement of the breed of horses in this country is cut down from the figure of £7,500 odd, at which it stood last year, to the figure of £2,000 this year. That is a very drastic reduction, which in the case of this important industry, I cannot understand. Perhaps the Minister for Agriculture may have an explanation to offer, but I cannot see at present, for the life of me, why such a drastic reduction as that should take place in connection with this branch of the farming industry. I know there are many classes of horses that are completely off the market at present, but the class of horses we want is a class of horse that should be subsidised by the Department of Agriculture, because that class of horse, namely, the hunter, is bringing in as good prices to-day as ever. If we could produce hunters to-day as we did in Ireland in the past we would get excellent prices for them. But it is not by a reduction of nearly £5000 on this Vote that we will be able to procure sires fit to produce hunters at all. It was for that purpose that the grant was really given, but generally the bulk of it went to produce a different class, such as Clydesdales and heavy cart horses more than to produce hunters. The Minister may have his explanation, but I do not know how he can defend such a drastic curtailment of that grant as has occurred in this Estimate. There are many of my friends in our small party with whose views I do not agree at all as regards the breed of cattle in this country. I hold that the Cattle Scheme of the Department was the only scheme that did any good for the country. The stores produced in Ireland to-day are as good as those produced in any part of the world, and I think that was mainly because of the introduction of sires which the Department sent through the country. I take my own Country of Wexford, and I defy anybody to tell me any county that produces better store cattle and that was mainly due to the introduction of the sires by the Department. They may have made mistakes in some instances in some sires. It is all very well for some parts of the country to pay particular attention to dairy produce but there are other classes of people to be looked after, and the producers of stores and fat cattle are just as large and as important as the producers of milk. I do not see that there is any future for a man breeding stores, seeing that all the grants for cattle are now going for dairying purposes. I believe that should not be. The Department should be as much interested in those districts where they produce good beef and store cattle as they are in those which go in for milk production. I notice that the cost of administration in this Estimate, £407,949, amounts to a great deal—nearly one-third of the whole—so that a very great proportion of this money which should go to help agriculture is spent in salaries here and in the country.
Just one point, I did not say that the Department of Agriculture were wrong in helping to produce store cattle. What I said was that they had put all their eggs in one basket. Stores in Ireland are now up against Canadian cattle, and that is likely to continue, and we have to go back to the dairy cow which the Department destroyed.
I am very sorry to see that the Estimate for Fishery Development is down by £3,393, because I look upon the fishery industry as one of our most important and most valuable industries. In common with all other Deputies and everybody else, I fully appreciate the very difficult position that the Government finds itself in; but I suggest, with all respect to the Government, that something should be done to reinforce the protection of our sea fisheries. I understand that the Helga in the old days and several other vessels used to do duty round the coast. Now, I understand, we have practically the same number of boats to keep watch over our fisheries, but whether they are doing so is another matter. Of course, once these fisheries are interfered with by foreigners coming within the three-mile limit, untold damage is done to the fishery beds, and it would take years and years to get them back again to a normal state of fructification. I hope the Government will look to that. As regards the inland fisheries the same is true, and I understand, owing to the times there has been a terrible lot of damage done to these fisheries. I earnestly exhort the Government to take whatever steps it can in assisting the guardians of the rivers and the fishery conservators, and to give them all the assistance possible in order to protect the inland fisheries. Though we have an enormous seaboard, the people of Ireland are not a fish-eating people; but if the fish from our sea fisheries could be landed at our people's doors inland, and in the minimum amount of time, I am quite satisfied it would be an enormous source of wealth to our country, and would give much-needed employment. Now, about the throwing of fish back again into the sea, I have seen it done myself in the city of Waterford. Anyone who knows anything about sea-fishing knows that at certain times of the year you have shoals of herrings coming into the various harbours. That occurred in Waterford Harbour, and they came right up to the city, and it might be said that in a city with 30,000 inhabitants there should be no necessity to throw the fish back into the sea. It was not done to raise the price of the fish. It was done because there was nothing else to do. Another thing we want for our fish, apart from smoked fish, is a means of preserving them both in the case of the sea and inland fisheries, and for that purpose we want to manufacture plenty of ice in Ireland. As far as ice is concerned I think we are practically derelict. When we get a proper means of manufacturing ice at a cheap rate we can get fish served to our people inland with celerity and safety and at a low price. Of course, we all appreciate the abnormal times we are living in. But the point I would like to make, and it is one of enormous importance at the present time as regards sea fisheries, would be to put, if possible, additional cruisers to watch our sea fisheries and to rigorously banish any foreigners who fish within the three-mile limit or fish over prohibited areas where the spawning grounds are situated.
One comment I am constrained to make. A certain element has appeared in a great number of these Estimates although these were discussed before and are being discussed again to-day. Retrenchment is a desirable thing and necessary, especially in the present state of the country, but there is retrenchment and retrenchment. Retrenchment for the sake of cutting down expenditure without regard to a deliberate and definite policy is always a dangerous thing, however desirable it may look at the first flush. I have been studying this Estimate for some indication of a policy outlined in it in order to discover, when we find that £3,500 have been deducted from Fishery development showing that amount of saving for the Nation, whether it is a saving or not. I believe it is not a saving and that the money should have been used to a considerable advantage, and that it would have been much more profitable to the country than will be found as a result of its having been saved. And so throughout there is a tendency natural enough, but which ought to be resisted, that Estimates coming before this Dáil must show a saving in many cases without regard to any definite policy that has been adopted. Deputy Wilson has indicated one matter and several Deputies have drawn attention to it in the Fisheries Estimate. The point I indicated is one of great importance. The curtailment of expenditure we make is of such a nature that when we come later on to the actual development of policy we may find production will be so impaired that we will have a great deal of leeway to catch up before we can begin to think of definite schemes for the future. I mention that in the hope that we may very soon get to the stage when agriculture and fisheries will all have formulated on their behalf some well-considered scheme of policy so that moneys when cut down will be cut down in the right place. There is another small matter to which I would like to draw your attention, and it is the amount for telegrams. I notice the item of telegrams has appeared over and over again as though it was expenditure actually incurred. I had assumed—I stand corrected if it is not so—I had assumed that telegrams incurred on behalf of the Government were not paid for as if they were required in the form of money to be found, unless it be telegrams across the water, but this sum of telegrams appears over and over again and requires, I think, some explanation.
There are one or two points I should like to ask the Minister about. Other Deputies have gone a considerable length usefully and necessarily into the Fisheries Estimate. Now the Ministries have some correspondence with reference to the tobacco growers in Meath. They wanted relief in the way of reduction of taxation, but the Government were unable to grant that. I would like to know what exactly is the position with regard to experiments in the cultivation of tobacco, particularly as there has been a reduction in the Estimate here of £500. The other matter is in connection with the collection of Agricultural Statistics. How exactly are the statistics collected now or has the Ministry considered the method of collection of statistics? In the abnormal circumstances of the times comprehensive statistics will be difficult to obtain, but under the older regime there were engaged certain men for the collection of statistics, the R.I.C., and anyone who has seen the R.I.C. at their work knows the whole thing was very largely a sham, because the man on the job generally went a mile or two on the road, had a chat, and very often came home and made his collection of statistics up in the barracks. I would like to know what is the present method and if the Ministry has considered a future method. Now, as one Deputy, I should be glad to see much more given for the agricultural development of the country, and I hope when the Agricultural Commission reports we shall be able to say that agriculture will be put in a much better way than it is at present. But I think there might be allowable reductions, not in the Estimates necessary for the development of agriculture, but in certain other administrative directions. I notice here the Secretary—I presume that is the Secretary of the old Department of Agriculture—and that his salary is to be reconsidered on a vacancy. I was reading over a list of salaries, wages and allowances under A. I notice a number of what seemed to me to be redundant positions in the Ministry, and I should like to ask the Minister if he thinks it necessary that all the officials are still required and will be required under the circumstances. I do not doubt at all that if the Ministry and the whole agricultural scheme in Ireland were functioning as we should all like it to function, perhaps many more officials would be required, but I should like if they are required that there would be no superfluous people, not that I want to sack anybody at all, but just the same it seems to me rather anomalous that out of a vote of £407,000 odd that so much as £181,000 odd should go to salaries and allowances.
I am inclined to differ from my colleague in his last remark. I can imagine a much larger proportion being well spent in salaries and allowances rather than grants. I am not sure that grants is the best way to do the work of this Agricultural Department. I want to raise two or three question, and I shall begin by asking a question on this item of live stock. Deputy Doyle drew attention to the reduction in H. 3.—"Improvement of Horse-breeding Grant," a reduction of £5,955. Presumably the Minister will give some explanation of that, at the close of the discussion, instead of doing it, as I think he ought to have done, at the opening of the discussion. Perhaps we also shall have an explanation of H. 8.—"National Stud, £5." Nothing is under that item last year, and I am just wondering whether there had been a decision on the part of the Minister to put £5 on a particular horse which lost, or whether some squandering of that kind has found its way into these Estimates as a precedent. Being a horse-loving country, and encouraging, as the Minister for Finance is doing, sweepstakes, I wonder is this the beginning of an embarkation on a policy of national betting. It might be enlightening to us to know whether this is a precedent for something of that kind. It is a curious item to appear in the Estimates:—"£5 for 1922 and 1923," and no explanation. I am very glad indeed to see that while there are a good many items of decreases there is an actual increase in agricultural education and research, an increase of £7,000. I would hope that the Minister will explain, and give us some enlightenment on what direction these increases have taken. I believe it is the right line; that it is through research and education that very much good will be done, and it is, I hope, an indication of the policy that the Minister intends to pursue, to devote a good deal of attention to that particular work of the Department. I do not know whether I am in order in raising the question of the Forestry Stations on this Vote. It is under the Department of Agriculture, but I am not sure that there is any particular item in this Vote which would allow me to raise that question.
It is under a separate vote, No. 56.
I want to say in that respect I will not try the patience of the Dáil. I am informed that there is in the Forestry Stations at Avondale and Ballyhaise a good deal of work to be done in the way of thinning and cleaning the plantations put down 16 or 17 years ago, and to which practically nothing has been done since. I complained some weeks ago on behalf of Mr. Everett that there had been some dismissals from the Agricultural Stations, but it is apparent from this information that there is a good deal of work to be done, and I would urge wherever it is possible to employ labour during this period on Forestry work through the Agricultural Department, that it should be done. I want to draw attention to a matter, a little bit apart, but quite in order, on this Vote. It is the attitude of the Minister towards the question of Canadian Stores; that is the importation into Britain of Canadian stores. No doubt, this is a matter which excites a tremendous amount of interest in Ireland, and is of great moment to the cattle breeders and agriculturists generally of this country. But judging by the letter which the Minister for Agriculture sent to a meeting of the Cattle Traders, there is in his mind a sort of regret that it is not possible to bring pressure on the British Ministry of the kind that used to be brought to bear upon the British Ministry. It seems to me that in reading this letter which he sent to the Minister for Agriculture in England, he is assuming a right to complain of what they do in England in regard to Irish cattle. I want to urge that that is not a dignified position for the Irish Agricultural Minister to take, in these days. We have by our own invitation cut ourselves off from the right to make demands upon the British Ministry of Agriculture. I am afraid the tone of this communication suggests that there is a regret in the Minister's mind that he has not still the power to bring pressure of a Parliamentary kind upon the British Ministry. He states:—
"The six days detention for Irish cattle is, however, an entirely different matter, and I have been careful to stress the point that there can be no reason why a change of policy as regards Canada should affect the relations between Great Britain and Ireland in a matter of such vital consequence to this country. It is but right and fair that the experiment of receiving cattle from the Overseas Dominions should be carried out under conditions erring, if at all, on the side of stringency, but every consideration of justice and expediency demands that Ireland, which is the natural and least precarious source of British supplies, and a depression of whose agricultural industry must react harmfully on British agriculture, should be considered in the future as she has been in the past as occupying in regard to the cattle trade an entirely different position from that of any of the Overseas Dominions."
There are quite a number of Clauses of this kind in this letter which seems to me to suggest that we have a right to interfere with the policy of England in regard to the admission of Canadian stores. We admit that it is right to retain a policy of diplomatic representation, but it is not right and it is going to put Ministers in a very undignified position and open the way to the retort, "You have chosen your way, we have chosen ours. We are going our way, you must go yours and have no regrets." There is a suggestion, I think, in this communication that you are asking the British Ministry of Agriculture to join with the Irish Ministry of Agriculture in a sort of attack upon the Canadian Ministry of Agriculture—to league Ireland and Britain against Canada. I submit that is a very undesirable state of mind for the Minister to adopt in this stage of our history. We have decided, for good or ill, to let Britain govern herself without the aid of Irish members of Parliament, and if they can be persuaded that it is a bad thing to put restraints upon the import of Irish cattle—well, all right; but please do not urge it as something that is desirable in the interests of Ireland, and therefore England ought to do it. I think it is necessary to draw attention to that, and to submit that we have to leave Britain to her own fiscal policy and to her own policy in regard to her own cattle and imports of overseas cattle, and we must make the best of the position we have made for ourselves. I just say in regard to the habit that has developed in agricultural Ireland and in industrial Ireland and in official Ireland, to denounce at all times the Department of Agriculture, as one who has followed its working a good deal in the last 15 or 18 years, I am not at all convinced that there is justice in that general denunciation. I believe that it has, in the main, done its work well; and I think that, while in many cases the policy adopted has been inadvisable, it has been done with the assent and consent of the agriculturists, and has proved itself beneficial to the country as a whole. I think there are many departments of its working which can be improved, and which ought to be improved, and will be improved. There will be changes of policy, but I dissent from the common habit of denouncing the Department of Agriculture high-up and low-down.
Before the Minister replies, I would like to know whom Deputy Johnson refers to when he talks of the denunciation of the Department. I heard no denunciation here of the Department.
I am not speaking of here, or of any specified place, but I think I have heard some people denouncing the Department.
We do not agree altogether with all of their schemes, but there is no denunciation of them.
I want to make it quite clear, first, that this Estimate is not the Estimate of a reorganised Department, and it does not presume to be an Estimate for anything new—any new development—in Irish agriculture. The Department, like every other Department, was taken over from the British Government on the 1st March, and since then it has just carried on. That is the truth. It is easy to make political capital about that, but that is the fact, and that is, I submit, the only possible procedure in the circumstances. We have considerably more to do at present, as is freely admitted from every side of the Dail, than mere administrative work. Between the 1st March and 6th December we had to take over Ireland from England and then we had to make a division between North and South, and into the bargain we have to run a war, and in all these circumstances it is perfectly sound policy, during the transition period, to carry on and lay your foundations before you start to build. Therefore, as I say, there is nothing new in that Estimate, and in the circumstances I make no apology whatever for that and I do not think it would be expected. Now, I agree with a number of things that have been said, though the speakers on a good many occasions based their remarks on facts which were slightly inaccurate. There seems to be an impression that the total estimate for the Department of Agriculture is only £407,949. That, of course, is only this particular estimate. In addition, if Deputy Doyle will just look at it, there are £62,499 Appropriations in Aid marked M. In addition, there are £184,738 for Science and Art, and in addition £114,300 Endowment Fund, so the real estimate of sums already passed is nearer £800,000 than £400,000, and that explains a good many difficulties, that Deputies have found for themselves in other items also. Now, first of all, it has been commented upon that only £11,900 appears on the estimates for the improvement of Dairy Cattle. Of course, that is not so. That is just one grant, one item, and if you will look through the estimates you will see there are moneys provided under other heads for that purpose. For instance, that takes no account of the staff that would be engaged in that sort of work and a number of other items. With regard to the £5 mentioned by Mr. Johnson. that is really—I think the financiers call it—a token item. The National Stud referred to there is the Tully Stud, which is not yet legally transferred and which is being run at present under the direction of Colonel Greer, and which we have not taken any account of, or made up the accounts of as yet. £5, I understand, is the thing the Treasury simply put in as a token item. I am not going to put it on any of the good horses raised in that particular stud, and that are being raced this year. Now, I entirely agree that the Department of Agriculture needs re-organisation; and in the circumstances I think it is more useful to consider future policy and future intentions than merely to spend the time going into those items which are items that have appeared in the Estimates of the Department time out of mind. I have spoken before here, and I still believe that the Department of Agriculture should confine itself to agriculture. I think there will need to be some division between the educational functions of the Department of Agriculture and what I call its proper functions. I agree that fisheries and fishing in this country is almost as important as Agriculture, and that the treatment which it has got up to this lumped in with agriculture, has been totally insufficient and totally inadequate. I want to point out that the items which the Deputies refer to here under the headings (K. 1) and (K. 2) do not represent the total amount that has been spent on Fisheries this year. I have just taken out the actual figures, and they are these:—There is £10,720 under (K. 1) and (K. 2). Elsewhere in the Vote there is £10,875, and from the Endowment Fund there is £10,755, so that the total roughly is something like £33,000. As I am on this particular item, perhaps I might explain this reduction of £3,393. If you will turn to (K. 1), that is, to the details on page 10, you will see the item, "Knockadoon Pier," and you will see that there was £2,333 spent on it. That was an ad hoc grant made last year, and it is not required this year.
And badly spent.
That may be, but I am not dealing with it at the moment. That explains the £2,333 of this item of £3,393. To do anything real with the fishing industry in Ireland, which is even more depressed at the present moment than agriculture, very large sums of money will have to be spent. They will have to be spent on technical education very largely; on curing stations, marketing, and all these matters that were raised. I have always thought that fishing and fisheries would be more properly attached to a Ministry like Industry and Commerce than to Agriculture, as it is in every go-ahead country. With regard to the points raised by Deputy Johnson and his reference to the question of Canadian stores, I entirely agree that it would be an undignified attitude for a Minister for Agriculture of the Irish Free State, whoever he may be, or for the Provisional Government, for the matter of that, to urge anything on England purely putting forward officially the view that it was in the interests of Ireland and that therefore it should be granted. I agree that we have taken another road and that we must walk that road. We cannot have it both ways. I entirely agree with that, and I hope that I have always been very careful to keep that point of view very well to the fore in any dealings I may have had with Ministries on the other side. I am not complaining about it. We have got what we wanted and we took it without any complaints or without any regrets. I have none. These letters to which Deputy Johnson has referred are letters mostly from technical men in one Department to technical men in another Department on a very important subject. Business is business and they had a perfect right to point out that Ireland was the main supplier of beef for England and the obvious and natural market for the English buyer in the future, and that it was in England's interest to see that special concessions were given to that market. That is, I think, what any business man would do who is pressing a business proposition. I hold I have gone no farther than that. Deputy O'Shannon raised the question of this grant for tobacco growing, and also this question of statistics, and he asked some assurances. I have had some correspondence in this regard last Spring, when the Department was asked to provide more money for this special purpose, to pay a bonus to tobacco growers, especially in Meath in connection with Sir Nugent Everard's experiments, and the experiments of Lord Dunraven. We have given this matter much consideration and there is no doubt whatever that the two men named, Sir Nugent Everard and Lord Dunraven, have spent a lot of money and have made remarkable efforts to introduce tobacco growing as a commercial proposition into this country. And there is no doubt that a public spirit of that sort should be helped. All I can say is that we have considered it from that point of view, and from every other point of view, and taking all the circumstances, and taking all the other interests that the Department of Agriculture must look after, we could not afford to give any more money this year than the item that appears on the Estimates. With regard to statistics, I know pretty well how statistics were collected in the past. I agree with Deputy O'Shannon that the police constable went out and met the nearest neighbour on the roadside or in his house and he collected the statistics for the parish. At present statistics are not being collected in some places. They are being collected from Department's officials in other places, and we intend to make some arrangement with the Northern Government in connection with the collection of statistics in their area. It has been found exceedingly difficult to collect statistics this year. It does not require any explanation. It is obvious on the face of it that it should be so. This is the normal Estimate, and if the money is not spent it will remain in the Treasury. There is only one other point, I think, and that is in connection with Canadian stores. This year, as every farmer knows, Canadian stores have been allowed into England, and that is the particular threat that is being held over the industry for a great many years. Irish agriculture was built on unstaple foundations in so far as it was built on the goodwill of England in keeping out Canadian stores. They are in now, and experts differ as to what the effect will be. But, whatever the effect is—and, personally, I do not think the effect is going to be so terrible as some people think—there is this to be said, that doubtful item and that particular threat hanging over the head of the Irish farmer for so many years, has at last fallen. If I may say so, we will find that we have simply called a bluff, that it will make very little difference, and that we will be able to build our future agricultural policy on a firmer and sounder foundation. I agree with Deputy Doyle, that dairying must be developed much more extensively in the future than it has been in the past. If we do feel the effect of the entry of Canadian stores into England, if it does affect the store trade, in one way it may be met by the development of dairying. As I have stated, I believe it is necessary to reorganise the Department of Agriculture and to reorganise it in the direction of confining it to its own business. I believe, further, that you can do more for agriculture in Ireland in the future by spending money on agricultural education than you can do by any other two or three methods which might be suggested. I believe the future of agriculture in Ireland is the future of agricultural education. I believe that is the direction to develop and spend the money on, and I agree that an Executive department is not the proper department to look after technical education or agricultural education. I hope to see some institution dealing with scientific, industrial, and agricultural research in the country, and, though it is very important to spend money on education in the primary schools, it is even more important to spend money on the University side of Education—on research. That is all I care to say at present. The Minister for Agriculture of the Free State will have the re-organisation of the Department and the question of future policy to consider; but, for myself, I think I am quite clear that those are the main lines to develop.
Does the Minister overlook altogether the drastic reduction made in the Horsebreeding Scheme? For what reason did he make such a drastic reduction?
That is not the amount of money spent on Horsebreeding. There are other items.
But the reduction is there.
This particular item was not anything in the nature of a recurrent grant, and the amount this year is just the balance left.
The Minister has declared with very admirable lucidity what would be his policy with regard to a re-organised Department. Because I saw the heading "Department of Agriculture," I was optimistic enough to think that a beginning had already been made on re-organisation. Knowing the progressive and reformative instincts and capacities of the Minister in charge, I am very, very much encouraged by what he has said, and I should like to enquire does he speak merely for himself or does he express the considered policy of the entire Cabinet? Of course, I pay no attention whatever to the deprecatory remarks he made, in which he forecasted another Minister—a Minister other than himself—in the Free State Government. Considering that the Free State Government is already within sight—it is only a few weeks away—and that there is no indication whatsoever, so far as one can discern signs of the times, of an alteration of Government, I think it would be really very valuable for us if we were to know on the constructive side of its work if those who are to administer the Free State share the enlightened views which the Minister has just given expression to.
I do not think I am really called upon to answer that particular question at this stage. I will only say this: the Ministry as a whole have a considerable amount of important work to do, apart altogether from administration and apart altogether from the work connected with administration. I am stating these views at present as my own views.
Motion made and question put: "That the Dáil in Committee, having considered the Estimates for Ministry of Agriculture in 1922-23, and having passed a Vote on Account of £320,000 for the period to the 6th December, 1922, recommend that the full Estimate of £407,949 for the Financial Year, 1922-23, be adopted in due course by the Oireachtas."
Agreed to.