I move:—
That the Dáil is of opinion that immediate action should be taken by the Government, either by the granting of loans or otherwise, to enable farmers to restock their lands, in cases where the owners have lost their stock through disease.
In moving this motion I want to make it perfectly clear that I am not accustomed to try to make things worse than they are. I think I have been twitted more than once with pretending that all is lovely in the garden, and I move this motion conscious of the fact that the matter contained therein is a thing of supreme urgency and a thing that will not brook delay, that it is a problem that confronts the country very seriously, a problem that demands the immediate attention of the Government, and one that ought to be tackled by them at once. It is conceded on all sides that the foundation of this State is agriculture. It will be conceded by every man who understands anything about the industry, and particularly by every farmer, that the cattle trade is the biggest and most important branch of our agricultural industry. The foundations of that trade, as we might say, are very largely, almost entirely, perhaps, built on the cattle and cows of the small farmers. If you go through the poorer counties of Ireland to-day everywhere you are confronted with this state of things. The small farmers of Ireland have never passed through a more trying period since 1847 than they have passed through this last twelve months, and particularly these last three or four months. The loss in cattle is so great that I do not think any statistics could be compiled that would show anything like a correct return of what that loss means to the State. If you ask these people what their losses are they will say, and I have met them myself, and heard them say it: "I would not like to tell."
I concede that it is not right that anyone should try to magnify a problem like this, a problem that is so really serious. But I have myself very good reason to know what it means in my own constituency. I am raising this question because it has been forced on me, that the problem can only be dealt with by the Government, by their tackling it thoroughly and understanding the seriousness of it. That knowledge was the cause of my putting down this motion. In my county we have something like 19,000 holdings, and 13,000 of these are of a valuation of £10 and under. I am sure I would be correct in saying that half of the agricultural holders in my county have lost a couple of cows. In some cases the number is small; in other cases it is very great. One-third of these, at least, have lost practically all their cattle. The unfortunate circumstances are, so far as my inquiries go, that it is the farmer with the three cows who has lost two. The Minister may question the figures I give, but I have gone to the trouble of making inquiries from other Deputies, and I think that the figures from other constituencies will be found more surprising than mine. I agree that in the drier counties, where the land is better, the farmers are more fortunate. They are very lucky. They have not the experience that the farmers in my county have. Let us consider what this must mean in the counties where the farmers have suffered. To-day we have thousands of farmers in the poorer counties who have had three cows, and who now have two, and some of them none at all. Some have lost all their young stock as well. When we consider that, we must ask what is to be the future of these farmers? In the first place, how are these farmers to live? This season, so far, the prospect for the smaller farmer is certainly not very promising. He was depending in practically every case for a living on his milk supply during the summer months until the harvest can be reaped. In most cases, in my experience, his milk is sold to the creamery. With the loss of his cows, that prospect is now taken from him. That is exactly his position. What can be done for him, or who can do it? If something is not done how can that farmer be expected to meet the demands that the State will make upon him? A farmer without his stock is like a workman without his tools, or the means that are necessary to enable him to work.
That is the position that many of our small farmers find themselves in now. They are hardly able to carry on until the harvest comes. If they are blessed with a good harvest they may manage to live. But by what means are they to replace the stock which have been lost? The farmer looks to his neighbour. Someone may suggest: "Let him try to borrow money in the bank." That might be a way out, if the number of these cases were very few. But we know it would take half the countryside going into a bank to-day to give a guarantee that would be sufficient to enable these men to get a sufficient loan to enable them to replace their stock. We must then look to some other means of relieving them. The farmer cannot get the money in the bank, because most of his neighbours are practically in the same position as he is in. The neighbour that has to borrow himself will not be much of a guarantee in the bank for a man who also wants to borrow money. There is, therefore, no remedy to be found in that direction. If the State does not come to his aid, if the State does not realise the difficulties that these people are placed in, and does not volunteer to do something to help them out it will, I am afraid, be a very serious matter for the State itself, from more than one point of view.
As I say, the State is depending on our agricultural exports to maintain its credit. I fear that our exports at the end of this year may be seriously down, and that if some remedy is not forthcoming they will be down in the years to come. Someone may ask me why. If we lose thousands and thousands of the best milking cows we have, all over the country, I would like to ask the Minister for Agriculture how will the Dairy Produce Act get us more this year than the four million cows that supplied us with milk and butter last year? If we sell perhaps one-third less butter than we sold last year, how will it affect us? When we consider the thousands of people and the thousands of families who are depending on the produce of the sale of milk for their living all through the summer months, and that that is removed, the difficulties of these people are very great, so great that only the State can help them. They cannot help themselves. We must agree that something must be done for them.
There is the other side. Our exports in cattle, I think, are by far the biggest item of our exports. These exports depend on the quality and numbers of the cattle we breed and raise. That depends, in turn, on the numbers of our cows. The exports of our cattle this year are determined largely by the number of cows we kept last year and the year before. The number of cattle that we are exporting this year may not be altogether determined by the number of cows we have this year, but, unquestionably the number and the value of our exports next year, and, perhaps, the year after, will be determined by the number of cows we have this year. If the number of cows we have now are down by thousands, undoubtedly the number of cattle, suitable and available, for export next year and the year after, must be, and will be, I fear, down by thousands—perhaps by a hundred thousand—if steps are not taken to replace the cattle that we have lost. Undoubtedly, from the economic point of view this is a very serious problem for the State. I say that, apart altogether from what it means to the individual, and what it means as a livelihood for thousands and thousands of people. As far as I can see the State, and no other, can give this help. I say that these people have every claim on assistance from the State in the difficulties with which they are confronted. Men have said to me:—
"We think the Government should come to our aid. We think the Government ought to help. We are not asking anything from the Government. We are not asking something for nothing. We are asking nothing but what, please God, we will pay back; we think the Government have a duty to do what they can for us."
If I could see that it was possible by other means than by appealing to the Government to intervene, I would not ask that any action should be taken by the Government. I would much prefer that individuals, when confronted with difficulties, would have the energy and the imagination to help themselves to find a way out. I would prefer that these people should find a way out of their own difficulties themselves by cooperating with one another, with a view to finding a solution for this problem. But I fear, in the present depressed conditions of agriculture, that it is not possible to find a remedy by such means.
If the Government do not consider that it is their obligation and their responsibility, then the plight of these people for several years to come is going to be very bad. Many of them will be faced with the sale and transfer of their land. That would not be a satisfactory solution. The Government can help, and since they are encouraging—and rightly encouraging—increased productivity, they should not neglect the agricultural industry. They themselves recognise its value to the State. It is their duty to stimulate increased productivity in that industry. They know the depression under which it is labouring to-day. These unfortunate conditions make the present position much worse and much more difficult than it would otherwise be and I grant that it is not going to be a simple matter for the Government to deal with this problem. It cannot be solved by a wave of the hand, nor can it be solved by the passing or acceptance of a resolution in this House. But with courage and energy, the Government can do a great deal to alleviate the distress which exists at present and which will exist if the causes are not removed. It should be possible for the credit of the State to be pledged to some extent, so that agriculture—and particularly the branch of it that is in a very serious plight—would get a stimulus that is much needed. It would be but right that the Government should pledge the credit of the State, if necessary, in order to help these people out. I am not going to say that the Government are not conscious of the duty that they owe to agriculture. But it is not enough to say that they know the farmers have suffered loss, that their difficulties are very great, that something should be done to help them, but that there are many things they could do for themselves which they are not doing. That will not solve the problem. While it is not for me nor Deputies on these benches to suggest what the Government ought to do, it is our duty and, I think, a duty other Deputies will feel called upon to discharge, to press upon the Government the seriousness of the situation that exists. It is their duty and their responsibility to do what they can for an industry which is so important to the State. The failure of the Government to rise to the occasion will not alone have serious effects presently but it will, as I have tried to point out, affect our productivity, our trade balance and the credit of the State perhaps two or three years hence. I am urging that the Government ought to take immediate action in this matter, and I feel confident that we will have the support of many Deputies in this House in our request. Further, it is practically the unanimous demand of the country that Government action should be taken.
