Any port in a storm. Deputy Gorey will admit that is sometimes a useful policy. Another reason is, why should any man lend money at 4 per cent. when he can get 5 per cent. in National Loan or Saving Certificates or Industrial securities? Suppose a shop-keeper or a farmer puts down the money, if the cattle are taken in respect of shop or other debts, does not that man stand to lose his capital? They have a beggar at the beginning and a beggar at the end who is now approaching bankruptcy. I know how difficult it is to deal with this question, but we have to face it and the Ministry must take it into serious consideration. I think the best suggestion came from Deputy Cole. Deputy Cole suggested lending money through the banks at a low rate of interest. The Deputy went on to show that, in effect, that proposal meant a saving to the State. I checked the figures he gave and while they are inaccurate, I have sufficient data to demonstrate the principle he advocated. Suppose the State puts down £100,000—it should be in the neighbourhood of a million to be useful—it is out of interest on that money for three years. Three years compound interest represents a charge to the Exchequer of something like £15.812 10s. We assume that the money is borrowed at five per cent. The same sum of money might be established by credit in a bank and arrangements made by which the money could be lent at 2½ per cent. to the farmer. Remember, the principle of solvent securities applies both to the credit societies and the bank. That would mean that the State would be losing, say, 2½ per cent. only for three years; in other words, that the loss would be, at compound interest for the same period, £7,689 1s. 3d., which represents a substantial saving in the neighbourhood of £7,800. That is only on a sum of £100,000.
There is a further point. Have we the law sufficiently up to date to deal with these credit societies? I read in the report of the Commission on Agriculture, in par. 13:
"We recommend that the registrar of friendly societies be furnished with the necessary powers to enable him properly to perform his duties with respect to co-operative credit societies, and to take legal action where necessary against societies and officials who fail to comply with the regulations."
The meaning of that is that the present functioning of our credit societies is not on a proper basis, and that there are legal loopholes through which officials can evade positive duties. Therefore, it appears that the State runs a certain risk or loss.
There is a further point. No man at the best of times likes to come forward and admit that he is financially embarrassed. By making it a public thing it is asking too much owing to Irish nature. The principle has been to go to the banks, if possible. The banks keep the affairs of a man secret, and while you have to get equal security in both cases, men, for motives of secrecy, will go to the banks. Even they will pay a higher rate of interest rather than have their affairs made a matter of public discussion. Suppose, as I say, we need a million pounds, what will the loss to the State be in any year? The loss can only be 2½ per cent., because only 2½ per cent will be paid to the banks who are acting as agents for the Government. If the money can be borrowed at 5 per cent., that means a difference of 2½ per cent. On a million pounds the annual charge to the Exchequer will only be £25,000. Remember, the Agricultural Commission reported in favour of that system in dealing with an abnormal situation.
One could question the fact whether, on the original and fundamental principles of co-operative credit, there was such a thing as State aid ever expected or desired. I think the original founders of the credit system, who were men rather analogous to the present, laid down as a basic principle that State aid was not desirable, that the principle was to foster self-help on the part of those seeking relief. Two Germans about 80 years ago went into this question very deeply; one was Schulze-Delitzsch and the other was Raiffeisin. There was a state of affairs analogous to what prevails to-day. Those men took up the benevolent work and helped to establish credit societies. For many years they acted independently and in hostility to the State. Consequently, the whole principle growing up around credit societies is something different from State aid. Therefore, does it not seem a strange departure for the Government to cut across the whole principle of the credit societies, namely, the principle of mutual help? I think that the proposal should be to let the agricultural credit societies get established on the basis which was the intention of the founders and that in dealing with this question of loss it should be through the system of credit in a bank.
We are asked to deal with the question of loss of which we have no accurate return. I was one of the first to advocate a census. I am still of opinion that a census of loss should at the early stages have been taken. It is suggested that, owing to the badness of human nature, people would exaggerate and lie, but surely there are sufficient checks to detect a man who descends to the lie. We can all approximately determine how much a farm can carry, if we know its valuation, its land purchase annuity and extent, and if we know the kind of soil. Any farmer of experience can tell to a nicety the stock that the land can carry. If men double or treble their losses, a Civic Guard even, going around, could immediately detect whether a man was speaking the truth. It has been suggested by me here that the first thing to do is to have an accurate survey of the problem which faces us. The Minister says he does not believe in going to each household for a census of stock. I believe if we had a census of live stock carried out twice a year, the problem would not be difficult. Owing to the absence of regular stock-taking on the lines of Government departments, the position is made more difficult, but I deny the problem is insoluble and that it is quite impossible to get an accurate census of mortality. It was suggested that the fluke would be forgotten in a few years. I wish it were possible, but I doubt it. There are men amongst us to-day whose minds can go back to 1879 and 1880 and who have reason to recall the very serious loss in livestock then occasioned. Is it not begging the question to suggest that mortality can be forgotten when we know in our hearts that conditions are serious for farmers? Some relief work has been suggested by Deputy Dolan, such as making roads and that kind of thing. Is that the proper method for assisting farmers to re-stock their land?
Remember, that a man working on the road on relief work of that kind withdraws his labour from his own land, and, to a large extent, the land remains unproductive. The position to me is such, at least, that while we can appreciate relief work, we must lay down the principle that it is only intended for certain classes, and one cannot apply it fairly and logically to the whole body of distressed agriculturalists. Perhaps it is the thought of something that Deputy Dolan said about farmers in Cavan not objecting to relief work that causes me to make that remark. These farmers did not object to relief work, but they objected to its partisan character. Deputy Dolan said that we should have a better spirit amongst the farming community. He reminds me of a line in "Macbeth" when he says to the weird sisters: "Call me a spirit from the vasty deep." In contradistinction to Deputy Dolan, I would urge upon the State the necessity, if possible, of making the necessary outlay for the purchase of a number of suitable bulls in order to raise the quality of live stock. I believe in education, but not so much in compulsion, and it appears to me that if we could get in the West of Ireland a number of pole-angus bulls and also attempt to develop the qualities of milk production it would perhaps be one of the best forms of relief which the State could give at this crisis. I would suggest that a number of pole-angus and dairy shorthorn bulls be loaned on reasonable terms to farmers, and that premiums for the upkeep of those animals be given in increasing numbers with increased grants to farmers in those areas. While on the one hand you want to develop the beef strain in cattle— and I believe for the requirements of the British market there is no animal to beat the pole-angus—you cannot develop on dairying lines without having a milk strain also at hand. I do not believe that it is possible to combine the two qualities in any animal.
