The necessity for this Bill, so far as my Department is concerned, arises from a few small difficulties which have been experienced in the administration of the original measure. The late date on which that Act became law rendered it impossible for wheat growers to qualify for payment of wheat bounty in view of the terms of sub-section (2) of Section 71 which provides, inter alia, that no bounty is payable on home-grown millable wheat "unless such wheat was grown on premises entered in the register of wheat growers during the period of three months next preceding the commencement of the cereal year." That is to say, before the 1st May. It became evident that, notwithstanding the publicity given to the scheme through the medium of advertisements, posters and lectures, a number of wheat growers had failed to realise the necessity for registration. I may mention, incidentally, that 8,000 odd wheat growers had registered up to 31st July last and that about 2,000 more have applied since. It seems only equitable that in the initial stages of a scheme of such national importance, persons who have grown wheat of millable quality should not, on a technicality, be deprived of the bounty, and the object of Section 8 of the Bill is to extend for this year only the period during which applications for registration will be regarded as satisfying the requirements of Section 71 (2) (a) of the original Act. Section 8 of the amending Bill deals with that matter.
A slight amendment of Section 76 (1) is necessary to cover the case of a person who is registered as a wheat dealer. He may, for instance, dispose of it, in opposition to the intention of the Act, by transferring it to premises for which he holds a permit under Section 36 of the Act. The wheat dealer who buys wheat on which a subsidy is payable may, contrary to the intentions of the Act, dispose of it to his own mill. That is a thing which we want to make right under Section 9 of this Bill.
Part III of the Bill deals with the important question of the sale of home-grown wheat for seed. It is desired to encourage licensed millers and registered wheat dealers to reserve, if they so desire, some of the better samples of wheat for sale for seed, and provision was made for such sales under Section 76 (3) of the Act. I regard it, however, as an essential condition of such sales that the vendor, who will no doubt expect and receive an enhanced price for such wheat, should refund to the State a sum equivalent to the bounty payable to the grower thereof. There is, of course, the obvious danger that without some such precaution bounty might have to be paid twice, or oftener, on the same lot.
There is also, as I mentioned when speaking on a previous occasion, the point that the dealer or the miller buying wheat from the farmer, paying the ordinary price for it, on which wheat a subsidy would be receivable from State funds, would be in a very favourable position competing against the ordinary seed merchant or the ordinary merchant in selling wheat. The only way we can bring them, more or less, on terms of equality is to compel the wheat dealer or flour miller to refund the amount of the subsidy to the State after the wheat has been sold for seed. The powers conferred on me by Section 76 (3) did not, however, enable me to deal with this matter adequately and Part III of the Bill is intended to remedy this by definitely requiring the licensed miller or registered wheat dealer to refund the bounty in cases in which he resells wheat for seed. The other conditions upon which such sales may be effected are laid down in detail in Section 11 of the Bill and are not, as in the original Act, left for settlement by regulations. Another matter has arisen which may be raised on the Committee Stage of the Bill. It refers to Section 81, which deals with the sale of pure maize for human food. I merely mention the matter now because I think it may be necessary, if an amendment is possible, to bring it in on the Committee Stage of the Bill. There are also in the Bill two sections which are more concerned with that part of the measure which is administered by the Minister for Industry and Commerce than they are with the part administered by my Department.
As Deputies are aware, there are two classes of millers under this Bill—the licensed miller and the permitted miller. The licensed miller can buy wheat on which a home grown wheat certificate is issued and the seller of the wheat is entitled to the bounty. The permitted miller, on the other hand, is not in a position to buy wheat under these conditions. If he buys wheat, there is no bounty given. Therefore, the farmer would not be disposed to sell his wheat to the permitted miller unless the permitted miller would give him the same price as the licensed miller would give, plus the bounty. The difficulty arises in drawing the line between the licensed miller and the permitted miller. There are very small millers who have done a good deal on a commission basis—taking the wheat from the farmers, milling it and returning it to the farmers for their own use. We should like to encourage that business and to see that farmers have their own wheat milled for their own purposes. I think there will not be any great difficulty in encouraging that business because farmers who get into the habit of growing wheat will be inclined to have a few barrels of the wheat milled for their own use. But there are millers in a small way who do a good deal of that commission business and who do also a certain amount of importing or buying wheat to mill for sale. If they were to apply for licences, they would be compelled to obey all the regulations laid down for the licensed miller and they would be subject to the penalties prescribed. Amongst the penalties is one of a fine in case the quota for which they apply is under-milled. There is an amendment in this Bill exempting from penalty millers who mill less than 1,000 barrels a year. That will give a chance to those small millers, who are partly commission millers and partly licensed millers, as described in this Bill, to exist. These are the points which have been dealt with. In a Bill of the magnitude and importance of the Cereals Bill, which went through early this year, it would be absolutely impossible to foresee all the difficulties that might arise in the administration of the measure. These few amendments become necessary at this stage and in all probability, as time goes on, other amending Bills may have to be introduced.
