I understood that Deputy Hugo Flinn was in possession when this debate was adjourned on the last occasion. I was rather waiting to see if the Deputy would resume the debate. This motion has been on the Paper for a considerable time, as can be seen from the motion itself. It refers to taking "steps to relieve agricultural land of rates during the financial year 1934-'35." That should now be 1935'36. But when this motion was put on the Paper it was evident to most people who were in touch with agricultural conditions that such relief was necessary for the farming community. That relief, necessary and all as it was at that time, is much more necessary at present. Because those members of the House who are members of local authorities are aware the conditions are considerably worse to-day than they were 12 months ago, and that as a result of the action taken by the Government in withholding the agricultural grants from the county councils because of the non-payment of land annuities, most if not all the county councils in the country to-day find themselves in a very difficult position, to say the least of it. The amounts withheld in many counties will mean a very substantial and a very heavy increase on the existing rate that has has been struck if the services are to be maintained. At the moment I am not quite clear as to the amount which it is proposed to withhold from us in Tipperary. We have two county councils in Tipperary. It has been intimated to the North Tipperary County Councils that a very substantial sum is to be withheld. I am speaking from recollection. The sum mentioned in the statement issued by the Department of Local Government and Public Health recently to be withheld up to the 31st of March was something in the neighbourhood of £44,000. That is equal, I think, to about 4/- in the £ in the rates in North Tipperary. Surely, no person and no member of the Fianna Fáil Party, even those members who try to convince us that as a result of the economic war there is no very great hardship placed on the farmers—will suggest for a moment that it would be possible for the ratepayers to meet such an increase as that.
In mentioning the figure £44,000, I am speaking subject to correction. I am not certain that that is the figure but so far as I can recollect that was the figure mentioned for North Tipperary in the statement issued, as I say, by the Department of Local Government some time ago. In any case, it is absolutely clear that, as a result of the withholding of the agricultural grant, there must be an increase in the rates, if the services are to be maintained at the same level, not to mention county councils going in for heavier expenditure, as many of them would have to do if the ratepayers in different counties were in a position to bear the cost. I think it is clear to most people who are conversant with affairs in rural parts of the country that even prior to the economic war and prior to the very substantial reductions in the price of live stock and so on, most people found it difficult enough to meet their annual demands for rates, and I think it will be admitted that one of the farmer's principal outgoings, one of the heaviest charges he has to meet in the course of the year, is the payment of his rates.
This Motion asks that they should be relieved from that burden during the continuance of the economic war. I think that is a fair demand to make particularly to a Government which definitely promised, when seeking the confidence of the people, that they would derate agricultural land in this country. I know that, since the Fianna Fáil Party came into power, they have on many occasions tried to deny that that promise was ever made or that those statements were made throughout the country, but I do not think that denial was meant seriously because it can be so easily rebutted. I heard it myself on many occasions during election campaigns and I have a very distinct recollection of one very keenly contested by-election, and, if I might say so, that was the real bait, the carrot, that was held out by the Fianna Fáil Party at that time—the withholding of £3,000,000 by way of annuities, £2,000,000 of which were to be devoted to the complete derating of agricultural land. The case was then made by every member of the Fianna Fáil Party that the farmers could not continue in farming unless they got the benefit of derating and if that was the position at that time, how much more necessary is it now?
My friend, Deputy Corry, speaking here last Thursday night, enumerated for us all the splendid and profitable crops which this Government had provided for the farmer and when I suggested to him that, according to his statement, the farmers must be very prosperous, he said that, indeed, they were not. The Deputy, of course, was quite right as he usually is. They are not prosperous. Deputy Corry, I recollect, both inside and outside this House, before he became a respectable member of a respectable Government, on all occasions, and on some occasions when he was not in order tried the patience of this House advocating complete derating for the agricultural community of this country. The Deputy made a very good case when he told us that the farmers were carrying the whole country on their backs and that they were so crushed that unless they got this relief it would be utterly impossible for them to carry on. The Deputy, as a matter of fact, was one of those who was largely responsible for converting me on this question of derating. The argument for derating to-day is much stronger and much more clear and the case can be made with much more confidence as to the inability of the farmers to meet these rates than it could have been made three or four years ago.
There is another aspect of this matter which, I think, ought to commend itself to this House. If the Minister withholds these moneys, which he says he will withhold, and if county councils are deprived of those moneys, unless they strike a very much higher rate, the services which are usually carried on by local authorities will suffer and many things will flow from that, not the least of which will be a considerable number added to the already very much swollen numbers of unemployed. I had expected—I still have some faith in our friends on the opposite side—that this motion would have been accepted at the beginning. If it had been accepted at the time it was put on the Order Paper, the farmers would have been relieved of a considerable burden. We hear from time to time that there is a conspiracy against the payment of rates. So far as I am personally concerned, I know of no such conspiracy and, if there was such a conspiracy, I certainly would not stand for it for one moment. I believe the farmers of this country— it does not matter what their political affiliations may be—are finding it very difficult and, in some cases, perhaps, impossible, to meet the charges made upon them and I am quite satisfied that there are many Fianna Fáil farmers who find it as difficult and who find it impossible to meet these charges in the shape of ratés as farmers who are supporters of the U.I.P., or any other Party.
We have to realise that it is not a political question but that it is an economic question for the farmers. It is a question of a man not being able to walk into a fair, as he could a few years ago, and be sure of being able to sell his stock and to sell at a good price. Deputy Corry, or some other Deputy, may tell us that they are getting so much for wheat and so much for beet and so on, but that does not obtain all over the country. There are farmers who, perhaps unfortunately for themselves, cannot grow either wheat or beet and cannot take advantage of these fairly heavily subsidised crops because of the nature of their land. I know, and there are other members of this House who know farmers who are in the position of having to depend absolutely on the few cattle they bring to the fair, and not only is the price of that particular type of beast very much reduced, but cattle of that particular class are almost unsaleable at the moment. I suggest to the House that it is very difficult indeed for those men to meet the demands made upon them in the form of rates and I suggest that before voting on this question, if there is going to be a vote, members on the opposite side should throw their minds back two or three years and remember the views they then held and to which they gave expression and try to be consistent. If they are, I have no doubt that this Motion will be carried.