Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 29 Apr 1937

Vol. 66 No. 14

Committee on Finance. - Vote 70—Export Bounties and Subsidies.

Minister for Agriculture (Dr. Ryan)

I move:—

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £1,492,000 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1938, chun Deolchairí agus Conganta Airgid um Easportáil.

That a sum not exceeding £1,492,000 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1938, for Export Bounties and Subsidies.

There are some changes from last year upon which I want to say something. The amount provided for the export bounties on pigs and pig products has been increased by £25,000 in the expectation of a larger export. The amount for bounties and subsidies on calf skins has been increased by £20,000, also in expectation of a larger export. The amount for bounties and subsidies on the export of eggs and poultry has been increased by £100,000 in order to give increased rates of export bounty on eggs in particular. With regard to dairy products, the Estimate shows a reduction of £65,000; but as a result of certain announcements made by the Minister for Finance in his Budget statement, it will be necessary to bring in a Supplementary Estimate for £350,000 for export bounties on dairy products. These are the only changes from last year.

Mr. Cosgrave

Is there nothing else the Minister can say? We have all that on the Estimates.

Dr. Ryan

There is nothing more that anybody can say.

Mr. Cosgrave

Surely there is something else?

Dr. Ryan

I will answer any question I can.

Mr. Cosgrave

Will the Minister explain why it is necessary to pay £80,000 on calf-skins? There ought to be some announcement of policy with regard to that on account of the changed circumstances. If the £80,000 is in respect of liabilities that have been occasioned, that is a different presentation from what it would be if the Government are still going to pay 10/- for every calf-skin from now on. I think Deputies are against that policy, and I should be glad if the Minister would give us some reason for it.

Dr. Ryan

I do not think so. I dealt with the policy with regard to calf skins as fully as I could on the Vote for Agriculture. As I said on that occasion, my original intention in bringing in a bounty on calf skins was to try to encourage the consumption of veal, which would remove the great disparity there is in this country between the number of cows required in the first place for the supply of dairy products, and, in the second place, for the production of cattle for consumption as meat. In many countries—in most countries on the Continent, at any rate—the number of cows for meat supply and dairy produce supply are just about balanced, so that there is no export worth speaking of either of meat or dairy products, and no import either —they are well balanced. The explanation is that they consume a good deal of veal. In this country we are not in that position. I believe we would be very much better off if we had a larger consumption of veal in this country and a lesser number of cattle for export, as we would probably get a better market.

I explained also that we were well aware, at the time of bringing in this scheme, that about 60,000 calves die each year from natural causes—that is the ordinary mortality—and that we were giving the benefit of this scheme to the owners of these calves as a sort of State insurance against loss. I should say that our hope of encouraging the consumption of veal was not realised. Last year we had a smaller export of calf skins than in the previous year. We are budgeting for about an equal number this year —whether we will reach it or not, I do not know. At any rate, we are budgeting for about an equal number. From what Deputies and others say, there possibly will be a bigger ordinary mortality amongst calves this year, because the cows are in very poor condition after last winter owing to poor hay, etc., so that there will be a fair number from that cause in any case. There may not be as large a number of calves slaughtered for the sake of receiving the bounty as last year or the year before.

No matter how conditions may develop here, there will always be a certain number of calves slaughtered for the sake of getting the bounty, and it will be always a good thing that they should be slaughtered, because if farmers find calves are not worth 10/- it would be better for the country that they should be slaughtered rather than allow them to grow up and help to deteriorate our cattle or get a bad name for them by having such inferior cattle in the country. I may say that any time I have gone down the country, particularly to the creamery counties, and met farmers, I have always found them in thorough agreement with this scheme.

Mr. Cosgrave

I must say I am not at all impressed with what the Minister stated about this matter. In the first place, if we are to produce veal, some sort of training would be required in the production of it. One does not get veal simply by slaughtering calves of two or three weeks old.

Dr. Ryan

That was not expected.

Mr. Cosgrave

If that is the policy, surely the people should be informed as to what is to be done. I wonder if the Minister ever considered whether it would pay the farmer to produce veal. My information is that the calves have to be fed very largely on milk and kept in straw, so that it is costly. Could the Minister assure the farmers that there is a prospect of a profitable sale? I understood that one of the reasons for the introduction of this particular policy was that we had too many head of cattle in the country. This was one system adopted to reduce the number. The other system adopted was to give free beef to people in poor circumstances. Now we have arrived at the point where there is a shortage of cattle.

It looks, on the face of it, as if the policy was adopted in haste, in a sort of panic, and that explanations are now being put forward which, if they were put forward at that time, and I think they were, were answered by the criticism regarding the production of veal. I should like the Minister to go into more detail concerning what efforts have been made to instruct farmers, who are not accustomed to the production of veal, as to how it should be done. For my own part, it looked to me from the commencement as if this policy were against nature and that it would be unlucky. I only hope that we will escape the ill-luck which follows any violent interference with nature, as has happened in this particular case. For some years this may have just got people out of a difficulty; but to go on with this policy at present is suicidal from the business and agricultural point of view. One particular item which I should like the Minister to explain is the bounties and subsidies on the export of pigs and pig products. Bounties are paid. Could the Minister give any information about the receipts in connection with the levy on pigs going to the factories? I presume that is used for the same purpose. The Minister might give us a better idea of the actual cost of the bounties and subsidies on the export of pigs if we had the other sum added to it.

Mr. Brennan

I am sorry I was not here when the Minister was introducing this Vote. I think it was introduced last year by the Minister for Finance and, at that time, I asked for particulars under sub-head A—bounties and subsidies on export of industrial exports. I am interested to know what are the industrial products on which we are paying export bounties and subsidies. The Minister for Finance could not furnish the information last year, and I do not think it was supplied. On the same occasion I asked for information on sub-head G —bounties and subsidies on exports of potatoes and other agricultural products, and expenditure on trial consignments to external markets. The Minister for Finance then gave some fantastic explanation which the Minister for Agriculture corrected afterwards. I hope he is in the position to give the required information to-day. What are the industrial products for which we are providing £63,000? Last year £75,000 was provided for the same purpose. I think some explanation is also due to the House about sub-head D —bounties and subsidies on exports of pigs and pig products. As the Minister is well aware, the country is at a loss to know what is operating to muddle the price of pigs at present. The position ought to be clarified.

With regard to bounties and subsidies on the export of calf skins, it amazes me that the Minister has not dropped that item, because it is part of the insane policy that he pursued with regard to livestock a few years ago, when the Government found that they had created a certain situation by the economic war. The Minister then told the House that what he was endeavouring to do was to induce the people to turn to veal instead of beef. As Deputy Cosgrave has pointed out, veal is something that the people could make money out of. Surely the Minister does not seriously suggest to the House and to farmers that it is a good policy at present to destroy calves, seeing that we are not able to fill the cattle quota for Great Britain. It seems extraordinary to bring such a proposal forward at the present time. The Minister stated that it was better to destroy some calves because they were of inferior quality, and would do more harm than good to our livestock. Very few people can afford to destroy calves at present unless they are very well off. If the Minister is endeavouring to compensate them for their losses on calves I do not think he is succeeding. Very few people are able to say if a day-old calf will be a good calf or a bad calf. This proposal seems, on the whole, to be pursuing the insane policy which has left this country in the position that there is not enough stock to meet the demand. I remember the Minister speaking about cattle production and about agriculture generally and stating that there was only one way to keep up prices, and that was to cut down production. He went a good way about it, as far as cattle are concerned. It was also stated recently that there were too many cattle in the country for the trade that could be done. The Government then started to get rid of them in two ways. First, we had a scheme for getting rid of the old cattle, and Belgium and Germany were made a present of cattle. Then the calves were slaughtered. All the time there was a flow of young cattle out of this country to Great Britain, which so reduced the cattle population that we have not now sufficient for requirements. The Minister ought to know that.

Dr. Ryan

I know quite the contrary.

Mr. Brennan

That is satisfactory to the Minister but it is not borne out by what is happening at fairs and markets, or by people who are endeavouring to set their land, because they are not able to stock it. Under sub-head G, apparently, we are going to continue expenditure on trial consignments to external markets. I wonder what has the Minister in mind under that sub-head. Is he going to continue sending cattle to Belgium, Germany, Spain and other places? He might tell the House how the consignments that have been sent repaid the people who sent them. The experience of people here is that they have a good market practically at their doors, one that pays them, but the Minister insists on sending trial consignments to any other part of the world, and they do not bring back any money. I remember that he reported a loss on these consignments last year.

Dr. Ryan

I never reported a loss.

Mr. Brennan

Is that so?

Dr. Ryan

Never.

Mr. Brennan

You never reported a profit. If my memory serves me aright, there was a definite loss on cattle sent to Belgium.

Dr. Ryan

Your memory is entirely wrong.

Mr. Cosgrave

What was done with the profit?

Dr. Ryan

It goes to the Exchequer.

Mr. Cosgrave

What about the farmers?

Mr. Brennan

Where does it appear?

Mr. Cosgrave

Buy cheap from the farmers and sell to the foreigners.

Mr. Brennan

An extraordinary statement was made by one Minister last year—that the British market was now developing into a better market for Irish produce and store cattle than it ever was for live stock. I am sure the Minister for Agriculture does not agree with that statement. It is the type of argument we get from people who do not understand agriculture. The Minister for Agriculture ought to know that the best market for us is the fat cattle market, because it provides an industry for our people and gives employment here and not on the other side of the channel. Apparently the Minister's colleague was influenced by people who have no real knowledge of agriculture. In my opinion, these sub-heads, dealing with the sending of trial consignments of live stock to other markets and bounties on calf skins, should be dropped. I do not think the Minister could go down the country and advise people to dispose of their calves, in view of the prices they are now getting for cattle, and the scarcity of cattle in that poor old God-forsaken British market, that is supposed to be gone. I ask the Minister to give us some particulars as to the industrial products we are exporting and on which we propose to pay £63,000 in bounties and in subsidies.

Mr. O'Neill

I should like to get away from cattle for a few minutes and deal with the subject of export bounties on fish. This is a matter in respect of which I appeal to the Minister to mend his hand. We had the Fisheries Estimate last week. It was discussed rather fully and in the course of the discussion some very remarkable disclosures were made as to the very precarious condition of the sea-fishing industry in this country at present. Under the heading of bounties, in the completed year 1936, there was granted a sum of £6,283 for bounties on fish exported, including both fresh fish and shellfish. That is a very small sum in view of the fact that the gross expenditure on bounties in that year amounted to the large sum of £2,250,000. I want to appeal to the Minister to extend all the consideration he possibly can to the exportation of sea fish. There is a fall in the value of our fish each year. I need not go over the figures I brought up on the Fisheries Estimate, but take the case of lobsters alone. There was a trade in lobsters worth about £40,000 a year, which has now fallen to about £20,000. On lobsters there is a bounty given of 75 per cent. and that amounted last year to £2,991. In the case of herrings, the Minister grants a bounty of 100 per cent. and, as giving an idea of the value of the herrings exported, the bounty paid amounted to 16/7.

Dr. Ryan

That was not for herrings generally. It was only for fresh herrings at one period.

Mr. O'Neill

There is an export bounty given on fresh herrings for one particular period and that is the time when the big Yarmouth and Lowestoft fishing is at its height. All during the fishing year from April to September, from several southern ports in this country, Kinsale and other places, there is a fair amount of trade done in the export of fresh herrings. The people engaged in the trade have to pay 40 per cent. to get the herrings into the English market and they pay that 40 per cent., not only on the actual value of the herrings, but on everything that adds to the cost of the herrings landed there. I saw some invoices last week and duty was actually charged on a telegram sent to the exporter by the sales agent in England. That is a frightful hardship on a precarious trade. I think the Minister would be doing something for this very precarious industry if he would grant the export bounty, not only during the month of October, when there is no export trade from this country, but during any other month of the year that herrings can be exported. It would be a great boon and it would not mean very much to the Exchequer, while it would mean a great lot to the fishermen engaged in the trade.

With regard to periwinkles and mussels, the Minister grants an export bounty of 100 per cent., and I think that has satisfactorily kept that little export trade alive. The escallop trade is a very difficult trade, carried on during the worst months of the year and from very few ports. They are practically confined to South-West Cork—Dunmanus Bay and Bantry Bay. These shellfish are nearly all sent to the London markets. There is practically no home trade whatever for them. The Minister grants 50 per cent. of a bounty and there is a tariff of 33? per cent. going in to England, which means that the fisherman from West Cork who gets 3/- a dozen for his escallops has to pay 1/- tariff, and he gets back 6d. from the Minister. In that case, I think there is a very strong argument in favour of the Minister giving a 100 per cent. bounty. The trade is small—it does not amount to more than a gross £3,000 or £4,000 a year—and the amount that would be debited to the Exchequer would be very small.

In the case of pickled mackerel, a bounty was given on pickled mackerel exported to non-British ports, that is, to places other than Great Britain, and I think that for reasons I do not wish to deal with here, that was not very successful. I ask the Minister if he possibly can devise some scheme by which that picked mackerel trade, which is a very considerable one in Dingle, Castletownbere and Valentia, could be encouraged and something done to enable the fishermen to jump the tariff walls into the countries to which these pickled fish are exported. There is a very strong case for very particular and exceptional treatment for the fresh fish industry, and I ask the Minister to give in every case a 100 per cent. bounty to meet the tariffs which this precarious and dwindling trade has to face. I am not dealing at the moment with salmon or inland fish. I am dealing with sea fishing, and I again point out to the Minister that the sum he would be called on to meet as a result of giving a total bounty of 100 per cent. would be very small.

This industry, as he knows himself from his association with it, and from the discussion we had on the Estimate last week, requires very careful nursing if it is to be saved from complete extinction. I do not know whether I am in order on this Vote, but it might be well if the Minister realised that the value of the fresh fish that comes into this country is double the value of the fish we land on our own shores, and it might be possible by some scheme to give the inshore fishermen of this country some little protection in the way of a preferential bounty on the fish they can export, and, at the same time, protect them from the inroads of the amount of fresh fish which is daily being landed in our cities and towns from across Channel. It is an extraordinary thing in a country like ours that we should at this stage be importing twice the value of the fish we catch. I put this matter to the Minister for his consideration. In view of the importance of this industry to the seaboard, especially of South-West Cork, we appeal to him, and we think he should have no qualms whatever in doing so, to give a 100 per cent. bounty on every piece of fresh fish that goes out of this country.

Mr. Bennett

I think we are entitled to comment on the take-it-or-leave-it attitude of the Minister in introducing this Estimate. He did not make any attempt to elaborate or explain any of the items from A to G. For instance, in respect of B—bounties on fishery products—we learned more from Deputy O'Neill in his few remarks just now than we did from anything that came from the Minister. If the Minister had taken some pains to give an explanation of some of the items, it might have helped us, and I should like to join with Deputy Brennan in asking the Minister for some explanation of A—bounties and subsidies on export of industrial products. What were the products? What amount of them was exported? Where were they exported to? In relation to the final item, the bounty for experimental and trial consignments to external markets, we are entitled to ask for some explanation even in respect of last year's expenditure. How and where was the sum of £49,000 expended last year on trial consignments? Were they successful consignments; was any good trade established, and was this money, on the whole, well spent? If it has been, we ought to have got beyond the point of trial consignments now, and there ought to be a regular system of exportation to some place or other. If that is so, the Minister ought to explain it. If he has been able to establish, through this expenditure, any fairly successful market with any promise of permanence, there might be something to say for the expenditure, and we ought to have arrived at the stage when, if there is any successful exportation of agricultural produce to any market outside Britain, it should pass out of Ministerial hands and be a matter for the general public to deal with. If we have been successful in establishing a market to any extent in some foreign country, it would be desirable, in the interests of agriculture, that we should have competition amongst the exporters, and it might be useful in the farmers' interest. I should like the Minister to give us some further explanation of that item.

One does not like to weary the House on the general question of subsidies, as there was reference to it in the Budget debate and in other debates. As regards the bounty on calf-skins—the one item of which we had any explanation—the Minister quoted the parallel case of some foreign countries where they had succeeded in balancing the dairy end and the cattle end, and where they consume the stock without exporting any. I should like to know if it is the intention of the Minister to bring that condition of affairs about here. Is the Minister hoping to lead up to such a set of circumstances in this country that we would have no export of cattle? If that is the Minister's intention, the House is entitled to be informed of it.

Otherwise, there does not seem to be any good reason for the increase this year in the bounty on calf skins. It is well known that there is a shortage of cattle of mature age here. It is evident in the Dublin and other markets that there is a shortage of these cattle, due to a great extent to the destruction of our young calves in the last three or four years. I do not think that can be reasonably disputed—that there is a shortage of cattle beyond the yearling age. That is borne out by the difficulty which dealers and exporters find in procuring sufficient aged stock, conditioned and unconditioned. Those who are familiar with the country know that a great many of the farms are not stocked to the full and that even if, by some miracle, money could be produced to enable the farmer to buy stock at present prices, the competition would be so keen in the limited market that the price would rise beyond the capacity of the farmers. I am talking about the ordinary store cattle. There are not sufficient cattle to stock the lands. If we could afford to keep the stock we need, we would be a long way short of what we are entitled to export and of the amount for which there is a market in contiguous countries.

The Minister has increased the bounty on calf skins from £60,000 to £80,000, implying that the number of calves to be slaughtered, for one reason or another, is this year to be increased. The Minister pointed out that part of this bounty was by way of commiserate allowance to farmers whose calves had died. That is all to the good, but he might put the amount down in another way and in a clearer form than that in which it appears on the Estimate. That does not account for the bulk of the sum asked for. It seems clear that the Minister is still attempting to induce farmers to slaughter additional calves and thus further deplete the already depleted stocks in the country. As the Minister refrained from giving us any explanation of the items in this Estimate, it is difficult for Deputies to engage in serious debate upon it, unless we adopt the principle of opposing the items of the Estimate en bloc. I hope, when the Minister is replying, he will give us more information than he did when bringing the Vote before the House.

Mr. Corry

It is hard to satisfy Deputies opposite. Deputy Bennett talks of opposing this Estimate en bloc. I challenge Deputy Bennett to do so and to call a division against the £685,000, which is to be paid on the export of dairy produce, and then go back to his constituency in Limerick and stand for election. We have heard so much noise from Deputies opposite about cattle and calves for the last four of five years that you wonder, when you look over there, that they are not growing horns. There was a terrible complaint at one time that the farmers could not sell their stock at any price. Now, Deputy Bennett is blaming us because farmers are getting too much for their stock. How are we to please him? For the first couple of years we were dealing with this matter, we were told about the cattle having to be brought home from the fairs. Now, they are being bought in the yards and the farmers are getting decent prices. Take the case of the country for which Deputy Bennett wants us to rear all these surplus calves. In England, last year they slaughtered 1,400,000 calves. That is the country for which we are to rear the calves. Holland and Denmark slaughtered 2,250,000 calves last year.

Mr. Bennett

Do you want us to do the same as Denmark?

Mr. Corry

Considering that we had boat-loads of young farmers sent over periodically by farmers' unions to Holland and Denmark a few years ago to be trained properly, I am surprised at the change of front on the part of Deputy Bennett. He talks about getting aged stock in condition. Everybody knows what the scarcity of fat cattle is due to this spring. Everybody is aware of what the weather conditions were like. That explains the scarcity of beef.

Mr. Bennett

What about the good feeding mixture?

Mr. Corry

We have done very well. We used up all our available supply of oats and barley and farmers were not going around asking the brewers and maltsters to take their barley from them as they were when the Deputy's Party were over here. Our Minister for Agriculture made very good provision in that respect. Our complete stock of barley, oats and wheat was absorbed this year, and absorbed at pretty remunerative prices. Then the Deputy complains. Of what does he complain? He complains because a certain number of calves were slaughtered. We all know that there are a certain number of calves produced in this country every year which it would not pay to rear. There are bull calves produced from purely milking strains. They would not pay to rear. We all know that. I would advise Deputy O'Neill to stick to the periwinkles.

Mr. Brennan

What about the cockles?

Mr. Corry

You have all the cockles there beside you.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputies should remember that they are not at the crossroads.

Mr. Corry

Deputy Bennett is going to challenge a division. On what?

Mr. Bennett

Who talked of challenging a division?

Mr. Corry

Deputy Bennett said a few moments ago that he was going to challenge a division because he had not got the information he desired. I understood that one of the qualifications which a Deputy was supposed to have was that he would be able to read. Surely if the Deputy reads the Estimates he should know all that he needs know.

Mr. Bennett

Does Deputy Corry know it?

Mr. Corry

Yes, with no trouble at all.

Mr. Bennett

Then the Deputy must be an analyst.

Mr. Corry

I have all the information I need from the Estimates. I know that Deputy Bennett dare not go back to his constituents in Limerick after challenging a division on this Vote. We had proof already of this here on a famous occasion when the Deputy broke away from his own Party and voted for bounties and subsidies.

Mr. Bennett

I wish Deputy Corry had the courage some time or other to do that.

Mr. Corry

The Deputy has changed. We know that the Minister is right, and that his policy has been proved right. His policy to-day is putting this country into a far better position, so far as agriculture is concerned, than it was in 1932. We need only to take Deputy Bennett's own arguments in proof of that. What has happened to the feeding? It is a fine thing that, as far as feeding stuffs are concerned, they were all consumed here in this country, and that our farmers this year got £2,500,000 for wheat. That is a splendid change in comparison with the period to which Deputy Bennett wishes us to get back. We have changed conditions in the country. The fact is that the agricultural community is going to benefit this year to the extent of £2,180,000 from subsidies and bounties. It is a good thing that we have a Government here that is prepared to assist the farmers to that extent. That is much better than to go along on the lines of the arguments we hear from the Opposite Benches. Then we have the collapse of these debates, one after another. That collapse amounts to a proof that our policy must be absolutely correct. Deputies admit that by the fact that they have nothing substantial to say against it. They are not able to argue against it. At all events, I do not see what use Deputies opposite are to the people who sent them here. They might as well be growing horns for all the good they are doing.

Mr. Keating

To my mind, the slaughter of calves is nothing less than a national calamity. The bounty on calf skins is bound to do this country incalculable harm. It is bound even to reduce the population of this country. Owing to the policy pursued by the Minister for Agriculture in the last three years, we have not now half enough cattle to supply the needs of the English market. Where have the English to go to for their cattle to-day? I heard Deputy Corry speaking of Denmark and Belgium. I think the Deputy is much more pro-English than I am. I wonder if he has ever been in the British store cattle markets? Has the Deputy ever seen the Belgian or the Danish cattle there? I have seen Danish cattle in the British market; they would remind one of goats—for that is what they are. We in this country are producing the best cattle in the world, and there is a market available for them. If we want to have tillage and to encourage it, we have got to raise live stock. As, no doubt, the Minister himself is aware, the man who, in his own county of Wexford, raises his own calves, is the best employer, and he is the man, too, who produces the best crop on his lands.

Such a farmer gives employment for 365 days in the year. The farmer who is only growing corn as a cash crop is not an employer at all for he gives only about six weeks' employment in the year. The result of such farming is that the land is getting overrun with weeds. To farm well a farmer must have farmyard manure. In order to grow beet, wheat, turnips, mangels and potatoes, the farmer must have plenty of farmyard manure. I was reared on a farm on which wheat was always grown. I have forgotten more about wheat-growing than Deputy Corry and other Deputies on the Government side will ever learn. What is the result of the Government's policy to-day and how does it affect the farmer? How has it affected the business man, the professional man, the agricultural labourer and the rest of the community? All these people have to pay 11/- a sack more for their flour to-day than the English consumer is paying. We are told that the Government want to make this country prosperous. How are they doing it? Everything a man buys to-day has to be bought at war prices, everything except what the farmers sell. The Minister thinks, apparently, that by slaughtering calves he is going to make this country prosperous. I tell the Minister that if he wants to make this country prosperous, the farmer must be allowed to go in for mixed farming. The farmer must be in a position to rear all the calves on which he can lay his hands. Surely the calf that is born in the morning and killed at noon is not fit to be eaten for supper. They slaughter calves in England, but they do not slaughter them until the calves are fit to be slaughtered. Why do the English farmers slaughter their calves? When do they slaughter them? They slaughter them when they are fit to be eaten; they slaughter them to make room for our Irish store cattle. The sooner Deputy Corry awakens to the fact that every calf that is born in this country is needed in this country, the better it will be; the sooner the Government awakens to this fact the better. Deputy Corry says that all inferior calves or scrub calves should be slaughtered. There are no scrub calves or bad calves in this country. We can and do produce the best live stock in the world; what we are suffering from now is the impossibility of procuring, at a reasonable price, mill offals on which to feed them. What is ruining the farming industry is that the farmers have to pay too high a price for the offals they feed to their live stock. As a result of the prices charged for offals, the farmers are not in a position to feed their cattle properly. I saw at a fair yesterday in the County Wexford well-bred cattle staggering with the hunger. That is a terrible state of things.

The sooner the Fianna Fáil Party come back to common sense and encourage the raising of all the young cattle possible, the better for the country, and the more employment the farmer will be able to give. Every calf that is killed means a loss of £10 to the State. That has been proved over and over again. Deputy Bennett says that there is a scarcity of big cattle. I say that there is a scarcity of young cattle, yearlings, one-and-a-half and two years old. You cannot have your loaf and eat it. As regards the calves that were slaughtered for the last two years, we miss them to-day, and undoubtedly the country has suffered a big loss because of the Government's policy in relation to the slaughter of calves. I calculate that there has been a loss to the Free State by reason of that policy of £5,000,000. If that is the way you are going to get the country prosperous, then God help poor old Ireland.

Mr. O'Neill

One portion of the Estimate deals with exports of industrial products, and I believe that portion of the account is explained by the Department of Industry and Commerce. I wonder will the Minister for Agriculture be able to give us any information about it?

Dr. Ryan

I will give the Deputy the list all right.

Mr. O'Neill

I can find no particulars with regard to an export bounty paid on any industrial product except on gravel and macadam, 6d. a ton. I would like the Minister to explain why this sum, which was £83,000 three years ago, fell last year to £75,000 and in the present Estimate the figure is only £63,000. Is it that there is a decrease in our industrial products exported, or is it that these industries are able to stand on their own and do not need any subsidy or bounty? It is an important part of the Estimate.

Dr. Ryan

With regard to this matter of industrial products, I should like to deal with that first. There is a long list of industrial products that are getting bounties. The fact that the Estimate has been reduced is not, I understand, due to a decrease in exports, but rather to changed conditions; some of those exports are carrying on without any bounty. As I have said, the list is a very long one and it covers the following:—mine and quarry products, linen and cotton piece goods and manufactures (including embroidery work), blacking and polishes, shirts, collars and hosiery (including pyjamas), horticultural and nursery goods (excluding insecticides), biscuits, jute manufactures, margarine and edible fats (excluding lard), basic slag, glass bottles, stained glass windows, goldsmiths' and silversmiths' ware, tailor-made clothing, agricultural machinery, brushes, paper (excluding stationery), church metal and other ornamental metal work, patent malt, buoy and beacon lights, patent mattresses, pillows, etc., bog-oak carvings, etc., monumental sculpture work, rosary beads, hand-woven tweeds, carpets and floor rugs, poplin piece goods and manufactures, wooden bobbers and ladder rungs, feathers, smoking pipes and miscellaneous.

The majority of the speakers dealt with the policy of giving a bounty on calf-skins. I have already dealt with that, and I stated that the original intention was to encourage the consumption of veal in this country, because, in my opinion, and in the opinion of others, we would possibly have better prices all round if we had a better balance between meat and dairy products. I said it was an inducement to the consumption of veal, not so much to the farmer in this case, because I thought we should start rather with the consumer. I thought that if a butcher were to get a calf with which he was getting a present of 10/-, he would be able to sell the veal cheaper than beef, and that he would be inclined to push veal and perhaps create a taste in this country for the consumption of veal and so get the thing established.

Mr. O'Leary

What exactly does the Minister mean by veal? Will he give us an indication?

Dr. Ryan

I do not mean at all what Deputy Keating accuses us of encouraging. Deputy Keating said that a calf that is born and that is killed the same day does not afford very palatable food.

Mr. Keating

Did not that happen in thousands of cases?

Dr. Ryan

That was not what we aimed at. We aimed at getting proper veal.

Mr. Keating

How long do you think it would take to get the proper veal?

Dr. Ryan

At least six weeks or three months.

Mr. Keating

You are right there.

Dr. Ryan

I have said already that we did not get the result we aimed at. There are a number of calves consumed as veal, but the number is small. Deputy Cosgrave asks does it pay, but evidently it does pay to a certain extent. I know, at any rate, that the butchers who can sell veal in this city are able to get good veal calves. The difficulty is with the consumer rather than with the producer. We have heard all this argument that it is against nature and cannot be lucky. There is no purpose served by going back over that argument. I never could understand the morality of the Fine Gael Party on that question. Deputy Keating and Deputy O'Leary admit that if you kill a calf six weeks old it would be all right for veal.

Mr. O'Leary

I think about three months old would be nearer the mark.

Dr. Ryan

Possibly it would be.

Mr. O'Leary

What would be the weight of the skin of a calf three months old?

Dr. Ryan

Under 18 lb., and that is our limit for the bounty.

Mr. Keating

Nonsense!

Dr. Ryan

I should like to say this, that I do not decide these things myself, because I recognise I am ignorant on some of those subjects.

Mr. O'Leary

We are glad to hear that; it is an honest admission.

Dr. Ryan

I got the opinion of experts on these things and I was assured by the experts, including one of the biggest skin merchants in this city with whom I discussed the matter, that if I put down a limit of 18 lb., I was quite safe in the case of a three months old calf.

Mr. Keating

It would be nearer to 24 lb.

Dr. Ryan

When I see that man I will tell him what the Deputy says, and I am sure he will be surprised.

Mr. Keating

Tell him he does not know his book.

Dr. Ryan

I am not arguing the point at all and I am quite prepared to admit that Deputy Keating has knowledge on this subject, much more than I have. In defence of what I did, I will say that I consulted experts and I was told that that was right. I have not the slightest idea, personally, what is the weight of the skin of a calf three months old.

Mr. Brennan

Will the Minister say, in view of the statement that he has not succeeded in getting the people to turn to veal, why he has increased this particular amount from £60,000 to £80,000?

Dr. Ryan

When introducing this Vote, I said that it was considered in my Department that there would be a higher natural mortality amongst calves this year. I think Deputies opposite will agree with that. Deputy Keating talks about the bad condition in which cattle came to the fair of Wexford, due to bad feeding in the winter. It was not due to the Fianna Fáil policy. No Deputy can blame the Fianna Fáil Party for the wet July of last year. I know there are other charges made against us that are quite as unjust as that.

Mr. Keating

The fact is that meal and pollard could not be got; people could not afford to purchase them.

Dr. Ryan

If the Deputy knew the facts he would not say that. As a matter of fact, we are producing more bran and pollard than were ever available in any year for several years past.

Mr. Keating

Would the Minister be surprised to know that the main anxiety of the producers was to ship it?

Dr. Ryan

They have again and again applied for permits to ship and they would not get them.

Mr. Keating

The live-stock producers in this country could not get meal or pollard, even where they could afford it.

Dr. Ryan

I would not let the producers ship it.

Mr. Keating

If that is the case, that is one good turn you did.

Dr. Ryan

I did you many a good turn and you do not appreciate it. Now Deputies opposite, no matter how much I may try to instruct them——

Mr. Keating

But you say you do not know as much as we do.

Dr. Ryan

——well, I know more about some things—Deputies opposite persist in saying that there are not as many cattle in this country as formerly. According to the statistics and so on, there are as many cattle in this country at the present time as there were when Cumann na nGaedheal was in office.

Mr. Keating

We know the conditions here.

An Ceann-Comhairle

The Deputy is not complaining of the Minister interrupting him, is he?

Mr. Keating

No, Sir.

Dr. Ryan

As I was saying, there are as many cattle in this country now as there ever were in this country under the Cumann na nGaedheal régime, and if the farmers are not sending their cattle there is only one reply to that.

Mr. Keating

You say there are as many cattle in the country now, although you are killing the calves?

Dr. Ryan

Yes, too many, if the Deputy likes.

Mr. Keating

Well, the dealers tell me differently.

Dr. Ryan

Now, I was asked about the bounties on pigs and bacon. I explained here, on the Agricultural Vote, that the amount of duty collected on bacon going into Great Britain during last year was £530,000— I have not got the exact figure at the moment, but I am correct within a couple of thousand, at any rate—and that we paid against that duty between £460,000 and £480,000, and therefore that what we paid in bounties was almost equal to what was paid in duties. It must be remembered also that the levies collected by the Bacon Board and the Pigs Board are used for other purposes besides bringing up the export value. However, that is rather a big subject, and I shall not deal with it now; we will have a Bill coming along to deal with all that. Sub-head G covers the bounties and subsidies on potatoes, rabbits, offals of lamb and sheep, and expenditure on trial consignments to external markets. There is a sub-head connected with that on which nothing was spent last year and it is doubtful if anything will be spent this year. We have been sending cattle to Belgium and Germany, and, under the Export Act, and so on, I must present a statement to the Dáil of the year's trading at the end of each financial year, and I think the Deputies opposite will be congratulating me on what a good business man I am when they see that statement and realise the profits I can make on cattle and sheep. As a matter of fact, if I had gone into the cattle business on my own behalf, like Deputy Keating, I think I should be a millionaire now.

Mr. Bennett

Well, why not throw that market open, and not keep it to yourself?

Dr. Ryan

I was the only one that had faith in it, at any rate. I had faith in it, but the Deputies opposite had no faith whatever in it. Deputy Brennan says that the best market for us is a fat cattle market. No doubt, as cattle go, that is true but, leaving the economic war aside, Deputies know all about the subsidy that is being paid on fat cattle in England, and they know quite well that as long as that subsidy is being paid in England our good stores will go over rather than our fat cattle, because it will not pay a farmer here to send his fat cattle over.

Mr. Keating

That means that our consumers here will have to buy dearer than the British.

Dr. Ryan

I do not think that comes into it unless we do something to counteract that, and that is a thing that must be considered. If we want to carry on a good fat cattle trade in this country, then we will have to compensate our farmers for fattening their cattle rather than selling them as good stores. That is a thing that has to be considered, but whether it is going to be an economic proposition, or whether it is worth doing or not, I cannot say for the moment. I was asked by some Deputy would I go to the country and advocate the slaughter of calves? Well, I was at a very large convention of farmers in County Wicklow—or rather in County Limerick, I meant to say.

Mr. Keating

Do not say County Wicklow.

Dr. Ryan

It was in the County Limerick. It was a farmers' convention. The first resolution they passed was one congratulating me on the calf skin bounties here. It was the very first resolution they passed, and it was passed both unanimously and with acclamation. I am going down there again a week next Saturday to another meeting.

Mr. Keating

Will I go down with the Minister?

Mr. Corry

The Deputy is worse than the calves.

Dr. Ryan

Now, with regard to fish, I agree with Deputy O'Neill that the amount involved in the fish bounties is very small so far as the State is concerned, but very important so far as concerns the people who are engaged in the industry. We have been very sympathetic in all cases where an application for a bounty came along, but there is a difficulty which, I am sure, Deputy O'Neill will recognise, from the financial point of view, in giving the 100 per cent. bounty. The difficulty is that there is very little inducement to the consignor to get his goods down to the right value. If he consigns his goods at a certain value, where a duty is payable, there may be some question on the other side of the price being too low, but if he puts the price up a bit, he gets the goods in without trouble and gets the full amount back by way of bounty. It must be remembered that in every trade there is always the possibility that there will be some person who, if he is not exactly a rogue, at least is not scrupulously honest. Now, I do not want to be accused at all of saying that all exporters are dishonest, because they are not. As a matter of fact, in dealing with them, I know that the majority of the people we have to deal with are very honest and scrupulous in their dealings and would not take a penny more than is due to them from the State.

Coming back for a minute to this question of cattle, it is true, as Deputy Keating and other Deputies have said, that if we had more cattle at the present time we could sell more, but we are on the point of exceeding our quota all the time to Great Britain. As a matter of fact, we did exceed it a little, some time in 1936, and if we do exceed our quota to Great Britain she may close down on us and say that she will not take any more from us, or that she will take less. It would be very bad for us if we had to go back to the old system, and we must be careful not to exceed our quota. It must be remembered that if there are 400 licences at a fair in the country, and there are 401 cattle there, that makes the greatest difference in the price. It means that the prices fall all round.

Mr. Keating

Where is the alternative market?

Dr. Ryan

We are sending a good number to Germany and Belgium.

Mr. Keating

Yes, stores.

Dr. Ryan

Good fat cattle. I say that if we have a very small surplus of even one in 400 or 500, and one beast too many at a fair, the price goes down all round. We must keep under our quota. I repeat that we are not lower in the number of cattle in this country than we were at the time Cumann na nGaedheal were in power. I quite agree with Deputy Keating that, in order to have a good tillage policy, you must have live stock. Everybody agrees with that, but we have the live stock here that were always in the country. We have as many cattle and we have as many sheep as were here before. We have as many pigs, if not more. We have as many horses. We have as many of all these animals here as were in the country under Cumann na nGaedheal.

Mr. Keating

And nearly as many people.

Dr. Ryan

Well, at any rate, they are not decreasing as rapidly as they were under Cumann na nGaedheal. We have as many, at any rate.

Mr. Corry

And better people.

Dr. Ryan

Well, they are more sensible people now, at any rate.

Mr. Keating

Well, I admit they are, but they had to pay more for their education.

Dr. Ryan

They are able to pay more. Now, there is another item or two to which I should like to refer. Certain bounties are announced. One is announced on potatoes, and I got a query the other day from somebody or other which showed that there was some misunderstanding in regard to that matter. The bounty is only announced up to the end of June. It does not state what the bounty will be on seed potatoes of the crop which is going down now. I may say now that that bounty will be the same, at least as the lowest rate that was paid last year. We were paying various rates last year. The lowest rate was 17/6, and it will be that when the potatoes come to be exported. Anybody planting potatoes now need have no fears about that matter. With regard to milk products, there are various rates which may be regarded as the minimum rate. I believe that if the price of British milk increases considerably over a considerable period, as is most likely, then we can pay a better price, or alternatively if production goes down considerably, as some people think it will, we can also pay a better price. I have announced the minimum rates, but we always pay more, as we always try to do better than our promise. I have only to add that I did not intend to treat the Dáil with any discourtesy by not explaining these matters in the beginning. I took it that the particulars of the Estimate were fairly evident on the sub-heads, and the policy behind this Vote was discussed so often that I did not think it wise to start that discussion over again.

Mr. Brennan

We asked for certain figures and facts with regard to pigs and pig products. The Minister has given certain figures which have only tended, I do not say intentionally, further to complicate matters. We provided £635,000 for this purpose, and the Minister said that the amount collected by the British was £530,000.

Dr. Ryan

I was speaking only of bacon and hams in that case.

Mr. Brennan

The Minister could not give us any information as to the whole amount? We voted £635,000 last year, as against £660,000 this year. The British collected £530,000 last year. The amount paid out by the Government was in or about £470,000. What became of the difference between that sum and the amount voted, £635,000?

Dr. Ryan

I was speaking only of bacon and hams. The remainder went on live pigs, pork, offals and so on.

Mr. Brennan

But £530,000 was collected by the British on bacon and hams.

Dr. Ryan

Yes.

Mr. O'Neill

Will the Minister seriously consider the question of bounties on fish? I understand from his remarks that there have been difficulties and that these difficulties reflect on the honesty of the exporters.

Dr. Ryan

I would not like to say that.

Mr. O'Neill

There is a complete check, having regard to the customs duties and the salesmen's dockets on the other side. These would give the Minister and his Department a complete check.

Dr. Ryan

I do not know that we have ever had these difficulties with the fish exporters, but we must always guard against them.

Mr. O'Neill

The reason I make an appeal on their behalf is that the amount provided last year in bounties and subsidies on fish exports was £6,283. In the present year the amount is reduced, so that it does not appear that they are going to get any more favourable consideration.

Dr. Ryan

There was only £5,000 provided last year, also.

Mr. O'Neill

I would ask the Minister to increase the amount to 100 per cent. of the tariff at least.

Mr. O'Leary

I should like to have an explanation from the Minister as to his purpose in giving a bounty on calf skins. Does he want to encourage the consumption of veal? He gives the House the idea that the kind of calves he wishes to see slaughtered are those between six weeks and three months old.

Dr. Ryan

That is right.

Mr. O'Leary

There is a difference of opinion as to whether the skin of a calf three months old would be under 18 lb., but I shall be able to get that information later on. The Minister said he would like to encourage this business. Did he make any attempt to ascertain from his Department what would be the cost of production of that class of beef? Can it be sold in competition with fat beef?

Dr. Ryan

I have no information on that, but I should say that I am fairly satisfied that a butcher can sell veal somewhat less than beef.

Mr. O'Leary

Does the Minister not know that calves must be fed practically altogether on new milk? What does he think it costs to rear a calf for a week on nothing but milk, with milk, let us say, at 6d. per gallon?

Dr. Ryan

About 1/9 I suppose.

Mr. O'Leary

1/9 to rear a calf for seven days?

Mr. Brennan

The Minister is not serious in that.

Mr. Keating

Would you not give him a gallon of milk at a time. It would cost 7/- with milk at 6d. per gallon.

Dr. Ryan

You would not give a calf a gallon of milk at a time. You would have a terrible mortality amongst calves if you did.

Mr. O'Leary

Would you not have to give him more on the second week than the first, and more on the third week than the second week?

Dr. Ryan

You would not give him a gallon of milk on the first two or three days, surely?

Mr. O'Leary

Probably the beastings will keep him then. I do not suppose that you can produce veal as cheap as beef and the Minister knows that, too.

Vote put and agreed to.