The 7/- includes the two. The total cost of this scheme during the summer was £150,000. It was decided to bring the net value of the butter to the creamery up to 145/- from 1st December, but the retail price of butter was not raised until 10th December. Therefore, there were ten days during which this had to be made good to the creameries—that is, to bring it from 137/- to 145/-. That cost £3,150. On the 10th December, 1938, the statutory price was increased to 147/- per cwt. That gave a net value to the creamery of 145/- per cwt. In addition to that, there was an amount of £28,750 required for a special allowance of 5/9 per cwt. on butter put into cold storage from June to September, 1938. This is a contribution given out of the fund each year to cover the actual amount paid for the storage, insurance during the period, interest on the money invested in the butter, and the risk of losses, etc. It is calculated to be about 5/9 per cwt.
It will be noticed that these items which I have given relate to production and not to export. Hitherto this was done more or less by way of export bounty, which had the same effect, and it was taken out of the Export Bounty Fund. This year it was done by way of production, and therefore must be voted on the Agricultural Vote. But it is anticipated that there will be a saving of a similar amount on the Export Subsidy Vote.
The next sub-head is M (9)—Importation of Seed Wheat. Again, there is a token estimate of £5. Owing to the unfavourable weather up to at least a fortnight ago, conditions for sowing winter wheat had been below expectations, and it was considered necessary to make provision for the import of a larger amount of spring wheat than we usually import. It was estimated that we would require about 25,000 barrels above the normal quantity of spring wheat. The seed merchants were not willing to take the risk of the wet weather continuing from the middle of January up to, say, the first week in March, because, of course, if fine weather came in that period, a considerable amount of winter wheat would be sown, and the abnormal quantity of spring seed wheat might not be required. The Government decided to guarantee the merchants against loss on this additional 25,000 barrels, which is over and above what was brought in normally every year up to this. If the guarantee has to be paid in full, it will cost about £1 per barrel, or £25,000, but it is not likely that anything like that sum will become payable.
The next sub-head is O (8)—Agricultural Produce (Cereals) Acts—£625. In order to prevent imported seed wheat from being sold as home-grown, permits for the importation are issued only on condition that the wheat be stained by officers of the Department. It is estimated that this will cost about £625. There is, however, a payment of 6d. per barrel on each barrel imported, which will probably more than cover the cost.
The next sub-head is O (17)—Losses— £282. That amount is required to meet a claim against the Department in connection with an accident which occurred to the S.S. Lindenau on the 20th September, 1937, which was bringing a cargo of 202 cattle to Bremen. The vessel ran aground; the cattle were not injured, but there was some damage done to the ship. We do not insure the cattle, and the Department therefore had to pay a certain amount of the damage, which amounted to £282. I should like to say, however, that our total losses on risks of this kind during the whole period we carried on a trade in cattle with Germany was £1,710, and the insurance payments would have been £5,810, so that we made money on that.
Under Appropriations-in-Aid there is an estimated deficiency under various heads of £229,665. Under sub-head O (2)—fees in respect of butter exported—there were less exports than had been anticipated, which accounts for the deficiency under that head. As to sub-head O (9)—sales of butter and eggs—and sub-head O (11)—sales of cattle—the last agreement which was made with Germany provided for a change in the system carried on up to that. Up to that period we had exported butter, eggs and cattle to Germany, and the Dáil provided the money for carrying on that trade. But, in the recent agreement, Germany took on the purchase of butter, eggs and cattle herself and, therefore, from 1st January to 31st March, the estimated amount of eggs, butter and cattle we had put down does not require to be filled. Also, under sub-head O (11)— levy on the slaughter of cattle and sheep—we did not collect as much as we anticipated. There was outstanding on the 31st December, 1938, under this heading, £37,240. As to "recoupment of part cost of veterinary inspection of old and uneconomic cows," the loss under that arises from the fact that our agreement with the Roscrea factory ceased to operate during the year. As to sub-head O (12)—fees for cattle export licences—the same thing arises there. The number of cattle exported was not as high as had been anticipated. As to sub-head I (4)—additional repayments from the Vote for Employment Schemes in respect of the cost of administration of the land reclamation, etc., schemes — more money has come in from that than was anticipated. In the same way, under sub-head M (4)—additional repayments of agricultural loans—there was more money than we had anticipated. The next item is one to which I have already referred. That is the collection of 6d. per barrel on imported seed wheat to cover the cost of inspection and staining. That is estimated to bring in the sum of £1,300. I think these are all the items.
