Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 10 May 1939

Vol. 75 No. 16

Financial Resolutions. - Committee on Finance.—Vote 52—Agriculture (Resumed).

Mr. Coburn

Last night, before reporting progress, I was referring to the question of credit facilities for farmers, who at the moment find themselves in the position of not being able to carry on their agricultural economy as they had been accustomed to carry it on in previous years. I also stated that possibly the giving of loans was not the best way of helping the farmers, but owing to the very serious times through which they have passed I think there is a large number of farmers in every county who find themselves in need of having credit facilities placed at their disposal. I happen to represent a county where mixed farming is extensively carried on, and where the farmers as a rule were able to make ends meet without any assistance from Government Departments, but recently I came in contact with many farmers who, through no fault of their own; find themselves very much handicapped through lack of capital. I refer now to the type of farmer who went in extensively for the rearing of cattle during those six years of the economic war, and suffered very great financial losses as a result of having to sell those cattle at prices which did not pay. That is the position at the moment.

The next point I should like to bring before the Minister, and I think it is a most important point in connection with the position of agriculture at the moment, is that the farmer cannot buy as he sells. If the farmer could buy as he sells, then at one stroke the chief difficulty in regard to the farmers' position at the moment would be settled. Everybody who has studied the question knows that some 30 or 40 years ago the farmer—the small farmer in particular—brought in his load of potatoes to the nearest market town. That load might consist of ten cwts. or it might consist of only six. He sold his potatoes at that particular period at an average price of 2/6 or 3/- per cwt. If he had ten cwts. he got about 30/-. The point I want to bring to the notice of the Minister is that when they got that 30/—most of them being married men with families, some of them with very large families—they went into the shopkeeper, and out of that 30/- were able to buy three or four pairs of shoes for their little children; they could go into the grocer's shop and buy groceries, and would have something left out of that 30/-. To-day that same farmer, if he is alive, or a farmer placed in the same circumstances, taking in the same amount of agricultural produce as represented by potatoes, gets about the same price. This year the price has undoubtedly gone up, owing to the fact that the winter was severe and there was a scarcity of potatoes, but if you take the average price for the last seven or eight years you will find there is very little difference between that price and the price which obtained 30 or 40 years ago. In the natural order, the farmer again goes into the shopkeeper to make certain purchases. Let us again assume that he goes in to buy a few pairs of shoes for his children. How many pairs will he be able to buy at the present high price as compared with 30 or 40 years ago? How many pairs can be pay for out of the 30/-? If he wants to buy a half cwt. or a cwt. of flour, what price will he have to pay to-day as compared with the price during those years? In the same way, if he wants a little suit of clothes, or anything in the way of wearing apparel for any member of his family, he finds he has to pay anything from 70 to 100 per cent. over and above what he paid during those years. That is the real difficulty confronting the farmers, both large and small and, incidentally, to the same extent the agricultural labourers of this country, namely that, for the money which they have to spend to-day, they cannot get the same amount as they could get some years ago.

I readily concede the point that this is a very difficult matter, but I consider that it is the duty of the Minister as representing the agricultural community of this country to keep a very close watch over the activities of the Ministers who are entrusted with the destines of the other Departments, particularly the Department of Industry and Commerce. I am one of those who have been connected with the Labour movement for a very large number of years. I am one of those who have always believed in giving a man a fair day's wages for a fair day's work, but I have also had the commonsense to know that I never could support a policy the object of which was to make the position of people who are comfortable more comfortable, and to make the position of people who are uncomfortable more uncomfortable. There should be some sense of relativity as between the activities of the various Departments. While people may laugh and joke at the expense of the farmer, and say he is always crying, we must remember that after all the rural population in this or in any country is the foundation on which the security of the country rests. For that reason, I think it is the duty of the Minister, backed up by the members of the Government, and, in fact, by the members of all Parties, to do something to make the lot of those who are engaged in agriculture more comfortable than it is at the present time.

Again, we come to the question of the employment provided by agriculture at the moment. At the opening of my remarks last night I referred to the growing of wheat and I questioned whether the introduction of the wheat scheme had provided any extra employment. As I stated then, and as I have since verified, one of the Ministers on the Front Bench stated that the growing of wheat would provide employment for an extra 30,000 or 40,000 labourers. He went on the basis that every 20 acres of wheat cultivated would mean the employment of an extra man. He estimated that it would take 800,000 acres of wheat to supply the flour needs of the country. Assuming that each 20 acres sown represented employment for one man, if 800,000 acres were sown, employment would be provided for an extra 40,000 men. Using my powers of observation, and I read at one time that observation is the best form of education, and from inquiries I have made I find that employment on the land—and I am now referring to land even in counties where wheat has been grown extensively — is unfortunately decreasing instead of increasing. There again, in my humble opinion, I think it is the Minister's duty to find out the cause. I think you can trace the cause back to the one fundamental fact that the farmer is not able to buy as he sells.

A farmer who employs three or four labourers is expected to pay each of these labourers 27/- per week. I am sure everybody will agree that that is not an exorbitant wage for an agricultural labourer who has to provide for himself, a wife and his family. But to pay even that wage of 27/-, week in, week out, for the 52 weeks of the year, on a farm takes some doing. The price which the farmer is getting for his produce is not sufficient to enable the farmer to keep these labourers in continuous employment. Consequently we have in this country a position vastly different from that of some years back, which was referred to by Deputy Ryan. At that time, when the farmer engaged his labourer he engaged him for 12 months, but in recent years he just engages him for the putting in of the crop and the taking out of the crop. In that way, he is only providing casual employment for agricultural labourers. Deputy Ryan had apparently at the back of his mind an idea that the farmers were not as keen workers as long ago, but he forgot to tell the House the reason for that, that the farmer is not in a position to pay the wages to-day, small as they are. At the time to which he referred the farm labourer's wages were only 8/- or 9/- a week. There is a big difference between employing four labourers at 9/- a week, which totals less than £2 per week and employing four labourers at 27/- a week, which works out at £5 8/- per week. The farmer would need to be something of a philanthropist to provide the same employment now. Deputy Ryan was unconsciously making a case against his own Government. He was proving up to the hilt that farmers who employ labourers are not in a position to keep these labourers employed for the 52 weeks of the year as they were some 20 or 30 years ago.

Of course Deputy Ryan had to get some scapegoat and he alleged that cattle dealers during the economic war formed a ring. It is nonsense for a man of Deputy Ryan's experience to speak in that strain about cattle dealers. Everybody knows that cattle dealers at that period could not give a price for cattle because of the fact that they had to pay £6 per head to the British Government before they were allowed to ship any cattle to the British market. If there was any ring, it consisted of those trick-of-the-loop supporters of the Government who saw a chance of making money by getting licences at that period to export cattle and who took away from genuine cattle dealers an occupation which they had followed by tradition for years. Anybody who knows anything about the conditions obtaining in the cattle industry at that time knows that all along the Border certain men who could never buy a goat previously, were given licences by the Government and before the economic war ended they were semi-millionaires.

Mr. Dillon

Led by John Brown.

Mr. Coburn

Deputy Ryan alleged that these cattle dealers had formed a ring. I know that the farmers of the country would be very happy indeed if they had these cattle dealers going to their homes to-day as they did in the old days. Not alone the cattle dealers, but the pig dealers also visited the homes of the farmers, made their bargains there and put money into the hands of the farmers there and then. That was a practice that lasted over 40 years. People were far happier then than they are to-day. Conditions are such to-day that, to all intents and purposes, large numbers of our people must depend on casual employment for a living. In my opinion the policy of the Government in regard to the centralisation of many of the services that were not centralised some years ago, has been the means of putting thousands out of employment during the last three or four years. I refer specially to the fairs and pork markets that were formerly held in all the little towns along the Border. Thousands of people made a living out of these fairs and markets. It is not for me to say exactly how they earned that money but they were able to rear large families in fairly comfortable circumstances to my own knowledge. All that trade has died away to-day and there is nothing to replace it.

That is why you have a situation to-day in which so many are flying from the land. That is not to be wondered at. Any young man with spunk in him will not go on living under conditions in which he can only earn from £1 to 27/- per week while he sees another young man of the same age getting 50/- or £3 a week in the neighbouring town. I do not grudge these young men in the town what they earn, but how can you expect a young man in the country to remain on a farm and to do the very heavy work involved in agricultural operations, when the recompense is so small as compared with the wages of the town worker? In my opinion the greatest tradesman in the country is the good all-round agricultural labourer. He can take a hand at anything and he is worth any amount of money. That man is condemned to work for £1 or 27/- per week, and to expect him to compete and to buy in the same shops with the man in the town who has an average of £3 a week, is to expect the impossible. That is the position that faces the Minister and the Government at present. That is the position that is going to face any future Government that may succeed the present Government.

I am not here to blame the Minister for everything. I am only pointing out that much of the legislation passed in this country has brought about the state of affairs to which I have referred to-day. It is my opinion that until the farming community can be placed on a sound basis, that is those farmers who are anxious and willing to work and to rear their families in comfort— I know that there are exceptions amongst the agricultural community as in every other section of the community, the sort of man who finds it difficult to get on under any circumstances—we can expect very little improvement in rural conditions. I am contrasting the state of affairs which exists in rural parts of the country with that which exists in our towns and cities, and I suggest that some effort will have to be made to bring about a closer relationship between the purchasing power of the two sections. There will have to be a much greater sense of proportion shown in our dealings with them. That is the business of the Government in my opinion. I am not saying these things by way of criticism. I say them because I am honestly convinced that the position of the people who earn their living on the land at the moment is not a very happy one. Everybody knows the quotation:

"A bold peasantry, their country's pride,

When once destroyed can never be supplied."

There are thousands of young men leaving the land every year and, God knows, how many more thousands would leave if they could get to America. If the emigration laws were the same as they were 15 or 20 years ago, our population would be very much further decreased. I remember distinctly the Taoiseach, when he was in Opposition, saying in this House on one occasion that there was no reason why this country could not support a population of 15,000,000. I am afraid it will be some centuries before that happy state of affairs will come into existence at the rate of progress we are making. That is the position, and, as I say, it does not give me very much satisfaction to bring it to the notice of the Minister. But, representing a country where many of the people live out of farming, it is my duty to bring it to the attention of the Minister so that he will know the real state of affairs. So much has been said on this Vote that I am not going to go over the same ground again. We all know that it is a very important Vote, and anything we say here is by way of help rather than by way of criticism, up to a point anyway. I hope and trust the Minister will see his way to do something to improve the position of the farmers all over the country.

Mr. Browne

From the discussion on this Estimate it would appear to be the general opinion that the agricultural population and their means of income are rapidly disappearing. It is not necessary for me to refer to a number of matters which have been mentioned, but I should like to deal with one item which does not seem to have been brought to the attention of the Minister and which is a very profitable item of production. I refer to egg production, which I hold is of great importance. If egg production disappears it will be a serious matter for the small farmers concerned. In 1930 our export of eggs to the British market was something like 4,735,000 hundreds. In 1937 the export had gone down by nearly half, to 2,458,000 hundreds. That is a very serious decline in seven years. As a matter of fact, the money value went down from something over £3,000,000 to about £1,000,000. That was very big loss to these small farmers of from £1 to £5 valuation. These are the people who produce eggs and who are suffering a great loss at present by not being in a position to produce them. During the same period Denmark and Holland doubled their export of eggs to the British market, while our export was halved. As I have said, that is a very serious matter and the Minister will have to do something to change the conditions with regard to the production of eggs. I believe that the position in 1938 was even worse and that the position in 1939 will be even worse than it was in 1938. I am not speaking from figures but from information got from people who are in the egg trade when I say that I believe the export of eggs in March this year was the lowest for the last ten years.

In addition to the decrease in production, the production of third quality eggs has increased. I have been informed on good authority that second quality eggs represent nearly 20 per cent. of the total production at present. That is a serious position, because second quality eggs, while they are allowed to be exported, are not recommended for export. If they are exported, they have a serious effect on the quality of Irish eggs in the British market. But these eggs are there and they have to be sold and exported. When these eggs are exported they are sold at 3/-, 4/- or 5/- per hundred less than specials or other first quality eggs. Therefore, I think it is up to the Minister to see what can be done to improve that position. I believe that something can be done. If the Minister would provide £50,000, spread over a period of two years, it would be money well spent, if we could bring the export value of our eggs from £1,000,000 up to £3,000,000 per year, or perhaps £4,000,000. I believe that some of that £50,000 would be well spent on evening classes or some other classes in the different parishes at which the exporters would attend and explain to the producers the necessity of having their eggs sent in proper condition for export. There could be a register kept of exporters and producers who attended, and if the producers were not prepared to put their eggs on the market in proper condition they would be much better out of the trade rather than be producing eggs of second quality and destroying the market for the producers of first quality eggs who take an interest in having their eggs in a fit condition. I believe also that a lot could be done by advertising our eggs, bacon and fowl in England, and I hold that £50,000 would do a lot in that way. We have new legislation in force now which is serious as far as eggs are concerned, considering the quantity of second and third quality eggs on the market. The better quality eggs are bound to suffer by the marketing of eggs of an inferior quality, because when eggs are bought at a flat rate through the country they have to be bought at a price which will meet the loss that is going to be sustained on the inferior quality eggs

The matter of day-old chicks has been mentioned by some Deputies. I agree that that method would be a useful way of improving the production of eggs. At the same time, I think that the production of these chicks will not improve the production of eggs in this country unless something is done to improve the housing accommodation of fowl. I think that the most important thing in connection with this matter is the provision of proper housing accommodation for fowl. Every Deputy here knows that fowl are allowed to wander around the farmers' houses, and no attention is paid to the fowl in the winter at all, with the result that they are not fed properly or heated properly during the winter months, a period in which eggs would be most profitable if proper accommodation were provided. It is my opinion that the people concerned are not in a position to undergo the cost of providing new housing accommodation themselves, and I suggest to the Minister that grants in a big way should be provided for the farmers to meet, this matter, or, if not grants, at least loans to meet the cost, or even a part of the cost, of providing proper housing accommodation. If that were so, and if proper accommodation were provided, the fowl would be warm during the winter months, and I think I can go further and say that if proper accommodation were provided, the farmers would not see these fowlhouses empty; they would make it their business to have fowl in these houses. I think it has certainly never been known in this country that if proper fowlhouses were there the farmers would not see that they were filled. As I say, the fowl would be properly housed and kept warm during the winter, and that would mean that you would have increased egg production during the winter months instead of as at present when there is a scarcity of eggs in this country during the winter months. As a matter of fact, in some of the small towns in this country it is nearly impossible to get an egg during the winter. Even to-day our eggs, as compared with the price in Northern Ireland, fetch a smaller price, although they are the same quality eggs, the same grade, and so on. I would go so far as to say that our eggs are of a better quality, and yet our eggs, as compared with Northern Ireland, fetch from 1/- to 1/6 per hundred less on the British market.

Mr. Hickey

Why?

Mr. Browne

That is what I should like to know. All I can say is that there is something wrong. You can take up to-day's paper and see that our eggs are less by 1/- a hundred than Northern Ireland eggs.

Mr. Dillon

Our eggs are stamped, and theirs are not stamped.

Mr. Browne

At any rate, whatever may be the cause, our eggs are less in value than those of Northern Ireland by 1/-, and at other times there was a difference of 1/3 and even 1/6. I think that the biggest difference was 1/6. Now, it seems to me that there is no reason why our eggs should be 1/6 less than those of Northern Ireland. We have the same grade and exactly the same weight per egg, and our eggs are at least of as good quality and, in my opinion, better quality, and yet our eggs fetch 1/6 less on the British market. That, of course, means a lot to the farmers of this country. It would mean a difference of about 6/- a week to some of the farmers in the matter of eggs alone, and that is a considerable item. With regard to the matter of the stamping of eggs, that may have something to do with it, but apart from that I think that if the matter were taken up properly and if our Department were to spend money on advertising Irish eggs we might succeed in making the stamped egg more valuable than an unstamped egg, because the stamp would be a guarantee of security as far as our eggs are concerned. It might improve the position if money were to be spent in that way in order to prove that the stamped egg was better than the unstamped egg. At any rate, I certainly would recommend to the Minister that he should make a special effort to do something to revive the egg industry in this country. If he does not revive that industry inside this year, or certainly within the next year at the latest, my opinion is that that industry will die out, and that would be a very serious loss to this country. I know that the Minister would be very sorry to see that industry dying out, but certainly there is something wrong with the industry, and something must be done or the industry will go out of existence entirely, and it will cost much more to bring it back than it will cost now to revive or preserve it. Now is the time to do that. That is all I have to say with regard to the egg industry.

Another matter to which I should like to refer is the question of bacon. Let us take the price of Irish bacon to-day on the English market. We have the best bacon on the British market, but where do we stand with regard to price? We only stand in the third place and, as a matter of fact, we are only running a race to see if we do not stand in the fifth place. Danish bacon, according to to-day's paper, is 84/- to 93/-; Swedish bacon, 76/- to 82/-; Dutch bacon, 76/- to 86/-; Polish bacon, 72/- to 81/-; and Irish bacon, 79/- to 83/- per cwt. We are looking for a bacon trade in this country and for the production of pigs, and hoping to do everything to promote the bacon industry in this country, but that is how we stand with regard to the prices of our bacon on the British market, although our bacon is of the very best quality. That is not all of it. If we take legislation into account, with regard to the hypothetical level and so on, we find that Irish bacon is cheaper on the British market than it is on our own market, and the public here are complaining about the difference in price. In every shop that you go into you see what the price of Irish bacon is here, then you read about what the price of Irish bacon is on the British market, and the public are asking why there should be that difference. Shopkeepers are being asked continually how it is that the price of bacon should be so high here as compared with the price of Irish bacon in Great Britain. If you go into a shop here you will pay 1/6, 1/8 and even 1/9 for your 1b. of rashers, and the public, naturally, compares that with 83/- a cwt. for Irish bacon on the British market, or 8½d. a lb., and they want to know why there should be that difference. If you get a quotation to-day for bacon here, that quotation is anything from 130/- to 150/- a cwt. The public are asking, where does that difference come in? I think it is too bad that the poor consumers in this country should have to pay in order to provide for cheaper bacon for the British consumers.

Now, with regard to pig feeding, during the months of May, June and July we have a shortage of pigs and, as a matter of fact, have to import pigs into this country. I think that something should be done to remedy that, and to tempt the producers here at home to produce pigs in May, June and July. These are the three months of the year when it is expensive to rear pigs because there are not the same means of providing cheap feeding stuffs as at other periods of the year. I quite understand that it is a hard thing to raise or lower prices suddenly, but I think that the Minister should consider the giving of a subsidy on bacon pigs during the months of May, June and July, and that, if he is prepared to give such a subsidy, the farmers should be made aware of it in time.

Mr. Dillon

The Minister tried to, but the curers put it in their pockets.

Mr. Browne

If the farmers knew that this subsidy was to be given in the months of May, June and July, a number of farmers who otherwise would be willing to sell their small pigs for the porker trade in February and March would hold them over for the months of May, June and July. If a subsidy of even 10/- a cwt. were to be given for the months of May, June and July, the farmers would hold over their pigs for these months, and that would mean that it would be possible to reduce the excess production of pigs in October and November. These are two items of which I desired to speak. I felt that eggs had been neglected by every Deputy, with the exception of Deputy Cosgrave, and nobody seemed to realise the condition of that industry. I ask the Minister to make a special effort to get the Department to work so that the egg industry will be put at least into the position in which it was ten years ago. There is no reason why it should not be put in the position in which it was in 1928, or even in 1924, when the first Eggs Act came in. If we compare our export of eggs in the years 1924, 1925 and 1926 with our export in 1938, every Deputy will be satisfied that something must be done for the industry. I hope the Minister will give these matters consideration during the coming year. Egg production for this year is practically at an end, but I urge him to prepare some scheme for putting into operation in November, so that we may be ready for the months of January, February and March, when we will have a supply of eggs.

Mr. Rogers

I think we have reached a point at which the Minister should come to the assistance of the farmers. During the years of the economic war the farmer sold his stock for absolutely nothing and was unable to restock his lands. Through no fault of his own, he has gone down, and I am sorry to say that the Fianna Fáil Government was responsible for it. He sold his stock at bad prices to pay his land annuities, his rates and his shopkeepers, and was then unable to restock his land. I listened to Deputy Esmonde last night fearlessly and ably telling the Minister that his colleagues, the Minister for Industry and Commerce and the Minister for Defence, have only to come in here and ask for money and their requests are granted, but the Minister for Agriculture, who represents the backbone of the country, the farming community, has not tried to do a single thing for the farmers. It is up to him, and to him only, to get the farmers out of the plight in which they are to-day.

We all know that the farmers of this country always paid their debts honestly if they had the means, but to-day they are unable to pay. I have made a track over to the Land Commission with appeals from decent farmers in County Sligo for time in connection with the payment of their land annuities. Men who were always well able to pay their way are to-day unable to pay. They are unable to pay their land annuities or their rates, so that it is up to the Minister to do something for them. We hear a lot about the factories and large amounts of money were put up to keep factories going, but there is one factory in this country, the homestead of the farmer, the cowshed, the stable and the piggery, which must get consideration. That is the industry on the land to-day, and in a native Parliament the farmers are the first men who should be considered, because it was the farmers' sons who went out when men were wanted and won a native Parliament for this country.

Other Deputies have mentioned pig production. In County Sligo, pig production has declined and many farmers have gone out of sows for the reason that feeding-stuffs are too dear, and they are unable to produce bacon at the present cost of feeding-stuffs. I also ask the Minister to consider whether it is possible to do something for farmers who are breeding shorthorn heifers. Perhaps they intend to keep that heifer for a cow on their own land, but they may have to pay rates and land annuities and shop debts, and I suggest that the Minister should give a bounty to those farmers who go in for shorthorn heifers, and so retain them on the land. We have in County Sligo one of the best cattle-breeding districts in the Twenty-Six Counties, but for the last year our store cattle have declined, owing to too many crosses with the Polled-Angus. I ask the Minister to consider that matter. There are also in County Sligo very good brood mares, bred of Irish draught stallions, and I would ask the Minister to consider giving a thoroughbred horse to the county. By doing so, I believe we would get far better horses than we have at present. Finally, I appeal to the Minister to do a little for the one section which is the backbone of the country, the farming community.

Mr. Linehan

There is no doubt that Deputy Coburn and Deputy Browne, in dealing with the question of bacon and eggs, dealt with matters which affect the agricultural community in a very grave way. So far as the bacon industry is concerned, everyone must admit that production has decreased, but the operation of Government policy has injured the entire agricultural community and the people who, to a certain extent, make their living out of the land in another way, because, owing to the operation of the present policy with regard to the sale of pigs, the monthly markets held in the various country towns have dwindled to practically nothing, and a number of people who made a comparatively good livelihood out of that business have lost it. On the question of eggs, I want to put this point: The worst effect, to my mind, of the drop in egg production is the loss of ready money going into the smaller houses. There was a period when, in the small farmers' and labourers' houses, the money made from the sale of eggs at the weekly market in the towns provided the necessaries of life for those householders. That is one of the most serious features of the decline—that the actual ready-cash income of those people during the week, and mainly people in a very poor way, has been lost. The reason, to my mind, is the cost of feeding-stuffs and the fact that people did not regard the cereal admixture as a good feeding-stuff for poultry production caused many of the smaller people to drop entirely out.

It is completely unfair from the point of view, either of pig production or poultry production, that the people here should be competing with their neighbours in the Six Counties on terms which are disadvantageous to us. Is it not a fact that, within the past month, bacon was imported into this country; that sufficient was not produced to meet even the home demand, and the fact that bacon could be produced by our Northern competitors on far more advantageous terms to them than obtain here was simply due to the fact that the price of maize was lower in the North. There was an attempt by some of the Government Deputies to make a justification of the Government policy, and their reason for the flight from the land, for the lack of inclination to work on the land, was not that the work on the land is badly paid, not that it does not give sufficiently remunerative employment, but that work elsewhere is more attractive. That is a rather peculiar statement. If everybody in this country— whether in professions, in business, or on the land—suddenly discovered that the particular work they were doing here was being paid better in some other country you would expect everybody to emigrate. It is perfectly well known that the reason for emigration is not that the terms of employment are more advantageous in England or anywhere else, but that the young people do not see any future for themselves on the land. They are leaving the country simply and solely because they are not satisfied to remain on the land, where they would never be able to make a living and support families in the manner in which they should be supported.

That will affect the population and the agricultural industry in two ways: Firstly, through people leaving the country, there is a drop in the marriage rate. People are not inclined to get married, as they are not satisfied that they could make a decent living on the land. The old people are remaining in legal ownership of the farms until they are nearly in the grave and then the sons and daughters are almost too old to get married. Neither they nor their families think it wise to settle down on the land.

As far as the beet and wheat schemes are concerned, they are no justification for the entire Government policy. They may be all right in their own way and in their own place. As far as my portion of the country—North Cork— is concerned, I do not think that wheat or beet would ever solve the problem there, because the bulk of the farmers are small farmers and the land does not lend itself to beet or wheat growing. In the second instance, and I am sure that Deputy Corry will agree with me, one of the great troubles is the labour question. It is hard to get labour—particularly casual labour— for beet tillage. It is extremely hard to get workers in the winter months. The average farm worker would rather do anything than pull beet in the winter months. When servant boys offer themselves for hiring at the beginning of the year, and are making their bargain—which does not happen so often now under the Agricultural Wages Board, though it does in some areas like my own, where we are paying more than the Agricultural Wages Board rate—one of the questions is: "Is there any beet?" and if there is the hiring price goes up.

I doubt if Deputy Corry will deny that one of the things that militate against beet is the lack of inclination on the part of labourers to deal with that crop, and it is hard to blame them. I do not believe there is a harder job to be found than that of working in a beet field on a frosty morning in the winter time after two weeks' rain. One of the things I would suggest in order to help the agricultural industry is that, in areas where there are a number of unemployed who are capable of doing normal farm work and are on the unemployment register or in receipt of unemployment assistance, and where there are farmers anxious to get labour but are not in a position to pay the legal rate of wages, though they may be in a position to pay one man the full legal wage and a second man a lower figure, one solution to the problem would be to make up the difference between the amount of unemployment assistance being paid to the labourer and the wage that he ought to get from the farmer. It should be possible to provide a subsidy for that.

Mr. Corry

For what?

Mr. Linehan

For work. Give him the difference between what he is getting from the State——

Mr. Corry

So that the city fellows may get cheap food.

Mr. Linehan

Deputy Corry says: "So that the city fellows may get cheap food." If the argument in favour of the wheat and beet schemes is that wheat and beet are suitable to the agricultural industry all through, that they are paying propositions and suit us very well, how can Deputy Corry argue that increased production is giving the city people cheap food. Supposing it did.

Mr. Corry

If the Deputy would allow me to explain——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I think we have had a speech from Deputy Corry already.

Mr. Linehan

I am sorry for drawing him, Sir. The real feature of our agricultural problem is that the young people regard the outlook on the land as hopeless. And yet the Minister has done very little about it. In introducing the Vote he said: "I do not know if I can say very much on the general question," and then he referred practically every question back to the Agricultural Commission.

Dr. Ryan

If the Deputy would read what I said about the Agricultural Commission he would not say that.

Mr. Linehan

I will quote the Minister:

"I do not know if I can say very much on the general question. I do believe that very much can be done apart from legislation, and Deputies will agree that very much must be done for agriculture in general. One of the matters which we have been considering in the Department is the matter of increased production. As Deputies are aware, the commission was set up practically with the terms of reference to consider increased production."

Is not that quotation correct?

Dr. Ryan

I said we would not wait for the report of the commission.

Mr. Linehan

The Minister said it would "take some years to go through all the matters it has to deal with, and that is not to say that it will take the same amount of time before it produces anything."

Mr. Dillon

If the Minister produces as much more as he has produced in the past——

Dr. Ryan

I think I said specifically that we did not intend to wait for the commission's report.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If the Deputy would address the Chair——

Mr. Linehan

The Minister drew me that time. The Minister said a lot should be done for agriculture, and when he is winding up the debate he will probably say that everybody has said that a lot should be done for agriculture; but the Minister is the person in charge of the agricultural policy of this Government, and he has not suggested anything that could be done to improve the position of the agricultural community. He has not stated whether an attempt will be made to increase production and if an attempt will be made to increase the production of bacon, eggs, and so on; he has not said what would be done to arrange for the proper marketing of those commodities.

I would like to put another point to the Minister—a point to which he may be able to reply. There is a complaint in certain areas where the Dairy Disposal Company is operating a number of creameries that the prices paid by that company do not compare favourably with the other co-operative creameries in the area.

Dr. Ryan

The other complaint is often made, too.

Mr. Linehan

I agree entirely that the other complaint is often made, that the Dairy Disposal Company in certain cases may pay better than the other co-operative creameries, but the point I make is that the Dairy Disposal Company is being operated under subsidies obtained from the Government and, therefore, there should be no complaint about that company.

Dr. Ryan

They try to pay the same price as is paid by the other co-operative creameries, but we get complaints that sometimes they are paying too much and sometimes not enough.

Mr. Linehan

I agree, but I do not think for a moment you could justify the position in an area like North Cork, where you have 20 or 30 creameries spread over a small area, that the Dairy Disposal Company, operating nine creameries together, would not be able to compete with individual co-operative societies if it were properly run—and, in case the Minister might think so, I am not referring to the Rathmore group.

There is just one other point. In a considerable proportion of the constituency I represent, terrific damage is being done by the rabbit pest. Nothing that has been tried, as far as I know, from trapping to the famous gas attack that was tried a few years ago, drowning, etc., has had any effect. There are some small farmers on the hillsides there whose farms have been absolutely ravaged, who have scarcely a field that is worth calling an arable field. It is very hard to find a solution. As far as I can judge, the more rabbits that are killed the faster they seem to multiply. It is a position that is rapidly becoming alarming in a number of areas. Whether the Minister has any effective solution in his mind or not I do not know, but I would suggest to him that it is a thing worth looking into. Considerable damage is being done and some farmers have been absolutely ruined in a number of areas in Cork.

There is one other point, in conclusion, on the question of agricultural education. There was a suggestion made here that the Press, radio and other organs of propaganda should be utilised to carry out a campaign of agricultural education. That sounds very well. If somebody in the United States, or in Czecho-Slovakia, or anywhere else, read that it was suggested in Dáil Eireann that a campaign of agricultural education was to be carried out by radio they would say that this must be the most prosperous country in the world because, otherwise, we would not waste money putting agricultural lessons on the radio when the farmers had no wireless sets. The position at the moment is that it would be very little use wasting time on radio lessons when most of the farmers have not wireless sets and the farmers who are able to buy cheap wireless sets—who may be buying them on the instalment system—will want to get something to cheer them up and make them forget the sufferings under which they are labouring owing to the policy of the present Minister for Agriculture, rather than lessons teaching them how to do their own business which, I suggest, they were always pretty well capable of doing.

Mr. Hickey

I will not delay the House very long, but I would like to ask the Minister has he had any complaint from farmers to the effect that, when they bring pigs to a factory, the factory will tell them they cannot take any pigs that day, and when they take the pigs just outside the factory, a pig buyer will take them. The pig buyer then takes the pigs into the same factory an hour later, and the factory will take them from him. I have had complaints from people living within the suburbs of Cork that that has happened. It is causing great hardship to the farmers, because they cannot take the pigs home, without greatly depreciating their value. I understand that the position is that those factories have a pig buyer or two who supply them with their requirements, and when certain pig producers bring in their lorry load of pigs to the factory the practice that I have described takes place, resulting in great hardship to the farmers. Some farmers co-operate and bring all their pigs in on one lorry and when they come to the factory they are told they cannot be taken. I have been told that that took place no later than last week.

I have been listening to many speeches about increasing production on farms. I remember reading a statement of the Minister himself during the economic war that there was too much production of eggs in the country.

Dr. Ryan

Eggs?

Mr. Hickey

Yes. I can produce the cutting, if you like. During the economic war, when the price of eggs was small, the Minister made the statement that the production of eggs was too great.

Mr. Dillon

Has the Deputy got the cutting?

Mr. Hickey

Not here at the moment.

Mr. Dillon

I wish you had.

Mr. Hickey

As coming from the city, some might think it rather strange to hear me talk about farming, but I know that if the farmer is not prosperous the city also suffers to a considerable extent because, after all, the farmers are consumers as well as producers. If they are not prosperous that fact is reflected in the shops and everywhere else.

A good deal has been said about the education of small farmers throughout the country. I would like to point out that, when I was working on a farm, which is nearly 23 years ago, I found that the greatest education in the country-side was given by agricultural instructors from the Department, who came down to particular farms, took a strip of land, and demonstrated the growing of certain seeds and the use of certain manures. Farmers' sons in the locality came to see for themselves how the thing was done. I think that practical demonstration of that kind is the best means of imparting the necessary agricultural education to farmers' sons. If anybody went to the trouble of visiting the agricultural stalls at the Spring Show last week, he would have noticed young boys studying very seriously everything pertaining to the work of the farm. I believe practical demonstration is far more important than leaflets or lectures, radio, or anything else.

In conclusion, I would like to say that, as far as the bacon industry is concerned, and as far as the flour industry is concerned, I do not think enough can be said about the inactivity of the Government in dealing with that problem in time. I remember that during the economic war everybody was suffering. Not only the farmers, but a good percentage of the unfortunate workers were suffering. I refer to the dockers. They were hard hit by the economic war. These unfortunate men sometimes had to be called up at six o'clock at night to do four hours' work and because they were signing on at the labour exchange during the day they were summoned and fined severely because they drew a paltry 2/6 a day although they were working for four hours. I want to say to Deputy Dillon or anybody else that whatever stand the Labour Party took at that time to fight the economic war, they would take again, but we do expect that, in fighting a war of that kind, people like the bacon curers and the flour millers should not be able to get away with excess profits without any punishment whatever. I think it is most unfair that they should do so and a very poor appreciation of the poorer section of the community who took part in that war.

I would point out to the Minister that there is one branch of the agricultural community that is of great importance, that is, the egg and poultry business. I notice that £600,000 is being given to the tourist industry this year, but I think the egg and poultry industry is of far greater importance. I would seriously suggest that if there is anything necessary for the farming community, especially among the smaller farmers and the agricultural labourers, it is accommodation for the rearing of poultry.

I think the matters to which I have referred are far more important than finding fault with the economic war, because the economic war is past, and we should concentrate our minds on what we should do in the future. I would emphasise again that, as far as my experience goes, demonstration on the farm is far more important and more effective than anything else we could do to educate the farmers.

Minister for Agriculture (Dr. Ryan)

We have spent 20 hours on this Estimate, and I cannot say that I am very edified by any speech I heard from the Opposition. I brought this Book of Estimates with me, but no Deputy on the Opposition seems to have ever seen it. I was never asked about a single sub-head in the Estimate. I was never asked whether a little more could be given under a certain sub-head or a little less. In fact, I think if I had time I could have written out every speech from the Opposition Benches, because I had heard them all so often before, including the two hours' nonsense with which Deputy Dillon led off. Indeed, I could have put in the personalities that Deputy Dillon quoted in his speech. As we all know, Deputy Dillon thinks that personal attack is a good argument when he has no other argument to use. However, we will leave it at that, because I am not going to follow with a personal argument.

Deputy Dillon devoted much of his time to the bacon position. I do not mind being attacked in this House for anything wrong I have done, and I suppose I have done wrong fairly often, at least in the opinion of the Deputies opposite, but I do resent meanness from any Deputy. In fact, I feel sorry for this House when I see a Deputy adopting a mean attitude. That is the attitude Deputy Dillon has adopted on the bacon question. I would ask him to go back and read his speech on the Second Reading of the Bill. He will find in that nothing but praise for the Bill. Every single provision of it was praised by Deputy Dillon, and I read that lately just to make sure. So that he approved of that bacon legislation just as much as I did. Now Deputy Dillon comes along and, with his satellites there behind him, tries to give the impression to the House and the country that the bacon scheme was my scheme and not theirs. Why has Deputy Dillon not the manliness to come forward here and say that he made a mistake, just as I did, in that legislation?

Mr. Dillon

Because it is not true.

Dr. Ryan

I ask the Deputy to read his Second Reading speech on that Bill when it was going through. If he does, I defy him to point out to me where he found the smallest fault with its provisions when it was before this House. Instead of finding fault with that Bill, he gave great praise to it and said it was long overdue. He had words of praise for the different provisions in it. I would ask Deputy Hughes who reiterated the words used by Deputy Dillon, to go back on that particular speech of his leader and read what he said on that occasion.

Mr. Hughes

On a point of order. During the course of my speech on this Estimate I made no reference to bacon, good, bad or indifferent.

Dr. Ryan

Not to bacon, perhaps— that is true. I would ask the Deputies who sit behind Deputy Dillon to read the speech he made on that Bill four or five years ago. Having listened to the speech that he delivered on this Estimate, and having read the speech that he made at that time, they will be in a position to draw their own conclusions as to whether he is not adopting a mean attitude now. As I have said, I do not mind being attacked here, but I do object to a member of this House—I do not care what Party he belongs to—or to any Irishman taking up the mean attitude that Deputy Dillon has taken up on this question.

Deputy Dillon said other things about bacon which, of course, were absolutely ridiculous. He said that the British asked us some time ago for 100,000 cwts. of bacon, and that we could not give it to them. I admit that we could not have given it to them, but the point is that we were not asked for it. We were asked for 10,000 extra cwts., and we gave them 3,000. We also gave them 1,000 live pigs, so that, if you like, we gave 4,000 out of the 10,000 extra cwts. asked for.

Mr. Dillon

The Minister was not able to give them 10,000 cwts. extra, and he has denounced me for saying that we could not give them 100,000.

Dr. Ryan

If we were asked for 1,000,000 extra cwts. we could not give them either. Is the Deputy drawing the conclusion from that that we could not give the 10,000?

Mr. Dillon

Was not the Minister advised by the High Commissioner in London that, if he chose to apply for this 100,000 cwts. extra, he would get them?

Dr. Ryan

He was not. The arrangement we have under the Agreement, which everybody can road, is that we can discuss with the British what quota we think we can fill, and what quota they think they can give us. We take the initiative, as we did this year. We put it to the British Government that we can export so much bacon, and they accept that. I think it was about the beginning of March that they came along and said they could take another 10,000 cwts.

Mr. Dillon

And you had not them to give them?

Dr. Ryan

No. If they had asked for 1,000,000 extra cwts. we could not give them either. We made up our mind as to what we could export. They came along looking for another 10,000 cwts. We could not give them. Deputy Dillon mentioned another case. He said he knew a man in the County Monaghan who brought his pigs into the factory. They were Grade A.1 pigs. He took them away and brought them back to the factory in three weeks' time when, according to the Deputy, he got less for the pigs than he would have got on the first occasion. I have been puzzling my mind as to how that could happen. I asked Deputy Dillon to sit down and take pen and paper and give the weight of the pigs on the first occasion they were brought in, and what they weighed on the second occasion.

Mr. Dillon

Does the Minister deny that his own personal attention was directed to the cases of farmers bringing their pigs into factories in the County Monaghan and of being sent home, the factories declining to accept the pigs, and of the pigs being put into a lower grade when re-presented at the factories?

Dr. Ryan

Yes.

Mr. Dillon

The Minister does not deny that, but he denies that the farmer, in the case I mentioned, sustained the loss that I alleged in the intervening three weeks.

Dr. Ryan

It was impossible.

Mr. Dillon

But there was a loss. The Minister admits that.

Dr. Ryan

It depends on what the Deputy means by loss.

Mr. Dillon

All that I allege is that pigs of high grade were put into a lower grade, because the factory would not take them on the first occasion on which they were presented.

Dr. Ryan

As a matter of fact, as the Deputy should know, farmers will purposely try to put their pigs into a heavier grade and expect to do better out of them, even though there is a lower price per cwt. for them. Take the weight of a pig on a particular day, and make it as favourable as you can in the Grade A.1 class. If you brought that pig in the next day, and if the weight of it was 1½ lbs. or so higher, it might happen that you would lose a bit on it, but if you kept the pig at home for three weeks—I am taking the case that the Deputy had in mind—I think it would be impossible for what the Deputy has alleged to happen.

Mr. Dillon

The Minister admits that, substantially, the facts are true?

Dr. Ryan

I admit that if a pig gets heavier there is less paid per cwt., but that does not mean that you lose on the pig. There are, as I have said, farmers who will purposely feed their pigs to put them into the higher grade weight because they believe that by doing so they will get more for them and do better out of them.

There were some other questions raised about bacon which I can deal with when I come to reply to what was said by other speakers. I would just like to say again that I do not mind being attacked about this bacon business. It does not do any great harm to this country, not the slightest harm, I think. If Deputy Dillon gives the impression to the country that I made a mistake, that, I think, does not do very much harm. Neither does it do very much harm if he gave the impression to the country that the curers made inordinate profits. But when we come to the point of saying, and of trying to prove, that it is impossible for producers to produce pigs at present prices, then I believe the Deputy is doing harm. Deputy Brennan came in here with figures which, I presume, he got from some private source. He spoke of some lots of pigs that had been fed in some way that was not mentioned. According to the accounts presented, there was a loss on the pigs. So far as official figures are concerned, figures which we get from county committees of agriculture or from any of the agricultural colleges, they would not go to prove Deputy Brennan's contention. The figures that we get from pig feeders who keep accounts, and who know how to feed their pigs, show that pigs are paying. These feeders will admit that. I think it is a great pity that Deputy Dillon and Deputy Brennan should try to give the impression to would-be producers of pigs in this country that pigs are not paying, because their statements may have the effect of keeping those people from going into pig production.

Mr. Dillon

Will the Minister say why he is winding up the maize meal mixture scheme?

Dr. Ryan

I will come to that.

Mr. Dillon

Is it not because the feeding is too dear?

Dr. Ryan

It is because the feeding is too dear if you like.

Mr. Dillon

That is all we are saving.

Dr. Ryan

No. I say that, even at the present price of feeding stuffs, pigs are paying. That is a thing that, I think, will be admitted by people who at the present time are feeding their pigs intelligently and keeping accounts. They will admit that pigs are paying. I do not say that they might not look for bigger profits. I do not blame them for that. Any returns we got from pig feeders who are feeding in an intelligent way and keeping accounts show that pigs are paying.

Mr. Dillon

May I ask the Minister a question?

An Ceann Comhairle

If the Minister gives way.

Mr. Dillon

Is it not true that the man producing 2,000 pigs in mass production can make a bit, whereas the men with two, three or four pigs, who form the bulk of persons interested, cannot, in fact, make pigs pay at present?

Dr. Ryan

I cannot see why the small farmer west of the Shannon or anywhere else with two, three or four pigs should not have a better chance of making them pay than the bigger man who has to buy all the feeding stuffs. The small man has potatoes or something to supplement the feeding, and has a better chance than the bigger man feeding 1,000 or 500 pigs.

Mr. Dillon

Where would the small man get potatoes at this time to feed pigs?

Dr. Ryan

He may have some potatoes, or, as somebody has suggested, might have some skim-milk. I have here a sheet, which it would be very awkward to publish, but I am prepared to answer any question about it with regard to any grade or any price of pig. This sheet shows the present price per cwt. dead-weight, here and in Northern Ireland, and in every instance, over three or four months, the price of pigs here is higher than in the North. In the case of the 10 to 11 stone pig the price is 19/1½ higher here than in the North. The price goes down to the regions of a shilling in certain cases for the 14 or 15 stone pig. Taking all the pigs here as delivered to the factory, and taking the weight on the average—because we have a certain percentage of pigs that go into each class—our pigs at present are fetching 10/- per cwt. more than those in Northern Ireland, yet Northern Ireland was held up to me in this House as an instance where pigs are on the increase. It is true that they were on the increase. I do not think that is so at the moment, but they were on the increase and there were two reasons for that. It may be due to propaganda or other pronouncements, but there is something in it. If you have daily papers and spokesmen on county committees of agriculture and in the Dáil saying that pigs are not paying here, that must have some influence. That is not heard in the North. Even though they have trouble between the Government and the Opposition with regard to the Pigs Board, they do not say that pigs are not paying. At any rate, they have some regard for the producer. They let him go on producing and do not try to stop him.

Mr. Dillon

Because pigs are paying.

Dr. Ryan

But we are getting 10/- per cwt. more.

Mr. Dillon

They are paying 2/6 less for meal.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy must give the Minister as good a hearing as he got.

Dr. Ryan

I had to listen for hours.

Mr. Dillon

I apologise to the Minister for interrupting him.

Dr. Ryan

I have given the matter considerable thought, and I say that, on the average, we are getting 12/- more for pigs, but I put the figure at 10/-. I say that one reason for the position here is propaganda, and, perhaps, a greater reason is want of credit. Want of credit may be the greater reason, and I will deal with that later. We were told that the prices of feeding stuffs here are higher than in Northern Ireland. They are. Take the ordinary mixture for which you go into any of the pig compound feeding stuff merchants or millers. They will give you 5 cwt. of maize meal mixture, 1 cwt. of pollard, 1 cwt. of bran and 1 cwt. of meat meal. I put it as simply as I can, because I want to make a comparison. What is the difference in the price of feeding stuffs? The difference is about 1/3 per cwt. higher here than in the North for maizo meal mixture. The price is something lower here for pollard and bran than in Northern Ireland. A simple test is this, that there is no prohibition and no tariff on pollard or bran coming here from the Six Counties, and yet none is coming in. They are something cheaper here. Meat meal was as cheap. I do not think it is as cheap now. On that basis, for a half-ton the price here would come to about 7/6 more than in the North of Ireland, but if you take 4 cwt. to 1 cwt. of bacon, our price here is more than sufficient to cover the increased cost of feeding stuffs.

I wish Deputies on the opposite benches would keep off the venom that they have for me and for the bacon curers, and appeal to the producers, by pointing out to them that they can get paying prices for pigs here and, in that way, try to get them to produce more. I do not think Deputies opposite would lose politically if they did that. They may think that by being able to point out, in six or 12 months' time that the number of pigs is going down, that is a political advantage, but they should forget that, and try to get the people to produce more pigs, and, at the same time, if they like, come along and get it made right, if the curers are getting too much out of the business.

I have been thinking over the question and, from the figures, there is no reason why we should not get bigger production having regard to prices. The prices are sufficient to make pigs pay. I think one of the biggest troubles is want of credit. It was the same when I was young, and living on a farm where credit was necessary. There was no great problem then about going to a shopkeeper and getting the meal necessary to feed a batch of pigs, and paying for it when they were sold. I believe it is not so easy to get that credit now. Perhaps it may not be the fault of the retailers. I believe they find it hard to get credit from others, and so on up along. The only remedy might be a slow one. I do not think anyone could suggest a quick remedy. I do not think any Deputy would suggest that people should go to the retail shops and tell the owners that the Government would guarantee them if they gave out meal for the feeding of pigs. The only remedy I can see is to try to get a method of co-operation. Where you have co-operative societies in Cork, Limerick, Waterford, and some other places, these societies are giving credit on a much better scale than could be got elsewhere, and if it was possible, if we tried to push these co-operative stores more generally, in order to give out credit by that means, we might get greater production of pigs. The same perhaps, might apply to poultry. I do not know if that could be done very easily. I do not know whether we are going to have the results that I hope we could have if it was done, because, I suppose, unless these co-operative stores are fairly well or long established they would find it hard to get credit for what they buy themselves. That is one thing that could be done, to try to get credit for the pig producers, and in that way increase pig production, at least to some extent more than prevails at present.

Deputy Gorey is not in the House at present, but if he was here I would like to say that, while I have heard as hard things said by him as by any Deputy in Opposition against the Government, there is one thing I always found about him, that what he said was, to a certain extent, constructive. The Deputy followed almost immediately on Deputy Dillon, and in his speech he said that there was a great improvement as a result of these regulations, from the point of view of the producers of pigs. Whatever we might have against the curers for what they have done, or what they have been accused of doing, let us try to put that aside and deal with it, as we hope to deal with it when the new Bacon Bill is brought in. I appeal to Deputies, for goodness sake, in their anxiety to get at the curers not to spoil the whole pig business, because I think that is the danger from speeches like that made by Deputy Dillon and other Deputies on the opposite benches.

Deputy Dillon spoke about a few other things. It was hardly necessary to take two hours to say what he said. He referred to fertilisers, and he said that we gave a bounty on fertilisers which went straight into the pockets of Goulding's shareholders. Remember that statement in view of what actually happened. Messrs. Goulding had issued a list-price of manures. We gave Messrs. Goulding's, amongst others, a 10/- bounty on the production of phosphate manures. We said that there would be a condition that a discount of 10/- would be given on the price already issued. That was done. I suppose it is not necessary to pay compliments to people in trade because they are well able to look after themselves. The discount was given. In some cases the price was even reduced by 12/6, so that the subsidy that was given came off the price list, and, coming off the price list, the shopkeeper who got the manures could sell them to his farmer-customer for 10/- less than the list price. What is the justification for Deputy Dillon saying we gave a 10/- subsidy for artificial manures which subsidy went straight into the pockets of Messrs. Goulding's shareholders?

Mr. Dillon

I take it that you are now asking a question to which you want an answer?

Dr. Ryan

No. I think everybody will admit that I showed great for-bearance in listening to Deputy Dillon for two hours without interrupting him. I have the excuse that he hardly made a tangible point on which I could interrupt him. Practically all his statements were nebulous. Deputy Dillon said that he could not save onions in Mayo. I should not like an official of my Department to say anything derogatory of a Deputy. I mentioned to an inspector of my Department that I heard a person say that he could not save onions in County Mayo. I did not say who said it. If I had, the inspector would have been more respectful. His comment was: "Pure nonsense. Some of the best onions produced last year were saved in County Mayo". Having got that opinion from an expert, I interpret it as meaning that the weakness is not in the soil or climate of County Mayo but in Deputy Dillon's own management.

We heard from Deputy Dillon and another Deputy a complaint that the Department did not push sufficiently the keeping of shorthorn bulls in County Roscommon. That allegation was hardly fair. I made inquiries into it. I found that the County Roscommon Committee is the most difficult committee with which we have to deal on that problem. I do not say that the committee itself is to blame because the committee may have its difficulties with its own people, but we find it almost impossible to get them to take a large share of shorthorn bulls in that county. It may be impossible for the committee to place the bulls. The Department has made every effort in past years to induce County Roscommon to take more shorthorn bulls and fewer Aberdeen-Angus and Hereford bulls. The complaint was also made— I think it was Deputy Brennan who made it—that the Department were putting out "special-term" bulls which were not up to premium standard. The bulls we buy at the bull sales here and elsewhere are of premium standard and I do not think it can be alleged that we have put out bulls under the "special-term" scheme that are below that standard. We all have our own opinions about the standard of bulls. Some people may say that a particular bull is not up to premium standard and others may say that it is. In the opinion of the inspectors who buy these bulls, these animals are up to premium standard. From my reading of files of correspondence between the Department and the Roscommon County Committee, I gather that it is very hard to get them to take shorthorn bulls. In the majority of cases, they would probably say that a bull was not up to premium standard because it was a shorthorn.

Deputy Brennan spoke of a scheme for day-old chicks. Other Deputies also mentioned it. There is such a scheme. When you have Deputies so very solicitous about farming conditions, it is a pity that they are not familiar with the different schemes available under the Department and the county committees of agriculture. One would think that they would study these schemes and recommend that they should be put into operation for the benefit of the farmers. There has been a scheme for the last couple of years for day-old chicks.

Mr. Dillon

I think Deputy Brennan said that he knew there was such a scheme and suggested it should be extended.

General MacEoin

He recommended that it should be developed.

Dr. Ryan

I accept that. We have been very anxious in the Department for the last couple of years to push any of these schemes with regard to the rearing of day-old chicks, loans for brooders for farmers and the provision of poultry houses, in the endeavour to get a better class of fowl for laying in the winter period and producing more eggs—particularly at the time they are valuable. Deputy Gorey spoke a good deal about the rabbit pest and other Deputies also referred to it. I am afraid that Deputy Linehan is right. He said that it appeared, when we did make a serious attempt in one year to get rid of a lot of rabbits, that in the next year they appeared to be more numerous than ever. I am afraid that is the fact. It is not an easy problem with which to deal. We have given attention to it from time to time. As Deputies know we had a bounty on the export of rabbit skins at one time. The tariff was taken off rabbit skins going into Great Britain as a result of the Agreement. That should not have lessened the value of rabbits exported from this country but the export of rabbits has gone down very seriously this year. There appears to be a big increase in the import of rabbits from Australia into the English market and that has cut the prices very badly.

Deputy Gorey referred to the question of minor drainage. He has spoken on this matter consistently on the Agricultural Vote for nine or ten years. He has urged that the scheme he advocates would relieve unemployment and, at the same time, give the farmer an opportunity of improving the quality of his land, increasing its fertility and its production. We are examining the matter at present with a view to seeing whether we could evolve any scheme—it is not an easy thing to do—by which we would pay a subsidy to farmers, for the employment of those at present unemployed, for minor reclamation and minor relief schemes on their own land.

A number of Deputies advocated the revival of the heifer loan scheme. I would like to tell the House that it is true that the collection of the instalments under that scheme has been very satisfactory; but it must also be remembered that in the third year when we had that scheme in operation it was almost entirely neglected. Very few applications came in for heifers. They amounted to only 2,000 for the whole country. As a result of the very disappointing reception for the scheme, it was dropped.

Mr. Dillon

That was in the middle of the economic war.

Dr. Ryan

It was started during the economic war and was very well started; it was not so well patronised the second year and it was practically dropped after the third year.

General MacEoin

That broke several small farmers. They bought too dear the first year.

Dr. Ryan

There may possibly have been defects in the way the scheme was worked. It was not so easy to work it. Deputies here advocated that instead of the public auction the Minister for Agriculture should get inspectors to buy the heifers and send them out to the farmers. I wish the Deputies who spoke had some experience of trying that sort of thing on the farmers. About 90 per cent. of the farmers would say, "That is not the sort of heifer I want at all," and they would send the animals back to us. I can visualise the sort of letter we would get from the farmers. They would tell us that it was a pity we did not get someone who knew something about a heifer and so be able to buy the proper type instead of sending out a man with a collar and tie. That is the sort of answer that I would get if I sent out inspectors to get the heifers and distribute them. The only possible scheme is to let the farmer buy his own heifer. I know that this is one of the questions that are being considered by the Agricultural Commission, and it is possible we will have a report on that particular matter in the very near future.

A number of Deputies spoke about fruit. I do not think they can make a complaint about the kind of fruit coming in here. Deputies were dealing principally with the fruits used for jam-making, mostly raspberries. Let us take raspberries, black currants, gooseberries and strawberries, used for jam-making. About this time of the year the Department makes up its mind what proportion of the home production will go to the jam-makers. We have to make allowance for the proportion of raspberries to be used for dessert purposes, and the same will apply to the majority of our strawberries. We make up our minds what is the amount that is likely to be available for jam-making. We then see the jam-makers and ask them what is going to be the production for the year. We have a check on the production for last year and the year before, and if there is any big change in the estimated production we try to find out why. We then allot the quotas for imports. I do not think we could do it in any other way. If there are more raspberries or black currants or strawberries—especially strawberries — produced, there is room for them here for jam-making. We are almost at saturation point in the case of gooseberries and black currants. We import very little, but we import quite a lot of strawberries for jam-making, and some raspberries.

Deputy Bennett said the price of milk was not good enough. Deputy O'Donovan and other speakers said the agricultural prices were good on the whole, but that the reason the farmer could not live was that what he had to buy was too high. Deputy Bennett took a different line. He said the price of milk was not good enough. Last year the average price paid for milk by the creameries in this country —I am not taking into account what the townspeople had to pay, because it is much higher—was 5¾d. I think the actual figure was 5.72d. That was paid for milk with a skim milk return. That is not such a bad price. The Fine Gael Party in 1936-37 issued a manifesto telling the farmers, the unemployed, the civil servants, the teachers and everyone else what they were going to do for them if they got back into power. They had a programme which was going to cost £20,000,000 and, among other things, they promised the farmers 5d. a gallon for their milk. In a Utopia under Fine Gael, one that would cost £20,000,000 in addition to what the country is being run for, they were going to give the farmers 5d. a gallon, and yet Deputy Bennett tells us now that 5½d. is not enough.

General MacEoin

We would not be £20,000,000 out.

Dr. Ryan

I put it at something between £19,000,000 and £20,000,000.

General MacEoin

And your calculations would be out.

Dr. Ryan

They were never contradicted.

General MacEoin

You were going to save £2,000,000 once, and what is the position now?

Dr. Ryan

Deputy Hughes also made a speech. I know that Deputy Hughes is a successful farmer, and I think he could point out to the House, if he wanted to do so, that farming can be made pay. He could do that from his own experience, but he does not do it, and I think it is a pity. I think Deputy Hughes should not follow Deputy Dillon and others into the region of higher economics, such as we have spoken of here. He might talk about his experience on his own farm. I know that he could tell us that farming could be made pay.

Mr. Hickey

I am glad to hear that.

Dr. Ryan

I know that is true. There are a few things that Deputy Hughes said that are not quite correct. The consumption of artificial manures is up this year; it is higher than in 1930-31.

Mr. Hughes

I quoted the peak points.

Dr. Ryan

I have not had time to go into the peak points, but perhaps the Deputy is right.

Mr. Hughes

I think I am.

Dr. Ryan

We had a satisfactory increase.

Mr. Hughes

I admitted that.

Dr. Ryan

We had a satisfactory increase, but it is nothing like what it should be. If we had three times the amount of artificial manures used, it would be all to the good. At any rate, we are going up a bit. The Deputy asked about the concentrated artificials. I do not know if I could say that we have actually had an experiment with the concentrated artificials. The Department has some information on them. They have considered the matter, and from the information I got I think one thing is sure, that per unit the price is higher for the concentrated than for the ordinary artificials. Against that the Deputy may say that the transit would be lower. That is true. Another difficulty which I am sure the Deputy will admit is a great difficulty, is that of distributing a very small quantity of manure over an acre of land, or whatever land you may have. I know the Deputy has had the experience of trying to distribute a cwt. of ammonia over an acre.

Mr. Hughes

I do not agree that that is a difficulty. You can use 1 or 2 cwts. and mix them with your grain seed and sow through an ordinary modern drill, and you will be putting it deep into the soil and not amongst the weeds. It is the non-fertilising of the weeds that is the big consideration. You should carry out experiments.

Dr. Ryan

I want to point out that it does appear, at first sight, to be dearer per unit. There was another thing I gathered from what the Deputy said in the course of his speech. I am sure he will admit that what he said was that Denmark, for instance, is increasing all the time in production and in exports. He said they had been increasing up to last year, while this country has not made any progress or rather had, if anything, gone back. I do not think that is altogether true. Somebody handed me extracts from a report issued by the British Consul in Denmark. These reports can be got in the Library. They are issued by the various consuls in the different parts of the world to which these consuls are attached. In this report the British Consul in Denmark says that bacon exports from Denmark to the United Kingdom in 1936 were lower than at any time since 1923. So there we have the fact shown that bacon exports have not gone up. The year 1937 shows that this has been continued. The exports of bacon from Denmark to all countries in 1936 were less than half those in 1931. There we have the fact shown that Denmark has gone down in its bacon production. Everything is fairly well regulated in Denmark and they purposely cut down production there. How would Deputies opposite feel if they were in the Danish Parliament facing the Danish Minister for Agriculture who had actually cut down production? I suppose they would tell him that he has broken the Fifth Commandment just as they told me some years ago in the matter of the calves. At that time they told me it was an unnatural offence when I ordered the slaughtering of calves. But there is Denmark and her exports have been actually reduced from the year 1931 to 1936 by more than half. Of course, it was necessary and it could not be helped.

There is also the statement in this report from the Consul in Denmark that "the movement in Denmark from rural to urban districts continues and especially into the provincial towns". So there is the flight from the land there too. In that way the British can see that Denmark, which has been held up to us here as a model country from the agricultural point of view, has reduced its exports of bacon in the last six or seven years by one-half and in that country there is also the flight from the land to the towns. We are not alone in our troubles.

From Sweden, which is supposed to be a country which is the least affected by any depression or slump of any kind in the last ten years, there comes this report from the British Consul there: "The figures indicate that the movement of population from the country to the towns continues". So again we have the flight from the land not only in Denmark but in Sweden.

Deputy Hughes asked about the grass seeds. What happened was that some time ago we tried to give some encouragement to the farmers on this side of the Border in the growing of grass seeds. Grass seeds are principally grown in Monaghan and to some extent also in Louth and Cavan. Our own growers here grow all the perennial rye grass seed we want but not all the Italian rye grass we want. We had to tariff grasses coming into this country. That has been changed now. The arrangement we have with the British on that question is that whatever amount of grass seeds we allow in here they must allow the same amount of grass seeds out. Fortunately we have the privilege of saying the first word as to what we will allow in. We have not allowed any in and the result is that our growers are getting more for their grass seeds than the Six-County growers are getting. We have troubles to some extent, at any rate, in preventing grass seeds coming in through illicit channels. I cannot speak without inquiry and some investigation, but I have been told that this thing was worked for a year or two and that the handlers or cleaners at this side of the Border were not charging more than the cleaners at the other side of the Border. Unfortunately the price of grass seeds is higher here but if that is so the benefit is going to our own growers. At the present time we could import grass seeds at a good deal lower price——

Mr. Hughes

Is the Minister aware of the discrepancy in the price?

Dr. Ryan

Yes.

Mr. Hughes

Does the Minister think that that is a good policy for the rest of the country?

Dr. Ryan

Deputy Hughes comes from the County Carlow. The farmers there grow a certain amount of beet and wheat. If I were up in the County Monaghan I am sure the farmers there would say: "We get no benefit from the wheat and beet growing". To that I would reply: "You are getting benefit from the grass-seed scheme, for example, in Carlow."

Mr. Hughes

Is the Minister admitting that he is importing Italian rye grass?

Dr. Ryan

No, we are producing between 30 per cent. and 40 per cent. of our grass seeds and there are also mixed perennial and Italian seeds grown and they are still mixed when sown.

Mr. Dillon

But you brought in 60 per cent. of the seed in Northern Ireland, cleaned it and charged 60 per cent. more for it here.

Dr. Ryan

No. I made inquiries into the prices on the very day that this Estimate started—that was last Thursday. The price that day in Belfast for perennial rye grass, 28 lbs. to the bushel, was 35/- wholesale. The wholesale price in Cork was 36/-. The retail price in Belfast was 40/-; the retail price in Cork was 41/- to 42/-. I got these figures from a firm which has a branch in Belfast and in Cork. The price of Italian in Belfast was 31/- wholesale, and in Cork 38/6. The retail price in Belfast was 35/- to 36/-; in Cork the retail price was 41/- to 42/-. So that in the case of Italian rye grass there is a difference of 6/- to 7/6 between Belfast and Cork but in the case of perennial the difference is only 1/- to 2/-. These were the prices last Thursday.

Mr. Hughes

Earlier in the year the discrepancy was much greater. I can supply the Minister with the quotations and I will this evening.

Dr. Ryan

Very well, I will be glad to get them. I did make inquiries after this scheme had been working for a year or two to see if the people who are handling this business were getting more than a fair market. I was told that they were not getting more than their colleagues on the other side of the Border, so that any figures that can be supplied by the Deputy will be welcome.

Mr. Hughes

I do not think the Minister realises the gravity of it and the effect it is having on other farmers.

Dr. Ryan

From the figures I have quoted there is not a lot in it. As the Deputy is aware, there was also a figure quoted by Deputy O'Donovan and supported by Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney, showing that the cost of seeding a statute acre with a mixture of seed for permanent grass was 75/-. I thought that was far too high. I said that I personally had bought some grass seed which, from recollection, I thought had not cost more than about 34/-. I got the catalogue since, and I find that is correct.

Mr. Hughes

I did not agree.

Dr. Ryan

That is true; Deputy Hughes did not agree with that, but there was a mistake made. In that statute acre there is about 22 lbs. of perennial and about eight or nine lbs. of Italian, and the difference between the prices I quoted will not come to a lot in four or five acres of seeding. Deputy O'Donovan asked me about allowing in a serum for white scour in calves. It is true that that is not allowed in; it is not allowed in under the Therapeutic Substances Act. The reason why it is not allowed in is that in the case of some of those serums which contain live bacteria there is a grave danger of introducing foot and mouth disease. As a matter of fact, I believe that one of the worst attacks which occurred in Great Britain was due to one of those serums coming in. I should also like to add that, as far as the veterinary opinion at my disposal goes, this serum is of very doubtful efficiency.

Deputy Jeremiah Ryan referred to the transferred suppliers. There is a certain doubt about the position legally and we did hope to bring in the long-promised Co-operative Bill which would make that right. I do not think that under the present law—that is, the 1928 Creameries Act—the supplier could compel the society to issue shares to him even though he had paid the £3 per cow. We did intend under the Co-operative Bill to make that right, and I hope that Bill will come along in the near future. A statement has been made here so often during the debate that I am afraid people will begin to believe there is a lot in it. It is not true to say that there has been a disastrous fall in the number of cattle, pigs, poultry, or anything else in this country. There has been some decline, admittedly, in the number of poultry, some decline in the number of pigs, no decline—in fact, an increase— in the number of cattle, and an increase in the number of milch cows. The total number of cattle in this country in 1931, which was the year before this Government came into office, was 4,029,000, and now it is 4,056,000, so it has gone up slightly. The total number of milch cows has gone up from 1,222,000 to 1,281,000, so that in both cases there is an increase. I suppose we cannot always say that the figures we get from the census are absolutely correct, but we always assume that the error is about the same, and, on the figures, we must at least accept the fact that there has been no reduction in cattle in the last seven or eight years. If anything, there has been an increase. The total number of pigs in June, 1938, was 958,000. In 1931 it was 1,227,000. That was the top of a cycle. If you take the year 1929 it was 945,000, which was lower than 1938. If you go back to 1928, which is the top of a cycle again, it was 1,182,000. There is no disastrous drop.

Mr. Dillon

Give us the number of sows.

Dr. Ryan

In 1938 it was 1,826. Again going back to 1929, it was 1,855. That is not a very big difference. In 1931 it was 2,149. Taking those graphs, I think you will find there is only a ten per cent variation at any time in the last 13 or 14 years. Largely, they have gone in cycles.

Mr. Dillon

Which the Pigs and Bacon Act was supposed to correct.

Dr. Ryan

I quite admit that we had hopes that the Pigs and Bacon Act would improve things considerably. The total number of poultry— taking turkeys, geese, ducks, and so on, all together—was 19,630,000 last June. In 1931 the figure was 22,782,000. Taking fowl over six months, which would I suppose be regarded as hens and cocks, the number went from 10,400,000 to 9,400,000, so that again there is about a ten per cent. variation there. It is not an alarming fall. It is a regrettable fall, I quite admit, and I wish to goodness the trend had been in the other direction, but we should not allow ourselves to fall into despair as we might be inclined to do if we listened to the speeches from the Deputies opposite, because the Deputies opposite seem to take it for granted that we have absolutely gone out of production, that our cattle are all gone, that our pigs and hens are all gone, and that we cannot get them back again. There is no alarming situation like that at all. There has been a slight fall, as I say in pigs and poultry, and a slight increase in cattle and milch cows.

Mr. Dillon

Does the Minister recall the figures for egg export? I think there was a decrease from £2,300,000 to £800,000.

Dr. Ryan

Well, I have not got all those figures up to date, but there was a big fall in the value of our exports in eggs. That is quite admitted. I do not know whether or not the feeling can be supported by figures, but it is felt at any rate that the consumption of eggs in the country has gone up considerably. Deputy McGilligan—I was very glad indeed to see him—came in and made a speech on the Agricultural Estimate. I knew, of course, that there was going to be something out of the common, and he did vent his feelings on the curers. Well, I think the curers are well able to take care of themselves, and I am not going to defend them, but Deputy McGilligan ought to know that I have no power to charge the curers with any crime. They may have done wrong, but what they did is not a crime in law, and Deputy McGilligan ought to know enough about the law to realise that unless I have the law behind me I cannot charge those men with a crime. There is no use in coming in and making a speech of that kind, asking me whether I am going to charge them with certain crimes. Whatever they may have done, it was hardly fair to use in connection with them the epithets which Deputy McGilligan used under the protection of this House.

However, that is his own look-out, and I suppose it is their look-out too, but there is one thing on which I am definite, and that is that it certainly was not fair to mention the Monaghan Curing Company. I said that the case was sub judice, but Deputy McGilligan said it was not, and went on to refer to it. I find it was sub judice. As a matter of fact, that company were not charged with keeping two sets of books, as Deputy McGilligan said. They were charged with failure and refusal to make certain returns. The judge gave no decision yet, therefore the case is sub judice. I said that the case was sub judice, but Deputy McGilligan told me he was certain it was not. I think he took a very unfair advantage of the privilege of this House in speaking of a case which was sub judice.

Mr. Dillon

Surely the Minister is misinformed?

Dr. Ryan

I am not misinformed.

Mr. Dillon

Surely one prosecution was brought to a conclusion?

Dr. Ryan

It was not brought to a conclusion. I am informed as officially as I can be on that particular question. The case was not brought to a conclusion. I may say that I expect to hear fairly straight and bitter things from Deputy McGilligan when he comes into this House, but I do not expect to hear anything stupid from him. I think it was very stupid of the Deputy to say that we put a levy on home produced butter in order to give cheap butter to the English people. That may have been the result of our scheme, that we gave butter to the English people at a lower price than that paid by the consumers here, but the Deputy knew well that that was not the purpose of the scheme. I do not mind a back bencher of Fine Gael making a stupid remark of that kind. Some of them may not have very much intelligence on these matters, but a Deputy who is rather particular should be careful that he does not make such stupid statements, whatever else he may say, as that we put a levy on home consumed butter in order to give cheaper butter to the English people. That was a most stupid remark. We wanted to give a better price to our home producers. The Government, of course, could have taken the butter that was surplus to home requirements and dumped it into the sea. Instead of that we said: "Let us get what we can for it on the English market or on the German market, and we can pay a bounty on the surplus exported, so as to bring the price up to an economic figure."

Mr. Dillon

Surplus over what?

Dr. Ryan

Surplus over what was consumed at home. It had to be disposed of somehow.

Mr. Dillon

Could you not have given it at a cheaper price to our own people?

Dr. Ryan

There is an old saying that you cannot feed a dog altogether on butter. In the same way, you cannot feed a Christian altogether on butter. Our people could only consume a certain amount of butter, and we exported the remainder and got what we could for it. As I say, we could have dumped it into the sea, but we sold it at a price that was prevalent on the British market and the German market, and we gave, in addition to that, a sum sufficient to make up an economic price for the producer.

Mr. Dillon

Does the Minister realise that a lot of our people are eating margarine?

Dr. Ryan

Very few of them. The consumption of butter has gone up considerably in this country during the last six or seven years, while the consumption of margarine has gone down considerably.

Mr. Brennan

It was not offered to the people at home at that price.

Dr. Ryan

No, it was not. I thought Deputies opposite, on one occasion here when I put it to them, agreed to this scheme. Of course, one can expect them to go back on anything if it suits them. Deputies opposite, Deputy McGilligan amongst them, accepted as a fair proposition that we should make consumers here pay what we regard as a fair price to our producers, and that if we had to export any quantity over and above what we required for home consumption we should try to provide subsidies on that out of the Exchequer. That was accepted as a fair proposition by the opposite side.

Mr. Brennan

That is not any answer to my question.

Dr. Ryan

Except that following out that policy, which was accepted by all sides of the House, the butter was offered to the home consumer at a fair price to the producer.

Mr. Dillon

Plus the levy.

Dr. Ryan

Last year there was no levy.

Mr. Brennan

And the surplus was offered to strangers at a lower price than that at which it would be offered at home.

Dr. Ryan

It was. The Deputy, although he may try to make a political point out of it, knows very well that if we tried to put more butter on the home market at a lower price, everything would be upset and it could not be done. I know that Deputy Brennan will never lose an opportunity of making a political point if he can, but it does not get him anywhere.

Deputy McGovern stated that there were not sufficient bulls in the country. We have more bulls in the country now than there were seven or eight years ago, so that at least Deputy McGovern should be thankful to us that there are more bulls in the country now than there were when Fine Gael was in office.

Mr. McGovern

But you have more cows going wrong.

Dr. Ryan

I say you should not blame us for that. We are pro-bull, if you like, more so than Fine Gael were.

Mr. Brennan

You have worse shorthorn bulls.

Dr. Ryan

I dealt with that point before the Deputy came in, and I am not going to go over it again. The Deputy can read what I said, if he likes. With regard to Roscommon, no matter what shorthorn bulls are sent there, they say that they will not have the shorthorn bull at any price.

Mr. Brennan

We are better judges than you are.

Dr. Ryan

Very few will admit that. I do not even know if the Deputy beside Deputy Brennan will agree with him.

Mr. Dillon

You have got Deputy O'Rourke into sufficient trouble already, and do not add to it. He has enough misery about Boyle Hospital.

Mr. O'Rourke

Look after your own miseries and I shall look after mine. I am all right.

Dr. Ryan

Deputy Mongan said that it would be a good thing if we could get a veterinary surgeon to live in Connemara. I should like to say that Deputy Mongan and others are familiar with the efforts that are being made to establish veterinary dispensaries and to get veterinary surgeons to live in these areas. It is not easy, however, to get that done but every effort will be made to provide these services if we can do it. Deputy Esmonde and other Deputies spoke about sums of £5,000,000 £8,000,000 and £10,000,000 being spent on Defence, adding that we could not spare a few pounds for agriculture. That is hardly putting the case fairly. I suppose it is too much to expect the case to be presented fairly by Deputies on the opposite side. It must be apparent to Deputies, after hearing the Budget to-day, that the amount spent on Defence is nothing like £8,000,000 £5,000,000 or even a £1,000,000 more than was spent last year. The Deputy also said that we could not provide a scheme to give manures in County Wexford. The Chairman of the Wexford County Council is here and he can bear out my statement that the Wexford County Council brought in a scheme to provide manures for farmers in the county. After setting up their organisation and going to the trouble of advertising the scheme, they got only about 20 applications.

Another question raised by Deputy Esmonde was the closing of the Kilcarbery rehandling station for tobacco. Deputy Giles raised a similar question about the closing of the Randalstown station. It was felt we had too many rehandling stations for the amount of tobacco we smoke. These two stations were not the only once that were closed. They were rehandling an extremely small quantity of tobacco, something less than 10,000 lbs each, and it would not be an economic proposition to keep them going. We made up our minds that we would have to reduce the number of rehandling stations if we were going to get this work done in an efficient manner and at an economic price and that is why we reduced the number of stations. Deputies opposite generally may condemn our policy of growing wheat, beet and tobacco but individually they agree with one or other of the items in our programme. Even Deputy Dillon would agree that we should grow onions. Last year he wanted us to grow French beans but he would not have us grow wheat or tobacco. Deputy Giles, on the other hand, wants us to grow tobacco. I think a good deal depends on the constituency which a Deputy represents.

Deputy Childers made a very original speech, a speech with which I certainly agree to a great extent. I might not agree with some of the views he put forward but to a great extent I agree that some of the things he mentioned, particularly regarding deposits in banks, loans to farmers from banks, and the incidence of taxation in case of derating should be all re-examined and checked up. Deputy Fagan made a typical sort of speech. He said that the subsidy on manures was no use, because even with the subsidy of 10/-, the farmer could not pay the other £3 for a ton of manure. But when he got away from that he advocated a subsidy for agricultural implements. Therefore, the farmer who could not buy a ton of manure because he had no money, could buy implements all right if he got a small subsidy, according to Deputy Fagan. Deputy Flynn raised a question as to the restocking of the mountainy areas in Kerry with sheep. I answered that question before, and I stated that the number of sheep in Kerry had not gone down. He mentioned a scheme in Wicklow. That scheme I am afraid was practically not availed of at all. The Agricultural Credit Corporation brought in a scheme for the restocking of the mountainy areas in County Wicklow with sheep and it was scarcely availed of at all. However, the Kerry position is being looked into to see, first of all, if it is as Deputy Flynn suggests, and, secondly, if anything can be done.

Deputy Belton stated that we killed 500,000 calves and that if they were alive to-day that they would be worth £15 or £20 each. Of course, if some of them were alive to-day I do not know what they would be like. There has been so much talk about this scheme that I am afraid I shall have to go back on it again, although I have dealt with it often. The position was that at one time the British quota for cattle was a bit too low for the number of cattle we had and we had to take certain measures. One of them was to kill a certain number of cattle and distribute the meat to those who were receiving unemployment assistance and home assistance. Secondly, I said to the Dáil at the time that if we could get the people here to consume veal, as they do in other countries, we would not have the same trouble. I instanced France and Germany, where they are self-sufficient in respect of butter—they have almost sufficient butter anyway for their own use—yet, they have not too many cattle. By the consumption of veal they have not any problem about exporting cattle. I said that if we could get a certain amount of veal consumed here instead of beef it would settle the balance and prevent a surplus of cattle.

I said at that time that the only way I could think of inducing butchers to buy calves and sell veal at a price at which the consumers would buy it was to give a bounty on calf skins. There is nothing immoral in that. I was told by Opposition Deputies that it was unnatural and immoral. I asked the theologians on the other side was it a sin to kill a year-old calf, and they said no. Then I asked them was it a sin to kill a nine-months-old calf, and they said no. I could not get them to draw the line where the sin commenced; but they said it was a sin to kill a calf. I do not know whether they have decided since where the sin commences.

Mr. Keating

Is it a sin to kill a day-old calf?

Dr. Ryan

That is what I want to know.

Mr. Keating

It is a mortal sin. It is not fit for human food.

Dr. Ryan

It is in some places. In Macroom they kill them at a day old and eat them. I was often told that anyway. I say that the scheme we brought into operation was, first of all, a scheme to induce butchers to buy calves for veal by saying: "We will give you 10/- for every calf you buy and sell for veal."

Mr. Keating

If the skin weighed so much. Of course the calf should be killed young.

Dr. Ryan

Quite right. It was not done in that way. The farmers killed the calves—I was told they fed them to hounds, and sometimes buried them —and sold the skins. That was not my fault. In any case, as I have said often before, I did not compel anyone to kill a calf.

Mr. Keating

You induced them.

Dr. Ryan

I gave an inducement to people to consume veal and they did not accept the inducement.

Mr. Keating

And the cattle industry was killed.

Dr. Ryan

If Deputy Keating will listen to me——

Mr. Keating

I am listening with patience.

Dr. Ryan

I never spoke to Deputy Keating about anything yet that I did not convince him and I think I will convince him now. The total number of calves in which the bounty was paid was 500,000. The last year the scheme was in operation we paid on 120,000 skins, and no Deputy could say that there was a single calf killed—they were all natural deaths. There were not so many calves killed at all under the scheme. If the 120,000 calves which died a natural death in 1936 were alive now they would be worth £15 or £20; but there was always a natural mortality.

Deputy Belton made another interesting observation. He said, "If you derate agricultural land, you will benefit the small farmers as well as the big farmers." He pointed out that I said at one time that by derating agricultural land you would not confer any benefit on the small farmers, but in fact would cause a loss to them. The reason I said that was that if a small farmer is paying £1 per year in rates and if agricultural land was derated and the money was raised by taxation on sugar, which was suggested by Fine Gael, the increased tax on the amount of sugar used by that man and his family would cost him more than he would gain by derating. Deputy Belton said, "That is all right, but if the small farmer has a beast to sell, the big farmer, because his land is derated, will pay him more for it." Is not that false?

Mr. Brennan

No. It could be reasoned.

Dr. Ryan

It could be reasoned by Fine Gael, but I do not know that it could be reasoned by anyone else. The Fine Gael Party have always held, and it is one thing on which I agree with them, that the price you get for the surplus exported will settle the price all round. Therefore, if you have a yearling to sell and the export price is £11, it will be exported unless a farmer at home gives you at least £11 for it. The export price therefore will rule the price of cattle whether you derate agricultural land or not. When Deputy Belton says that the large farmer will give more for a beast to the small farmer if agricultural land is derated, is he making out that the large farmer——

Mr. Gorey

Perhaps the Minister is a real fool.

Dr. Ryan

I did not hear Deputy Gorey's remark.

Mr. Brennan

The Minister is leaving out a very important fact.

Mr. Gorey

Perhaps 80 or 90 per cent. of them must be sold in the country to be made fit for export.

Dr. Ryan

I was so complimentary to Deputy Gorey when I was talking about him that if he had been here then he would never say a word about me again.

Mr. Gorey

I am not saying anything. But why do you not advert to all the facts?

Dr. Ryan

Anyway Deputy Belton has a solution for the problem of wheat growing. He says that wheat growing is all wrong, and that he is going to solve it. What is his solution? To make the lecturer in plant breeding a professor? How would that make any difference? You would have the same man all the time. If he were made a professor instead of a lecturer, Deputy Belton says everything would be solved and wheat growing would be a success, which it is not at present. I may be wronging the Deputy, because he may have intended to go on and say something else, but he did not. As a matter of fact, I told Deputy Belton before that the first time I ever heard him speak I thought he was a great man. That was at a Fianna Fáil Convention in the Rotunda in 1926. Deputy Belton made a speech there on wheat growing which was one of the finest productions I heard from any man. It was a most convincing speech.

Mr. Gorey

That is the time you got the economic policy.

Dr. Ryan

It was a fine speech on wheat growing, and I was convinced by it like everybody else. It is extraordinary how the Deputy has turned against wheat growing since he want back to Fine Gael. Deputy Belton told me—and I think Deputy Brennan agrees with him—that I should be ashamed to say that we could import food at a cheaper price than the price at which we could afford to produce it here at home. That was in connection with beef from the Argentine, and wheat, and so on; and I said that that applies to everything else. Deputy Belton then told me that I should be ashamed to say that. I think that everybody knows that we could bring in Argentine beef here at a much cheaper cost than our own.

Mr. Hughes

Not stores.

Dr. Ryan

The important thing is that you must produce the calves. Of course, we could bring in beef from the Argentine, mutton and lamb from New Zealand, and eggs from China, much cheaper than we could afford to produce them here. I think everybody will admit that. As a matter of fact, we have a sixpenny tariff on the import of lambs at the moment, but notwithstanding that tariff, these lambs sometimes come in from New Zealand. Supposing you were to take that tariff off, where would you be with regard to the production of your own farmers? We could bring in eggs from China and from other countries at much cheaper rates than we can produce them here. I think everybody knows that, but Deputy Belton says that I should be ashamed to say it. Later on, of course, Deputy Belton said that he approved of the increased wages and the better prices for foodstuffs, but how does he propose to arrange that these good prices and good wages should be given if we are to allow everything to come in from other countries free of duty? I think that Deputy Belton will have to revise that speech of his. He says that he disapproves entirely of the more extensive growing of wheat. Well, all I can say is that it is a pity that we cannot refer him to the speech he made in the Rotunda in 1926.

General MacEoin

It could have been done last night, but I suppose it would not be in order.

Dr. Ryan

Deputy MacEoin mentioned the case of the fármers whose cattle had been seized for the non-payment of rent and rates, and who got less than the value of their stock, and he wants to know if we could review that position. Well, I shall take that for what it is worth, but I do not know what the Deputy thinks we could do with regard to that matter. How could we possibly go back, even if we were disposed to do so, to the question of the value of the cattle seized at that time?

General MacEoin

Surely the Minister has the returns?

Dr. Ryan

I do not think so.

General MacEoin

Yes, I think the Minister has; or at least, the Minister for Justice could give him the particulars with regard to every one of these cases. There were some cases where a beast that was worth £10 was bought for £1.

Dr. Ryan

Sometimes they got a good price.

General MacEoin

Could the Minister cite any of these cases?

Mr. Gorey

The best person to whom to go for these returns would be "Mr. Morgan," and he is still operating.

Dr. Ryan

Well, of course, I did not go into the report of the Prices Commission very fully here, because, as I said, a Bill will be coming before the Dáil which in my opinion, will attempt to make things right, and I thought that it would be better to defer discussion on the report of the Prices Commission until that Bill comes along. As far as I am concerned in the drafting of that Bill, my object is to see that no undue profits will be taken by the curers in future. Deputy Coburn said that the cattle dealers in this country were a very decent lot of people, and I myself always thought so, although Deputies on the other side of the House did not seem to think so. At any rate, Deputy Coburn said that they had played the game during the economic war and gave the best price that they could give. Now, when I was giving out licences for the export of cattle during the economic war, I used to point out that the giving of these licences was meant to be a benefit to the farmers of this country, but I was always told by Deputies on the opposite benches that the farmers did not get that benefit. Well, if the dealers are decent men, why did not the farmer get the benefit? If the dealers were such decent men, the whole of that benefit should have been passed to the producers, less, of course, whatever would be a fair amount of profit for the dealers themselves.

Mr. Hughes

Does the Minister believe honestly that that was done?

Dr. Ryan

Yes, I believe it was. I used to say, before there was any question of a bounty or anything else of that kind, that the cattle dealers went out and competed with other buyers and paid to the farmers what they could afford to pay, leaving them a sufficient profit for themselves. Why, then, should there be any difference just because they got 30/- extra? Why do Deputies say that these men put that money in their pockets, and, assuming that they did put it in their pockets, why did they not do that before? Of course, I admit that when quota restrictions came in, competition was killed to a large extent, but Deputy Coburn says that when it came to the question of giving out export licences we gave them to the greatest rogues in the country. Well, all I can say is that we gave the licences to the same people who had always been doing business in that way, and whom Deputy Coburn describes as a very decent body of people. As a matter of fact, we did give these licences to the producers, and I want Deputy Coburn to know that. I think, as a matter of fact, that this matter of licences first arrived on the 27th December, 1933. It was a black day for me, at any rate.

Mr. Brennan

Yes, that is true.

Dr. Ryan

Yes, and I must say that I did not get much help from the opposite benches in that connection. However, at that time, I called the cattle traders together, and they all came, or at least I had a roomful of them. There were about 30 of them present, and it seemed to me that they were very hopeful men. I asked them to send in their returns for the previous years, and told them that I would put an advertisement in the papers. I told them that the distribution of the licences would be on the basis of the numbers of cattle they had exported in the years 1932 or 1933—the previous years. Now, Deputy Coburn has described these people as being the most decent fellows in the country, but he then said that the people who got the licences were all rogues, but the people who got the licences were the very same body of men.

Mr. Coburn

There were men in the trade at that time who were never in it before—due to the Minister's policy —and there were men who got licences at that time who were never in that trade, and the Minister knows that.

Dr. Ryan

The number of people who would have got licences who had not been in the trade before would be less than about .05, and that was because they were supporters of the Government policy that was being carried out.

Deputies

Hear, hear!

Mr. Coburn

Now we are talking.

Dr. Ryan

I say that there were certain patriotic men who bought cattle at that time.

Mr. Coburn

Well, then, I was right when I referred to the camp followers of Fianna Fáil.

Dr. Ryan

I am referring to patriotic people who bought cattle at that time in order to try to counteract the Blueshirt conspiracy.

Mr. Gorey

Those fellows whom you supplied never had bought a beast.

Dr. Ryan

That is not true. I say that, as far as about 99.5 per cent. of the licences were concerned, they were given absolutely on the same proportion to the same people as on the previous year.

Mr. Coburn

Would the Minister relate that to the quota period?

Dr. Ryan

That is the period I am referring to. Surely, the Deputy must know that there were no licences except during that period.

Mr. Coburn

Were there not two periods?

Dr. Ryan

Yes.

Mr. Coburn

At any rate, it is a well-known fact that farmers met strangers at fairs during that period whom they had never seen before. That is a well-known fact.

Dr. Ryan

That may be.

Mr. Coburn

They met people that they had never seen before, and yet these people had licences in their pockets.

Dr. Ryan

The licences were given out according to the method I have described. If the Deputy will put down a question I shall be delighted to answer it, as to how many licences were given out to the trade in the ordinary way each year and also, as I have said, to the patriotic group of men who bought cattle against the Blueshirt conspiracy.

Mr. Coburn

Is it the Minister's opinion that there was a ring against the cattle dealers during that period? Is that his opinion?

Dr. Ryan

During the period when I was giving out these licences to the cattle exporters, everybody on the opposite benches told me that these men were putting the money into their own pockets. On the one hand, Deputy Coburn describes the cattle exporters as a very decent body of men, and then he tells us that we gave the licences to the greatest rogues in the country. I do not know how you would describe that.

Mr. Coburn

You started the economic war.

Dr. Ryan

Yes, and we ended it.

Mr. Brennan

You started it, at any rate.

Dr. Ryan

Yes, we had the courage to start it, and we knew that we would win it also.

Mr. Gorey

You started it, and somebody else fought it and paid for it.

An Leas - Cheann Comhairle

We must have no more interruptions. The Minister must be allowed to conclude.

Mr. Gorey

When he asks questions he must expect a reply.

Dr. Ryan

I am the most patient man in Ireland. I sat here for four days and never interrupted anybody.

Mr. Brennan

That is true. The Minister is entitled to be heard.

Dr. Ryan

I was asked by Deputy Browne why our eggs are getting less than Northern Ireland eggs. He says our eggs are as good. There is no doubt about their being as good, and we hope to make them better, but the reason is that the Northern Ireland eggs are not stamped while ours are, with the result that the British consumer believes, when he gets an unstamped egg, that he is getting a fresh egg from the farmer. I agree with Deputy Browne that if we carry out the provisions of the Eggs Act strictly, and improve the quality of our eggs, the stamp may be an addition to us later on, because the consumer may come to realise that the stamped egg is better than the unstamped egg and we may get a better price. As a matter of fact, I think I can say definitely that we are coming nearer to the Northern Ireland price than we have been, so that it is perhaps possible that the consumers on the other side are beginning to realise that our eggs are very good.

Deputy Linehan asked if it is a fact that we had to import bacon to make up a deficiency here. No, that is not exactly true. Under the British Agreement, we settled with regard to quotas. Last year, so far as I remember, we got a bacon quota for export to Great Britain of 600,000 cwts., and we gave them a quota of something like 2,400 cwts. It is 3,000 cwts. this year. It may look rather foolish that we should be sending bacon to Great Britain and that they should be sending bacon to us, but there are traders on the other side who say they have a connection here for a certain class of bacon, and, seeing that we were getting a quota of 600,000 cwts. from them, we could not refuse them something in return.

Mr. Gorey

Where is it being sold?

Dr. Ryan

The system is exactly the same on both sides. The British send us quota certificates for the month and we distribute them to the curers. We send them certificates for bacon coming in here. We do not inquire to whom they give them, but I understand that about half the bacon goes to the Border counties and the other half to Dublin. I was asked also if the bacon that came in was cheaper than the bacon here. I believe it was. It is true that our bacon is getting less on the British market than on the home market. The British bacon coming in here, sold at home, was getting about 88/- or 90/-, and it was sold here at the same price, so that it would be so much cheaper. Deputy Linehan also said that beet was not a suitable crop for North Cork.

Mr. Linehan

I said in portion of North Cork.

Dr. Ryan

In any case, the Deputy said it was difficult to get labour. That is rather unfortunate, if it is true, because we have been hearing for the last three or four days that the farmer and the labourer in this country are quite willing to work.

Mr. Linehan

I did not say it was hard to get labour for this work, but that there was a decided objection on the part of labourers to work at the wages they were getting.

Dr. Ryan

It is hard to get labourers to work at the wage. It is a pity, if that is so. That is all I have to say on it.

Mr. Linehan

And it is hard to blame them.

Dr. Ryan

Another point raised was the question of the price paid by the Dairy Disposals Company in their creamery, and as to its being lower than that of the surrounding co-operatives. The policy adopted by the Dairy Disposals Company from the beginning is not to give what would be regarded as a remunerative price, following out their own accounts, but that which the surrounding creameries were paying, if they could afford it, to pay more because they might take the milk from the surrounding co-operatives, and they would object very strongly. They do try to pay the same price. I have heard from time to time that they were paying too high a price and, at other times, too low a price, but they have tried, as far as possible, to pay the same. There may be a difficulty where they are surrounded by three co-operatives, because these three may not be paying the same price, so that it would be difficult for them to fix a price. I did not hear the suggestion as to education of farmers through the radio, but sometimes announcements are made.

Mr. Linehan

What I said was that one of the Minister's Deputies suggested it.

Dr. Ryan

I did suggest that we might do something through the schools, and we have more or less decided on a scheme of getting our leaflets distributed through the schools. I do not know whether it will be a success or not. We have tried to get school-children to bring out a list of the leaflets we have to their parents, and to ask them if there are any subjects upon which they would like a leaflet, and, if so, the teacher would help the pupil to write a letter to the Secretary of the Department, asking that that leaflet be sent to his father or brother.

Mr. Brennan

Might I put a question to the Minister? The reason I want to ask it is that I take it that the Minister was speaking from conviction, and I think it right to ask him this question with regard to derating. He referred to derating and said what a foolish thing it was for people to think that if a large farmer got derating and, consequently, had not to pay a very large sum in rates, he would be able to pay a bigger price for live stock to the small farmer. He described that as ridiculous and said that the Opposition held that the export price ruled.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is a very long question.

Mr. Brennan

This is the question: Does the Minister not realise that if a farmer who buys in for six months' or 12 months' feeding, has his overhead charges reduced, he must take that fact into consideration in paying his price and, if his rates are remitted, he will be able to pay a better price?

Dr. Ryan

The point is that I think it only reasonable to assume that the farmer will not pay more for cattle than he must pay.

Mr. Brennan

But he is in competition with everybody else.

Dr. Ryan

He will not pay more than he must pay.

Mr. Brennan

Agreed; but he is in competition.

Question put: That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.

The Committee divided: Tá, 50; Níl, 58.

Tá

• Belton, Patrick.
• Bennett, George C.
• Benson, Ernest E.
• Brodrick, Seán.
• Browne, Patrick.
• Burke, Patrick.
• Coburn, James.
• Cole, John J.
• Cogan, Patrick.
• Corish, Richard.
• Cosgrave, William T.
• Costello, John A.
• Curran, Richard.
• Daly, Patrick.
• Dillon, James M.
• Dockrell, Henry M.
• Doyle, Peadar S.
• Esmonde, John L.
• Everett, James.
• Fagan, Charles.
• Giles, Patrick.
• Gorey, Denis J.
• Hickey, James.
• Hughes, James.
• Hurley, Jeremiah.
• Brasier, Brooke.
• Brennan, Michael.
• Broderick, William J.
• Keating, John.
• Keyes, Michael.
• Linehan, Timothy.
• MacEoin, Seán.
• McFadden, Michael Og.
• McGovern, Patrick.
• McMenamin, Daniel.
• Mongan, Joseph W.
• Morrissey, Daniel.
• Mulcahy, Richard.
• Murphy, Timothy J.
• Nally, Martin.
• O'Donovan, Timothy J.
• O'Higgins, Thomas F.
• O'Neill, Eamonn.
• O'Sullivan, John M.
• Pattison, James P.
• Redmond, Bridget M.
• Reidy, James.
• Reynolds, Mary.
• Rogers, Patrick J.
• Ryan, Jeremiah.

Níl

• Aiken, Frank.
• Allen, Denis.
• Bartley, Gerald.
• Beegan, Patrick.
• Boland, Gerald.
• Bourke, Dan.
• Brady, Brain.
• Brady, Seán.
• Breathnach, Cormac.
• Breen, Daniel.
• Breslin, Cormac.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Carty, Frank.
• Childers, Erskine H.
• Cooney, Eamonn.
• Corry, Martin J.
• Crowley, Tadhg.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• De Valera, Eamon.
• Flynn, John.
• Fogarty, Andrew.
• Friel, John.
• Fuller, Stephen.
• Corry, Patrick J.
• Harris, Thomas.
• Hogan, Daniel.
• Humphreys, Francis.
• Kelly, James P.
• Kelly, Thomas.
• Killilea, Mark.
• Kissane, Eamon.
• Little, Patrick J.
• Loughman, Francis.
• Lynch, James B.
• McDevitt, Henry A.
• Maguire, Ben.
• Meaney, Cornelius.
• Moore, Séamus.
• Moran, Michael.
• Morrissey, Michael.
• Mullen, Thomas.
• Munnelly, John.
• O Briain, Donnchadh.
• O'Grady, Seán.
• O'Loghlen, Peter J.
• O'Reilly, Matthew.
• O'Rourke, Daniel.
• O'Sullivan, Ted.
• Rice, Brigid M.
• Ryan, James.
• Ryan, Robert.
• Sheridan, Michael.
• Smith, Patrick.
• Traynor, Oscar.
• Victory, James.
• Walsh, Laurence J.
• Walsh, Richard.
• Ward, Conn.

Tellers:—Tá: Deputies Doyle and Bennett: Níl: Deputies Little and Smith.

Question declared lost.

Main question put and agreed to.