On the question that the House do now adjourn until 10.30 to-morrow, Deputy Linehan wishes to raise matters arising out of a Private Notice Question addressed to the Minister for Agriculture to-day.
Adjournment Debate. - Minimum Prices for Crops.
The substance of this question really is that Deputy Bennett, who signed the original motion that gave rise to this question, and I are asking that the Minister should now fix minimum prices for crops that farmers will produce in the coming harvest. Firstly, I want to say that, in the early part of the proceedings when this question was first raised, some Deputies in the House apparently got it into their heads that what Deputy Bennett and I were anxious to secure were fixed prices and they protested, even at that time, against the fixing of any prices and intimated that they expected that oats, to take one crop, would reach a very high price by the end of this year. I want to make it clear that we are not asking for fixed prices.
You have no right to ask for them.
Neither am I concerned with the position of the man who is able to hold his crops for a sufficient time to enable him to take advantage of a rising market. I am, however, very much concerned with the position of the man who has to dispose, say, of his oats crop, as soon as he threshes it and who last year had to dispose of it at what was practically a ruinous price. He was driven into the position of having to buy the very same oats later on in the year at treble or quadruple the price. Actually, for certain types of farm produce the Minister has already fixed prices. In the present situation when the Government and the Minister are asking for greater production, surely it is not unreasonable to ask the Minister that he should now say that in respect of all categories of farm produce where it is possible to do so, he will fix a minimum price to be paid for that produce after next harvest so that, no matter what crop a farmer produces, he will be able to know beforehand that he will be in a position to dispose of it at a certain price. If, as some Deputies have suggested, there is the possibility of a great rise in prices in respect of some products, there is no reason why that man, if he were in a position to do it, could not hold the crop until later on in the year and take advantage of that rise in prices. I want, however, to make it clear to the Minister that there are hundreds of other farmers who have to get rid of their crops in harvest time because they want the money immediately. That is the reason I suggest that the Minister should now fix minimum prices and indicate to these farmers what they may expect for their crops.
The minimum is always the maximum.
I am not concerned with whether the minimum is the maximum. What I am concerned with is that if a man is producing a crop which his economic circumstances may compel him to cash immediately after next harvest, he will not be driven into the position of having to take a price which is uneconomic and scandalously low, in other words, that he will have the assurance that he will get a proper price for his crop. Everybody may not be in the happy position of Deputy Corry. If Deputy Corry has, say, 50 acres of oats, I assume he is in a position which will allow him to keep those oats until after Christmas when he can take advantage of a rising market, but as far as I am concerned I certainly do not want to see the small farmers who have to cash their crops immediately, and sometimes have to contract for the sale of them before they are threshed, being put into the position that people of whom Deputy Corry is loud in his praise occasionally will come along and buy their oats and other crops in September, selling them back to them in various forms and in their original form in February and March. I respectfully ask the Minister, in regard to the small farmers of this country, who are not in a position to retain their crops, who are not in a position to store their crops or to take advantage of rising markets, but who have to cash their crops or even contract for the sale of them before the threshing, to tell them here and now with regard to cereals, and I suggest as well with regard to potatoes, that they will get a definite minimum price for them at that time. If there is a chance of the price increasing afterwards they will get their chance the same as anyone else, but they should not be left in the position of having to sell their crops at a ruinous price. I do urge on the Minister that a minimum price should be fixed.
One of the reasons why we are asking for an immediate answer from the Minister on this matter is that whatever value the motion may have as an inducement to farmers to put in the maximum amount of crops, particularly cereals, in the remaining few weeks of spring, would have been lost when the motion was eventually reached. It was for that reason that Deputy Linehan thought it fit to raise the question to-night. The Minister himself has admitted the truth of the charges which I repeatedly made in this House that in the autumn of 1939 and 1940 the farmers sold their oats and perhaps other cereals but certainly their oats at a price which permitted the purchasers shortly afterwards to get 100 per cent. profit, and in many cases more. The Minister has admitted that that is a fact. I repeatedly asked the Minister last year to make arrangements before the harvest so that what happened the year before would not happen that year. It did. The farmers are a timorous people. I have no doubt that most of them are trying to do their duty; some of them may be affected by the fear that what happened to others last year will happen to them this year—that after they took the pains to grow a crop the bulk of the profit would be taken by the merchants who purchased it from them. We are not asking anything that will encroach upon the Exchequer; we are not asking anything that we believe will affect the ordinary consumer, in fact we rather believe it will help him. If a fair minimum price is fixed for the crops which the farmer grows it will not cost the Exchequer anything, it will help the farmer, and it will put the consumer and the purchaser generally in the position that they will know what was paid for the crop and will be able to determine what profit the merchant gets on any crop which he purchased. That will, to a great extent, prevent profiteering. I do not want to repeat arguments which were put forward in this House on many occasions. All we ask is that the Minister would now make a declaration that the farmers will get a minimum price for their crops this year. If he cannot state the exact figure at the moment, if he cannot determine what is a fair minimum price to offer, we would certainly ask him to make a statement now telling the farmers generally that what happened in 1939 and 1940, when perforce they sold their crops at a ridiculously low price, will not be allowed to occur again.
We will fix our own price next year.
What should the minimum price be?
I should not like to agree exactly with what Deputy Bennett has said, that I admitted that the prices which the farmers got for their oats in the harvests of 1939 and 1940 were afterwards doubled by the merchants. I think I went very fully into that on previous occasions. There is not very much time to go into it now, but I am sure we will go into it again on another occasion. Deputy Bennett also said that before last harvest I was asked several times from his side of the House to fix the price. I am not going to take all the blame for what occurred before last harvest. I think if Deputies will look up the official debates they will see that the general tone of the debate from the other side of the House was that there was a surplus of oats and barley, that it was going to be dumped at a very low price, and that the farmers were not going to get very much for it. On every single occasion when that matter came up I appealed to Deputies not to stampede the farmers into throwing their grain on the market; that in a very short time there would be an improved price for that grain, and in fact that if the farmers held out they would get a very good price for what they had. I do not say at all that every farmer could hold out, but I do say I appealed to farmers as far as they could to hold their grain last harvest, and if those who could hold it had held it the price would have been quite different. However, the prices which some people got were poor. The prices improved all through the year, and of course the prices to the consumer now are out of all proportion. In considering the next harvest, and what is going to be done after next harvest, we must have regard to where that grain will go to. I am talking now about barley and oats. In the case of wheat there is a price fixed, because it is for human consumption, and we know what we can fix in that case.
In the case of beet, the same thing applies. In the case of flax, it is going into fabrics, and it is quite easy to determine what the price should be. But in the case of barley and oats, if there is a surplus, then a certain part of it will have to go back to the farmers themselves for consumption by their own families. A certain portion of the barley and oats will possibly be required for bread. If all the surplus were required for bread, we could now fix the price. A certain part of the barley will be required for the making of beer and spirits. We could fix the price for that, because that again is for human consumption. A certain part of the oats will go for oatmeal, and can be dealt with, but, if the acreage under oats and barley is as good as we expect, and if the harvest turns out in any way abundantly, there will be a certain surplus of oats and barley which will go to the merchant, from the merchant to the maize miller, and from the maize miller back to the farmer for feeding pigs and poultry. For that reason I do not see how we can fix a price for oats and barley.
There will be very little pigs and poultry.
There will be some. We do not know what the market is going to be like at that stage for bacon, pigs, poultry and so on. That is why it is impossible now to say what the price for oats and barley should be, but if Deputies think it any use I can give what my personal opinion or reaction is to this whole matter. I think we should be able to work out a scheme of fixing a price for oats and barley whoever they may go to, whether they go for brewing or for distilling or for flour or to the oatmeal miller or eventually back to the farmer; we should fix the price that the producer would get, that price varying from say September to the following March, giving something to the farmer who holds his grain over; we should then fix the price that the merchant would get from the miller or from the brewer, and we should go further than that and fix the price that the maize miller would charge to the farmer who is going to buy that ground oats or ground barley for consumption.
If we can do that, it is fairly obvious that a minimum price is not going to be enough; there must be a fixed price. If we are going to have a perfect scheme like that, there must be a fixed price right through, the fixed price being laid down for every person and varying from month to month or from two months to two months. That is what I am aiming at and I think it can be done. If we can do that, it will be a great advantage to farmers, whether they are growers or consumers.
A fixed price would be totally against the farmers. Leave the price of oats alone.
Deputy Fagan is quite satisfied with what happened in the last two or three years.
I am not. Anyone with commonsense knows that, as there may not be enough wheat in the country, the oats and barley will be required for human consumption.
The Deputy wants us to leave the farmer alone. I do not know what opinion Deputy Fagan may have on the oats or barley question; I do not know what his idea is—whether we should leave the farmer to take his chance.
If you leave the farmer alone I guarantee that he will get a good price for his oats.
The Deputy suggests that we should not interfere at all. On the other hand, Deputy Corry has some secret weapon down in Cork. He is going to deal with the oats and barley question all on his own.
I am, and I will deal with the merchants, too.
Where are farmers to get bran or pollard? There will be no bran or pollard because of the milling regulations.
I think that we should fix the price right through and I am hopeful that a scheme of that kind can be evolved by the Department concerned. When such a scheme is evolved, if there is an order necessary to put it into operation, that order will come before the Dáil and then we can hear the views of Deputy Fagan, Deputy Corry and any others who are interested.
As regards the fixing of prices, the Minister stated that in due course he will bring that matter before the Dáil. Is the Minister prepared to say that, as far as he possibly can, he will prevent the farmers being mulcted in the manner in which they were mulcted in the last two years?
The Dáil adjourned at 10.55 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Friday, 4th April.