In so far as this Vote is concerned, the only turf that is involved is that which is produced for the national turf supply. I cannot speak with any authority on the arrangements that may be made by the or with the local authorities in respect of turf produced for other purposes. I think that, in considering the total cost of turf which is available to Fuel Importers, Limited, Deputies should bear in mind that some substantial part of it is due to development works. That applies also in respect of the turf produced by the Turf Development Board, to which reference was made during the discussion upon the main Estimate. A large part of the expenditure incurred by the Turf Development Board, just the same as with a large part of the expenditure incurred by the county surveyors, was on development operations of one kind or another—the construction of roads, the draining of bogs, the removal of the tops of the bogs, and other activities of that kind which will not have to be done twice, and, in so far as turf production is continued on the bogs which have been so developed, the future costs on that account should be lower. The costs may rise for some other reason, but the same work will not have to be done all over again.
The average cost of all the turf obtained by Fuel Importers, Limited, either from county surveyors or private producers, on rail or loaded on lorries or barges in 1941-42 was 37/9 per ton. The freight upon that turf to a point of discharge which was either a fuel merchant's yard or a turf dump was 17/10 on the average. The cost, therefore, of a ton of turf at the discharge point was 55/7 per ton. The turf could be sold at that point at that price. I tried to explain to the House in the course of a previous discussion that a large part of the additional cost of the turf in the non-turf areas is due to the fact that it has to be stored. It is not stored as it comes in. Turf can only be won and transported during a limited season of the year and it is required for use in another season. There must, therefore, be a process of storing, and that process is a particularly costly one, due, amongst other reasons, to the loss of weight which occurs in storing.
The actual average cost of the turf delivered in Dublin is not 87/6, or any such figure, but 55/7. That includes all the turf produced by all the county surveyors, as well as the turf bought from private producers. Some of it had to be transported, as Deputies are aware, over very long distances. Now, consider the costs that arise in the dump. There are a number of expenses—the handling of the turf, bringing it from the railhead to the area where the dump is, ricking it in the dump, the payment of rents, the making and the repair of roads, the watching of the turf, the maintenance of the clamps, the segregation of unsaleable turf and the re-ricking of rejected turf, the interest paid to banks upon the capital involved in that storing of turf, as well as overhead expenses. These charges come to a total of 14/1.2d. in respect of the turf in the dumps.
As I explained, not all the turf goes into the dumps, because some is sold direct to the merchants and is delivered direct to the merchants' yards. Spread over all the turf handled by Fuel Importers, Limited, these charges arising in respect of the turf in the dumps average 6/1. I mentioned that we had to face a considerable loss of weight through shrinkage. Experience has suggested that we must assume a loss of 20 per cent. in weight through shrinkage in the dumps and, in relation to the turf actually placed in the dumps, that shrinkage loss must be taken into account at 17/5. Spread over all the turf handled by Fuel Importers, Limited, the cost arising from shrinkage in the dumps is 7/6.
There are then certain selling expenses which have to be incurred. These average 10d. over all the turf handled by Fuel Importers, Limited. The total of these dump charges, spread over all the turf handled by Fuel Importers, Limited, averages 14/5. The 14/5 representing the dump cost, and the 55/7 representing the cost of the turf delivered in Dublin, give a total of 70/-. That is the final cost of the turf available for sale to merchants and bellmen. Since, however, the Government have decided that turf shall be sold at 64/- per ton, quite clearly Fuel Importers, Limited, cannot sell at 70/-, or even at 64/-, to merchants or bellmen. They must sell to merchants and bellmen at a price which will enable merchants and bellmen to recover the costs of collecting the turf from the dumps and delivering it to their customers. That cost varies from district to district. In the case of the Dublin bellmen, it amounts to 16/- per ton.
It is clear, therefore, that the figure we must take into our account is the actual amount which Fuel Importers, Limited get for the turf. They got 47/5 per ton up to the end of 1942, and 46/- since for the turf sold by them to merchants and bellmen. The average amount realised by Fuel Importers, Limited, from merchants and bellmen for the turf sold by them since the commencement of their operations is 46/7. The estimated loss, therefore, is 23/5. Now, 210,036 tons were sold up to the end of last year. Another 293,868 tons, it is estimated, will be sold up to the end of the present year. The total sales, therefore, actual and estimated, amount to 503,904 tons. At the rate of 23/5 per ton the loss upon that total quantity of turf will amount to £589,989. Adding the provision for possible additional sales during the coming twelve months, on the assumption that the demand for turf will be greater in the present year than it was in the past—£70,250—the total of the subsidy required in respect of the turf to be retailed at 64/- per ton is £660,239. The total amount of the original and of the Supplementary Estimates is £660,000. I think that gives the House all the information it requires to enable it to understand how this amount is calculated, and for what purpose it will be required.