Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 27 Nov 1946

Vol. 103 No. 11

Committee on Finance. - Vote 29—Agriculture.

I move:—

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £10 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1947, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Agriculture, and of certain Services administered by that Office, including sundry grants-in-aid.

There are three or four headings in this Estimate with which I might deal. The first is sub-head E (2)—veterinary research—for which we are asking £15,000. That sub-head is also divided into parts. When introducing the Estimates for my Department for the year 1945-46, I mentioned that it was the intention to make provision for veterinary research on an adequate scale and a sum of £7,000 was included in that year's Estimate for the purchase of a suitable farm on which a veterinary research institute of adequate size could be established. No lands suitable for the purpose became available in that year, but early in the present financial year an opportunity arose of acquiring a very suitable farm which has been purchased by my Department at a cost of £22,000. This farm, which is known as Brownsbarn, Clondalkin, is 7½ miles from Dublin on the main Naas Road and comprises some 412 acres of land of good average quality, with little or no waste, and suitable both for tillage and grazing purposes. Owing to existing lettings and leases, the effective area available for the purposes of veterinary research is about 380 acres. It will be necessary to erect special buildings as a research institute, the plans for which are being prepared, but the existing farm buildings, with some alterations, repairs and additions will be utilised and are of considerable value.

As a sum of £12,000 was provided in the Vote for the current financial year, a further sum of £10,000 is now necessary for the completion of the purchase of the farm, of which possession will be taken at the end of the present month, November, 1946. A further £5,000 will be required to purchase implements for the ordinary working of the farm, to take over at a valuation existing fodder crops on the farm, to purchase live stock, seeds, etc., and to pay the wages of the farm manager and workmen up to the end of the financial year.

Why are you not asking for the £12,000 now?

We are asking for £15,000 with the £12,000.

I thought it was £10 as set out on the Estimate? You got £12,000 already?

Yes. Immediate use will be made of these lands, in conjunction with the present research laboratory at Thorndale, Drumcondra, in extending immunisation experiments on contagious bovine abortion which are at present in progress and also to initiate new work which could not previously be undertaken owing to limitations of pasturage and housing accommodation. This will include experimental work in relation to bovine mastitis, the treatment of liver fluke infestation in cattle, hoose in calves and the immunising value of vaccines in louping-ill disease of sheep.

The farm will also enable the research laboratory to build up and maintain a foundation stock of cattle and sheep for the breeding, for experimental purposes, of calves and lambs the exact histories of which will be known with respect to health, age and breeding. A gradual re-division of the lands will have to be undertaken to provide paddocks of suitable size and supplied with water for the grazing of the breeding stock and experimental animals.

When the proposed research institute is erected and equipped, it will be utilised for research on various diseases and other conditions of economic importance affecting animal health and also for the preparation of biological products such as vaccines, anti-sera and diagnostic agents used in the prevention, treatment and diagnosis of disease. It will also act as an advisory centre and may conduct preliminary investigation work on individual farms in cases of illness and mortality the causes of which are obscure.

With regard to sub-head E (3), the sum of £13,670 under this sub-head is required for payment of a year's subscription to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations— 53,000 U.S. dollars—or £13,167 14s. 0d. plus the expenses of my Department in respect of the delegation to the Copenhagen Conference.

The Food and Agriculture Organisation had its beginning at a Conference of the United Nations which was held at Hot Springs, Virginia, in May, 1943. This conference set up an interim commission, which drew up a constitution and rules for a permanent organisation, and these were adopted at the first conference held at Quebec in October, 1945.

The objectives of the organisation are: (1) to raise levels of nutrition and standards of living; (2) to secure improvements in the efficiency of the production and distribution of all food and agricultural products, and (3) to better the condition of rural populations, thus contributing towards an expanding world economy.

Governments, in accepting the constitution of the organisation, pledged themselves to promote the common welfare by furthering separate and collective action for these purposes, and to report to each other on the progress achieved.

Among its many other functions, the organisation proposes to collect, analyse, interpret and disseminate information relating to nutrition, food and agriculture. It intends to promote and, where appropriate, to recommend national and international action with respect to scientific, technological, social and economic research relating to nutrition, food and agriculture, the improvement of education and administration relating to nutrition, food and agriculture, and the spread of public knowledge of nutritional and agricultural science and practice. It proposes to concern itself with, inter alia, the improvement of the processing, marketing and distribution of food, the adoption of policies for the provision of adequate agricultural credit, national and international, the adoption of international policies with respect to agricultural commodity arrangements, and it also proposes to furnish, particularly in undeveloped countries, such technical assistance as Governments may require.

In the early part of this year, the Food and Agriculture Organisation arranged to take over the functions of the International Institute of Agriculture, Rome, a body of which this country had been a member for about 40 years. The institute had concerned itself mainly with the collection and publication of statistical, technical and economic information regarding agriculture. It was proposed that these services should in future be provided by the Food and Agriculture Organisation, whose functions are, however, to cover a very much wider field than those of the institute.

Both from the long-term aspects, that is, because of the statistical, educational and research services which the organisation will provide, and because of its interest in the allocation of food and supplies for immediate consumption, the Government considered that membership of the organisation was of importance to this country. Accordingly, it was decided to apply for membership and to send a delegation to the second session of the conference, which was announced to be held at Copenhagen in September last. As the Dáil had adjourned for the summer when this decision was reached, it was not possible to discuss it here before the conference. I was head of the delegation to Copenhagen, and I was assisted by officials of my own Department and of the Departments of Industry and Commerce, External Affairs and Local Government.

The agenda for the conference comprised a number of items of importance to us, such as consideration of the present world food situation and of the food situation next year. The main item on the agenda, however, was the proposal for a world food board. This had been prepared by the Director-General of the organisation, Sir John Boyd Orr, at the request of a special meeting of the organisation, to deal with urgent food problems, which had taken place in Washington in May of this year. Before dealing further with these proposals, I should like to state that the Copenhagen Conference was attended by representatives of some 41 countries, including all the larger agricultural and grain-exporting countries with the exception of Russia. Four new applications for membership were submitted to the conference, viz., from Portugal, Ireland, Switzerland and Italy. Of these, Switzerland and Italy were elected unanimously, and Ireland and Portugal received 24 of the 26 votes cast. The Polish delegate had previously stated that he was unable to vote for our admission, as his country had no diplomatic relations with ours. At the end of the conference, Hungary also applied for and was admitted to membership.

The Standing Committee on Financial Control, one of whose functions it is to determine the contribution to be paid by each member country, decided that this country's contribution should, as a temporary measure, be placed at a figure of 53,000 United States dollars. Although the organisation's budget for the present financial year is about 5,000,000 United States dollars, I consider that this contribution is rather high, and it is proposed to take steps to have it reduced when the matter comes up for consideration at the next regular session of the conference.

As Deputies are probably aware from the publicity which the World Food Board proposals have received, the functions of the board, as visualised by Sir John Boyd Orr, would be:—(1) To stabilise prices of agricultural commodities on the world markets, including provision of necessary funds for stabilising operations. (2) To establish a world food reserve adequate for any emergency that might arise through failure of crops in any part of the world. (3) To provide funds for financing the disposal of surplus agricultural products on special terms to countries where the need for them is most urgent. (4) To co-operate with organisations concerned with international credits for industrial and agricultural development and with trade and commodity policy, in order that their common ends might be more quickly and effectively achieved.

These proposals were discussed very fully at the conference. The Director-General, in presenting them, explained the need for a board such as he proposed, and said that the agricultural problem in peace time was to find a constant market at a remunerative price. Half the population of the world suffered disease, physical disabilities and premature death owing to lack of food, while at recurring periods enormous surpluses of unmarketable food brought ruin to farmers. Even now, farmers feared that agriculture would again follow the same disastrous course it followed after the first world war, and the problem could only be solved through an international agency capable of dealing with the food question as a whole. Delegates from many countries accepted the proposals in principle, but all referred to the need for further study and elaboration of details before they could commit their respective Governments to final acceptance. It was finally decided that a preparatory commission, representative of 16 countries, should be set up to examine the proposals in detail, and that it should present its report to the organisation, which would then send copies to all Governments for consideration and call a special meeting of the conference to discuss the result. This preparatory commission, composed of the following countries:— Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Egypt, France, India, Netherlands, Philippine Republic, Poland, United Kingdom, United States, is now sitting in Washington. It is expected that its report will be presented to the organisation within a few months. Invitations to take part in the work of the commission were also sent to Russia and the Argentine. It is understood that the latter accepted. An observer, who is holding a watching brief for this country, is attending the meetings of the commission.

Will the Minister say who he is?

Our economic representative in Washington, Mr. Commins. If one may judge from public statements and Press reports which have appeared in this country in recent months, many people are under the impression that these World Food Board proposals, if finally accepted in their present form, would immediately provide a solution of difficulties which farmers in this and other countries experience from time to time. I should like to take this occasion to remove any unjustified optimism that may exist in this respect. While there is no doubt that the "ironing out" of fluctuations in the prices of agricultural commodities is eminently desirable, it is not improbable that a country like ours would, in effect, contribute more for the purposes of a World Food Board than we should ever gain from its operations. We are, as is well known, large importers of grain and exporters of highly perishable commodities. It may transpire that the grain we import may be subject to the operations of a World Food Board, which will keep the price at a relatively high figure. On the other hand, the highly perishable commodities which we export may not come under the operations of the board, and we may conceivably find ourselves in the position of having to "buy dear and sell cheap". This, however, is not to be taken as condemnation of the World Food Board proposals, but rather as a note of warning against unduly high hopes as to the benefits this country is likely to derive from the acceptance of them.

I should also like to point out that one of the functions of the World Food Board, as visualised by Sir John Boyd Orr, would be to provide funds for financing the disposal of surplus agricultural products on special terms to countries where the need for them is most urgent. This, it will be appreciated, may have very considerable financial reactions for us, if we should be called upon to provide a portion of these funds, and our natural desire to help less fortunate peoples must be conditioned by our ability to provide the necessary finances.

As I have already stated, the decision of the Government that this country should join the Food and Agriculture Organisation was made at a time when the Dáil was in recess. I am now asking the Dáil to confirm this decision by providing a sum of £13,670 for payment of a year's subscription to the organisation plus the cost of sending the delegation to the Copenhagen Conference.

What is the fee for joining?

A year's membership is £13,167 and there would be, roughly, £500 for the expenses of the delegation. The next sub-head of this Estimate concerns the National Stud. There were considerable delays in transferring the National Stud from the Department to the new board; in fact, the transfer did not take place until 31st August, 1946. We must provide for the expenses of running the stud from the end of the financial year to the 31st August. We have provided here for that purpose £9,390. Against that we have the appropriations-in-aid, which came in during that period—£4,550. That completes the sub-heads of the Estimate.

Is the farm paying its way at the present time?

I could not say at this stage if it is.

I am sure the Dáil will be unanimous in approving the purchase made by the Minister so far as a suitable farm for veterinary services is concerned. It is a much-needed requirement and I think we can compliment the Minister on the purchase of the farm and its situation. I believe it will prove a tremendous asset to our live-stock industry. As a matter of fact, we were very deficient in the matter of veterinary services. We were backward when we compare the services we had with other services. Our opportunities for research were almost negligible and our live-stock activities are so vital to our national welfare that it seems extraordinary we were so poorly served in the matter of adequate opportunities for research. There is no doubt the mortality resulting from disease in this country is very high.

That could be substantially reduced and whatever cost may be incurred as a result of the plans that are being made for research, I believe it will be returned possibly a hundredfold; there will be a very high return, at all events.

The Minister mentioned some of the diseases that are prevalent, such as contagious abortion, mastitis, sterility, hoose and louping ill. These constitute a major problem all over the country and they require urgent attention. Then there is the question of preventive treatment to which the Minister referred and that is, if anything, more important. There were some Parliamentary Questions addressed to the Minister some time ago as to what experiments were being carried out in the use of Strain 19 for contagious abortion. The Minister indicated that he hoped to produce a vaccine at least equal to Strain 19, and possibly it might be better. I am surprised the Minister did not give us some information as to what is being done in that direction. We would like to know something of the experimental work in connection with contagious abortion, whether we are proceeding on an independent line or are we merely carrying out some research work so far as the products of the United States and other countries are concerned.

On behalf of this Party, I may say we are very pleased to learn that so much progress has been made. We feel satisfied with the selection of the farm. Because of its size, ample opportunities ought to be provided there for necessary and urgent research work. The natural corollary to that must be efficient veterinary services for the country. I think certain recommendations were made by the post-war planning committee in that regard. The committee urged the importance of providing efficient veterinary services. I have no doubt the Department has turned its attention to this problem and, now having provided a farm, it is to be hoped that their attention will be immediately directed to the provision of a veterinary service which is so essential to our live-stock interests.

The Minister asked for money to defray the expenses and the fee for joining the Food and Agriculture Organisation. He told us a decision was made while the Dáil was in recess. As a matter of fact, long before the Recess the Minister was urged to apply for membership of the Food and Agriculture Organisation. He ended in a rather pessimistic mood on the success or otherwise of the Food and Agriculture Organisation and the extent to which our interests might be served by the Food and Agriculture Organisation. I am more alarmed about the future of the Food and Agriculture Organisation for a reason altogether different from that which the Minister mentioned. Judging by the attitude of the United States, there may be a note of interrogation put to the whole scheme of the Food and Agriculture Organisation. Unless the United States is prepared to fall into line with other countries, the prospects are not so rosy at all. I am not inclined to agree with what the Minister said. It was obvious to any man for a number of years that the position of the primary producers in the world was a common interest. So far as the prosperity of the world is concerned, it is obvious from what economists have said that that prosperity must rest on a prosperous agriculture. We must fully appreciate that when we realise that 75 per cent. of the world's population is engaged in food production. So far as the industrial section of the world is concerned, the purchasing power for the goods produced by the industrial section comes from agriculture. Any scheme, or any international organisation, that can help to maintain the prosperity of the agricultural community throughout the world will help to bring a higher measure of prosperity to the world generally.

The Minister indicated the aims and objects of the organisation, namely, to raise the nutritional standards, to provide a decent standard of living for all the people of the world, to provide an adequate diet for all the people of the world. That adequate diet, of course, must be well-balanced diet which will make for normal vigorous health and go a long way to eliminate disease. We know that this organisation was set up originally as a result of resolutions passed by the Hot Springs Conference and the aims are very laudable and praiseworthy. As the Minister pointed out, there may be difficulties in the implementation; but, so far as the necessity for such an organisation is concerned, I think it is beyond question. Between the two wars, primary producers suffered to a terrific extent from fluctuations in prices which brought about a great measure of instability and insecurity.

It is not generally appreciated that a very high percentage of the world's population is under-nourished. In fact, over 50 per cent. of the world's population is under-nourished. While a considerable number of people got what might appear to have been sufficient food, they did not get food of the right type. They did not get nutritious food, they did not get a well-balanced diet. With that shortage of food, we had huge surpluses in the world. We had huge surpluses of wheat. So far as the primary producer was concerned, we had wheat being sold below the cost of production. The cause of that was that price was the regulating factor. Price governed production, and not the human requirements of the world. In the approach to this whole problem, it is the human requirements of the world which should control production, and not merely price. Price retarded production. The primary producer's margin was so narrow that he was restricted in his production. There were millions of people who did not get an adequate diet. The result of that inadequacy was that disease was rampant. In our discussions here on local government and other matters, we continually stressed the necessity for adequate incomes.

I agree with the Minister that the solution is not by any means a simple one. But this organisation is a States' organisation. It is an organisation of Governments, or representatives of Governments. It has a counterpart in the Federation of Primary Producers. The Federation of Primary Producers is an international organisation of the primary producers of the world. They propose to help and to co-operate with the Food and Agriculture Organisation. While agreeing with the Minister that it is not by any means a simple matter, the real solution of this whole problem, of course, is for all the Governments that are members of this organisation to co-operate to try to provide adequate purchasing power, effective purchasing power. An effective purchasing power really means adequate incomes for all the people. So far as the primary producers of the world are concerned, the best and the most effective way to stimulate production is to provide that adequate income which is necessary for a family to purchase adequate food for its maintenance. It is well to appreciate that the primary producers of the world as an organisation cannot do very much in that respect. An organisation such as this, representing States or Governments, can help very much by its deliberations.

When the Minister points out that we produce highly perishable commodities, I want to say that, while this organisation may improve cereals, it might be easier to solve the problem by attacking the price of highly perishable commodities. I am sure the Minister appreciates that, if a food-producing country suffers from depression, it has repercussions in other countries. That is inevitable. If the aim of the Food and Agriculture Organisation is to raise the general standard all over the world, and if the general standard of the primary producing countries is raised, I think we may feel satisfied that we will not be left on a lower level, particularly when we remember that we are equipped in a particular way for the production of protective foods containing proteins and vitamins. They are the highly valued foods. I think it was Sir John Orr who pointed out that, if adequate food for all the people of the world is to be provided, an increase of from 20 to 40 per cent. in the calorie foods will be necessary, and that an increase of nearly 200 per cent. in the protective foods will be essential. It will take a great many years to reach that high level so far as the protective foods are concerned. We fall into that category in a particular way. As I said, we are particularly interested in the production of the protective foods and we are equipped in a special way for the production of them. We are amongst the few countries that have a very high surplus for export. For that reason, we are particularly interested in the operation of an organisation of this sort.

I want to stress that, in my opinion, one of the things which has resulted in chaos was the fact that countries were ignorant of each other's plans, the effects of their plans on other countries, and the repercussions likely to result from their plans on the world as a whole. When States enter into an international organisation such as this they can tackle international problems. They can appreciate the plans, the aims, the objects, and the ideas of other countries. They can adapt to their circumstances new ideas that they find in association with other peoples. Therefore, while I agree with the Minister that the problem the Food and Agriculture Organisation has set itself is a very big one, bound up with economic considerations, considerations of adequate and effective purchasing power, related to the incomes of the people of the world, as an inter-State organisation it can deal with every aspect of the problem. That problem can be divided roughly into two categories. The first is purchasing power, because that is the stimulus to production.

Production may appear to be a comparatively simple question because surpluses existed in the world before the last war, but economists, like Dr. Bennett of the Soil Conservation Organisation in the United States, are satisfied that the arable land in the world is only barely sufficient to produce the world's food requirements and that it must be farmed on a high nutritional basis if it is to produce all the protective foods that are essential for good and healthy life.

Personally, I am very pleased that the Minister and the Government have decided to join this international organisation. I feel that we are vitally interested. I should be terribly disappointed if the Minister is right, that the Food and Agriculture Organisation will merely deal with the supply of calories and neglect the foods the Minister referred to as highly perishable commodities, the foods that are so vital to life that they are known to be protective foods—proteins and vitamins. In my opinion, they would stultify themselves if they were merely to deal with the production of calories. One could understand their being concerned with the production of wheat and grain, at present, because of the acute shortage in the world, but that is a comparatively simple problem which will correct itself in the next two or three years. It will take a long period of years before the world will have a supply of the foods that are so necessary to life, and I am sure the Minister and his Department are aware of that.

In regard to the future activities of the organisation, I should be much more pessimistic if the United States is not prepared fully to co-operate and, judging by statements that have been made recently by representatives of that country, their attitude appears to be rather doubtful. I would be rather pessimistic if they are not prepared fully to co-operate, because of their tremendous capacity to produce and to dominate world conditions and to provide purchasing power. The mighty dollar would be a very effective factor. If their co-operation is secured, this organisation can do a lot of very useful work in helping the primary producer of the world. The primary producer gives the most vital service to the communities of the world. The first essential to life is food. Food is supplied by the primary producer, yet no one can deny that he is probably the lowest paid worker in the community.

That has its repercussions on every section of the community because 75 per cent. of the world population is engaged in agricultural production and industry can only be prosperous if the purchasing power for industrial production exists in the agricultural sections of the world. When depression occurs in the world it always occurs in agriculture. If purchasing power in agriculture fails, depression is inevitable.

In considering these problems we must appreciate the tremendous field of activity there is for an organisation of this sort. We must also realise that, no matter what effort was made in the past by individual countries, failure was inevitable because depression in any country has its repercussions externally as well as internally. The aim of an organisation like this must be a general uplifting of the primary producers of the world, to encourage them to produce to the maximum degree, so that the world's requirements in food may be provided. That can only be done by ensuring effective purchasing power on the part of the consumer, which means an adequate income for the consumer. It is therefore essential that the organisation to tackle the problem must be a State organisation. An organisation of primary producers only would have little or no effect but if there is an inter-State organisation such as this, if it is given ample power and if its plans and decisions are accepted by the countries and Governments it represents, I think we can be optimistic instead of pessimistic in regard to the future.

We have been told on very reliable authority that a sum of £7,000,000 is lost annually to the farmers of this country because of disease in live stock. Various agricultural bodies and public bodies have been urging the Government, for a very considerable time, to make some effort to stem the ravages of such diseases. We have been jealous of other progressive countries who have made great progress in that direction. For some reason, our Government have been very lax in respect of veterinary research, with the result that many diseases amongst live stock, particularly in dairy cattle, such as contagious abortion, mastitis, sterility, and other diseases, have caused very severe losses to farmers.

It is, therefore, a great pleasure to me and to others vitally interested in live stock to find that the Government have decided to establish a proper research station and we are very sure that any money spent on such research will be well repaid. The losses in live stock are colossal and it is time that something was done in a practical way to remedy the position. Therefore, we welcome the statement of the Minister and I am sure the Dáil will unhesitatingly vote any money he requires for the farm he mentioned a while ago. We are glad that the Government have decided to join the Food and Agriculture Organisation. That should be for the betterment of all sections of the community. I think we have good reason to be optimistic about the results. It gives us great pleasure this evening to give a cordial welcome to the statement about Ireland's joining the Food and Agricultural Organisation and I am sure that it will have the approval of every Party of this House.

I join with the other Deputies in supporting the passage of this Estimate particularly in so far as it relates to the association of this country in the future with the Food and Agriculture Organisation. I believe we should be associated with all these international organisations especially in present-day circumstances. We may not gain very much, perhaps, but we shall learn a good deal in the school of experience and we shall benefit by our education later on.

May I take it that by the introduction of this Supplementary Estimate we shall have in the near future a complete re-organisation of the veterinary section of the Department of Agriculture? I feel that some such re-organisation should be associated with the introduction of an Estimate of this kind and particularly with the purchase of a farm for the purposes mentioned by the Minister. I was furnished with a list— an amazingly long list—of positions in the Civil Service where the occupants have been granted an extension of their usual period of service. Amongst the names appearing in that very long list was that of the Chief Veterinary Officer of the Department of Agriculture. I am not personally acquainted with the gentleman but I am sure that he, like every other civil servant who was lucky enough to get an extension, has given good and faithful service to the State.

In present-day circumstances, however, and with employment in the state in which it is amongst the professional classes as well as every other section of the community, it would be just as well if these people were retired within a reasonable period after reaching the maximum of the retiring age.

Does the Deputy think that that particular case arises on this Supplementary Estimate for £10?

I take it that it is bound up with the question of re-organisation.

No re-organisation is proposed under this.

I am assuming that with the introduction of an Estimate of this kind there will in the near future be a re-organisation of the veterinary section of the Department of Agriculture. I would ask the Minister either to affirm or contradict that.

I think Deputy Davin has raised a rather important point. All I can say is that some re-organisation in regard to the veterinary service so far as research is concerned must necessarily follow. One of the reasons why we cannot extend the personnel of our Veterinary Research Department is because we have not got accommodation. As soon as we can supply more laboratory accommodation we shall necessarily have a bigger veterinary staff for research purposes. It will take some years, however, to erect suitable buildings on this new farm. From this on they will be able to do better work than they have done in the past. Two things were holding them up. One was they had no land where they could keep animals for experiment and the other was the lack of laboratory accommodation.

Deputy Halliden spoke of the severe losses in our live stock through mortality. Deputy Halliden quoted a figure of £7,000,000 per year. It may be something less than that. The general opinion is that it is somewhat less. If we could make any substantial reduction in that—even to the extent of 20, 30 or 40 per cent.—the money will be very well spent on this research work.

Deputy Hughes dealt fairly extensively with the Food and Agriculture Organisation. I do not want to give the members of the Dáil a false impression. I do not want to be in any way pessimistic about the future of F.A.O., as it is called, but I do want to sound a note of warning because some people seem to think that great benefits will accrue to this country as a result of our going in to that organisation. Whatever the benefits may be there are likely to be onerous obligations at the same time. I do not wish to go any further than that. But I think they are obligations we should willingly undertake because they will make for improvement all over the world and they will help to bring up the standard of living of those people who have a lower standard than we have ourselves.

As Deputy Hughes pointed out, the objects of the Food and Agriculture Organisation are laudable and praiseworthy. I quite agree with that and I have no hesitation whatever in asking every member of the Dáil to agree to our becoming members of that organisation by passing this Estimate.

In introducting this Estimate I said that there was a danger, purely from the economic point of view, that this organisation might increase the price of grain. We are importers of grain. At the same time it may not deal with processed animal products and we are exporters of processed animal products. In that way we may find ourselves worse off as a result of the operations of Food and Agriculture Organisation. My reason for saying that is because I think it is fairly certain that the Food and Agriculture Organisation will deal in the first instance with bread foods, including grain products. It will be some time before they will deal with other products. In fact they may find it difficult to deal with animals at any time. The machinery for dealing with grain is comparatively simple. It is possible to take stock of the world supply of grain. It is possible to find out where grain is required and where there is a surplus. Where there is a surplus of grain it is an easy matter to store it. From every point of view grain is an easy product with which to deal and there is no doubt the Food and Agriculture Organisation will deal with grain first. If the effect of that is to keep the price of grain up that will naturally affect us here, but we are not going to complain about it.

Animal products, such as meat, bacon, butter and condensed milk, are not nearly so easy to deal with from the point of view of the Food and Agriculture Organisation. For one thing, there will be no surplus of animal products for a long time to come and, therefore, the Food and Agriculture Organisation will not have an opportunity of dealing with it. If there is a surplus of animal products it is not an easy matter to store meat or butter over a long period. In so far as the Food and Agriculture Organisation succeeds —and I hope they will succeed all the way—it is more than likely that they will deal effectively with grain but not so effectively with animal products. That is why I said that from the narrow economic point of view the operations of Food and Agriculture Organisation may place more obligations upon us than they will confer benefits on us. I shall leave it at that. However, the objects of the organisation are very good and I think we should have no hesitation in voting the amount which is necessary to become members of the organisation. I do not think any other point was raised on the Estimate.

Vote put and agreed to.
Vote reported and agreed to.
Top
Share