asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will state the total quantity of wheat at present in store, and the quantities which are expected to arrive before September 1st, 1948, from (1) U.S.A.; (2) Australia; (3) Argentina, and (4) other sources.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Wheat Supplies.
The total quantity of wheat in store on 15th May, 1948, the latest date for which figures are available, was 103,325 tons. This figure includes the grain equivalent of flour stocks. The following additional supplies, for which contracts have been placed, are expected to arrive before the 1st September next:—
|
U.S.A. |
9,375 tons flour |
|
Australia |
52,697 tons wheat |
|
Argentina |
23,688 tons wheat |
|
Other sources |
300 tons flour |
In view of these figures, will the Minister explain to me how it would be possible to maintain the bread ration if there had been no purchase of Argentine wheat?
If the Deputy had not left the purchase to the day before he left office as Minister for Industry and Commerce.
Is the Minister aware that I was criticised by the Minister for Finance for having completed the purchase of 75,000 tons of Argentine wheat, which is presumably included in the figures now given by the Minister? Am I correct in the assumption that it requires 10,000 to 11,000 tons of wheat per week to maintain the bread ration; that the minimum working stock is from eight to nine weeks' supply; that consequently the bread ration could not be maintained at its present level to the 1st September if there were not available 200,000 tons of wheat? If I am correct in these assumptions, am I not entitled to assume that failure to have purchased and to have secured delivery of 75,000 tons of Argentine wheat would mean that we would now be on a lower bread ration?
The Deputy——
Would the Deputy leave it to the Minister?
The Deputy was criticised by the Minister for Finance for allowing a position to arise in which he was blackmailed for 75,000 tons of wheat at £50 a ton.
Does the Minister know that the Minister for Finance's complaint was that I completed the purchase of 75,000 tons of wheat before leaving office? Is the Minister aware that during the interval from the middle of 1947, every ounce of wheat that could be purchased anywhere in the world was purchased and that the total supply, including that from the native harvest, was inadequate to maintain the bread ration? Does he now know that if the 75,000 tons had not been purchased we would not have sufficient wheat to maintain the ration to the 1st September? Have we in fact sufficient wheat to maintain the ration, even as it is, to the 1st September, with a reasonable working stock?
The Deputy was criticised by the Minister for Finance because he dawdled with this problem for months before he left office.
That is a complete misrepresentation of the Minister for Finance.
It is not. I am stating that the Minister for Finance criticised the Deputy, not for getting 75,000 tons of wheat, but for paying £50 a ton for 75,000 tons of wheat.
Does the Minister for Industry and Commerce know that two months earlier Argentine wheat was £60 a ton?
That is not right.
I am telling the Minister it is right.
From May, 1947, it was on offer for £50.
On the contrary, we sent a purchasing delegation to the Argentine, who could not get wheat at less than £60 a ton and, by delaying, we got it for £50 a ton but, if it had not been purchased, we would now be on a three-ounce bread ration.
Would the Minister indicate if he has since been able to obtain flour and at what price?
Deputy Lemass is quite wrong and is trying to twist the position and to extricate himself from a position from which he cannot extricate himself. The Deputy neglected for a number of months to look after this vital matter of wheat. On the very day he left office, after months' negotiations, he concluded an agreement committing this country to the purchase of 75,000 tons of wheat at £50 a ton. That is what the Minister for Finance criticised.
Is the Minister for Industry and Commerce or the Minister for Finance aware that the Argentine Government would not sell wheat before February, 1948?
I am not aware of it.
I am now informing the Minister for Finance and he should not make statements without being aware of the facts.
I am aware of the facts.
Is he aware that we purchased from the United States all the wheat they would sell us; that we got from the Australian Government more wheat than the International Council agreed we could purchase; that we had the maximum supply from the Irish harvest that the weather conditions permitted; that a special mission was sent to the Argentine to purchase wheat and failed to purchase at any price we were prepared to pay; and that it was not until February, 1948, that it became possible to purchase Argentine wheat? Is he aware that the Minister for Finance suggested that we could have maintained the ration without Argentine wheat? Is he now not disposed to think that the Minister for Finance misled the Dáil on that essential matter?
I gave the truth.
I am aware of this. For some strange reason, since the first time it was established, the Deputy bought wheat otherwise than through Grain Importers, Limited, and over the heads of Grain Importers, Limited.
Where?
And that the Deputy bought it through the services of a non-national of this country.
I do not know what the Minister is talking about, but the Dáil was informed in March of last year of a movement to secure international agreement, started by Mayor La Guardia of New York, for the centralised purchase of Argentine wheat by all European countries, and that we had assented to that arrangement.
Does the Deputy deny that, for the first time since it was established, he went over the heads of Grain Importers, Limited, and purchased wheat elsewhere; that this was the only wheat that was not purchased through Grain Importers, Limited; that it was purchased on the Minister's instructions; that the negotiations were conducted by a non-national of this country, and were concluded on the afternoon of the last day the Deputy sat in the Department of Industry and Commerce?
Is the Minister aware that wheat was purchased at our request by the British buying agent in the Argentine who was there negotiating a similar agreement on behalf of the British?
It was negotiated by Mr. Rank, on the Minister's instructions.
Who was their buying agent. We can have this matter again. Obviously, there is no element of truth or decency at all to be expected.
It was bought at £50 a ton.