asked the Minister for Agriculture his reason for stating in the Dáil on 17th May (Official Report, Volume 115, column 1320) that the County Galway Committee of Agriculture might have the civility to answer his letter; whether he was then aware that his letter was discussed by the committee at its meeting on the 27th April and that as a result of the discussion a reply was sent to him by the secretary of the committee that evening; whether he is further aware that a letter dated the 30th April from the Minister's private secretary was sent to the secretary of the committee acknowledging receipt of the letter of 27th April regarding suggested changes in the matter of agricultural instruction; and finally whether, in view of the facts set out, he will now withdraw his aspersion on the chairman, secretary and members of the County Galway Committee of Agriculture.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - County Galway Committee of Agriculture.
The Galway County Committee of Agriculture had before them at their meeting on the 27th April two letters from me, one related to the price of eggs, and the other was a request for their advice in regard to the organisation of additional facilities for farmers in the county and ended with the paragraph: "I cannot too strongly emphasise that this letter is not a demand nor is it an announcement of a change in policy; it is a bona fide request to your committee for the benefit of their advice on the merits of the proposal, and any decision on this matter will be taken in the light of that advice. It is in order to have the help of that advice that I have ventured to trouble you with this communication.”
The committee thought it well to pay my first letter the compliment of "marking it as ‘read,'" and after Mr. Callanan had inquired "what are the instructors going to be there for, is it to look after the grass?" and Councillor Ruane had stated "in my opinion all that will be there soon are the graziers, the herds, sheepdogs and the bailiffs," and Mr. O'Toole had said "tell him to mind his own business and we will mind ours," Councillor Ruane inquired "what is the use of declaring a Republic and adopting a foreign policy as the Minister for Agriculture is doing," Mr. King commented on the fact that the Minister had sent out the letter personally and wondered if he had gone against the advice of his experts; after this interlude the secretary was instructed to reply to one of my letters and did so in a perfectly correct communication dated 27th April, which was acknowledged from my Department on the 30th.
If in the light of this, the Deputy considers the phrase "acting the role of crumpaun" inappropriate, I can only say we must continue to agree to differ, and I am happy to add that the surprising example of the Galway County Committee was followed by relatively few other county committees in the country.
Arising out of the Minister's reply, which is no reply whatever to my question, I have given here the date of the volume, and the column and the words that he actually used, wherein it was stated that the Galway County Committee of Agriculture treated him in a contemptible manner by failing to answer his letter in regard to his suggestion for improved agricultural instruction. He has not replied to that question.
I have.
I do not mind him insulting the Fianna Fáil representatives on the county committee of agriculture but the people to whom he is offering as much insult are his own supporters on that committee.
I would direct the attention of the Deputy to the fact that I have answered his specific question. I would further direct his attention to the fact that if he considers the record which I have described as a civil reply, I wonder what it would have been if they tried to be uncivil.
Arising out of the Minister's further comment I do not mind what appeared in flaring headlines in a paper but I mind the decision which was given and which was conveyed to the Minister as a reply. Furthermore, his letter to the chairman was acknowledged on the 21st April. He has carried on in this manner to such an extent that he still further implies that they did not treat him as they should have treated him with common courtesy. I would regret very much if any Minister of State was treated with that form of discourtesy. I might raise the matter on the Adjournment, but I do not intend to waste time in doing so because his conduct is such as to injure only himself and to increase our popularity.
Common courtesy is lost on that gentleman over there.