I did not hear the figures of the result of the division when they were announced but it came as a shock to me, at least, to find that there are so many Deputies in this House who condone irregularities.
Committee on Finance. - Vote 27—Agriculture (Resumed).
The matter now under discussion is the Vote for Agriculture.
I got a bit of a shock and I was somewhat surprised at the figures. When interrupted, I think I had reached the subject of the land rehabilitation scheme. I challenge Deputies on the other side to say if they can find any fault in the world with that scheme. Should that scheme be introduced or should it not? Personally I hold it is a great scheme, a scheme which was never dreamt of or never thought of by any Party in this country before, since we got native Government. I say it is one of the finest schemes we could have, no matter what the expense is. The expense is estimated at £40,000,000. Some of the money may not be spent to the best advantage, I agree, but anyway it shows a determined and earnest effort to bring back into fertility and productivity thousands and millions of acres in this country. I think that part of the Minister's policy is sound at least.
Can any Deputies on the opposite side object to the provision of free veterinary services in this country such as are being operated by the Minister and his Department? Is that scheme wrong or is it right? If it is wrong, then Fianna Fáil is right, but if it is right, the Minister is right. I hold it is an admirable scheme, a scheme for which the Minister should get due credit. Does anyone object to the scheme initiated by the Minister, a scheme never dreamt of by Fianna Fáil, for the reducticn in the number of uneconomic cows in the country? Is that scheme wrong or is it right? If it is wrong, well, the Minister is wrong, but I pin my faith in the, Minister's belief in this scheme and I believe it is a step in the right direction. Is it not a most generous scheme? At present the scheme is being operated only in certain creamery areas but I believe it is the Minister's intention to extend the scheme to othar areas in the country. Under that scheme any man who has an uneconomic cow, a cow yielding under 500 or 600 gallons, will, if he so wishes, have that cow taken away from him and the cow will be replaced by a heifer given by the Department. Is there any scheme in this or any other country that is more generous or more calculated to improve agriclture and farming generally? Can anyone object to the ground limestone scheme, to the distribution of ground limestone at 16/- per ton delivered to the farmers' land? Is that scheme wrong? I think it is a sound, reasonable honest and sane scheme, a scheme which will make for greater productivity in this country than any other scheme I know.
Is the scheme to provide a water supply for the farmer's wife in her kitchen or scullery wrong? I do not believe it is. This is a scheme also that was never thought of by any former Government in this country—a scheme by which a farmer can get up to a maximum of £100 to provide water for domestic purposes. If that scheme is wrong, of course the Minister is wrong but I believe that it, too, is a sound scheme. These are only a few of the many schemes which the Minister has initiated and which will come to fruition at some time. I hope they will because I believe the Minister will remain for a long period in his high office as Minister for Agriculture. It is my sincere hope that he does, and in saying that I am expressing, not alone my own wishes, but the wishes of the practical farmers of Roscommon.
It is remarkable that the tillage policy of the Minister has been criticised by members of the Opposition. It is rather strange when you remember that to-day we have 250,000 acres more under grain crops than we had in 1939 and, at the same time, we have 26,000 acres more under root crops than in 1939. Is the Minister's tillage policy a good policy or a bad policy? I am casting no reflections on anyone, but I say that, if production has been stepped up by 250,000 acres in one case and by 26,000 acres in another, that is a fairly decent record.
One more cow, one more sow, one more acre under the plough.
I did not think I would take up so much of the time of the House. As a matter of fact, I was very anxious to contribute to this debate and not to throw bouquets at the Minister, but just to give credit where credit is due. I do not believe in praising a man or in making him feel that he is so much bigger than he is if he does not deserve it, but, where a man deserves it, then I would expect that every Irishman, and every Deputy, would give to him the credit which he deserves.
Hear, hear!
I am glad to hear Deputy Gilbride say that.
You are making converts right and left.
I think I am not doing too badly at all. I want to say this in conclusion, as a man who meets farmers in various ways—I am a farmer myself and I meet farmers in other ways and have dealings with them—that I can assure the House that, as far as my constituency is concerned, the farmers in that part of the country are perfectly satisfied and highly delighted with the agricultural policy which is being pursued in the country to-day. I say that on behalf of farmers whom I know very well. As I say, I am a farmer myself and I think I know what I am talking about.
There is one other thing that I want to congratulate the Minister on. As I have said, I am always slow to congratulate anyone unless I feel he deserves it. I want to congratulate the Minister on his action regarding the removal of the obstruction in the Boyle River known as the Tinnacarra rock. If all the Deputies knew how beneficial that scheme is going to be for the County Roscommon they would say that I am quite justified in praising the schemes which have been initiated by the Minister for Agriculture. For 40 years I have been hearing about the menace which that Tinnacarra rock has been. It has been responsible for the flooding of at least 20,000 acres of land in West and North Roscommon. I have heard of the various attempts that were made under the British regime, under Cumann na nGaedheal, under Fine Gael and under the Fianna Fáil regime to deal with that menace but not until this year of 1951 were active steps taken concerning it. Active steps are now being taken by the Minister for Agriculture to have that obstruction removed.
Is it gone?
It is going, and it will go, too. As a matter of fact, I have been informed by the Minister that the work is to start this week. I can tell Deputy Gilbride that a sum of over £60,000 has been earmarked for the removal of that obstruction.
We are all delighted to hear it.
Does the Depaty want to start another split in Fianna Fáil?
The Minister should mind the splits on his own side. He has enough of them.
I want to congratulate the Minister on the steps he is taking for the removal of that obstruction. It will be removed now.
It will be.
£60,000 will not remove it.
The Minister is always prepared to do anything and everything likely to be of benefit to the agricultural industry in this country. I would ask him on behalf of the people of North Roscommon to extend his activities a little bit farther. We have in the extreme north of the county, in Arigna, Ballyfarnon, and Keadue a number of small farmers with valuations of from £1 to £5. There is a job of work to be done in those areas somewhat similiar to the removal of the Tinnacarra rock. I would ask the Minister to consider seriously the pliglit of the people living in the vicinity and see that steps are taken for the removal of the obstructions in the Feorish River. That would be of great benefit to the people living in that part of Roscommon. It would also benefit people in the County, Sligo, and would mean that a good job had been completed. I think I have covered all the ground that I wish to cover. I must apologise to the House for causing a bit of trouble.
If the Deputy wants to try and keep the debate going a bit longer, we will help him out.
What about the Deputy from your side who talked for two-and-a-half hours yesterday?
Are you not talking it out?
I had no intention of taking part in this debate, but having listened to the experts, professional and others, who have been telling us ali about farming, there are just a few things which I would like to deal with. When I went home last week-end I attended a meeting of the Sligo County Committee of Agriculture at which two resolutions were passed. I want to tell the House and the Minister that, following the last county council elections, this committee is composed of 13 Coalition members and three Fianna Fáil members. I saw that for fear the Minister might think that this was another Fianna Fáil ramp. The first resolution was proposed by Councillor Frank Higgins, who was a Fine Gael candidate at the last general election.
He was not. He was an Independent.
He was Fine Gael at the election before that. The second resolution was proposed by Councillor Frank Gannon who was a Clann na Talmhan candidate at the last election.
And always supported Deputy Gilbride.
Election activities in the County Sligo are not in order on this Estimate.
The resolution proposed by Councillor Higgins was in connection with the price of bran and pollard. What led up to it was the terrible condition to which the cattle in the western area have been reduced. It was pointed out at that meeting that, unless something was done to provide cheap bran and pollard in order to help the farmers to keep their cattle alive, half the cattle would be dead before the 1st June. Councillor Higgins stated that the price of bran and pollard had jumped from 14/- up to 35/- per cwt., and said that the Minister had allowed that. He asked me to come here and impress on the Minister the necessity of getting the price of bran and pollard reduced. He also said that the mills are filled with bran and pollard, but that the farmers cannot afford to buy it at the present time. Now, I am not stating that as a fact. I am giving Councillor Higgins' words for that. That resolution was passed unanimously by the Sligo County Committee of Agriculture. I did not take any part in the debate except to try and make excuses for the Minister. I hope God will forgive me for that.
It is a pity I was not there to hear you.
I tried to impress on the committee that the Minister was not responsible for the bad weather and a lot of other things, and that probably he was doing his best.
It was very charitable of the Deputy to speak up for me.
Perhaps it is more than would be expected of me by some of the Deputies over there. Some Deputies said that the cattle were not in a bad way. I say that the cattle are in bad condition. The lorries have failed to take away a lot of the cattle which have died down there. They are not able to cope with the number of cattle that are dying. At fairs held in County Sligo the buyers are afraid to buy the cattle and put them out to grass because the cattle are in such a thin condition. I have been at some fairs and have seen that myself. Ninety-seven per cent. of the cattle are in such a condition that the buyers are afraid to buy them.
That is not a very good advertisement for Sligo fairs.
It is not, but you must face the truth.
I do not think it is true. I think your apprehensions are unfounded. I assure you that that is not true. By and large, Sligo cattle are in good condition.
They are not in good condition, I am sorry to say. I was at a fair in Grange last Friday and there were very few cattle sold. The reports from all over the country are that the cattle are not being bought. They are in such a thin condition that the buyers are afraid to buy them and put them out on grass until the weather improves. That brings us to the point as to what is the cause of this. We have had bad seasons before and the cattle were never in such a bad condition as they are now. I charge the Minister with the fact that it is his attitude towards the growing of grain crops that is responsible for this. I will confine myself to oats, as enough has been said about the growing of wheat. County Sligo, on the whole, is an area which grows a lot of oats. I charge the Minister that it is his attitude towards the growing of oats that is accountable for this. If the farmers in Sligo had a good supply of oats, as they had in other years, they could have prevented this, because that is the one feeding stuff that would have kept the cattle in good condition. In introducing his Estimate in 1949, the Minister said that any farmer who grows oats as a cash crop should get himself apprenticed to a tailor or a cobbler. If words mean anything, that means that there should be no oats grown for sale.
The Deputy is not quoting me?
Yes, as reported in Volume 49, column 1081 of the Official Reports—the man who grows oats as a cash crop should be apprenticed to a cobbler or a tailor.
I will check on that. Would the Deputy be kind enough to give the reference again?
Volume 49, column 1081.
Is the Deputy sure of the volume? Volume 49 seems to be very far back. We have reached Volume 125 this year.
It is two years ago.
I want the Deputy to see that the reference is correct. The Deputy says it is Volume 49.
That would be about 1927.
That is the reference I got. I will look it up.
Deputy Walsh must be slipping up, as he is usually in charge of the files.
The Minister said it in introducing his Estimate in 1949.
I want to know if the reference is right.
Anyway I have a distinct recollection of hearing it and of answering it afterwards. What the Minister said was that any farmer who grew oats as a cash crop should be apprenticed to a cobbler or a tailor. If words mean anything, that means that oats should not be grown as a cash crop. I ask the Minister or any Deputies, especially the Labour Deputies, if oats are not grown as a cash crop, where is the oatmeal to come from, the best food we have? Where is the oatmeal to come from, which is now close on 10/- a stone, if oats are not grown as a cash crop? I claim that that is the cause of the condition of the cattle at the present time. If there were plenty of oats in the country the cattle could be kept in good condition. Does the Minister realise that even during the bad year we have passed through the wheat crop, the oats crop and the other cereal crops did stand up to the storm, but the grass which he talked so much about has been a complete failure?
The oats were saved in the best of condition. The wheat crop and all the other cereal crops were saved in the best of condition, while the hay and the grass are absolutely useless. Does that not bring home to the Minister that even in our wet climate these crops are the safest stand-by, no matter how bad the year is? The Minister said a while ago that he was sorry he was not at the meeting of the Sligo County Committee of Agriculture. I am sorry he was not there to hear the opinions of the members of that committee who are his own supporters and what they thought about the way this matter has been handled.
I heard a Deputy talking about farming in Roscommon. Farming in Roscommon is different from farming in Sligo. In Roscommon they go in more for ranching; they have never gone in for real farming, but in County Sligo we have always been a farming community, people who till the land and grow crops. These people now find themselves, owing to that advice, without oats and with the potatoes rotting in the pits. That is not hearsay. In certain districts a market cannot be found for the potatoes.
I heard Deputy Dockrell say that there had been nothing only a string of abuse of the Minister from this side of the House. I would be very sorry to abuse of the Minister. In fact, I like the Minister personally, but I am in complete disagreement with his policy. As I am in complete disagreement with it, I think I should be free to criticise his policy, but when I criticise his policy, I am not criticising the Minister. I would be sorry to criticise the Minister or to hear any Deputy criticise him. I object to the statement that Deputies are criticising the Minister. They are not criticising the Minister. But, if we do not believe in a certain policy, we should be at liberty to criticise it and it should not be taken as abuse of the Minister. I hope the Minister understands that. Deputy Dockrell gave the impression that the Minister was giving too big a price to the farmers for their produce. Will Deputy Dockrell go back to the year 1912, which was the last normal year we knew in this country, and take any ten articles sold in his business premises and compare the price of them then with the price of them now? I went to the trouble of doing that and I found on a rough calculation that every one of the articles sold in his business house or in any other business house in the cities and towns are at least seven times dearer now than they were in 1912. What commodity which the farmer has to sell is seven times dearer? Yet we are told that the farmers are getting too much for their produce.
The only criticism I heard levelled at the Minister came from his own benches—from Deputy Lehane, Deputy Sheldon and other Deputies on the Government Benches.
This Estimate is a dishonest one. It is dishonest because the Minister has asked for a sum of something over £9,000,000 odd. I would ask the Minister how much of that £9,000,000 odd goes in subsidies?
May I interrupt Deputy Gilbride for a moment. The quotation to which I take it he referred comes from Volume 115, column 1081. Will the Deputy give way so that I may read the paragraph?
"Oats should be grown on an ever-increasing acreage by those farmers who understand what farming means and who realise that the bulk of the oats grown upon our lands must be consumed on the holding if they are to yield a profit in all circumstances. The farmer who grows them exclusively as a cash crop will confer a blessing on the community at large if he puts himself as an apprentice to a tailor or cobbler and gives up farming altogether."
Sure, there was never such a farmer.
Exactly, but I think Deputy Gilbride alleged that I warned farmers not to grow oats and held them up to derision if they did.
But the words I used are:—
"Oats should be grown on an everincreasing acreage by those farmers who understand what farming means and who realise that the bulk of the oats grown upon our lands must be consumed upon the holding if they are to yield a profit in all circumstances."
Therefore, Deputy Gilbride has been less than just in the manner of presenting that quotation to the House.
Not a bit more unjust than the majority of the people who read it, because that is the meaning they took out of it and that is the reason for the scarcity of oats this year.
That is scarcely noblesse oblige, particularly from someone who likes the truth.
Deputy Gilbride on the Estimate.
I did not misquote the Minister, did I?
By gum, if you did not, words have lost their meaning.
Words have lost their meaning if they do not mean what I said. On the question of the comparison of prices, I would ask those Deputies who talk about the farmer getting too much to compare the prices then with the prices now, and I would ask them is the farmer getting anything as compared with what other people are getting. Take the price of milk. The second resolution that was passed by the county committee of agriculture was proposed by Councillor Gannon, as I said before, and, in putting that resolution, he pointed out that the increase of ld. per gallon offered by the Minister was an insult to every farmer in Ireland.
I wish people would insult me with £1,000,000.
Those are not my words. I think if they were listening to Deputy Moylan to-day when he gave the Minister the figures and when he showed how much the Exchequer will gain on it, they would know that it would have amounted to twice as big an Estimate. I suppose the Minister will probably give other figures later on. But Deputy Moylan definitely told the House that the cost for the summer months was £400,000 and that on the whole year the Minister makes a profit of over £40.000 on the whole business. If that is a benefit to the farmer, then I do not know what a benefit is.
When the Minister interrupted me I was about to deal with the question of subsidies. This Estimate is for £9,000,000 odd. I do not know the exact figures, but I wonder would the Minister state how much of that goes in subsidies.
Is the Deputy referring to the sub-head?
No. All the headings. I think the Minister asked for a sum of £9,000,000 odd.
But then there was a Vote on Account before that.
We will take the £14,000,000. How much of that would go on subsidies?
About £10,000,000.
Does not the Minister think that is very dishonest? These subsidies do not go to the farmer. They go to the consumer. It is very unfair, then, to put down that sum as Vote to agriculture.
The farmers eat bread.
The farmers produce cheap bread for Deputy Davin and his supporters.
I thought the farmers used to eat bread, too.
They eat their share of it. That Vote should not be put down to the farming account. That should be a different thing altogether. It is no good coming in here and saying agriculture costs £14,000,000. It costs nothing of the kind. If £10,000,000 goes on subsidies, it costs us round about £4,000,000. This £10,000,000 that goes in subsidies does not go to the farmer by any means. As some of the other speakers here have pointed out, until the people here are prepared to pay an economic price for the produce of the farmer, it is no good coming in here and pretending that the Minister is giving a subsidy to the farmers when he is not. The Minister is giving a subsidy to get Deputy Davin's friends, as I said before, and to every other Party here.
£4,000,000 difference is twice as much as Fianna Fáil ever spent.
We are not discussing Fianna Fáil. I will come to that in a moment.
That looks like as if I will not get in this evening.
You are not a bit anxious to get in this evening. If the Minister wanted to get in this evening——
That was not the Minister who was speaking. Do not blame everything on me.
I hope the Minister will take note of these resolutions and I hope he will appreciate that this is not a Fianna Fáil ramp when people ask for cheap bran and cheap pollard in order to keep their cattle alive and for a decent price for their milk. As I told the Minister, I did not take any part in that debate. I have simply come up here now to convey the wishes of the people of Sligo to the Minister and to let him know that they are utterly dissatisfied with the position.
Great play has been made around compulsory tillage. As far as Sligo is concerned, it does not want compulsory tillage. The people there have always tilled a good proportion of their land and they will always be prepared to do that. I do not believe in compulsory tillage.
Another split in Fianna Fáil.
I am glad the Minister has said that, because I want to assure him of one thing: the one thing we want here is a Minister free from worry. In case the Minister might lose his sleep over it or be worried through fear of a split in Fianna Fáil, I want to assure him that when it becomes necessary for Fianna Fáil to make a decision on that point they will make that decision and when that decision is made it will be loyally obeyed and no one will be dragged in the mud for having obeyed it.
Obedience is a great virtue.
We had an example of it to-day.
Obedientia secundum quid.
The bacon industry has been completely ruined, the egg industry is ruined, the hatcheries and supply farms are idle and those who invested their money in them are idle.
Is there anything right?
When a Deputy on this side mentions bacon and eggs, the people over there get very irritated. They remind me of an old fellow down the country who had a pig for sale and who went to the fair. His wife had given him orders about the different things to buy. He sold the pig and met some friends and, between all, they drank the price of the pig. He started for home and, as he came near, his conscience began to get the better of him. He was foreseeing trouble ahead and thought the best thing to do was to put on a brave face. When he went into the house he looked around and said: "The first who opens his mouth about a pig in this house, I will wreck the house." That is the attitude over there: if you mention a pig they are inclined to break up the house, as they know they have made such a hash of the matter.
Any breaking that was done to-day was not done on this side.
They have squandered the price of the pigs and the eggs and they do not want to hear any more talk about it. When the Minister came into power we were to have fertilisers at a very cheap rate. Fertilisers are most important, as without them we cannot grow the crops or the grass the Minister is so fond of telling us about. Instead of a cheap rate, we find they are unprocurable and the price has gone up.
Unprocurable?
They cannot get the bags for them.
In Sligo you have to do with a 60 per cent. quota of what you got last year and last year it was scarce.
100,000 tons extra came in.
I am giving the facts.
Unless you have bags, you will not get it.
Merchants in Sligo will tell you you must bring the containers.
If Deputy Roddy wants to intervene, he can do so and I will promise not to interrupt him from start to finish. I think I am entitled to the same thing. If I make wrong statements, it is up to Deputy Roddy to point that out. I was on the road before he was. I have made a statement that the merchants in Sligo are only giving a quota.
Unless the customer brings bags.
I heard nothing about the bags.
Ask about them.
Anyway, the fertiliser is not there and the price has gone up, contrary to what the Minister promised.
I think the fertiliser is there and the price has gone down.
Not lately.
Deputy Beirne talked about the veterinary service. That service was in force long before the Minister came in. He talked about a scheme for doing away with uneconomic cows. We want information as to how it is working out, as there are piles of those uneconomic cows and there is not a word about it in County Sligo. I hope the Minister in reply will tell the people what they are to do and where they are to go to get these cows taken away and have them replaced by good heifers. I have asked different people in County Sligo. It is not Fianna Fáil who are offering this criticism; the same criticism was offered by Deputies Lehane and Sheldon and they told us they did not know a thing about the scheme. It is up to the Minister to tell the House and the people what to do to avail of the scheme. If he does that, I would be the first to congratulate him, but there is no good in coming along and saying such a scheme is in force when something tangible is not done to put it into force and to tell the people how to avail of it.
The people of Sligo are not satisfied with the agricultural policy as it stands. On the land rehabilitation scheme, I know nothing whatever about it. Sligo was supposed to be one of the first counties, but I did not see a farm where it was in operation.
Go down to the mental hospital and see the scheme there. There is a scheme at McGee's of Barroe, near the hospital. It is only a half a mile off the Deputy's road on his way home.
Sligo local affairs should be discussed in Sligo.
That is my opinion, too. If Deputy Roddy thinks he can stop me from talking, he is making a big mistake.
That is not my intention at all. The Deputy is making a good hand of it.
May I ask Deputy Gilbride does he seriously tell the House that he has not seen any work proceeding anywhere in County Sligo under the land rehabilitation project?
Yes.
And he is not aware that a large project is going on in the mental hospital at the moment, that a considerably large job has been done just outside the City of Sligo and that hundreds of farms are at present being done in his own constituency?
By the farmers themselves?
Some by machinery and some by the farmers.
He can see the scheme at MacGee's if he wishes.
Has the Deputy never seen any of them?
Never.
If I send him particulars——
I will go round and visit them.
We would be glad to do that from the very beginning of the scheme.
As far as I am concerned, inside and outside the House I told everyone to avail of the land rehabilitation scheme and to go in for it as far as possible and also for the Works Act. No matter what Deputy Beirne or anyone else says, if there is any scheme of any benefit to the farmers I will back it, but we want to get some help in the matter. I move to report progress.
Progress reported; the Committee to sit again.
The Dáil adjourned at 5 p.m. to 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 1st May, 1951.