When speaking on this matter last Wednesday I had not the advantage of having a copy of the costings prepared by Professor Murphy, of University College, Cork, with regard to the production of milk, for the Cork Milk Producers' Association. I should like, first of all, to bring to the notice of the house the basis of the costings as regards farm produce. For the purpose of these costings hay was valued at £5 a ton; turnips 20/- a ton; mangels 30/- a ton.
Private Deputies' Business. - Price of Creamery Milk—Motion.
Debate resumed on the following motion:—
"That Dáil Éireann is of opinion that, having regard to the existing costs of production, the present prices paid to the producer for milk supplied to creameries and for milk sold for human consumption are inadequate and that immediate steps should be taken to increase the price so as to give the producer the cost of production plus a fair profit."— (Deputy Corry.)
From what is the Deputy quoting?
From the costings made by Professor Murphy, University College, Cork, with regard to the cost of production of milk.
To whom was the report supplied?
To University College, Cork. Beet tops were valued at 18/7 per ton, ensilage 22/- a ton, kale 28/- a ton, potatoes £5 a ton, and cabbage £1 a ton. That was the basis on which the cost of production of milk was made out in 1946-47.
I do not think that the present Minister for Agriculture with his knowledge of agriculture would dream for one moment of saying that these were fair prices for agricultural produce even in that year. He will remember that on the last occasion on which we went into costings the cost of the production of beet was found to have increased by something like £4 17s. 6d. per acre and that has to be added to these items I have mentioned so that the Minister would get a fair idea of what we are driving at. Last week we had Deputy O'Higgins telling us, as reported in column 309 of the Official Report for 7th November, that the increase in the price of butter was due to political cowardice. We had Deputy MacBride going on something like the same lines.
I hope you will quote what Deputy MacBride says.
I certainly will. I am sure the Deputy will like to hear it.
I would.
Why not take a chance with it?
You often took a chance and were caught out.
Mr. O'Higgins
You took a few chances and that is why you are over there.
As reported in column 538 of the Official Report for 8th November, Deputy MacBride said:
"Then we had the increase in the price of butter. I have already referred to what I think was one of the worst features of that, namely, the cynicism and lack of morality, if I may put it that way, the lack of public morality it displayed."
The Deputy went on to——
Finish it.
I do not want to waste too much time on you. The Deputy went on:
"We had an election campaign a short time before in which the price of butter was one of the matters upon which the last Government was being attacked. We had these advertisements in relation to the price of butter published at a heavy cost. Within three weeks of the change of Government the present Government itself increased the price of butter, presumably in order to buy some support. I do not know whether the increase in the price of butter was necessary or not."
That is a good statement from a Deputy who was only three months out of office considering some of the statements he made during the election.
I want the statement related to the motion.
Deputy MacBride went on:
"I do not know whether subsidies could not have met the increased cost if it was felt that the farmers should get a higher price for milk. I do know that the increase in the price of milk led to an increase in the price of butter and cheese."
When the price of milk was increased by 1d. a gallon there was a general attack by inspired articles in the Press and by Deputies opposite on the unfortunate farmer who was going to become a millionaire out of the increase of 1d. a gallon he was to get for milk.
You promised him 6d.
We did a good job and the Deputy should be thankful to us. Deputy O'Higgins told us last week that the increase in the price of milk and butter was due to political cowardice on the part of the Government.
Mr. O'Higgins
I was using the Tánaiste's phrase. It was the Tánaiste said it. Look at column 309 of the Official Report and you will see what the Tánaiste said.
If the Deputy will shut up we will get on better. He should try to contain himself until to-morrow.
If the Deputy invites interruptions, the Chair will have very little sympathy with him.
I want the gentleman to try to conduct himself. I was dealing with the basis on which these costings were taken. I have given the basis for the food. If the Minister has a copy of this document and turns to page 8 he will find there that the net cost of the production of milk was 18.45d. per gallon during the winter period and 8.10d. during the summer period. That was made up at a period when agricultural wages were £2 10s. Od. per week.
The increase in the cost of production, so far as labour is concerned, is £1 12s. 1d., or 62 per cent. increase, which is exactly 2d. per gallon. The cost of concentrates has gone up by something like 75 per cent. since these costings were taken from November, 1946, to October, 1947. The cost of home-produced food, which I pointed out at the start was far too low, has gone up something like 70 per cent. since, so that the item here of 8.64d. per gallon for food will have to be increased by something over 5d. per gallon. Herd maintenance has certainly increased enormously. The miscellaneous costs, such as those relating to buckets, tankards, veterinary fees and all the rest of it have also been gone into. The total increase in the cost of milk production since November, 1946, is somewhat around 7¾d. per gallon. There is an increase on the credit side of something like 2d., which leaves 5¾d. altogether.
I am sure we are all anxious that we should not be placed in the position of having to import 3,000 tons of foreign butter into this agricultural country in order to feed our people. The fact that we have to do so is largely due to want of courage on the part of this House, in the first place, and want of courage on the part of whatever Government is in office, in the second place. One cannot expect the farmers in five or six of our counties, and the dairy herds of this country are confined to five or six countries, to produce milk in order to supply butter to the people of the Twenty-Six Counties while milk production remains uneconomic. The amount of milk produced in the other counties does not count.
I contend that the foundation of our agricultural industry, our dairy herds, is being wrecked year after year. I asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce to-day what result this cutting to the bare bones on agricultural produce has had? Since this Government came into office we have had a continual howl about the increase in the cost of living. In the reply I got from the Minister to-day he told me that two-thirds of the 1d. increase in the price of sugar was caused by the high cost of imported sugar. We have had to pay something like £4,500,000 for foreign sugar because the Government of the day, when appealed to, refused to give 4/6 a ton increase to the farmer for his beet. The Government of the day preferred to pay the equivalent of 30/- per ton to the foreigner for foreign sugar.
I appeal now to the Minister to rectify the position. I have been here for a long number of years, longer than I wish to remember, appealing to successive Governments to find out the cost of milk production. There are eight or nine farms run by the Department of Agriculture. It should not be an impossible task on one of these farms, farms that are run by managers earning anything from £800 to £1,000 a year, to find out the cost of milk production. After all, a group of farmers in Cork handed their farms over to University College and got the costings calculated. Those are the only costings available at the present time in relation to milk production and we went to the trouble of getting them. They are there now for everybody's benefit. The first thing I did was to make a present of a copy of them to the last Minister for Agriculture, Deputy Dillon, so that he would not be working in the dark, but I am sorry to say that it had no effect on that hard-hearted individual. Despite the intrigues of Deputy Madden and all the rest of them, he could not be brought up to scratch, but he made a death-bed repentance and threw us a penny a gallon the day before he went out of office. This year we have to go abroad to purchase 3,000 tons of butter. Where will we get it? What price will we have to pay for it?
Is it not 6,000 tons?
The Minister said 3,000 tons. He will tell us if we are wrong. Where will we get this butter? I will quote now from a statement that was quoted here before.
From what is the quotation taken?
It is taken from Volume 126 of the Official Report of 27th June. 1951, at column 578:—
"A meeting of creamery managers from all the Munster counties, members of the Irish Creamery Managers' Association, was held at the Town Hall, Mallow, County Cork, yesterday. The following statement was made after the meeting: ‘This meeting is of the unanimous opinion that the quantity of creamery butter produced this year would be at least 15 per cent. down on last year's production, and that the Government is faced with the importation of a considerable quantity of Danish or New Zealand butter to meet the country's requirements, or, alternatively, reducing the present ration to 6 or even 4 ozs. a week'.
Having regard to the fact that all the indications show that the United States, Canada and Australia would probably join the other butter-importing countries this year— that is Britain, France, Germany, Belgium and Switzerland—it means that butter prices are undoubtedly going to be higher.
The present sterling equivalent of creamery butter prices in the United States, Canada, Belgium and Germany to-day ranged from 449/3 to 550/- per cwt. If those prices are to be paid for imported butter to the extent of about 25 per cent. of our total requirements, it is strongly urged that an economic price be now fixed for home milk producers so as to ensure that a sufficiency of Irish creamery butter is available for our own people next season.
Three thousand tons to be bought from the foreigner at, taking the lowest price quoted there of 450/- a cwt., represents £1,350,000 of the Irish people's money paid to the foreigner for imported butter."
On a point of order. On the question that is being raised about the shortage of butter, so far as Clare is concerned, I can give the answer to that question.
That is obviously not a point of order. It is a point of fact.
I want to state that much. I am a new member of the House and I think I should get a fair show.
The Deputy is entitled to make his statement, but unless Deputy Corry is prepared to give way he is not entitled to speak now.
I am not prepared to give way to a Clare man.
I know what is wrong.
The Deputy can make his statement afterwards.
Of course, I am new on the job, but I will get into it by degrees.
Due to the muddling of Deputy James Dillon when he was Minister for Agriculture, our present Minister finds that he has to purchase 3,000 tons of foreign butter at the prices which I have quoted. I do not know whether or not he has succeeded in getting it cheaper, especially in view of the way in which the old pound is being walloped around. If we are going to be placed in the position of having to pay something like £1,500,000 to the foreigner for butter—to pay him a price which, if paid to the Irish farmer would get the greater portion anyway of that butter produced at home, the position is certainly very serious.
What I am anxious about is that the Minister and his Department would set up a costings board here to go into the cost of the production of milk, to set up the costings board which he very kindly guaranteed to us a couple of months ago. What I want to know is, how far he has gone, when this costings board is going to be set up, and whether we are going to get results from it.
Why not accept the Minister's word in the matter?
I will accept the Minister's word on anything, but a couple of months ago we had a Minister for Agriculture and no one could take his word. However, thank God, there has been a change in that.
For the time being.
I thought the Deputy was busy with the printing press for notes to meet the financial crisis.
Deputy Corry should deal with the motion respecting the price of milk.
The cows will go dry if he does not hurry up.
What I want from the Minister is a definite statement as to when we are going to get the costings board, and whether, in the meantime, he can do anything that will prevent farmers from selling their dairy herds and getting out of production. I say that because that, unfortunately is the tendency all over.
I do not intend at this stage to go into all the items which went to make up these costings in the manner in which they were made up. The Minister has a copy of them, and they are a faithful reflection of the facts as found by Professor Murphy in 1946 and 1947. Surely, you cannot increase agricultural wages by 62 per cent., you cannot increase the price of artificial manures, you cannot increase the price of cotton seed cake and the other concentrates needed for the production of milk and at the same time expect that the price of milk is to continue at the same old level. It cannot be done. The farmer, finding himself, unfortunately, faced with that condition of affairs, has a remedy and is turning to it. It is practically impossible at the present time to get a decent milch cow except in the hands of men who have refused to take the advice of the Department, and who have turned to milking breeds. I would urge on the Minister to give immediate attention to this problem, and endeavour, by some means, to rectify the matter before it is too late to be rectified, and before we find ourselves compelled to go abroad for what there should be a surplus of in this country for our own people—butter.
I second the motion. I am not only concerned with the problem of the suppliers in the creamery areas, but, perhaps to a greater extent, with the problem of those who supply milk for human consumption. Those who supply milk for human consumption receive a higher price than that paid at the creameries, but against that they receive back no separated milk for the feeding of livestock. In addition, they are called upon to maintain a supply of milk the whole year round, thereby involving themselves in the considerable cost of keeping up their dairy herds. They are the people who are very frequently compelled to go to fairs and buy cows when they are at the highest price in order that they may be in a position to maintain their yearly contracts. These people are also deserving of consideration.
There is no doubt but that a few years ago it looked as if the milk supply in the city area, and adjoining areas, was increasing. The fact that it was increasing was used as an argument against the producer. At present there is no surplus of milk whatever in the Dublin district area. As a matter of fact, there is a great scarcity in many towns in Leinster in regard to whole milk because, apparently, the producers are not finding it economic to supply the full requirements of the various towns. The result is that we have a serious shortage.
On the motion which was before the House last week in regard to agricultural wages, I took a certain stand. It was that this matter of wages should be adjusted in accordance with fundamental Christian principles and justice: that is to say that a body should be set up to find out what would be fair and just, and that on the findings of that body the Government should act. I would not be logical if I did not take exactly the same stand in regard to the price paid to the farmer for milk.
This motion recommends an increase. I would much prefer to see that increase come about as a result of an impartial inquiry into every aspect of the question, into every item of costings, rather than that it should come about as a result of agitation or as a result of a shortage of supply. I think, therefore, that if the Minister is wise he will lose no time in setting up an impartial investigation into costings in regard to milk. That will have to be a comprehensive and complete investigation, an investigation the findings of which cannot be questioned by, or from, any side.
I have seen criticisms from various places in regard to farmers who ask for an investigation into their costings. These critics say, "Why do not the farmers themselves form some kind of an organisation which would carry out an investigation into their costings?"
I do not think that would meet the situation because the consuming public would, in all probability, not accept costings prepared by the producers alone. In regard to beet, as the Minister knows, because he took an active part in the matter, a very impartial investigation was carried out in regard to costings and that investigation was controlled, not only by the producers of sugar beet, but also by a joint committee of producers of sugar beet and the representatives of the sugar beet factories. In the same way, we want a thoroughly impartial and objective investigation into milk costings. We farmers, I think, are prepared to accept the findings of that investigation. No farmer or producer wants to inflict any injustice upon the consumer. We recognise that milk is the most vital of human needs and there could be no justification for a price that would be unfair to the consumer, having regard to the costs of production.
I think it is desirable that the House should hear the statement recently made by the Coadjutor Bishop of Cork, Most Rev. Dr. Lucey. He said:—
"Until we get over the notion that farming is less respectable than trading, working in a Government office, being a civil servant, etc., we are not valuing the farmer at his true worth to God and the community. And until the prices for his produce are such as to enable him to live as well as they live he is not getting his due in justice. The farmer is as good a man as the best in the country. His work is skilled work; it is hard work; it is work that does not admit of an eight-hour day, or six-day week, or closing down for a fortnight in the summer."
His Lordship did not stop at doing justice to the farmer. He also referred to the agricultural labourer. He said:—
"The farm labourer, too, no less than the farm owner, is a farmer. His, too, is an honourable calling. He, too, has a right to a due return for his work."
Then His Lordship refers to the fact that he does not want a levelling down of the salaries and wages of persons other than those engaged in agriculture. Rather he wants a levelling up, and he concludes:—
"I do want a levelling up of the country labourer's wages to the urban standard. And that can come only by way of a just price for milk, eggs, pigs, poultry—the produce of mixed or genuine farming. At the moment, the prices for these commodities are too low to give the farmer himself or his man the standard of living others in the community have."
Might I inquire what the Deputy is quoting from?
I am quoting from a statement made by Most Rev. Dr. Lucey.
What is the document?
He has already indicated it to the House.
Is it from the Irish Press?
I am not sure. I think it is from the Irish Independent. Now there you have the basis of a just and fair demand by those who are engaged in milk production and, as I have said. the Minister will meet these demands in a reasonable way if he proceeds immediately to investigate these costings in a thorough and impartial way. There is, however, of course, another obligation upon the Minister which, I think, he definitely did contract when taking office, and that was, he gave an undertaking that he would meet representatives of the agricultural community if and when it was desirable in the national interest.
Was that one of the promises he made when the Government was being formed?
That was not a promise but it was part of a definite statement of policy by the Government, and it is part of a statement of policy which I am quite sure the Minister will have no hesitation in honouring. His immediate predecessor refused to meet the representatives of the creamery milk producers and he described them as a Fianna Fáil ramp. As a matter of fact they were nothing of the kind. They were a non-political, non-party body trying to advance the interests of those engaged in the dairying industry. I am sure that the Minister will not hesitate to meet these people and discuss with them this problem of costings investigation.
In the same way I would like the Minister also to take the earliest opportunity to meet the producers in the Dublin milk supply area. These people have a very efficient and representative organisation which is not concerned with pressing any political objective but is solely concerned with protecting the interests of producers and advancing the best interests of the dairying industry.
In the Dublin district the position is that recommendations in regard to prices are made by what is known as the Dublin District Milk Board, which is representative not only of producers but also of wholesalers and other persons engaged in milk production and marketing. That board unanimously recommended an increase. I think they recommended an increase of 4d., but an increase of 2d. has been given up to date.
In view of the fact that the Dublin district board have unanimously recommended an increase which has not been fully granted, I think it would be wise for the Minister to meet the representatives of the Dublin milk producers and discuss with them either in what way it would be possible to give them an improved price or to bring about a reduction in their costings. There is no doubt whatever that the costs of milk production have increased enormously over the past year. Not only have feeding stuffs and fertilisers required for the farm increased but, in addition, very substantial increases in wages have taken place. The increase in wages in the Dublin district milk suppliers' area is much larger than that recommended by the Agricultural Wages Board because, with the competition of other organisations, farmers, though they may not be too generous, have found that, if they want to keep men on their farms where there is extensive dairying carried out, they have got to pay them a wage in excess of the minimum agricultural wage.
That is a good thing. Farm labourers who milk cows are engaged in one of the most arduous branches of the farming industry—a branch which involves long hours, overtime and Sunday work. They are, therefore, entitled to fair remuneration. It is not so pleasant for a young fellow to have to remain at work on Sundays when his neighbours are off to football matches, to cinema shows, and to other places. As I said before, the farm workers are entitled to fair wages, but, in order to pay such wages, it is essential that the owner of the dairy herd must be met in a reasonable way. The seriousness of this problem will be brought home to the Minister if he has looked, as I am sure he has, at the statistics of the number of dairy cows in this country. We have heard a lot of talk about these cows for the past couple of years. In actual fact, the number of milch cows in this country has fallen by 50,000 in the last year; that is a very dangerous trend. On the milch cow depends the whole live-stock industry of the country and on the live-stock industry depends the whole agricultural industry, tillage and the other branches of farming. It is a very serious matter, therefore, to find the number of milch cows being reduced from year to year, because the whole foundation thus falls out of the agricultural industry. I think that, from every point of view, the Minister ought to give very serious attention to the suggestion which has been made to him by Deputy Corry and which I would like to endorse strongly. I would say to the Minister: "Get down to the basis and find out what are the true figures in regard to costings. Do not take any hearsay figures Deputies, or anybody else, may give you. Get the true facts and, having got them, give the milk producer a firm undertaking that you, as Minister, will act on those."
As a new member to the House, I have been listening to Deputy Corry making statements. I feel, in fact, I honestly believe, that Deputy Corry is not as innocent as he pretends to be of the facts which he has placed before the House. My opinion as to the shortage of butter at the present time is based on two facts. While we have cause to regret one, we certainly should feel pleased as regards the second one. Deputy Corry has stated in this House that we have to import butter.
I agree with him on that point, but I would ask him to listen very carefully to what I have to say; I do not know what happened in Cork, but I know very well what happened in County Clare. Deputy Corry and every member of this House knows what the farming community suffered as a result of last year's bad weather. In the districts surrounding my native town of Ennistymon cows which were due to calve in March or April were sold to the factories in November because their owners were unable to provide sufficient feeding stuffs to feed their stock through the winter months. I know of two and even ten people who came to the fairs in my native town from the surrounding districts in order to sell some of their cows. In fact, one farmer of my acquaintance had to sell four of his eight cows in order that he would be able to keep the other four alive and carry on with his business. All this is certainly to be regretted, and Deputy Corry must agree with me that such a state of affairs led to the shortage of butter.
Would the Deputy pardon me if I interrupt him for a second?
Certainly.
The Deputy, I understand, is a member of the Fine Gael Party, and surely he read Mr. James Dillon's statement saying that one need only 'phone him and that he would send on all the feeding stuffs required.
Deputy Murphy should be allowed to make his speech without interruption.
I am very happy to say that due to the prosperity which crept into this country during the three and a quarter years of the inter-Party Government's administration the occupants of slum dwellings in different areas of this country have now plenty of butter available. Where only one pound of butter per week "walked" in now, thanks be to God, one pound "walks" in every day.
It must be Danish butter.
Since the establishment of Dáil Eireann some strange characters have been elected as members of this House, but the strangest combination that we have had for many a day is the Deputy Corry-Deputy Cogan combination. We heard Deputy Corry making a case for an increase in the price of milk in this House. Everybody knows that Deputy Corry likes others to listen to him while he is making a speech and all of us who know Deputy Cogan realise that he loves to hear himself making a speech.
Like yourself.
The farmers of this country must know and the Minister himself must realise that it has come to a poor day when the milk producers of this country are dependent on the Deputy Corry-Deputy Cogan combination to put forward their case in this House. Deputy Cogan has taken on the role of "Alannah Machree's Dog" again to-night. The history of that dog is that he went part of the road with everybody and the whole of the road with nobody. He has spoken to-night in favour of the agricultural workers, but he could not find a good word to say for them last week when the House was seeking to give them an increased rate of pay.
I said nothing against it.
May I now say that it is quite evident that there seems to be no definite policy on the part of the present Fianna Fáil-Cogan-Cowan Government as far as the price of milk is concerned. We have the Minister broaching one type of policy, we find Deputy Corry—one of his henchmen— speaking on different lines, and we find the man who put in the Government— Deputy Cogan—formulating a different policy. If there is one thing that can be said about the policy of the former Minister for Agriculture it is that when we made up the Government we were behind him no matter what line of action he took. We supported him, and we had the courage to support him and to stand over whatever he did. I sympathise with the present Minister for Agriculture. Indeed, he must be a very unhappy man and not too proud of a policy which does not go down with his own followers. We have had statements to-night that Deputy Corry doubts the Minister's undertakings, and Deputy Cogan unconsciously let out that one of the undertakings that was given when Government policy was being formulated on the 12th June last was that the milk producers would get what they wanted. If that is what is responsible for having the present set-up in office, I am glad that the inter-Party Government was defeated because so long as they were in office, it could not be said that they were there as a result of bargaining, and Deputy Cogan knows that. Deputy Cogan is the one man who does know that. It is extraordinary to hear Deputy Corry putting up a case for an increased price for milk, and to hear Deputy Cogan making a like appeal. Neither Deputy Cogan nor Deputy Corry has spoken one word in favour of the unfortunate person who has to purchase milk, butter or to buy cheese. Surely there must be someone living in the constituencies of these Deputies who drink milk, eat butter or consume cheese? Yet these Deputies have no consideration whatever for their constituents in that respect.
I shall be prepared to support Deputy Corry's motion if the Minister will give an undertaking that if milk producers get an increase of 2d., 4d. or 6d. per gallon, 2d. per lb. will not be added to the price of every pound of butter a poor man buys or that 4d. a lb. is not going to be added to the price of every pound of cheese. Is it not high time that the present Government gave some consideration to the unfortunate poor person? There is quite a large section of farmers in the constituency which I represent but, at the same time, I feel I must have some consideration for the working class who have to suffer while Deputy Corry's farmers in East Cork and certain farmers in Deputy Cogan's constituency are allowed to get fatter, and richer, while the poor grow thinner and poorer. I am not prepared to support a policy of that kind. I am not prepared to support an increase in the price of milk if that means an increase in the price of a pound of butter for the poor man.
We have the Minister for Health and the Minister for Social Welfare, Dr. Ryan, at every possible opportunity making an appeal that people should consume more butter to improve their health. To guard against tuberculosis we are told by the present Minister for Health, and we were also told by the previous Minister, that it is necessary that children and mothers should consume plenty of butter. Is it not sufficient for Deputy Corry and Deputy Cogan to know that as a result of their disgraceful conduct in the past six months, they have succeeded in raising the cost of living on the people, that they have succeeded in having the cost of every household commodity increased, without making further demands to-night to have the price of butter increased to such a prohibitive figure that no agricultural worker, civil servant, school teacher, garda, businessman or any section of the community other than the wealthy rich farmers whom Deputy Dillon made millionaires can afford to eat it? I make that statement with a full sense of responsibility, knowing that there are milk producers in my constituency.
How many?
I make the statement knowing and believing that when Deputy Corry in this daft motion, asks that the present prices paid to the producer of milk supplied to creameries and for milk sold for human consumption, should be increased, it will mean an additional imposition even for the half-pint of milk that goes into the workingman's house where the worker, his wife and seven, eight or ten children, half-fed and half-naked, are endeavouring to exist. To-night this House is asked to deny them that half-pint of milk by making the price prohibitive for the father, mother, or unfortunate widow. If the Minister for Agriculture can increase the price of milk without its affecting old age pensioners in the city and in towns like Tullamore. Birr, Portlaoighise, Mount-mellick and other areas in my constituency, I shall be with him and with Deputy Corry but if I find that the money which will be jingling in Deputy Corry's pocket for his milk is going to be taken out of the pocket of the road worker, the industrial worker, the civil servant or the businessman in my constituency, I shall oppose this proposal in the strongest possible manner.
It will be observed from the motion that Deputy Corry wants the price increased so as to give the producer the cost of production "plus a fair profit." Anybody who knows Deputy Corry knows quite well that he has no idea of what a fair profit would be. Why has Deputy Corry not given us a specific figure so that we shall know what he means by a fair profit and know the amount by which he asks the Minister to increase the price of butter and cheese? If he had done that, we would know what the unfortunate poor in the towns and cities are to be asked to pay for their butter. It is necessary for us to have these figures but the Deputy characteristically puts forward this motion in its present form, in order to pull the wool over the eyes of the people. I challenge Deputy Corry to let us know what he considers a fair profit. I am sure it would be of some assistance to the Minister also if the Deputy would indicate what his idea of a fair profit is.
Deputy Corry referred to the fact that Deputy Dillon when Minister for Agriculture increased the price of milk, and unfortunately that was followed by an increase in the price of butter. For that he was cried down by members of the Opposition in every town and city in the country, and the present Minister, Deputy Corry and other members of his Party promised the country to bring down the cost of living. So far from doing that they added another 2d. per lb. to the price of butter immediately they got into office. If that is Fianna Fáil's method of bringing down the cost of living, it is one that could only be conceived by a Government coming from a mental hospital.
Deputy Cogan has given us a quotation from a speech by Most Reverend Dr. Lucey. Of course we do not know where he got that quotation. He does not know what paper the report appeared in. He does not know the date of issue; he knows little about it beyond the fact that he is introducing the name of Dr. Lucey for the purpose of making a certain case in this House.
On a point of explanation, that was a quotation from the Cork Examiner.
We have a little more information now.
Are you satisfied?
Deputy Corry referred to imported butter, and asked why we should import any butter. He said there would be no necessity to import butter if our farmers were given a reasonable price with a fair profit. There would be no need to produce any butter because nobody would be able to buy it, if the price were fixed according to the manner in which the present Minister would fix it.
When Deputy Corry was on this side of the House for three and a half years, every time he spoke on agriculture he referred to the imported butter. His nostrils went to the back of his head every time he pictured a pound of imported butter. He once referred to it as bad car grease. He referred to the distasteful odour that came from the butter and said that it used to walk off the table by itself.
So Deputy Murphy told you a while ago.
Deputy Corry must realise that more of that butter has been imported in the past six months than in the three years of the inter-Party Government.
There was no butter imported in the last six months—none
If the imported butter was bad, if it had legs and walked when the inter-Party Government brought it in, the same must happen to it now. The only difference is that, since they went to the other side of the House, Deputy Corry and Deputy Cogan have lost the sense of smell as well as other senses. I say, without fear of contradiction, that it is only right and proper, when fixing prices, that the House should not accept a motion so vaguely framed as this one is. Consideration should be given to the very large section of our people who consume butter, milk and cheese. When our standard of living is raised sufficiently by way of improved social services, improved health facilities, all-round increases in wages, then probably consideration should be given to the application of the milk producers for an increase in the price of their butter, but, with the present trend in the cost of living and the decline in our standard of living, and having regard to the gloomy report submitted by the Central Bank and the disgusting, disgraceful White Paper submitted by the Minister for Finance that tells us to take off our good clothes and put on our rags and to remove the smiles from our faces and to get tears and cry again, is it not up to us to see that the people who are principally concerned with the cost of living, namely, the working-class people, do not have a further burden placed on their shoulders and that this House will not consider giving any further increases to the section that Deputy Corry speaks for until the greater section that Deputy Corry has forgotten, the working-class people, and every citizen who consumes butter, milk and cheese, are provided for?
If the Minister for Agriculture gives an undertaking that the acceptance of this motion will not mean an increase in the price of those commodities, I will vote for it and I will support it. Deputy Corry will have performed a useful act if, in respect of this motion, the Minister will tell us that he is prepared to increase the price of milk without increasing the price of butter and cheese.
Reference was made to the fact that the milk producers were not received by the former Minister for Agriculture. If my memory serves me aright, shortly after the present Minister took office he received some of these people and there was a statement made in some of the papers to the effect that they were dissatisfied and discontented and that the interview was not a success. That is more than they can say about the former Minister for Agriculture because they did not get in to see him.
Deputy Corry or Deputy Cogan—I get mixed up because these two Deputies can be referred to as the twins of the House—referred to the Milk Producers' Association and said that the former Minister for Agriculture made a statement to the effect that it was a Fianna Fáil ramp. The former Minister for Agriculture has made many true and many wise statements but the truest and the wisest statement he ever made was the statement to the effect that the Milk Producers' Association was a Fianna Fáil ramp. It is quite true. They were such and they are such to this day. For that reason, I believe the former Minister for Agriculture was wise and right in refusing to receive them. Now a plea is being made by Deputy Corry to the present Minister to receive those people.
I am sure he will not refuse to receive his own friends and his own supporters. I am sure the Minister will agree within the next seven days to make room in his office for the representatives of the Milk Producers' Association whom Deputy Dillon refused to see. If he does not do it, I am sure Deputy Cogan will have him removed from office forthwith. I am sure no time will be lost in seeing that the most comfortable chairs will be made available in the Minister's office for Mr. Fletcher and the members of the Milk Producers' Association and that Deputy Corry will see to it that the Minister will have a box of cigars for them and that every entertainment will be provided for them and that the Minister will hear what case they have to put forward for an increase in the price of milk. I am sure no time will be lost in sending for those people by telegram so as to comply with the wishes of Deputy Corry and Deputy Cogan.
I do not intend to take up the time of this House any further. I rose to express my disgust at hypocrisy. St. Paul once said that much is expected of those who know much. One of the reasons why we expected so little from Deputy Corry and Deputy Cogan to-night in relation to this motion is that they know so little. I protest in the strongest possible manner against any attempt by this Government to have butter made a commodity for the high-class people, a commodity which can go only on the rich man's table. Milk that was once consumed by all of us is to-day becoming a rich man's luxury. Cheese can no longer be used by the poor man, even as bait in a mousetrap. To-day it is only swanks who can have cheese and biscuits after dinner because Fianna Fáil, Deputy Cogan and his colleagues have seen to it that cheese is for the rich only. They are now seeing that butter will be for the rich and that milk will not go into the belly of the poor man's child but will make the rich man's child hardier and stronger.
Mr. Walsh
Since this motion appeared on the Order Paper I have been around the country to committees of agriculture and so forth.
I have made statements in connection with this costings organisation to which Deputy Corry and Deputy Cogan referred to-night. I have told the farmers in the various counties that it is my intention to set up a costings organisation. I can now tell the House that I have made headway in the setting up of that organisation, and I hope, within the next two or three weeks, to be in a position to announce the personnel of the organisation itself.
This question of the price of milk is not a new one. In 1947 the price of milk was 10½d. per gallon. In that year the present Minister for Local Government, who was then Minister for Agriculture, fixed a price for milk. The price fixed then was 1/2 per gallon for the summer months and 1/4 per gallon for the winter months. That price obtained between 1947 and April, 1951. A motion was moved here about 12 months ago, and some of the people who, I am sure, are now preparing to support this motion to-night, had an opportunity then of asking the Minister of the day to give an increased price for milk. Yet, when it came to the division, these people walked into the lobby and voted against an increase in the price of milk. I hope that during the discussion on this motion some of those people will not have the temerity to ask me to accept it—but such has been the case.
Some 12 or 18 months ago my predecessor in office, Deputy Dillon, went to Waterford. He asked the milk producers there to produce milk for a period of five years at 1/- per gallon. Naturally, there was an outcry—because the price had been fixed by the present Minister for Local Government, when he was Minister for Agriculture, at 1/2 and 1/4. My predecessor, Deputy Dillon, asked the farmers to reduce the price of milk. Instead of giving them an increase, he offered them a reduction. Of course, it was not acceptable, and we had the agitation which had been going on for some time prior to that and which lasted until April, 1951.
Immediately before the general election, the then Minister for Agriculture, Deputy Dillon, decided—I am sure as a sop to the milk producers in this country—that it would be a wise thing to give an increase of 1d. per gallon. Consequently, the price of milk for the summer period was increased by 1d. from 1/2 to 1/3—but between 1947 and 1951 the price was not increased. I am sure many people on the benches opposite are now shedding crocodile tears for the dairy farmers. However, when they had an opportunity of supporting a motion put forward by Deputy Cogan about six or eight months ago they walked into the Division Lobby and voted against it. Such is the sincerity of some of the people who, I know, are prepared to support the milk producers to-day—not for the purpose of supporting the milk producers, but just in order to gain some cheap popularity for themselves.
When we came into office we published a 17-point programme. Included in the 17 points was one which stated that we would give adequate prices to producers—milk producers, wheat producers, beet producers, and so forth. Only two commodities are produced on the farm for which the Government has the responsibility of fixing prices, namely, milk and wheat. The first action of this Government was to examine the price of milk in an endeavour to see in what way the lot of the dairy farmer could be improved, because we voted for an increase eight months before that. We knew an increase was justified and, because of that, I would say that the first action of the Fianna Fáil Government when they came back into office was to increase the price of milk, not by 1d. for the whole year round, but by 1d. for the summer months and 2d. for the winter months. I may be asked: "Why differentiate between the summer months and the winter months?" My predecessor forgot that it costs more to produce a gallon of milk in winter than in summer.
In order to compensate the farmer who is producing milk in the winter months we stepped up the price by 2d. in the winter months. The present prices are 1/4 in the summer months and 1/6 in the winter months. These prices obtain until next April. The price fixed last April by my predecessor, Deputy Dillon, was for a five-year period. In announcing the new prices of 1/4 and 1/6, I pointed out that they would apply until the 1st of April, 1952. Of course, the price will be reviewed between now and April next. I hope to have the costings organisation I have spoken about in operation long before then. As a matter of fact, it will be in operation after Christmas.
By setting up this costings organisation I think I am fulfilling a duty to the milk producers and a duty to the consumers. It may be argued that the present price of milk is not economic. Although I am a farmer myself, I do not know whether the present price of milk is economic or not. I do not know if anybody in this country knows what is the economic price of milk, because so many factors have to be taken into consideration in arriving at a price. The only way to find out is to get down to hard facts through a proper organisation set up for the purpose. As I have said, I have already got the person who is prepared to carry out that work. We have no proof that the present price is not an economic price and, on the other hand, we have no proof that it is an economic price. Until such time as it can be proved or disproved that 1/4 and 1/6 is an economic price, we are just groping in the dark when we offer a price. That has been the position in the past but I hope it is not going to be the position in the future because we shall determine the price through the costings organisation.
To-night, some Deputies mentioned that we imported butter. Yes, we did import butter and we shall have to import butter this year. The reason for the importation of butter is that our people, possibly over a period of four years——
Mr. O'Higgins
They were eating more butter in the last few years.
Mr. Walsh
That is only one of the reasons. The consumption of butter has increased by 1½ ounces. That is not the reason why we are importing butter. If the Deputy thinks that it is, I may assure him that it is not. The reason is because we have developed an export trade for chocolate crumb, dried milk and condensed milk. That trade is developing. We have developed it in this present year.
Mr. O'Higgins
It was there long before the Minister became a Minister.
Mr. Walsh
It has been there for 15 years.
But the chocolate crumb industry was accelerated in the last few years.
Mr. Walsh
It was not accelerated to any great extent. I know the factory the Deputy is referring to. It has not been extended in the last four or five years. The diversion of milk has been greater in the past summer than heretofore. We have not had a reduction in the production of milk this year. The production in the month of October has gone up by 15 per cent., strange as it may appear, compared with last year. Deputy Murphy, when he was speaking to-night, gave reasons—genuine reasons —why the milk production went down last year. It was due to a bad winter and a bad spring.
Deputies
Hear, hear!
Very good.
Mr. Walsh
That was one of the reasons. I am not trying to make political propaganda like the people on the opposite side. We approach these matters honestly and truthfully. I am giving all the facts as I see them. When I meet people like some of the Deputies on the far side of the House who have got into these positions through trickery, I am not going to listen to them.
As regards milk production, one of the reasons—there are others—why the production of milk went down was, as I have said, that much of the milk is being diverted to other non-butter products. This year we are going to import 6,000 tons of butter at a price of 376/- per cwt. I hope it will not be necessary to import butter next year. It may be. If we can develop our export trade in non-butter products we will do so, as it would reduce our adverse trade balance. The price of milk to produce butter must be lower than the price of milk to produce chocolate crumb which is the least economic of all the products that can be produced from milk, strange as it may appear. That is not getting away from the fact that the farmer to-day is not satisfied with the price he is getting for his milk. I cannot, at this stage, add anything further to what I have already stated regarding what the price may be next year. I must depend upon getting a proper answer—a correct answer—from the people in so far as the cost of producing a gallon of milk is concerned. When that has been done then it will be a question of fixing a margin of profit for the producer.
The Minister has not finished yet, has he? Has he not something to say about receiving a deputation or whether he is or is not in favour of the motion?
Mr. Walsh
Is the Deputy anxious to get on his feet?
Mr. O'Higgins
We are still waiting to know what your policy is.
Mr. Walsh
While down the country a most peculiar thing happened.
Mr. O'Higgins
You will be going back there shortly.
Mr. Walsh
Not as soon as you think. You thought you were staying over here for a long time. When I was down the country talking to the people in the creamery districts, a most surprising thing happened. I was speaking on the price of milk, just as I am to-night, when one gentleman got up and said he was prepared to take 1/6 per gallon for milk. I was rather surprised. Another gentleman, who was also a member of the committee of agriculture, got up and said he could not produce milk under 1/8 per gallon. I was between the devil and the deep sea. I did not know which one to believe. However, I had at this particular time the prices that had been paid in the various creameries in that county. I knew the districts from which the members had come. I looked up the figures and found that in the case of the man who was prepared to produce milk at 1/6 he was actually getting 1/6½ per gallon in the month of September. The other man, who said he could not produce it under 1/8 per gallon, was actually getting 1/7. We hear a lot of talk and a lot of nonsense to-day all over the country about the price of milk in many of the creameries. I am sure it would surprise Deputies to know that the price of milk is far in excess of 1/4, that it is actually making 1/6.
The gentleman who said he would be satisfied with 1/6 per gallon and who got 1/6½ would be satisfied with an average of 1/6.
Mr. Walsh
He got 1/6½.
You are making a small, miserable point at the end of the season.
Mr. Walsh
He still has a couple of months to go. The price he was getting was actually the winter price. In a fortnight afterwards the price would be increased by 2d., and, instead of getting 1/6 per gallon, he would get 1/8. That is a fact. I am just giving you the peculiarities of this question.
Reference has been made to the increase we gave in the price of milk and the effect it had on the increase in the price of butter. We gave that price for milk in order to carry out our promise to the people making what we considered to be an adequate price to encourage our milk producers to produce more.
What promise to what people?
Mr. Walsh
To our people under the 17 points. If the Deputy had read them he would have seen them.
I only read your policy before the election, not after the election.
There was no policy before the election.
Mr. Walsh
We increased the price so that we might have a greater supply of butter in the country and a greater supply of milk in order to export chocolate crumb and build up that industry better than it was. That is our policy with every agricultural product. We will encourage our people to produce. If we failed to do that we would have to supply milk to Deputy Flanagan because he is not able to supply himself, and we would have to get somebody to go to him with a loaf of bread.
Thanks be to God, I am able to eat them all, provided you give them to me at a reasonable price.
Mr. Walsh
You will not produce it. You have never produced anything and you will never produce anything in the future. The volume of milk production has gone up by over 15 per cent. in the month of October this year. We are on the right road and I believe we will continue on that right road. If we succeed in having our costings carried out inside the next 12 months, then it will only be a question for an organisation—whatever that organisation may be—to fix a margin for our people. I hope our beet growers and people who have already been connected with costings realise what I am talking about. We will have to get the production price of milk. It will then be a question for producers and the Government to fix an economic price.
I move the adjournment of the debate.
Debate adjourned.