Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 1 May 1956

Vol. 156 No. 9

Committee on Finance. - Vote 27—Agriculture (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—
That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.—(Deputy Walsh.)

When the Minister opened the debate on this Estimate on April 17th he said, as reported at columns 418 and 419 of the Official Report:—

"I think I made it clear that it is now pretty generally agreed that the economic future of us all, whether we live in city, town or village or on the land itself is, in the last analysis, dependent on the success or failure which attends our efforts to expand production from the land."

I wish to state that I agree absolutely with that statement. Also at column 419, the Minister is reported as having said:—

"A great many people over the last 17 years have become so accustomed to living in a seller's market that they forget, or are prone to forget, the fundamental change that is introduced when we find ourselves in these times in a buyer's market."

Later on in his speech the Minister said this:—

"Fortunately we have been able by a series of trade agreements, principally with Great Britain, substantially to mitigate the severity of the impact on that competitive atmosphere; but, more and more as it impacts on us, our success or failure to expand production here will depend on our ability to expand it on terms which will enable us to meet competition, and beat it, both as to quality and price in the markets where we trade."

That is so. Speaking quite recently the Minister said in Carrickmacross that owing to our adverse balance of trade he had to wage war on two fronts —the import front and the export front. Right through his speech on this Estimate, he said that we have to meet and beat our serious and acute adverse trade position and he has mentioned the increase in our cow population and particularly our pig population.

Dealing with pigs, the Minister stated in the same volume:—

"The next item in our expansion programme must be pigs. Over a short term, pigs have the greatest potentiality for dramatic expansion because you can expand the pig population very much more quickly than that of cattle or sheep."

Undoubtedly, that is agreed, but I should like to remind the Minister that, in 1954, when the present Government came into power, due to the fact that the cost of feeding stuffs was not kept related to the selling price of bacon, we had an increase in pollard in September, 1954 of £5 and a further increase in pig meal of £1. In my part of the country, West Limerick, small farmers with from 12 to 15 cows have to engage in mixed husbandry, which includes a certain amount of pig rearing, and when the price of pollard and the price of pig meal went up in the autumn of 1954, I know from my own experience that several farmers in that part of the country got out of pigs, sold their sows and so forth.

I should like to say to the Minister that we all agree with him that, if we are to survive and keep our position and independent status in foreign markets, we will have to do something to meet the position before us at the moment. We have to keep our financial credit abroad as high as it possibly can be. I am not going to deal with the figures in regard to the decline in that respect at the moment, but I should like to say to the Minister that, if he wants to wage war on imports and exports, as he said he did in his speech at Carrickmacross, then he must plan carefully and wisely. You do not go to war without having well-laid plans, plans that will satisfy in the final analysis and will not lead to your defeat. The Minister must have behind him the confidence of the people who are engaged in the rearing and production of pigs.

During the course of his speech, the Minister offered a solution by saying that the man with five cows should keep a calf or two extra, proportionately up along according to the strength of his stock. I would say to the Minister that if you give the Irish farmer a fair break and ask him—as he is being asked at the moment—to increase production, you will find that he will not be lacking, but he will have to get some guarantee that he will at least get a decent margin of profit from whatever article he is engaged in producing. I was glad to hear the Minister announce the formulation of this new scheme for pigs whereby the producer will get a guaranteed minimum price of 235/- per cwt. for a grade A pig. I am sure the Minister is well aware that that price must be kept as closely related as possible to the cost of feeding stuffs.

There is an awful lot of headway to be made up, because, as the Minister said in his statement, we are no longer in a seller's market. We are in a buyer's market. If we are going to increase our exports by way of pig production, I think it is admitted by all fair-thinking people that we must put a high quality and high class bacon on the market. In order to qualify for the Grade A stamping, not only have we to produce the right type of animal but, what is a very important factor, we have to manage and feed that animal properly. I do not know what progress has been made in the progeny testing stations the Minister set up, but I welcome his statement that officials of his Department were at the factories to watch out for the type of pig that made Grade A. I would suggest that any of his Department officials in Limerick City would have a look at the quality and class of pig being produced on the farm attached to the Limerick Mental Hospital.

I have been out there visiting this farm on several occasions and I must say that the land steward has put himself in a very favourable position because at least 70 to 75 per cent. of the pigs have qualified for Grade A. I think that should be followed up. I know some farmers in West Limerick who bought sows from the same institution and reared the bonhams. They were the type of pig most suitable— the long, lean type with shoulders going well into the body. There is very little use in trying to compete in the foreign market against the Danes and so forth, if we do not make a serious effort, first of all, to breed the right type of pig and, secondly, to feed the pig properly.

I was also glad to hear the Minister state that, as part of a gradual process, he intends to eliminate as far as possible the import of maize into this country. I think that should have been done a long time before now. We have reached the stage now where the tastes, not alone of our own people but of the people who buy our produce abroad, are such that they must get the first-class article, otherwise we will be lagging behind in the buyers' market. The policy of trying to produce in this country as much feeding stuffs as we can ourselves in order to reduce the import of maize is a very acceptable one to the people. There was no sense or meaning—nor was it good national policy—in the policy of having the plough in Argentina and the pig in Ireland. Let us have both the pig and the plough in Ireland.

I would say to the Minister that this suggestion of switching over to the ration of barley and skim milk and the other proteins necessary is a move in the right direction. It is up to each one of us engaged in that trade as a fundamental part of our living to remember that the days of the fat pig are over and that we have to put the right type of article on the market and on the counter for our people to purchase. It is admitted now that any housewife, either here in Dublin or in any town or village down the country, when she goes into a shop for bacon wants a particular cut. She does not want second quality bacon, bacon that is too fat, and so forth. She looks for the type that satisfies the palate of the household.

I would agree with the Minister that if, as he says, it is manifestly clear that we could quadruple our exports of pigs into the British market, if we moved in the right direction, there is no use in putting up a finished product which will not hold its own against all competitors, no matter where they come from. No Minister for Agriculture could do more than is being suggested in this respect as regards bacon production.

We have to cut out the obsolete type of organisation dealing with pigs and the idea that anything was good enough, and that animals could be starved, possibly, at the early stages and finished off in a hurry. I believe that if you feed with the proper nutrients from the early stage of weaning, there is no bacon to beat the bacon you can produce with barley and skimmed milk, adding other nutrients, if necessary. There is a guarantee for our farmers at the moment which I hope they will avail of. The organisations such as Muintir na Tíre, Macra na Feirme and the National Farmers' Association would be well employed in helping to propagate in their own areas the right type of pig that will enable us to hold our place in the markets abroad.

There is another very important fundamental unit in our agricultural economy, that is the dairy cow. I doubt if the Minister's advice to the dairy farmers will receive the respect or co-operation he is hoping to get, and I will tell him why. Whether the Minister knows it or not, the dairy farmers' organisation, the Creamery Milk Suppliers' Association, have the feeling—rightly or wrongly, I do not know—that they are not getting a fair break with the holding back of the findings of the Milk Costings Commision. They feel that that is being done on purpose. The Minister might not agree with me at all, but I have heard that from several farmers, and they are not all Fianna Fáil farmers.

To be fair to the dairy farmers, it should be remembered that this commission was set up in 1952 and that other commissions were set up about the same time. We had, for instance, the commission to deal with the wages and salaries of teachers, the Beet Costings Commission, and the Commission on Emigration. We had an arbitration board to deal with civil servants. All these commissions and arbitration boards gave decisions, and I am not sure that the farmers, waiting for over two years to get the findings of the Milk Costings Commission, are not entitled to have a grudge, and to be dissatisfied.

I want to tell the Minister that if they get a fair break, they will respond. Even if this commission does not issue its findings as early as the Minister and we all might like, the time is ripe to follow up the Minister's own statement when he appealed to the dairy farmers to get extra stock, breed extra heifers and build up the cow population, both for milk and for export.

The dairy farmers feel that the Minister must know that there was an increase given in 1953 and it is admitted by any honest fair-minded individual that costs under every head—rates, labour, etc.,—have gone up since then. I believe that if the Minister would give an increase to the dairy farmers, pending the findings of the Milk Costings Commission, his appeal would not fall on deaf ears. We must be clear about that. Unless that is done now, the response he was hoping to get from the dairy farmers will not be as good as we would all like it to be. You are not going to carry on any type of husbandry, or increase it, if you do not see some profit for your labour and your capital investment.

They maintain that the price they are getting is not an economic one, or a price that will allow them a decent margin of profit after meeting all their overheads. I do not know how the Minister would feel about that, but I am telling him that it is the feeling that is there at the moment. I was glad to see the statement in the Sunday papers from the chairman of the Creamery Managers' Association, a Limerickman like myself, that, in the very near future, the Minister and the Taoiseach and I think, the Tánaiste, are to receive a deputation from that body. I hope that, if they do, they will, like sensible men all round, all play their part in the fight they are asked to play at the moment, and have a solid united section of our Army in this fight the Minister has mentioned. The best way to have that solidity is to have them satisfied and contented that whatever they are asked to do in the national effort to meet the acute and immediate problems, in relation to our adverse balance of payments and so forth, is going to be of some monetary value to them.

I am satisfied that, at long last, even though progress may be somewhat retarded, we are moving in the right direction as regards the pig industry. As time goes on, our farmers will readily see the advantage of doing the right thing in the matter of grading. The various tests were most puzzling, with all the differences between A and B and X and Y. I know cases myself which were surprising. A brother of mine brought good pigs in two different batches to the same factory. The first half were graded A, and the following week the other pigs did not make the same grade, though they were of the one litter and got the same type of care, attention and food, so that the thing was very puzzling.

I remember another case, and perhaps it might be wrong to mention it here because the particular firm could be identified. It was during the scarce period in the autumn of 1954 when the price of pollard and pig meal went up and bacon remained as it was. When that scarcity was there, a farmer brought in two pigs out of 24 to a certain factory. They were undoubtedly two of the heaviest pigs he had. He said to the factory that he knew the scarcity was on and that they were looking for bacon pigs. He said:—

"I have so many more, and I will bring them in, but I was anxious to find out what grading they would make."

They made grade A, the heaviest of the whole lot, and the following week the balance went to the same factory and they all qualified for grade A.

You have a seasonal increase. People cannot throw their skimmed milk away. They do not throw it down the drain. They put it to some use, so that, when supplies become plentiful again, very few of the pigs make the grade.

I am glad that that question has been fixed up. I am glad for the sake of the small farmers, the people who must have a good, sound, solid economy, that this question of pig grading will be fixed up, once and for all. We are now facing a different situation in which we have got to put our production on the foreign market and I hope our effort will succeed.

I am glad also to hear the Minister state that he has instructed his representatives at the factories to be on the lookout for the right type of pig. I hope he will take note of the pig farm which I mentioned, the pig farm of the Mental Hospital, Limerick. From my inspections there, and the high percentage of gradings they have got, it would be well worth the while of the Minister's representatives to keep an eye on that institution.

There is another matter I should like to speak about, the Parish Plan. There seems to be a lot of controversy and clashes of opinion about the Parish Plan. I am a member of the County Limerick Committee of Agriculture and at that committee I have advocated getting as many qualified agents as we possibly could into County Limerick. Subsequently to that, we had a deputation before us representing the N.F.A., and they were objecting, not so much to the bringing down of agents, as to the line of control. We have a rather peculiar situation in Abbeyfeale. Part of it is in the Fieldsbridge milk supply area and the Minister has an agent there who is working very hard. We have agents in other parts of County Limerick, but they seem to be cutting in on, and not working in harmony with, the men we have in the county.

I believe that the more competent men we can get with agricultural degrees, and the more of them we can bring into the counties, the better it will be for our people. The time is ripe now to give to the farmers the benefit of the technical and scientific advice they can get from these men. I cannot understand why the Minister, notwithstanding his keenness in having all that knowledge available, insists that they be controlled from Dublin. I do not know whether the Minister has lost confidence in the integrity and ability of the county committees of agriculture, but it does not make sense. We in Limerick have got two more men, and, if I got my way, I would double that number, having due regard to the amount we are allowed to take by way of rate levy in contributing to the scheme.

I think the Minister should reconsider that whole question of the Parish Plan. I am for the Parish Plan. I followed it from the first day that Muintir na Tíre introduced it. I knew the founder in the old days and I was interested in this great development he has brought about in this country. It is a step in the right direction, but I think the Minister was a bit too optimistic when he said that he could give agents all over. That is not possible.

I calculate that we have about 900 parishes in this part of Ireland where we have freedom. Allowing for one agent in every three parishes, that would mean that we would need 300 agents or more. I was greatly interested in this matter and I went to the trouble of looking up the figures to see what our annual output is. I am given to understand that our average would be about 25 a year. That is not allowing for the number that fail. It is not an easy examination to get through and you have to know your stuff to get your degree in agricultural science. I would ask the Minister, because of the great importance of putting all the technical advice we can at the disposal of our farmers, to help in this great drive to meet the demand that is on us at the moment.

I am a believer in the development of our grasslands, not in grass to such an extent that it would be for the bullock alone, but in its proper development. A lot of the money being spent on land reclamation is not giving its full return, owing to the lack of proper treatment of the land when it has been reclaimed. I am sure the Minister will agree with me that where land has been waterlogged for a number of years, there is little use in applying ground limestone and the other artificials to it. The real job that such land requires to have done to it is reseeding. The reseeding of such land is of great importance. I saw it done myself, and I am very pleased to be able to say that you can see the difference in the land that was reseeded and the other portions of land all around. I think my colleague, Deputy Colbert, speaking on Thursday last, mentioned the same matter.

It would be of great importance if we could increase the grass for our cows every year. It is a pity that in my district we cannot put our cows out until 13th May. That is somewhat late. Around the Golden Vale, they are out on grass weeks ahead of us. I have seen farmers back in the West who have availed of the scientific knowledge available and increased their grass production to such an extent that they can have their cows out a fortnight earlier than the farmers who have not treated their land in that way.

I should like the Minister to tell us that this difference of opinion as regards control will be resolved for once and for all. We have six or seven men in County Limerick and it will be no benefit to us if they do not work together. It would be as well to abolish the county committees in relation to their control over such agents and have them all controlled by the one body. I think it would be better to have them all equally controlled by the C.A.O.s in the respective counties.

I have here a little booklet, the annual report of our committee of agriculture for the past 12 months. It is a most comprehensive and detailed report and one which any farmer would like to get. The report shows the good work being done by our agricultural, poultry and other instructors.

In regard to pilot farms, I should like to suggest to the Minister that as many as possible should be created in all parishes. The practical thing is by far the best. I have here a report on the working of a pilot farm in Limerick and it is most encouraging and gratifying to read of the results that have been achieved. You can send down the parish agent and he will take soil tests and do all sorts of things. These things are very important, but the practical thing is best.

As regards the use of grasses, to be a tillage farmer, you have to grow up with tillage. The same thing applies to dairying. You just grow up with it and it becomes a part of your existence and your economy. It is the same thing with the reseeding for and cultivation of grasses for pastures and meadowing. Here again you want the pilot farm to bring home to our farmers the value of reseeding.

I should like to see parish agents going into as many counties as possible, but I am not at one with those who would allow one section of those trained professional men to be under the control of the committees of agriculture and another section directed from the Department of Agriculture. I think the Minister should look into that position. Rome was not built in a day and we cannot do all of the things we want to do at once. We are getting demands all over from people looking for parish agents, but it will take time to get sufficient qualified men.

I should like to ask the Minister why the decision taken by his predecessor as regards providing a bovine T.B. service in County Limerick was changed by him in favour of Clare and, I think, Leitrim.

That is a question I was asked to put to the Minister by a number of people who are interested in this development.

Bansha covers portion of East Limerick.

It is in Tipperary.

But there are three parishes—Bansha, Galbally and a third one.

We can rightly claim that County Limerick is the nursery of dairying in this country. Compare our cow population with that of Leitrim and Sligo. We are really anxious in County Limerick to see a successful development of this scheme. I was glad to hear speakers in this debate say that the incidence of T.B. in some of the counties that have been selected was very low. I do not know exactly how we stand in Limerick. I do not want to be misunderstood if I say that we have a high incidence in our dairy herds and I would be glad if the Minister, when replying, would give an explanation and his reasons for dropping County Limerick out of the scheme. It is a splendid scheme and a scheme that will have to be speeded up because, as the Minister stressed, when he was dealing with pigs, we are now being forced into a buyer's market. A time will come in the near future when our cattle exports to Britain will have to compete under stricter and more stringent conditions than our pigs will have to compete with in the foreign market. The eradication of T.B. in England is making headway and areas are being zoned, and in the very near future we will find if we want to hold our markets for our live stock, we will have to have the cattle offered for sale in that market covered by the eradication scheme.

In regard to farm building schemes, the Minister, in his speech, mentioned a global figure. In other words, he said that so much was earmarked every year and that, if it was not sufficient, some cognisance would be taken of the number that did not succeed. The Minister knows very well that the cost of materials has risen a lot since the present figure was fixed and I would ask that, if possible, increases be granted.

I should like the Minister to tell the House also what is the position as regards the installation of pasteurisation plants in County Limerick. Are the creameries receiving the 50 per cent. grant for installations?

There is another point agitating the minds of the people very much. We feel that if we can develop our bacon and pork trade as it should be developed to hold its ground in the foreign market we are moving in a particular direction, but if, on the other hand, we step up our milk production, we will be faced with a situation of finding and holding a market for our products.

The Minister said he was not in any way dissatisfied with the position as regards chocolate crumb. A lot of the milk from West Limerick over the last few years was directed to the manufacture of chocolate crumb and was sold to the factory in Rathmore. We all know the position of the market at the moment and my information is that our competitors across the water are beating us to the tune of £6 18s. Od. per ton. That is what I have been told by the creamery managers interested in the development of chocolate crumb production. They say that production costs here, including transport, taxes and other costs, leave them in the position that their competitors have that advantage over them.

I should like the Minister to deal with that point, because this is a very valuable outlet for our milk production. I ask the Minister to go very carefully into the figures, and I have some of them before me, and see if for the moment he could give the dairy farmers an interim increase of 1d. per gallon which would automatically reduce that advantage of £6 18s. Od. which competitors in the chocolate crumb industry have over us.

How would you reduce the obstacle if you raise the price of milk? Would that not increase the cost of production of chocolate crumb?

It would increase the trade and the supply of milk which would come in, if you would pay the penny extra. They could then go into the development of the business to a greater extent and in any business, when there is a greater output, there is a reduction in the overhead costs. It would also be possible that you might induce Fry-Cadbury to develop further in this country.

I think I have made the points that I was anxious to make, but I would ask the Minister to be just with the farmers in this matter of milk prices. I hope that when he meets the representatives of the Creamery Suppliers' Association, as he is to do in the near future, according to the reports in last Sunday's newspapers, he will not send them away empty-handed, but will try to give the increase which they are asking and to which they are entitled.

The Deputy inquired whether the 50 per cent. grant was available in the Limerick creameries. I can tell him now that it is.

I should like to intervene in this debate very briefly and to try to be as helpful as possible. I must say that if you have not a happy, prosperous and contented agricultural community, your cities, towns and villages will eventually suffer.

I am a firm believer in the dairying industry and I am confident that it is the pivot around which the agricultural industry swings. I believe in the cow, the calf, the store, the sow and the pig and all the other industries which dairying encourages, and I now appeal to the Minister to do the best he can as regards the price of milk because, as he knows well, the costs of production have gone up very much in recent times. The Milk Costings Commission should have given their verdict long before now, but I cannot see how they can give any verdict since the cost of production of milk varies very much in one area as compared with another. I am of the opinion that Deputy Walsh should have seen that in 1952 and should not have put this country to the expense of that commission.

There are two years' supply of wheat in every country in the world. I cannot understand the mentality of the Opposition who never speak of anything else but the growing of wheat. They never say a word about barley, oats, potatoes, or even beet. I am also of the opinion that the headlines in the Press about the drop in cattle prices did a certain amount of damage to the rather innocent farmers. It did damage in my county and the farmers there are not very innocent. I know of one instance where a local farmer sold eight two-year-old store bullocks to a tangler in the early morning at a certain price and that tangler was able to get £6 a piece more for the cattle. The people were led to believe that the prices of the cattle were going to drop and so they got rid of them to their own disadvantage.

I wish to thank the Minister for all the good things he has done for the farming community, including the lime scheme, the land project, the parish plan and the scheme for the eradication of T.B. In the past, I know, small farmers were compelled to till land which was unsuited for tillage, and, instead of increasing food production, that policy had the reverse effect.

I have seen dark days in farming. I have sold 13 yearlings at one stage for less than £20 and I have sold wheat at 36/- a barrel in 1946. I have often wondered how we managed to live at all in those dark days.

I want to say that I take strong exception to the remarks of certain Deputies last week who said that the farmers were looking for better prices for milk but paid poor wages to their staff. I know something about paying staffs because I keep a staff of four employed continuously, and when I can get them, I have five, and I think I pay them reasonable wages, and so do all my neighbours. It is wrong to have such criticisms made of the farmers who must fight for their rights as well as any other section of the community.

Hear, hear!

I think the Minister did a very good job in 1948 when he was appointed Minister for Agriculture. I found it very hard in the past to pay my way from farming, but, thank God, I think that is all over now. Any time that you get from £35 to £40 for a yearling, you are doing very well.

The Minister has done great work for the cattle trade, and, because of that, since 1948, lorries have been travelling up and down the country as frequently as motor cars. If he would now give a little more to the farmers for milk, he will have done a very good job indeed.

I should like to refer to the question of farm buildings and to ask the Minister to reconsider, if it is at all possible, the position as to the payment of grants to farmers in respect of farm buildings. Many farmers in my constituency have been ruled out on technical grounds, sometimes because the specifications were not strictly in accordance with the views of the Department's overseer and inspector and, on other occasions, because the work had not commenced on the prescribed date, or something like that. I had a case the other day in which a farmer built a very substantial outoffice and, simply because it was one foot outside the plan or specification, he was informed that he can get nothing towards it. That building cost him a few hundred pounds. He is a small farmer. I think there should be some method by which such claims could be reconsidered; it would be mere justice to give such farmers a grant proportionate to the expenditure incurred.

The same argument applies to land reclamation and drainage. Where the work is not completed by a certain date, farmers have been informed that they will not get the maximum grant. I trust the Minister will find it worth his while, when replying, to deal with these two matters. It is very poor encouragement to farmers, after they have done a good job of work, to have an inspector come along and tell them that, because they did not work in accordance with certain plans and specifications, or finish in relation to a specified date, they will get nothing. That is very poor consolation to men who have done their utmost to improve their outoffices or their land in an effort to comply as closely as possible with the requirements of the Department.

Recently, I asked a question with regard to the outbreak of anthrax. A farmer in my area had his farm completely isolated. His milk, which he would normally send to the creamery, had to be destroyed. Under the Department's regulations, that man will get no compensation. Surely there should be some method devised of compensating such farmers. I submit the same procedure should be adopted as is adopted in the case of foot-and-mouth disease. Some provision should be made governing such a situation. I know that the farmer in this instance has lost at least £400. He was completely isolated, under Garda supervision, for a period of three weeks. I appeal to the Minister to consider these cases to see if anything can be done.

The other day, too, I asked a question about the tomato scheme in Ballinskelligs and the Minister informed me that the Department had failed to get the requisite number of Irish speakers to participate in the scheme. The Minister told me that the Department decided that there should be at least 100 applicants in order to render the scheme economic. I would like to know how the Department arrived at that figure. Could a scheme not be economic with 80, 70 or 60 applicants? Would it not be better to proceed with the scheme with 60 applicants, rather than have no scheme at all? This scheme was initiated by, I think, Deputy Smith when he was Minister for Agriculture, and it has been in operation now for some years. I am fearful that the whole thing may be shelved. Remember, it is very easy to kill a scheme. I am not saying, of course, that it would be shelved intentionally, but it is, as I say, a very simple matter to refuse a scheme for one reason or another. The Department may say it is not workable, that it is uneconomic. If the Minister is indifferent and leaves it at that, that is no good to us. We want action.

I make a final appeal now to the Minister to consider that scheme in particular. If we cannot get the requisite 100 applicants in the locality, then we should be allowed to go outside the area. As the Minister is aware, this is a Fíor-Ghaeltacht area. We have done everything possible in my constituency to make the scheme workable along the lines required by the Department. The parish priest appealed to the people at public meetings, and otherwise, to come forward and avail of the scheme. Unfortunately, we were not able to get the requisite 100 inside the district and I appeal to the Minister now to accept farmers five or ten miles outside the area. I submit that such a scheme could be handled. I realise that one has to take certain factors into consideration in order to make such a scheme economic, such as transport, packing and all the rest of it. I realise all that, but, when we are up against it and are faced with a certain difficulty, I appeal to the Minister to try to find some way out in order to ensure that the scheme will be put into operation as early as possible.

Having listened to the speeches from both sides of the House, I am glad to know that we are, at least, in agreement on one fundamental principle, namely, that the economic survival of this country depends upon our farmers' ability to increase production from the land.

Progress reported.
Top
Share