Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 25 Mar 1958

Vol. 166 No. 7

Committee on Finance. - Agriculture (Amendment) Bill, 1958—Second Stage.

Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Smith)

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time.

The primary occasion for this Bill is to enable county councils, where they so wish, to increase the maximum contribution payable to committees of agriculture for the service of their agricultural schemes to a sum not more than 15 times the produce of a rate of 1d. in the £ in the area consisting of the county, exclusive of any urban districts therein.

The annual income at present available to each committee of agriculture consists of a contribution from the county council equal to the produce of a rate of not less than 2d. in the £ nor more than 10d. in the £ and a State grant related to the amount of the agricultural rate.

The existing maximum agricultural rate of 10d. in the £ was fixed under the Agriculture (Amendment) Act, 1955. Since the enactment of that Act 11 of the committees have obtained a rate higher than the maximum of 7d. in the £ prescribed before the passing of that Act. Three of these are in receipt of the present statutory maximum of 10d. in the £, while two are in receipt of a rate of 9½d. and 9d. in the £, respectively. The increased expenditure of committees of agriculture in recent years has been largely due to the expansion of their agricultural advisory services resulting in the number of advisory officers in the employment of the county committees being increased from 185 in 1948 to 312 in 1958.

It is clear that rising costs will prevent the committees, who are now receiving the existing maximum rate of 10d. in the £ and others who in the meantime will go to that figure, from maintaining their agricultural programmes unless they are enabled to secure a larger income in the future.

It is proposed, therefore, to empower county councils, where they so desire, to increase the maximum contribution to committees of agriculture from 10d. in the £ to 1/3 in the £. I would emphasise, however, that this provision is purely a permissive one. It does not impose any obligation on county councils to increase their contributions to the committees of agriculture. It simply empowers them to do so where they consider such an increase is called for.

The opportunity is being taken in this Bill to accede to requests from committees of agriculture that they should be put on a par with other local bodies, such as county councils and vocational education committees, by being made bodies corporate. Corporate bodies normally have the right to acquire and dispose of land, to sue and be sued and to borrow money. The exercise of the powers to acquire or dispose of land or to borrow money will, however, be subject to the consent of the Minister for Agriculture and to any conditions he may impose.

The Bill also provides for the retrospective application, where the Minister so desires, of regulations made by him in respect of the salaries and allowances of officers of committees of agriculture, and for enabling the travelling and subsistence allowances payable to members of committees of agriculture in respect of attendance at committee meetings to be brought into line with those of members of county councils.

The remaining provisions of the Bill are simply amendments of existing legislation consequential on the foregoing provisions.

Mr. Dillon

There is no reason why this Bill should not be read a Second Time. There are certain matters upon which I should like to comment. It is not very long ago since I sponsored legislation here to authorise county councils to raise a maximum rate of 10d. instead of the then 7d. Now it is proposed to extend that permission to 15d. As the Minister says, this is purely a permissive power. No county council need do it if they do not want to.

Bearing in mind the staggering burden of the rates on people who own land in rural Ireland and, worse still, on people who have agricultural holdings in Ireland, one cannot help feeling some degree of alarm at the prospect of a further increase, even if it is only 5d. in the £. Nevertheless, in this case at least there is the consolation that, if there is an increase, it will be used in the service of agriculture. In that connection I should like to raise this matter.

Much of the additional funds raised by county committees, either through the rate or the supplementary agricultural grant, in recent years has been devoted to multiplying the number of agricultural structures. That would be a good thing provided we were satisfied that the agricultural advisory service, as at present organised, was giving us the best value. I do not think it is. I believe it is a matter of urgent importance that we should arrive at a stage where there would be available in every rural parish in Ireland one competent agricultural adviser for those farmers who desire to avail of his services.

My experience has been that where that is made available every farmer ultimately seeks to avail of those services. I think that to realise that ideal immediately would be, perhaps, too ambitious. I would be quite content with an interim measure, if we could arrive at a point where there was an adequate advisory service available to every group of three parishes.

That brings me to the question as to whether existing advisory services are adequately organised. There are many counties in Ireland in which the direct responsibility of the agricultural adviser is unduly scattered. He has not any particular territory for which he is personally responsible. The result is one gets the feeling that a great deal of his time is spent sailing around and filling up his diary whereas, if he had a restricted area for which he was personally responsible to the chief agricultural officer of the county, it would be very much easier to observe what success attended these efforts and, what is even more important, a zealous and effective agricultural adviser would have the personal gratification of seeing the results of his labour in a limited area for which he was exclusively responsible. I tried to give effect to that by the provision of parish agents in those areas where there were not sufficient advisory services available from the county committees of agriculture. I believe about 20 such parish agents were functioning, when I left office, directly under the supervision of a senior inspector of the Department of Agriculture. As I have often said, I would be quite prepared to have the result of that service judged not by the result in the best of the groups of three parishes served by it, but by the results in the least successful group and, even there, I believe results would be found which abundantly justify whatever cost was involved.

I do not think it very much matters whether the agricultural advisory service is provided directly by the Department of Agriculture or by the county committees of agriculture, as a general rule. However, there are some county committees of agriculture in this country grossly inefficient and constituted very largely of persons who have no real interest whatsoever in the agricultural industry. Unless that is remedied, sooner or later, I think the whole present system of county committees of agriculture will be called very earnestly in question by the farmers.

At first glance, the obvious and simple reform would appear to be to provide that nobody would be eligible for appointment to a county committee of agriculture but a farmer. However, when you try to apply that formula, it is not as simple as it at first appears. I cannot see why an agricultural worker should not be eligible. Then there are other categories of persons in rural Ireland who might have a very real interest in agriculture and be eminently fitted to make a useful contribution to the deliberations of a county committee of agriculture who would be excluded, if you simply provided that nobody but a farmer should be eligible for membership.

It seems perfectly clear to me that, as we increase the field of activity of the county committees of agriculture, we ought to concern ourselves to ensure that they will be more properly representative of the interest they are charged to help in their capacity as the county committee of agriculture. I should be glad to hear from the Minister for Agriculture if he proposes to provide further facilities by way of the parish plan as operated by the Department, or whether he proposes, under his general powers of approving or disapproving of schemes submitted by county committees of agriculture, to urge on these committees that there should be some system in their advisory services analogous to the procedure operated by the parish plan under the Department of Agriculture.

I think he should be prepared to do both: (i) to expand the services available under the parish plan operated by the Department and (ii) to use his influence in so far as is reasonable to urge the county committees of agriculture to operate their advisory services on the same model. It is right to say that certain of the county committees are at present operating that system, I think, with a high degree of success. The example of the parish plan operated by the Department of Agriculture and of the parish plan as operated by certain of the committees is quite ample justification, I think, for the Minister in pressing the development of this system of advisory services on the rest of the country.

In regard to the incorporation of the county committees of agriculture, I think that is a proper step. If my recollection serves me right, the decision to take it was made some considerable time ago. I am not quite clear, and I do not think the Minister has made it adequately clear, what the purpose of Section 6 is, that is, the section which says that regulations under Section 27 or Section 28 of the Principal Act may, if so expressed, have retrospective effect. The Minister might have told us into what category those regulations fall.

Mr. Smith

It concerns the payment of proposed increases of salaries that might be influenced or affected by improvements in the standards of, say, civil servants. In many cases, the employees of local bodies have to wait for the determination of the higher level. They will, therefore, be entitled to reward as from a date earlier than it would be possible to give them that award.

Mr. Dillon

I take it that this Section 6 brings county committees of agriculture on to the same footing as the vocational education committees?

Mr. Smith

Yes. It is designed to give the committee power to pay in retrospect, so as to bring them in line with officials of similar status in the other services.

Mr. Dillon

If that is the purpose, then I think it is a proper purpose. Generally, I think, the conferring of retrospective powers of this character on the Minister is a source of great embarrassment to him. It is a very much easier position, certainly for a Minister who is required to pass a final judgment on these things, to be able to say: "I have no power; all I have is power to approve as from the date submitted to me." Otherwise, you are liable to get applications to approve retrospectively all sorts of things which should not be approved.

Mr. Smith

It would not be fair if that power were not given to the committee, all the same.

Mr. Dillon

If it is enjoyed by the vocational education committee——

Mr. Smith

And by all other public services.

Mr. Dillon

I agree. If this is no more than bringing county committees of agriculture into line with other analogous bodies, I do not think there can be reasonable opposition. I take it that Section 7 is for the same thing —to bring it into line with the vocational education committee. I accept the Minister's word that the consequential amendments on Section 8 arise on the other adjustments made. In these circumstances, I think the House can very well give this Bill a Second Reading.

Mr. Coburn

I am not a farmer. I listened with interest to what Deputy Dillon had to say with regard to the types of people who should comprise committees of agriculture. I am a member of the Louth County Committee of Agriculture. Representing, as I do, a rural constituency, I must, of necessity, interest myself in agriculture.

I listened with interest to what the Minister had to say by way of explanation of this Bill. He enlarged a little on his reasons for bringing in Section 2, which increases the maximum amount of contribution which a county council can make to a committee of agriculture. He said that the maximum rate which county councils are empowered now to pay represents a rate of 10d. in the £, the minimum being 2d. It is proposed now to increase that to 1/3. One of the main reasons for these extra powers being given to county councils is that, in recent years, there has been greatly increased expenditure evident as a result of the appointment of many agricultural inspectors throughout the country. I am not condemning such appointments; I appreciate that they are necessary to further the agricultural drive.

The Minister said that another reason for this Bill having certain points enshrined in it was the agitation on the part of many agricultural committees. I agree that their advice should be listened to, but I question— in a small way, at least—the wisdom of giving them so much power. Knowing the position throughout the country with regard to the level of the rates, I am afraid that these additional powers may—I say "may"— tempt them to shove up the rate still further. If that happens, the time will come eventually when people, especially farmers, in the various counties will not be able to pay their rates.

I notice that the committees now are to be empowered to purchase lands and to erect buildings, and also even to borrow money. That will be a source of grave temptation to them, to adopt the attitude that the sky is the limit as regards expenditure. I trust the Department will continue to carry out the arrangement hitherto pertaining, that is, arranging the recoupment to the amount of 50 per cent. of the local rate.

The Minister made reference to most of the sections of this Bill, but did not make any reference at all, as far as I can recall, to sub-section (2) of Section 2, which gives county councils power to donate the produce of a 1/2d. in the £ to local committees of agriculture, in a county where forestry schemes are being implemented. I observe further that the operative word is "shall"— that the county council shall make this contribution. I am wondering if this is an attempt on the part of the Government to shelve some of its responsibility and throw some of its financial burdens on to the ratepayers.

The sub-section is qualified by the insertion of the words "if so required by the Minister," but I am sure that, in these days of stringency, the Minister always will require that such be paid in counties where afforestation schemes are being implemented. I am suspicious of it and I have a feeling that, some day recently, the Minister for Lands and the Minister for Agriculture, got their heads together and decided to insert this in the Bill, as it obviously is a move to reduce the financial burden on the Government with regard to afforestation in general.

I agree that afforestation is very important. In my own county, there are two or three schemes pending and we are waiting anxiously for them to start. Now it seems that, when they start, we are to be presented with a local bill for them. Afforestation is a national undertaking and afforestation in general should be a Government concern, as it is the nation as a whole which will benefit from the eventual fruition of these schemes. In conclusion, I would like the Minister in his reply to enlarge on sub-section (2) of Section 2, which relates to forestry schemes in particular counties.

Mr. Rooney

This Bill may be described as an enabling Bill, giving power to committees of agriculture to commit the county council up to 1/3, instead of the present 10d. While we have this Bill before us, we had better discuss the merits of the system under which the committees of agriculture operate at present. The first question I would put to the Minister is this: Are the farmers satisfied with the manner in which the committees function? Are they satisfied with the services available to them through these committees? Is it not a fact that the committees concentrate mostly on horticultural activities, such as the science of growing vegetables, particularly in market gardening, in addition to the science of growing various types of plants, and carrying out certain tests in relation to seeds?

Any of us familiar with the set-up of these committees of agriculture must admit that they are not set up in the best interests of agriculture. They are set up through the county councils. On them, a certain number of councillors must be appointed. It does not matter whether these councillors are farmers or non-farmers—they can be nominated to function on the committee of agriculture. In fact, I believe there would be a majority of council members on any such committee. The remaining members are co-opted and it is not specified that the persons co-opted shall be engaged in agriculture or know anything about it.

When the committee is set up, the various activities come before them, usually monthly. They have different programmes in operation according to the staff they have employed and the purposes for which those persons have been appointed. Usually, there are horticultural instructors and they are allocated to various districts in the county. They are available to give advice to people who wish to learn something about the growing of any particular crop. They also give advice on the growing of flowers such as roses and shrubs and trees, and the pruning of these shrubs and trees.

These services are available in general to the public through the committees of agriculture. The services of these people can be got by interested persons making application to the county council or committee of agriculture for them. The result is that the agricultural officer will visit any person who is interested in any aspect of the activities for which these services are available. The adviser visits these people and he follows up the advice he has given and the work being done in a particular garden, field or farm. These services are given by the officers of the committee in relation to such things as experimental plots where the yield of a particular crop can be tested, and in relation to experimental crops where varieties of seeds can be tested by these officers and advice given to the interested person.

There is also the scheme whereby trees are available to persons desiring to plant them and they have the advice of these instructors regarding the variety of trees to be planted. People desiring to plant fruit trees can consult these advisers regarding the variety of fruit tree it will be best to plant. These officers also engage in organising ploughing competitions in these counties and, on the other side of the scale, there are poultry instructresses who will advise people engaged in the poultry business. Similarly, there are grants available for pedigree cattle, horses and pigs.

In addition, there are grants available to people who are prepared to hire out certain types of machinery in districts where they reside to persons desiring to use such machinery. There is also the soil testing service whereby persons desiring to know about the condition of the soil in a particular garden or field can have it tested by the committee of agriculture. I have mentioned this matter so that we can have a picture of the services available through these committees, and the question I am inclined to put is whether in fact they contribute substantially to the welfare and economy of agriculture? I feel there should be greater emphasis on the live-stock side of the advisory services available through these committees.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is wandering away from the Bill.

Mr. Rooney

I would not agree with you, Sir, because this Bill seeks power to increase the maximum of 10d. up to a maximum of 15d. and everything that the 10d. already covered can be discussed under this Bill. I feel that while these committees are helpful to people desiring to have technical advice in relation to the various activities I have mentioned, there is an opportunity there for them to engage in a more profitable type of advisory service, which they could make available to the farming community, relating to cattle, pigs, sheep and poultry which are the backbone of our national economy, particularly in regard to the value of our exports.

The other services appear to be of a domestic nature and do not contribute substantially to the national economy, apart from, perhaps, fruit growing. On that score, I should like to mention that, unfortunately, we are very far behind in relation to fruit growing. For several months of the year, it is necessary for us to import apples when, in fact, we have plenty of land in every county where we could have large orchards established, thus cutting out the need for the importation of apples which exists for a number of months each year.

I feel that these committees could engage to the profit of the farmer in the operation of a pig progeny scheme and also a cow testing scheme, operated independently of the committees of agriculture, and which would improve the existing system of milk production. This Bill gives us an opportunity to consider again whether the committees of agriculture, as they are set up, and the services which they give, are justified and whether in fact they can be improved or ought to be replaced. The committees of agriculture as they stand could be used to greater advantage for the farming community, if they were utilised to operate a parish plan in an intensive manner in every county.

We have seen examples of the advantages which the farming community can gain from a concentrated effort in a parish in relation to all the activities on the land. Through these committees of agriculture, a vigorous parish plan should be operated and, if it were operated, we would have in addition to the advisory services presently available, the advantages which a parish plan would bring to the community in general, by improving the quality of our live stock and our system of farming in various areas.

I feel that the farmers themselves are not satisfied with the services available to them through these committees. They are waiting for a lead to be given by the Minister and the Department of Agriculture to ensure that these committees will be used as a jumping-off ground from which much better services will be made available to the farmers in general. Much of the time of the agricultural advisers, and of the travelling expenses paid to them, are taken up to a great extent by people who have a fad for the growing of one variety or another of either vegetables or fruit. These services are not availed of to a proper extent by the ordinary farmers who are aware that the services are available to them in relation to these testing schemes. If it were made known to the farmers that still greater services could be made available to them by these agricultural advisers, they would avail of them. Instead of that, it is unfortunately a lot of people who have a hobby of some kind or other who are demanding the services of these technical officers.

Generally speaking, if we examine the figures for these various committees of agriculture, we will see there is a greater amount of money spent on salaries and travelling expenses for these officers than there is on grants towards the various schemes operated by those committees whether they be fruit growing schemes, grants for machinery or grants for pedigree animals and so on.

Mr. O'Sullivan

I have just one brief word to say to the Minister. I want to take this opportunity of saying that the method by which agricultural officers are appointed at the moment is something that should be looked into. These graduates who come from college, having successfully passed their examinations and having put their families to the very heavy expense involved in getting them through college, have now to go through a campaign of canvassing which can only be compared with that which people seeking election to the Seanad go through.

It is terrible that these men are not appointed to these positions in the same way as other officers of local authorities, either by the Appointments Commission or by a board set up under the local authority. I consider that the method by which they are now appointed is a case of who you know and not what you know. The fact that some of these boys have to undergo thousands of miles—and I am not exaggerating—travelling around, haunting the doors of members of committees of agriculture and bringing every conceivable pressure to bear on members of committees of agriculture, is an extraordinary state of affairs.

To visit any county council chamber even preparatory to the creation of vacancies and to see these lads having to bring relatives, clergymen, creamery managers and all kinds of influential people to haunt the members of committees of agriculture is to witness an awful procedure, and I would ask the Minister to look into it. When these lads have successfully got through their examinations, they should not have to resort to this kind of canvassing but should go forward to the Appointments Commission or some such body which will impartially judge them on their individual merits, not on who they know but rather on what they know.

Mr. Fanning

The last speaker made reference to the appointment of agricultural instructors. We all know what happens when it comes to an appointment like that. We all vote one way or another. This complaint refers to temporary appointments only. Permanent appointments are always made from above. The last Deputy should not make statements of that kind. I think he fought a very hard campaign in his own constituency to get a friend of his own appointed.

Deputy Rooney commented on the amount of money spent in regard to the growing of apples, etc. Surely we have appointed people to look into those matters and they have done fairly well. There was also the complaint that we were not giving sufficient encouragement to cattle breeding associations. My experience of my own committee is that we have given grants both to cow testing and cattle breeding associations. It is amazing to see Deputies getting up and speaking as if these things were not being looked after.

Some members made great capital out of the proposal to give local committees power to increase their rate from 10d. to 1/3. There is no farmer who will agree to put up the rates by 3d. or 4d. I do not know if our committee are at their maximum rate yet. If you increase your rate you will hit the farmer, the man for whom you want to cater. Deputy Dillon referred to certain members on committees who had no knowledge whatever of agriculture. Perhaps they have not, but they may represent a rural area and have experience of what the people want to grow and know how they can help them.

Deputy Rooney said we were wasting a lot of money on salaries and travelling expenses. If we want instructors to do their jobs, they should be enabled to travel around, meet the farmers and give them advice. In our area we established offices in certain towns where the farmers can go in and meet those people. They are doing a very good job. We appointed these officers under the parish plan. Certain committees may have objected to it but our committee was not one of them. These officers have done very good work. In regard to Deputy O'Sullivan's remarks about college graduates, every one is entitled to have his own views and to vote whatever way he likes.

Mr. Smith

I do not know how Deputy O'Sullivan came to conclude that permanent appointments to the committees of agriculture were made on the basis——

Mr. O'Sullivan

No, temporary appointments.

Mr. Smith

It is very necessary to make that clear for the purpose of the record. For many years all appointments have been made through the machinery of the Local Appointments Commission. I suppose cases arise where temporary appointments have to be made. I know of no other way in which a temporary appointment can be made except by the committee itself. I do not know whether there is in it the objection Deputy O'Sullivan mentions. Some of these young men—and young ladies, too—are anxious to get their feet in and naturally busy themselves to secure a temporary appointment even for six or 12 months because the work will give them experience. When there are more people qualified than there are vacancies, there is bound to be a bit of effort in order to get a place. I know of no means of eliminating the practice. Whether or not it is desirable that it should be eliminating the practice. Whether or not it is desirable that it should be eliminated, I cannot say. If the Department succeeded in finding some other method, without having examined it I would find myself in grave doubt as to whether it would be any better.

I am invited to discuss the whole matter of the composition of committees of agriculture, their personnel and the method by which these committees are brought into being. As far as I know, the last named is provided for by law. I shall not travel over all that field and I do not think I am called upon to do so.

We all feel for the bodies we ourselves know most intimately. I know a few county committees and their personnel. While they might not be completely and absolutely ideal, in the main they are composed of people who have a very close association with agriculture. I do not think it would be possible to make any amendment of the law that would result in improving the material that goes to make up these committees. I think that even if they were elected on the same basis as members of county councils the personnel would not change very much.

Deputy Coburn was in some doubt as to what might be lurking in the back of the mind of the Minister for Agriculture in putting forward these proposals. I made some inquiries as to the number of occasions on which this permissive provision has been revised in the last 30 years or so. I find that in 1931 it was increased from 2d. to 3d. in the £ and in 1941 from 3d. to 4d.

In 1948 it was increased from 4d. to 7d. in the £ and in 1955 from 7d. to 10d. in the £. All these steps have been taken on the understanding that, where the premier body took advantage of this provision and increased the rate, the State would be committing itself, pound for pound, with the local contribution. Whatever Deputy Coburn may think of the ideas of the Minister for Lands and myself, the only thought we could have is that if the county council decides to increase the rate, the result would be that the State would have to increase its contribution also.

Mr. Coburn

I was referring to sub-section (2) of Section 2.

Mr. Smith

In that case the Deputy was also on the wrong track because the provision there is to give committees of agriculture power to acquire and power to dispose of. I have been told that in the case of one county committee of agriculture it is the owner of a forest. No county committee of agriculture would have been entitled to acquire a forest for themselves but it so happens that this plantation was left to this committee prior to 1931. It is only right that if a county committee of agriculture is given something free it should also have the right to dispose of that property whenever it thinks fit and proper. It was not the intention that county committees should be empowered to go into ordinary business in forestry, if that is what Deputy Coburn had in mind.

Mr. Dillon

But surely sub-section (2) gives them a mandatory power to make a halfpenny rate available whenever they think right?

Mr. Smith

That right was provided in the 1931 Act but it was never used in that sense or for that purpose. The sub-section to which the Deputy referred is a clarification of that position. I am talking about the over-all position of forestry and its relation to the county committees of agriculture. The sub-section to which the Deputy refers is a different matter entirely. The Act of 1931 made provision for the striking of a rate of a ½d. in the £ for forestry purposes and this has something to do with the clarification of that matter in which I am not too well versed.

I have the same views as have been expressed here in relation to the rate position all over the country. There is no doubt that local rates have been rising and have now reached the stage where people are crying out, and not without good reason. It is because of that that I was hesitant about introducing a Bill such as this at a time like this. Every time, down the years, that this permissive provision was increased the county committees of agriculture succeeded in inducing their parent bodies to push the rate along until the maximum was reached in a short space of time. It may be that that will not be so easy in the years ahead because of the rate position in general.

However, it is a permissive matter and the local committees have been asking for it. Three of them have already reached the maximum allowed by law, and two others are very close to it. They have been asking the Department to amend the law so as to enable them to get additional money and that being the case I do not see how we could oppose them.

It was not my intention to go into the question of the services rendered by the officials of these committees. I am conscious of the fact that outside officials employed, not only by local authorities but by State Departments, are not easy to watch. It is not easy to control their activities so as to see that value is being received for the money spent. A great deal depends on the extent to which there is public demand for their activities and help. If the public do not make use of their assistance, whether they are employed by county committees or are parish agents, you are not going to get good value for the money spent upon them. I think that, by and large, there is that demand for their services and I hope it is on the increase. Let us hope it will continue to increase because there is nothing so demoralising as the provision of money for the employment of technicians who are running about the country and are not applying their knowledge and doing the work they are supposed to do. I do not think there is any matter on which I want to say anything further.

Question put and agreed to.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

When is it proposed to take the next stage?

Mr. Smith

April, 15.

Mr. Dillon

Might I ask the Minister if, in the meantime, he would look into sub-section (2) of Section 2, with a view to clarifying on the next stage the question as to whether that is a new power?

Mr. Smith

What sub-section is it?

Mr. Dillon

The one in which the Minister has mandatory power to direct the local authority to make the proceeds of a halfpenny rate payable.

Mr. Smith

I know what it means, but find it difficult to explain it in technical terms.

Mr. Dillon

We can discuss it on Committee Stage.

Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 15th April, 1958.