Last night I was complaining that the Minister was not making a sufficiently vigorous effort to ensure that the T.B. eradication scheme would be brought up to a standard which would ensure that our very valuable cattle trade with Great Britain would be properly maintained and protected. The position at the moment is that our scheme appears to be lagging behind the sister scheme in Britain. In Britain they appear to have reached a standard which leaves us out in the cold. The result is that our farming community, which depends on the sale of store cattle to Great Britain, is obliged to accept depressed prices. The farmers find it difficult to sell their cattle. Generally, the position is that the small farmers who normally depend on the sale of store cattle for export at reasonably good prices must now depend to a greater extent on the larger farmers in the fattening areas to purchase the majority of these store cattle. The result is that the demand for store cattle is not as strong as it would be if there were competition from across the water. To these small farmers the price of a few store cattle in the year means all the difference between making ends meet and failing to do so. They have been obliged to hold on to their cattle instead of selling them for the purpose of meeting their liabilities.
The Minister, in his statement, admitted that the cattle population has increased, but it has increased mainly because of the difficulty farmers experience in getting their store cattle exported. It is now much easier for them to export finished cattle, provided they come off accredited farms, but only a limited number of feeders in this country can cope with our very high production of young cattle. For that reason it is necessary for the Minister to make a vigorous effort to try to have a large part of the country accredited as soon as possible. In fact I feel he should take some emergency measures which would ensure the completion of the bovine T.B. eradication scheme at the earliest possible date.
There are many cases of national emergency where a Government may find it necessary to take drastic action, and the livestock industry is so important that any factor affecting that sphere of our economy should be regarded as a national emergency. The Minister mentioned that, up until now, he has spent approximately £7,000,000 on this scheme but does he consider the expenditure of that amount, in connection with an industry whose welfare is a matter of life or death to the country, a sufficient effort? We can point to the fact that in the last 12 years we spent well over £100,000,000 on the provision of dwelling houses for our people. That was a national emergency and it was met within a reasonable time but, at the present rate of expenditure, we certainly shall not spend £100,000,000 on the T.B. eradication scheme over a similar period.
As I say, this is a matter of life or death. If we do not maintain our cattle population and the fertility of the land that produces them we shall not have an economy strong enough to maintain our dwindling human population, and I may emphasise that that population is dwindling. I mention this because I feel the Minister should be prepared to spend £10,000,000 a year on this scheme in order to get the whole country accredited as soon as possible.
I wonder would the Government consider floating a National Loan, in order to obtain the necessary money, if there is any difficulty regarding the financing of the scheme. Perhaps the Minister may tell us that he is not short of money, that he has money to spend and, if that should be so, my suggestion to him is that he should be prepared to spend it immediately to ensure the early completion of the scheme. Even within the next 12 months he should be prepared to spend a sum of at least £10,000,000. Surely such an amount is not too heavy an expenditure to protect a £100,000,000 industry? When the job would be completed at least our livestock industry would be safe for years to come, depending on any change that may occur within the industry itself and, naturally, we must be prepared for changes.
The idea of bovine T.B. accreditation, which has spread amongst the more progressive peoples of the world, is something that we could not have anticipated ten or twenty years ago. It is upon us now and we should tackle it vigorously and complete the job as soon as possible because we cannot stand back and allow the main sector of our economy to become more depressed than it is. I should add that already there is widespread depression, particularly amongst farmers who have store cattle to sell but who cannot find a ready purchaser and, when they are obliged to sell, have to accept a loss or only a very small profit which is not sufficient to enable them to carry on this business as they did in the past.
We are all wondering just how long more will cattle prices continue to be as low as they are now, and how long more will producers experience difficulty in getting them sold. Our farmers, I feel, will continue to face these difficulties until they stand level with the farming community across the water who have advanced their eradication scheme much further than we have ours. We can make the same progress but it will depend on the Minister giving the leadership which is necessary to get the job done.
He did mention that to a certain extent a number of counties west of the Shannon have been cleared. Certainly they are the areas worst affected, but it has been noticed that in areas outside those counties there is often delay experienced in having farms accredited. Many land owners comply with the necessary regulations and then send notices asking for the usual inspections to be carried out in order that their holdings can be accredited, but very frequently these notices are either ignored or overlooked. In any event there is a hold-up in the accreditation of their farms.
I do not intend to go into the technical side of accreditation. That is a matter for the technicians, but I feel that the Minister must insist on co-operation amongst the farmers. It is all very well for one farmer to do his best to comply with the regulations and reach the standards laid down, but when his neighbours make no attempt to do likewise, they spoil that man's efforts. That is why I suggest the Minister will have to interfere more directly so far as the clearance of these areas is concerned. He will have to point out to the farmers that this is a matter of national importance and that the nation is affected to a considerable extent by the fact that this scheme is lagging behind its counterpart across the water. He will have to ask all land owners to keep pace and to comply with whatever regulations are proposed to each area in order that that scheme can be completed.
I consider that this is a crisis for this country which must not be overlooked but a solution found as soon as possible to ensure again a ready flow of cattle out of this country to Great Britain, our main customer. After all, we must face the fact that we depend on Great Britain for the import of nine-tenths of our livestock. It is all very well to talk about exploiting markets for beef and canned meat in European countries and elsewhere and to suggest that our factories should process the meat and export it; but when we face the fact that less than 10 per cent. of the beef produced in this country can be disposed of in that way we must realise that the other nine-tenths are exported, mainly on the hoof, to Great Britain and that the larger portion of our livestock industry depends on a ready market there. The market is there provided we can comply with the regulations. We are not able to comply with them because we are so far behind time and we are therefore not able to compete in the cross-Channel market with our cattle.
Deputy Dillon mentioned that another reason for the depression which exists throughout the length and breadth of the country on the land is the fact that the income of farmers has dropped by £18,000,000 in two years. At the same time the farming community has got to face higher costs. Higher wages have been granted to meet the higher cost of living faced by every section of the community, and the farmers, who have dropped £18,000,000 in their incomes, have to meet these higher prices and costs. It cannot continue.
For instance, the farmer is obliged at the moment to pay I suppose 7d. a loaf more for his bread than he paid as recently as three years ago. Still he has to take less for his wheat. Yet, in that background, he is facing a levy in the coming harvest.
I was glad to learn from the Minister's statement that the sheep trade, though it met with some difficulties towards the end of last year, has improved again. A great part of that trade is the price which is obtained from wool exports. I hope that whatever can be done to improve the economy in relation to sheep production will be done. There is plenty of hillside grazing in this country where much larger numbers of sheep could be reared and fattened. There is no scheme here to encourage the improvement of grazing on mountainsides and hillsides, but in other countries they have brought up very suitable schemes in connection with this type of sheep rearing. I feel we should take advantage of that and implement some kind of a plan which would enable sheep farmers to take advantage of these larger areas on which better feeding could be provided.
Although the pig progeny testing scheme was introduced here by the previous Government, and though very useful work was carried out, I fear that full advantage has not been taken of it. We have got some useful statistics and results from experiments that have been carried out and I feel they should be encouraged in every part of every county through the county committees of agriculture. The information gathered could be made available by the committees so that better quality pigs would be produced.
I noticed in the Minister's statement that the Marketing Advisory Committee set up a few years ago had suggested the establishment of a number of boards, one of them being the Bacon Export Board. I am in favour of that suggestion and if it will result in a very good increase in bacon exports it should be welcomed everywhere. It is very encouraging to notice that a reasonably high percentage—17 per cent. I think—of pigs qualified under the new section as super-grade bacon. I feel our advisory services, which can be provided through the various committees of agriculture, in connection with progeny testing and pig feeding will ensure that a much greater percentage than that will qualify as super-grade bacon.
In the matter of poultry, it is to be noted that the real progress has been made in connection with the double-breasted turkey. There seems to be a growing demand for this type of poultry flesh, and we should take advantage of all the technical advice resulting from the setting up of the station at Athenry. Such advice must inevitably result in expanding the production of turkeys. In past years turkey production was a very important part of our economy. But last Christmas the Minister and the Government made a very bad mistake in advising turkey breeders to sell at the wrong time. Many of them suffered heavy losses as a result. They sold their flocks for less than half the price secured by many of their neighbours who sold at a later date.
I would advise the Minister to watch the market and give better advice to turkey breeders this year. Many housewives in this country rear large flocks of turkeys and at Christmas time, after all their trouble and expense, expect to get some profit from the work they have put into the rearing of their birds. The money they get in this way enables them to meet quite a number of the costs that arise in connection with their domestic activities. Quite a number of wives of small farmers depend nearly exclusively on their turkey flocks and on the profitable sale of the birds at Christmas to make ends meet.
I mentioned that farmers were suffering because of poor cattle prices but they are also suffering because of the poor prices they are obtaining for other produce. Mechanisation has taken place here to a certain extent and the result is that we have surpluses of various crops, and the difficulty is to sell them. The sale of this produce to our dwindling population is becoming more and more difficult. The Marketing Advisory Committee should concern itself with this problem. I hope their suggestions concerning the setting up of these boards will meet with success because something will have to be done about the matters they have mentioned—the export of eggs, bacon and dairy produce. But there are other surpluses available for export and, unfortunately, they cannot be sold. They either go to waste, and the farmer gets nothing for his labour, or they are sold at sacrifice prices.
We must face the fact that in most modern countries to-day the mechanisation of agriculture has resulted in a very big rise in the volume of production; but here, according to the Minister's own report, the volume of production has increased by only three per cent. In many other countries production is increasing by leaps and bounds, and if we are to have mechanisation we shall have to have a higher output. Having got that, we must then find a market for our surplus. The increase in the population of the world at present is approximately 20,000,000 persons—an extra 20,000,000 people to be fed every year. Yet here we are in this country, capable of producing a vast surplus of food, but our producers are unable to sell it at a profit. They are capable of producing far greater surpluses but are all the time faced with the danger that, having produced that surplus, they will be unable to dispose of it.
I suppose that explains to some extent the reason why production on the land in this country has gone up by only three per cent in the last twelve months. If we examine the rate at which agricultural production has increased in other countries, we must admit that progress here has been very slow. We must aim at producing greater surpluses than we have at present, but if they are produced in the immediate future, there is no doubt that our producers will find it almost impossible to sell them.
I turn now to wheat. We have been warned by the Minister that it is proposed to impose a levy on this year's harvest and that the scheme will be operated by An Bord Gráin. If An Bord Gráin are not prepared to give it, then we should ask the Minister to give us an undertaking on this occasion that if a levy is imposed on wheat for a certain purpose, it will be used for that purpose and for no other purpose. A couple of years ago when this Board was set up and a levy of 5/9d. per barrel decided upon, the money was collected and it was to be used for the purpose of giving a reasonable price for the wheat surplus. Because the harvest that year was a complete loss, there was no surplus. Yet the 5/9 per barrel, which was to be used for levelling out the price for an expected surplus, was taken from the producers and used for another purpose. If a levy is to be imposed again this year, the Minister should set out clearly the purpose for which it is being collected, and it should not be taken for any other purpose.
I do not believe it is necessary that any levy should be taken this year because I do not think the acreage of wheat has increased to such an extent that we shall have an unmanageable surplus. I understand the Minister has in mind approximately 300,000 tons of wheat. But supposing there are only an extra 10,000 tons, would he consider that the imposition of a levy, with all the inconvenience and annoyance associated with it, would be justified? I do not believe he would. The Minister ought to be in a position to know from the approximate acreage of wheat sown the estimated amount that will be harvested if the weather is reasonably good.
We must remember, when talking of wheat surpluses, that there was a surplus on the 1956 crop, and the Minister and his Government exported it at sacrifice prices. The following year the country would have been very glad if we had held that surplus of high quality wheat. Instead, because of the bad harvest that year, we had the panic importation of wheat. Most of the big countries—Canada and the United States in particular—always carry in store one or two harvests of wheat. Surely it is reasonable to expect that we should carry the harvest of at least one year. We could have used every ton of it following the bad harvest I have referred to.
I am suggesting that the Minister has let down the wheat growers in the matter of price. He gave them to understand they were going to get £4 2s. 6d. per barrel when they got 78/6 per barrel, and they are getting very much less now. If the Minister intends to play ducks and drakes with the growers, at least he should be fair to them in the matter of the levy and adopt a reasonable policy which will not cause them unnecessary hardship. Last year, the barley growers had to be glad to take 38/- a barrel for feeding barley but they were getting up to 50/- a barrel for it at a time when the Minister and his party were telling the farmers they were not getting half enough. Fianna Fáil told the barley growers to take 38/- a barrel and be happy about it.
In the same way the milk producers were politically exploited by Fianna Fáil in Opposition. The producers were led to believe during those years that it would be quite simple to give them an extra 6d. a gallon but it was not so simple when the change of Government came. Fianna Fáil had got the support of the producers in the meantime even though they reneged them afterwards and broke their promise and gave them only a very miserable increase, one from which deductions were made rendering it almost useless. At the same time the rates on agricultural holdings were increased considerably; wages and costs of equipment were increased and even the cost of butter made from the milk produced by these people was put up by something like 10d. a lb.
Those are the difficulties which the wheat and milk producers are facing at present. They were led to believe they would have prosperity and a sound economy if they changed the Government. They did change it in 1957 in return for those undertakings none of which was fulfilled. Only a few weeks ago we saw the verdict given in the Carlow-Kilkenny by-election by the farming community and to a great extent they are producers of wheat and milk.
There has been a certain amount of boasting on the part of the Government about industrial activity but the figures of employment have not shown that any more people are earning wages in that sphere. The Government should not ignore the fact that in the long run it is a prosperous agricultural economy that will count here. The Shannon industrial gimmicks will not pay for the collapse of the agricultural industry if it is allowed to collapse and it does seem to have fallen down in many ways.
Before I conclude I want to refer to the vast amount of poor land we have. There are a couple of million acres which are capable of producing livestock and crops and which are producing nothing because of the depressed economy and lack of capital among owners. These people cannot go out into the fields and take advantage of the fertile soil and produce crops; they probably could not get a market for them. Now we have the same position in regard to livestock, but, at least, if an effort was made to improve the quality of grass on what appears to be derelict land, it would start producing something and would add considerably to our volume of production. We should be in a position to find markets for these surpluses. We must increase our volume of production if we are to maintain the standard of living to which the people have become accustomed in the past 10 years. If we are to keep up that standard, production must go up as soon as possible. We have modern techniques at present; we have mechanisation and technicians and all these combined would be capable of getting increased production from our fertile land. These things should be combined to bring about that increase soon.
Last night Deputy Dillon mentioned the fact that in western areas particularly there is such poverty in the land that families have locked their doors and emigrated. That is happening not only west of the Shannon; it is happening in every county and parish in Ireland, because people are losing the fight for existence. They are losing an economic battle and are forced to emigrate to try to keep body and soul together by offering their services elsewhere. I think we shall have more emigration unless our agricultural economy improves and there is a change of Government. It seems from the last by-election that we shall have a change of Government.