On September 5th an agreement was reached between the Minister for Agriculture and the Minister for Industry and Commerce that on the estimated yield of native wheat this year 300,000 tons would be available for use in the flour industry. On that basis millers were advised to increase the percentage of grist from 70 to 80 and an increased price of 5/9d. per sack for bakers' flour and 7/9d. per sack for household flour was suggested. Although people felt that this was an essential foodstuff they had no great objection to the increase because, even if the wheat used would be more expensive, it was native wheat and they would like to support native industry and production. They did not express too much opposition to the increase.
The justification for that increase was that instead of using 70 per cent. native wheat as was originally proposed, the percentage was to be increased to 80 and thus ten per cent. less imported wheat would be used. Imported wheat was, of course, much cheaper and therefore something had to be found to cover the increase in the price. The Minister agreed and increased the prices of bakers' and household flour. That was all right as far as it went, but on November 2nd as a result of a Question and Supplementary Questions, to the Minister for Industry and Commerce, it was brought out that, irrespective of the yield of millable native wheat from the harvest, that increase in the price of flour was to be maintained. That was news to me.
I felt that if we were not able to get the required amount of millable wheat in the normal way, flour prices would go back to where they had been or would go even lower if more imported wheat had to be used in the grist. I wanted to follow that up and put further questions. The Ceann Comhairle said that it was an argument, and not questions, we were raising. To some extent, I suppose, that was right but to have the matter clarified I put a direct question to the Minister asking, as far as I remember, when we might expect a reduction in the price of flour due to the reduced percentage of native wheat in the millers' grist.
The Minister said that, irrespective of the quantity of wheat available from the 1960 home crop, the price of flour would be maintained and an agreement to that effect had been made between himself and the Minister for Agriculture and that imported wheat would be taken and issued to the millers as Irish wheat. I do not think that is quite playing the game with the general public. I remember becoming a little bit heated in following up the question and the Minister said that if we wanted cheap bread or flour we could use imported wheat. I think there is nothing in that argument; it is only a catch-cry. Every man, woman and child in the country is anxious to see every possible grain of Irish wheat used in Irish flour and I do not think the Minister gained anything by that suggestion. That was a cheap way of saying it. Nobody wants to import more wheat. When we had wheat at 85/- a barrel, the price of flour was half the price it is today. It was the policy of the Government to remove the subsidy. I am not going into that debate again as it has been debated several times already in the House and there is no point in going further but the fact remains that when the farmers received 85/- a barrel for wheat the price of flour was half what it is today.
Native wheat has come to stay because it is the policy of the previous Government and of the present Government to have native wheat used. We have driers and corn stores and silos built to handle and hold it from season to season. There is no question of anybody suggesting any opposition to that policy or saying that we should not use Irish wheat as much as possible in Irish flour. I am sure that Irish wheat will be developed so as to be suitable for bakers' and household flour and we may then see 100 per cent. Irish wheat used and I think the people will agree to that. They did not object even though the price was terribly high, putting flour and bread into the class of luxury goods nowadays. There was not much outcry because the people felt that our own people were getting the benefit.
Last July, the Minister for Agriculture announced that there would be a levy of 4/6d. a barrel on wheat. That levy was imposed and we all know it was put on to cover the disposal of surplus wheat as it was expected that the full yield of wheat would not be consumed as in flour—it could, of course, be consumed in other things— and that the surplus would be covered by that levy. For the past year also there has been a tax of £2 per ton on imported wheat and that tax, I think, is still to the Government's credit because it was hardly used last year— I think all the wheat was millable and the farmers and the millers made full use of it. This year that import duty is liable to be increased to £6 or £8 per ton and, as a result, that increase in the price of foreign wheat will be put on to the price of bread and flour which will be considerably increased in price.
I have heard arguments here before that when the standard of living rises the consumption of flour and bread goes down as people use other foodstuffs. This is what I call a purchase tax, the first one we have had. Only the other day the Commission submitted its report and I feel this is the first purchase tax imposed by the present Government. Who is going to be hit by it? If we say that when the standard of living goes up the consumption of bread goes down therefore the family costs of the man with the lower standard of living will be added to in greater proportion than those of his well-off neighbour. Who is going to be hard hit but the ordinary man with the lower standard of living, the ordinary working man, the man on the dole and the old age pensioner because bread is their main staff of life?
I feel that if the Minister has any case at all, the burden should not be placed directly on those who cannot bear it. That is what the Government are at present doing. If the burden were carried by the Exchequer, it would be scaled equally well over the whole community—it would be borne by the man with £7,000 a year as well as by the man with 30/- a week. In this case, we are putting the burden where it presses hardest, on the poorest section of the community.
When this Question was being asked, we had the old slogan used against us that the Opposition were trying to depress the price of wheat. People use such slogans only when they know they have a bad case. If they have a good case, there is no necessity to use those propaganda slogans. Nobody is out to depress the price of wheat.
The barley harvest and a good share of the wheat harvest is in for the past three months. The stores are chock-full of barley and wheat and the Government have not made any attempt to handle the barley and wheat crop this year. A Question was asked in the House this evening about the imports of offals and the granting of licences for these imports and the Minister said that he had given a licence.