The amendment which appears on the Order Paper has a typographical error in the fifth last line of the second paragraph. "That" in the middle of the line should read "than."
Pigs and Bacon (Amendment) Bill, 1961—Report and Final Stages.
I move:
In page 15, to delete lines 28 to 41 and to insert the following subparagraphs, namely:
"(i) in case the quantity would, if increased by the quantity (if any) of bacon already purchased by the Commission from the holder during that period, be equal to or less than the quantity specified in the external-sales sub-quota certificate (within the meaning of the said Part 111) in respect of that period for the premises to which the licence relates, the whole of the bacon, and
(ii) in any other case, such quantity (if any) of the bacon as it thinks proper, having regard to the quantities (if any) of bacon exported by the holder aforesaid on or after the 1st day of January, 1960, and before the commencement of this Act, provided that the quantity purchased shall not be less than the quantity (if any) which if increased by the quantity (if any) of bacon already purchased by the Commission from the holder during the external-sale period aforesaid would be equal to the quantity specified in the said external-sales sub-quota certificate."
The first part of this amendment is a drafting amendment and the second part is designed to clarify the position mentioned by Deputy Dillon in the course of the discussion on Committee Stage.
The text of the amendment is, by necessity, rather complex and difficult to understand. I appreciate that the first part is substantially a drafting amendment. The second part comes in some degree part of the way to meet the problem which I raised in connection with the bacon curer who had been diligent in exploiting export markets prior to the proposal for the centralisation of marketing. I would have wished that the Commission should have been required to accept the total quantity such curer had available, but I appreciate that, in practical circumstances, it may be necessary to retain some measure of flexibility. I should like to be reassured by the Minister now that the phrasing "in any other case, such quantity (if any) of the bacon at it thinks proper, having regard to the quantities (if any) of bacon exported by the holder aforesaid on or after the 1st day of January, 1960," does in fact imply that, in ordinary practice, the diligent exporter in the past will not find himself left with bacon on his hands as a result of an export quota fixed hereafter by the Pigs and Bacon Commission.
I think we have gone as far as we could in our final score to meet that point and to clarify it. The Commission, I am informed, could purchase from the curer in excess of the quota, but this amendment helps to clarify the position and, as I say, goes as far as it would be wise to go.
Amendment agreed to.
Bill, as amended, received for final consideration.
Agreed to take remaining Stage today.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass".
This Bill is mainly a Bill to attempt the experiment of central marketing, although of course it provides for some other minor matters as well. On Committee Stage, I directed the attention of the Minister to the fact that his proposal to give the curers a larger representation on the Commission than he was prepared to give to the producers is a grave psychological mistake. If this new departure is to have any prospect of success, it must command the confidence and goodwill of the producers and everyone in the pig and bacon industry. I believe the producers are justified, and fully justified, in expecting and demanding that they should have equal representation on this Commission—at least equal representation —with the bacon curers.
I do not agree with the Minister that his revised proposal to give the bacon curers three representatives and the producers only two is calculated to produce a more efficient Board. I very much doubt if the Minister believes that himself. I believe he was subjected to pressures to which he saw fit to give way. I greatly regret that that feature had been incorporated in this Bill. I gravely apprehend that the Minister's decision constitutes a flaw in the legislation which will gravely prejudice the prospects of success that might have attended the proposal we all have in mind. I do not think it is yet too late to put this matter right and accordingly I urge the Minister, between now and the time he approaches Seanad Éireann, to review this matter.
I believe the Board, as originally constituted, would have done all right. It would then have consisted of two representatives of the bacon curers, two of the producers, two of the Department and an independent chairman. If the Minister is not able to resist pressure brought upon him to expand the curers' representation to three, then I urge that between now and the time he goes to Seanad Éireann he should introduce an amendment expanding the personnel of this Commission to three for the curers, three for the producers, two from the Deaprtment and a chairman, giving a total body of nine. Unless that is done, this Bill is going to have a very grave flaw in it.
All of us are anxious to see the pig and bacon industry further expanded. It is a flaw in this legislation that there is not more advertence to the possibility of expanding the export of live pigs because I believe that in that direction there might be found a marketing opportunity for the producer which could be developed and if it ever reached the dimensions it had reached three years ago, it would be a most valuable additional outlet for pig producers.
I appreciate all the difficulties of maintaining standards and grades in pigs for the purpose of securing that the bacon we have to export will be of the quality and type that foreign markets want to purchase, but it would be folly for a central marketing organisation such as we now propose to set up to close their eyes to the fact that some of the largest pig producers in Great Britain have now publicly avowed that they no longer believe that the production of the end product now associated with Grade A pigs is primarily the responsibility of the pig producers. Some of the largest curers in England have now said they are not only willing but anxious to accept whatever type of pigs the producers find it most economic to produce and that they are prepared in their processing plants to extract from these pigs suitable bacon and saleable by-products by their own techniques.
We should be vigilant to ensure that, if the processors here are not equipped to do as much, we should not cut off our producers from processors in Great Britain who are prepared to handle profitably types of pig other than Grade A or Grade A.1. Neither should we be unduly critical of processors here, if they find themselves unable to provide an identical service for producers with that offered by certain processors in England because we should bear in mind that there is in the densely populated British market a market for a wide variety of by-products that are not so readily marketable here and that are not so readily transportable from here to the British market were they produced here.
It is these by-products, such as pork pies and bath chaps, and a variety of other by-products of the pig industry, which are readily saleable in certain areas of Great Britain which make it possible for the processor there to handle efficiently and economically a heavier pig than can be handled by the factories here. Nor can we close our eyes to the dilemma that if we are concerned to secure for our factories the maximum number of Grade A and Grade A.1 pigs, if we make too readily available an alternative market for pigs that do not fall within these grades, we may very easily create a situation in which there will be no Grade A or Grade A.1 pigs available for our factories here at all.
I see all the difficulties—perhaps I see them too clearly—of steering between Scylla and Charybdis. There is a temptation to over-simplify these two problems and to demand of the Minister and this body which is now being created an easy and facile solution. With the best will in the world, I do not think it is possible to find either an easy or a facile solution to these problems, but the fact that their solution is not easy should not induce us to turn our backs resolutely on what may be in the future a very valuable and expanding market for a type of pig which it is economic to produce and which our geographical circumstances may make it possible for us to process effectively here in Ireland.
Subject to these two important considerations: (1) the personnel of this Commission and its present inadequate representation of the producer, and (2) the potential market for live pigs which this Commission should have a graver duty to pursue and investigate, we have no objection to the passage of this Bill. I am bound to say, however, that the absence from this body of an equal volume of representation for the producer as is being made available for the curer causes me the gravest apprehension that this Pigs and Bacon Commission may find itself prejudiced against diligently seeking a market for live pigs.
We have to bear in mind that, human nature being what it is, bacon curers in this country do not welcome competition any more than any of us do. A strong and vigorous market for live pigs would be the most effective competition that producers could have in order to keep the curers up to their duty. It would be a thousand pities if that valuable instrument of competition were blunted by any decision of the Pigs and Bacon Commission. I used to be a director of a bacon factory—I am not any longer—but, as a pig producer, I feel quite honestly that the Minister is making a very grave mistake not only from the point of view of the psychology of the matter, but also from the point of view of getting this Commission to do the right thing in not giving the producers equal representation with the bacon curers.
I doubt if there is a Deputy on either side of this House who believes that a Pigs and Bacon Commission concerned to serve the pig industry equitably is properly constituted with three curers on it, two representatives of the producers, one of the Minister, and an independent chairman. It seems to me that that is a most unsuitable arrangement.
I have deliberately tried to avoid making a violent personal attack upon the Minister in regard to this matter, though I could very easily have done so, because I do not want questions of prestige or face to become involved in this. I believe it is desirable from everybody's point of view that the right thing should be done. There is still time. I was tempted to divide the House on this stage of this Bill, on the ground that the representation of the farmers is not equal to that of the curers. I do not propose to call for a division. The reason I do not propose to divide the House on the Bill is that I hope that, between now and the time the Minister brings it before the Seanad, wiser counsels may prevail and we will get a fair representation which will give producers that measure of confidence in this Commission that it ought to have if it is to have a fair chance of doing the job committed to it effectively and efficiently.
There is a general feeling in the country, as well as in the House, that this Bill is a fairly good Bill. Any Bill designed to put things right is worth a chance. That seems to be the general feeling of those interested in pig and bacon production. I should, however, like to add my voice to that of the last speaker in relation to the serious discontent that exists amongst pig producers. The Minister has deliberately limited their representation on the Commission and made it something less than the representation given to the curers. Quite a number of people have asked me why the Minister gives only two representatives to producers, when he is giving three representatives to the curers. If there are no producers, there will be no curers. The Minister, between now and when the Bill goes through the Seanad, should set that matter right.
The bacon industry is one of the most important from the farmers' point of view. The very fact that producers have got this dash of cold water thrown on them in the matter of representation on the Commission will not help the intentions of the Minister. Neither will it help the hopes that everybody has in this Bill. I cannot see any reason why the producers should have a more limited representation on the Commission than the curers or for that matter any other body. The average farmer who raises pigs is the very basis of the bacon industry in the country.
Producers all over the country have gone through a very lean period during the past three, four and five years. They suffered severely from a feast and a famine. They looked to this Bill for some ray of hope, but they find that they are still of little consequence so far as the whole industry is concerned. That is a bad start. At the very least the Minister should even the matter up and, when this Bill goes through the Seanad, he should give them equal representation with the curers.
I do not suppose there is anything I can say which will convince Deputies on the other side who protest as to the constitution of this Commission. I still think it is fair. I still think it will be a well-balanced body. The Commission consists of three curers, two producers, a representative nominated from my Department and a chairman who is independent. No amount of arguing and no process of reasoning would convince me that there is anything unjust or unfair about that.
We debated this at length and no argument on my part will, perhaps, induce the Deputies who made the opposite case to change their mind. The same applies in my case. I do not feel I am called upon to repeat the case I made beyond saying that a Commission of six, composed as I have described, with an independent chairman provided for in this measure, could not be said to be a Commission loaded against the producers. The producers I know—and there are a few —do not seem to share the fears expressed here at all by the Deputies opposite.
As far as the other developments in the bacon curing business in Britain are concerned, the developments on the consumer side and marketing, these are tremendously interesting as Deputy Dillon stated. No doubt they pose considerable problems for the industry here in the future. They are things for which it is not easy to find a solution, but they are certainly developments which will have to be watched most carefully. I know the difficulty the Commission will have to face. I think—and I thought from the very beginning from the report received from the advisory body—that it was the one business where a central marketing body should be making some worthwhile contribution for the whole industry. I am a believer in private enterprise. I see the advantages from time to time in many ways. At the same time if central marketing could be justified in any case, I believe this is an outstanding one and I naturally hope that the Commission provided for here will meet with success.
Would the Minister say why he gave the curers——
We had all that.
That is the one point the Minister never gave the House.
Might I ask a question? Will the Pigs and Bacon Commission constituted by the Bill be the sole exporter of bacon? Can anyone export live pigs without reference to this Commission?
I think so—yes.
Question put and agreed to.