Committee on Finance. - Vote 17—Supplementary Agricultural Grants. – Dáil Éireann (17th Dáil) – Wednesday, 21 Feb 1962

Minister for Finance (Dr. Ryan)

I move:—

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £90,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1962, for the increase of the Grant to Local Authorities in Relief of Rates on Agricultural Land (No. 35 of 1925; No. 28 of 1931; No. 23 of 1939; No. 36 of 1946; No. 36 of 1953; No. 18 of 1956; and No. 11 of 1959).

When the original Estimate for Supplementary Agricultural Grants was submitted the local authorities had not yet fixed their rates and, on the basis of experience in previous years, an average increase of 3% in rates was provided for and a provision of £5,160,000 was made in the Estimate.

The rates actually struck represent an increase of about 5% on the previous year. The additional amount needed is estimated at £90,000—the sum provided for in this Supplementary Estimate. Allowing for the extra £90,000 proposed the total expenditure in respect of the Agricultural Grant for 1961-62 will be £5,850,000 of which £5,250,000 will be from voted moneys.

The agricultural grant is divided into two main headings, the primary allowance and the employment allowance. The primary allowance for this year will take £4,762,000, that is, as Deputies are aware, three-fifths remission of rates on the first £20 valuation of the holding, and the employment allowance will take £1,062,000, that is, £17 per person employed by the farmer, whether the person is a relative or a paid employee.

Mr. Donegan

We on this side of the House welcome what is merely an automatic increase taking place as a result of the extraordinary increases in rates which have been largely borne by the agricultural community over a number of years. It is now stated by the Minister that he has always budgeted for a three per cent. increase in rates but last year the increase was five per cent.

Lest anybody should take the view that this is another grant to the farmer, I should like to point out that the farmer is the only citizen who pays rates on what I would call his stock in trade. The factory owner, the business man, pays rates on his property but that has no relation to the earning capacity of that property. A small jeweller's shop might have a very small rate but it could have an earning capacity far above the amount of the rates on the property. The farmer is in a different position. On the basis of his earning power, which is his agricultural land, he has been rated. He pays rates on his buildings, out-offices and on his stock in trade.

The crossroads has been reached and the arrival of this Supplementary Estimate is an indication of it. The impact of the Health Act on the rates, which the Minister opposite said at one time would mean no more than 2/-and the regional water schemes which are now proceeding have pushed this Estimate of the Minister from three per cent. to five per cent. I believe that this day two months the Minister's advisers will be in a position to tell him that the increase next year will be considerably greater and that the imposition which the farmers must face will result in a further Supplementary Estimate arriving during the coming financial year.

On the basis of normal farming income, the present primary allowance referred to by the Minister is related to a valuation of £20. It would be a great step to increase the amount of valuation upon which this two-thirds remission would have effect. There is also the point that the secondary allowance, namely, the £17 per year remission for a man employed, should take into account persons employed on seasonal work. I could give an instance of a farmer who pays £4,000 for labour, on a particularly large farm, admittedly, who gets a remission of only £68 because quite a number of these workers are employed on horticulture and the harvesting of cereals.

It is our considered opinion that next year a further Supplementary Estimate will be necessary unless something is done to remove from the farmer's back these impositions which have come about because of the greater demands placed on the rates through legislation.

Mr. Blowick

I wonder does the Minister, in asking for this sum of £90,000, realise the situation that has arisen amongst rural dwellers? I think the Minister is living in a fool's paradise. He has not the least idea of what is happening in the country at the present time. The only hope I can see of bringing the Minister to his senses is the way the farmers have gone into open rebellion against the rates. Our rates in County Mayo are 58/10d. in the £ this year. I want to put this question to the Minister. Do the Government of which he is a member think they can continue to raise taxation off the land to the extent involved in the legislation they have forced on it? It is the legislation passed here by Fianna Fáil Governments that has driven up the rates.

The Minister for Finance, when he was Minister for Health, came in here with the Health Act and said that he could not see the rates being affected as a result of that Act. He said that its operation would not increase the rates by any more than 2/6d. in the £. Does the Minister remember making that statement? What was the health rate in County Mayo alone last year? It was 22/7d. in the £ which is a pound and a penny over and above the Minister's optimistic estimate. One of the causes of the rates being at their present level is that Fianna Fáil, since 1932, have been in the habit of forcing legislation giving benefits to certain people and passing the cost on to the ratepayers.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy knows that discussion on this Supplementary Estimate is limited. What the Deputy is saying would be more relevant to the general Estimate.

Mr. Blowick

I submit that what I am saying is relevant.

An Ceann Comhairle

This Supplementary Estimate does not entitle the Deputy to go over the whole matter of the health services. The Deputy may make a case but he may not discuss the incidence of the rates in every constituency.

Mr. Blowick

In deference to your ruling, Sir, I shall not go any further on that point, except to remind the House that it is legislation passed by the House that has left the rates in the deplorable condition in which they are today. The time has come when the Government will have to face up to the complete derating of all the land in this country so as to put us on a level with the farmers of Northern Ireland and Great Britain. At the very least, they will have to derate the land of the lower valuations.

All our villages and townlands which were formerly full of happy homes are empty now because the people have been forced to emigrate. The pattern of emigration heretofore was that the youngest ones went but there was always someone left behind to carry on the family name and tradition. All that is changed. Now they are all going and the houses and farms are left deserted. I believe that to counter this, the Minister will have to shoulder the whole burden of the rates.

What industry in this country is being taxed on its means of livelihood in the manner in which the land is being taxed? Every other industry is being feather-bedded and bolstered, but it seems to me that the Government have an undying hatred for all those who live on the land. Ever since they first came into power, they have hit the people living on the land blow after blow. The result is that the land is being completely depopulated. The level of the rates has driven the people from the country with the result that the work of other Government Departments has been upset. The flight from the land is making a huge joke of the work of the Land Commission. The time has come when the Government will have to shoulder the burden of the rates.

At the present time, the small holdings throughout the country would not be worth the rates being paid for them, if they were put up for sale on the open market. That has all been brought about by the action of the Minister and his colleagues in giving gifts to certain people at the expense of the ratepayers. If the Government want to give gifts and pay benefits to certain people, the best proof of their willingness to do this is to pay for them themselves.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 21 Feb 1962

Committee on Finance. - Vote 17—Supplementary Agricultural Grants.

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 21 Feb 1962