Committee on Finance. - Vote 41 — Agriculture (Resumed). – Dáil Éireann (17th Dáil) – Thursday, 21 Nov 1963

Committee on Finance. - Vote 41 — Agriculture (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

"That the Vote be referred back for reconsideration."

—(Deputy Donegan).

Mr. Crotty

I was dealing with the recommendations for the dairy industry and the bacon industry. I think it would be very bad for the country if the suggestion to amalgamate the creameries were acted upon. These creameries perform their own function and provide the farmer with many services.They provide him with credit when required; they provide a lorry service and so on. The same applies to the bacon industry. It would be a backward step to have only three or four very large factories in the whole country. I understand another recommendation is that the farmer should pay for these factories by a levy of 5/- a pig.

It is hard to understand the Minister's action in sanctioning the closing of the flour mills. In his speech he mentioned that the trend in France and Germany was to provide employment for the small farmer by the provision of industry. Here, instead of encouraging the growth of industry in the smaller areas, we find the policy of the Government is that it should be centralised in three or four industrial centres throughout the country such as Shannon and Dublin. They say that only in these places will the industries get the services they require.

That is a very wrong policy altogether. As a result of Government policy, we have flour mills closed in my constituency. Because of an amalgamation in the fertiliser industry, we have had a loading depot, a storage depot and a compounding depot closed in Kilkenny. If the Minister were to follow his remarks about France and Germany to their logical conclusion, he would promote industry in the smaller areas. For years we have heard the Minister for Transport and Power say that the flight from the land was no worse here than anywhere else and that the only hope was to establish industry to absorb those people. But now, even in places where industries are already established they are being closed down. I suppose the Taoiseach being a city man, does not know very much about the ways of the country.

I notice the Minister resents the protest meetings and marches of the farmers. He says they are an imitation of what has been done on the continent.But are the Minister and the Government not the best people to prevent these meetings and marches? If the Minister and the Government co-operated with the farmers, they would not have to bring people together from all over the country to protest. We would not have what we had in Limerick recently where 500 or 600 guards were sent to protect the people from the farmers, where two guards were appointed to escort each tractor in the procession in case anything might happen.

It has been proved these marches produce results. There was the case of the increased grant for the relief of rates. Nothing was done about it until the farmers protested strongly in several areas. I understand they were asked not to protest in Dublin, that their claims would be met before they arrived there. They were met, with a £2 million grant for reduction of rates. I see the same thing occurred in regard to the heifer scheme. We had meetings in Athlone and a protest in Limerick and then the heifer scheme was initiated. These organisations consist of responsible people who do not want to embarrass the Government. They have able and brilliant men in the farming industry at their heads and want to co-operate with the Government.Apparently, the Government do not want that co-operation. Only when people feel they do not get the co-operation they deserve do they organise the protest speeches and marches the Minister resents so much.

Although it may be very hard for him, I ask the Minister to co-operate with the organisations so that in future when any claims are made, they may be debated and discussed as happens with the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. I see the Taoiseach is anxious to meet the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and to have consultations with them and with employers' unions but there is no suggestion of any meeting with farmers. He has no time for them. He does not understand them. I know the Minister is in an unenviable position in trying to help farmers.

Deputy Allen mentioned the Land Project. I was surprised that any Fianna Fáil Deputy should have the temerity to mention this subject. We know what happened when the present Government came in. The Minister now speaks about the credit being provided for the farmers but was not this an ideal credit scheme for the man who could not afford to meet his share of the cost of the Land Project, that it could be put on the annuities and he could pay for it as the land is brought into production? This was not a scheme only for the man who could find a large sum. There was the option of Section A, if he did not want it put on his annuity. If a man had not got the capital sum, he could opt for the second part of the Land Project.

Deputy Allen said the cost now was about £60 per acre while the maximum grant now was £30. This, he said, should be increased to £45 per acre. I support him in that but I would prefer it had he asked that Section B should be restored to enable the farmer who cannot pay the capital sum to be facilitated. Under the new issue which is being made to counteract the effects of the turnover tax, we are going to provide houses for the farmers in respect of which the capital sum can be put on the annuities. But in the Land Project, Section B, there was already provided the necessary credit which people required very badly. I suggest that, to the best of his ability —I know it is hard to get any hearing unless there is a protest march or something like that, from the present Taoiseach—the Minister should keep pressing and try to get a fair deal for the farmers.

Mr. P.J. Burke

If Deputy Dillon would wait to hear me, he might learn something.

Mr. Dillon

A Daniel come to judgment—I should love to.

Mr. P.J. Burke

The present Minister took office at a very difficult period. I have heard other Deputies speak of the schemes organised by the inter-Party Government and the then Minister for Agriculture. It was easy to tell the people that the schemes were there but my experience in County Dublin was that any farmer who tried to avail of these schemes, reconstruction or building of out-houses, drainage or sinking wells, that normally benefit the farmer, found there was no money to pay for them. Not only that, but no other Minister had to deal with the bovine tuberculosis scheme. At that time we had a deadline from the British market that unless we had a TB-free herd by a certain date, we were finished. Other Ministers, including the previous Minister for Agriculture, had fallen down on this job completely. The nation owes a debt of gratitude to the present Minister for the wonderful job he did in that huge scheme.

First, we had to deal with the number of farmers who thought it was not necessary; others said: "My father's and grandfather's cows were all right and so are mine." We are naturally conservative but we had to move with the times and deal with the problem that present-day changes brought about. It took a long time to do it. Almost 500,000 cows had to be slaughtered and tact and encouragement were needed to operate this scheme and at the same time, subsidise farmers, keep up the stock of cattle and keep the export market going. It amounted to saving the agricultural industry as a whole, no small task in a few years.

We have people of all organisations with cures for all ills: our export markets are not as good as they should be; no market for the surplus goods and so on. Thank God, we are in a free democracy and these organisations, Macra na Feirme and the others, may say what they like about the Minister and the Department but while Macra na Feirme have done a good job for the country in organising farmers, trying to get them to adopt more scientific methods and trying to get them out of the groove in which they had been for years, it should go a step further and be constructive in its criticism. The Minister is very wide-awake. He is well aware of the position. He is a politician and a member of a Party and it is to his own advantage, as well as to the advantage of his Party, that he should do the best he can. If he can do better, naturally we shall all be pleased. But the Minister is doing a very good job. I compliment him on it.

The Minister and his Department have availed of every opportunity that has offered to improve the lot of the farmer. There are people who criticise a great deal, especially people holding jobs, official or honorary, in the various farming organisations. I would strongly advise the Minister to adopt the same strategy as Abraham Lincoln adopted: he would send for the most ardent critic and tell him that he seemed to be able to do the job better than the man who had it and he there and then offered him the job. I would appoint these critics, asking them to report periodically on progress to the Minister.

It is one of the healthier signs of democracy that people can criticise. One would at all times like that criticism though to be constructive. Neither Fine Gael nor Labour criticise constructively. Constructive criticism would help us to make this country even better. I come from old farming stock and I have heard stories from my great grandfather and my grandfather.They survived without the help of any Minister for Agriculture, for there was no Minister for Agriculture to help them. There were no schemes. The standard of living was low, but the people survived, and survived under very adverse conditions.

Today we are putting £40 million into farming, subsidising farming, both directly and indirectly. Agriculture is our most important industry. The tourist trade comes second. The industrial arm proper is rapidly catching up. A great many schemes have gone through this House since I first became a member, some 20 years back next May. Many improvements have been made on our farms. Help is even given when adverse weather conditions prevail.The Exchequer steps in to aid farmers, and will again, should occasion arise.

Our greatest difficulty is, of course, the finding of markets for our surplus produce, and we have a considerable surplus. In Dublin at the moment, we have a surplus of vegetables. A farmer from Balbriggan told me at the Árd Fheis that it did not pay him to bring cabbage to the market because of the slump. I think the solution to the problem lies in the establishment of co-operative societies. If we go into the Common Market, if we are not as good as our neighbours in Europe, we will fall by the wayside.

I have had some experience in exporting surplus vegetables to Britain and Scotland. Freight charges are prohibitive. The answer to the problem is the co-operative society in which every member will pull his weight. There is very urgent need for co-operation in my constituency. We got away reasonably well with wheat but vegetable growers are suffering badly.

Co-operation is the only solution. It would solve the problem of machinery for one thing. It would cut down overheads. A small farmer purchases a machine costing £2,000 and half the year the machine is idle. It takes a great deal of effort to pay for that machine, to say nothing of depreciation.With a co-operative society, one machine could do four or five farms. Instead of one man going into the Dublin market with a lorry half full, the same man on the same lorry could take the produce of five or six other growers. That would eliminate overhead costs.

Foreign markets must be studied. I am talking of vegetable markets now. It is essential to understand the presentation of vegetables in these markets.I have been in London, Glasgow and Edinburgh from time to time. Our standards must be brought up. Tomato growing in County Dublin has been very successful and a grading system will be put into operation. This year there was a certain amount of grading done. It is hoped to be able not alone to supply the home market, but to export tomatoes. The Irish tomato is of much better quality than the imported variety. It is felt that, if handled properly, there is a good export market for tomatoes, that the quality of the tomatoes will sell them.

I remember when the onions grown in Kerry first came on the Dublin market. A co-operative movement was started. It is a pleasure to see the way onions are marketed now, having been properly harvested. The same applies to the co-operative societies dealing with apples. I do not intend to discuss the dairying industry. I am confining myself to a few problems that concern County Dublin particularly.

I cannot over-emphasise the importance of co-operation. The day of the individual producer is gone. Farmers must co-operate with one another. Our aim should be to make ourselves better than our forefathers were, to leave this country in a better condition than that in which we found it. People must think intelligently for themselves. I hope the young farmers will not always be going to Fine Gael meetings and Labour Party meetings where all they do is criticise the Minister for Agriculture.I hope our people will be prepared to stand on their own feet and to think for themselves and do the best they can, in co-operation with their neighbours. It is highly important that there should develop a spirit of co-operation.Given that, there will be a very easy task for any Minister for Agriculture in the future.

Mr. R. Barry

My intervention is intended to be very brief but the debate on the Estimate for the Department of Agriculture affords Deputies from rural areas an annual opportunity of voicing in Dáil Éireann the opinion of their constituents as to the activities of the Department of Agriculture over the preceding 12 months in particular and over the past few years in general. Therefore, I rise this evening to speak on behalf of the farmers in North-East Cork, whom I have the honour to represent, and to give the views of, as I consider, the great majority of them in relation to the position in which they as farmers find themselves today.

When I heard my friend Deputy P. J. Burke from County Dublin extolling the Minister for Agriculture and assuring him that farmers and horticulturists in County Dublin were satisfied with the administration of his office by the Minister, I could not help thinking that he, like the Minister and the Government generally, is completely out of touch with reality.

It is accepted and admitted by all sides of this House that the agricultural industry is still basically and fundamentally the industry on which everything in this country hinges. It is generally agreed that the wealth of Ireland is not under the soil but on the top surface of the soil. That being so, I am glad even at this late stage to think that the Fianna Fáil Government now admit that the basic industry is agriculture and, that being so, that we have to work it to the best advantage.

I would point out to the Minister and to the Government that farmers generally find themselves in the position that they cannot give of their best because they feel they are being treated anything but fairly. It is true to say that the farmers were worse off on 1st November, 1963, than they were on 1st November, 1962. I do not gloat in making that statement to the House. I am sorry to have to make it. Even though farmers are agitating at times and are taking part in protest marches, in justice to them I would point out that there is good reason for their agitation and protestation.

The Minister agreed, as did Deputy Medlar within the past hour and a half, that the prices for grain have not been increased over the past four or five years. That is admitted on all sides. It must be admitted also that the costs of production of grain have increased considerably over the past four or five years. Is it any wonder, then, that farmers are agitated? Farmers, especially the grain growing farmers and other farmers of north and north-east Cork, are rightly agitated as a result of the position in which they find themselves. The price of grain has not increased. The cost of production has increased considerably. Rates have increased considerably over the past four or five years. In Cork they have increased by 3/- in the £ in the last year. The grain-growing farmers of north and north-east Cork are the biggest ratepayers in the constituency. While they have to pay the increased rates and, like everyone else, have to meet the increased cost of living, the price of grain in 1963 was the same as in 1958-59.

I would appeal, in all honesty, in all fairness, without agitation, to the Minister and the Government to give their immediate attention to the situatition in which such conditions are allowed to prevail. I want to suggest also, in all fairness, that when the farmers do represent to the Minister for Agriculture and to the Government that they are not getting their due share of the national loaf, they are doing so in a very honest and sincere way.

Like Deputy Crotty, I would appeal to the Minister and the Government to treat the National Farmers' Association and other organised farmers' groups as the various trade unions are treated and, in my opinion, rightly treated. The organised industrial trade unions are listened to whereas the farmers' organised groups get very little hearing.

If we are to get the idea across to the people that increased production is necessary, that it will be necessary to work harder on the land, in view of the possibility of European competition in the future, and if we are sincere in appealing to the farmers to help us in that trojan task, we must show some faith in them, first of all by listening to them and then by dealing with their grievances in a sincere, honest and straightforward manner.

I believe that this Government are the industrialists' Government and have very little concern for the farmers. A great many farmers held that view before I did. If this Government want to appeal to the sense of nationality and patriotism of the farmers, they should do as they did during the emergency when the farmers responded to the appeal. While the emergency may not be as great now there is still an emergency and you must treat them in the way they should be treated as an organised body.

I have said already that the price of grain has not altered in the past four or five years and I want to add that the farmers are worse off this year than they were in 1962. All over the country the yield of grain is down considerably this year. In my constituency, the yield of barley is down about five barrels per acre and a reduction of five barrels per statute acre means a reduction of about £10 per acre. The Minister and the Government have no control over that but it is a fact that it has happened. The yield of wheat is down about three barrels per statute acre which means about £10 per acre in terms of money. Whether the farmers grow barley or wheat, apart from the price being the same and their costs greater, they are also £10 an acre worse off than they were in 1962.

Those are plain, blunt facts and in view of them and of the position in which the farmers find themselves as a result, it is now the immediate task of the Government to do something about wheat and barley prices. The Minister knows that a situation exists now, at the end of November, in which many people cannot get enough barley. I wonder what was the cause of the drop in the acreage of wheat and barley this year? Was it that these crops do not pay to grow? It is remarkable that there are farmers who find it impossible to get feeding barley at present in the south of Ireland. I cannot understand what was the reason for the drop in acreage.

There is something fundamentally wrong with a policy which allows a situation to develop in which last year we gave practically £2 million to An Bord Gráin for the handling of the wheat crop here. The fact that so much money was given to the Board to handle so much surplus wheat requires immediate investigation.

I want to go on and tell the Minister that while the farmers in my constituency suffered all those losses and hardships through the growing of grain, they also find themselves in anything but a happy position in regard to the cattle trade. I have no intention of blaming the Minister for the present price of cattle but the farmers now find themselves in the position that the cattle trade has fallen into an unhappy mess in the past couple of months.

I have not come across anybody in this country who could pinpoint the reason for the drop in cattle prices. Cattle rearing is the fundamental side of the agricultural industry, which is, in itself, the fundamental part of our economy and it seems extraordinary that the reason for the fluctuation in cattle price cannot be pinpointed by anybody here. We will have to devise a system whereby prices can be maintained in some kind of consistent form.

We have the same position with regard to pig rearing. After all the money that was spent in grading pigs and all the rest of it, we now have the situation in Cork where pigs are at a premium, grading has been discarded and anything in the shape of a fat pig brings in from £17 to £20. Where have they all gone to? Is it a question of supply and demand or has all the money spent on grading them and trying to find out what is the best type of pig been wasted? All those things seem to go by the board when any kind of a scarcity arises. I begin to wonder if all the money spent on the pig industry will have the effect we hope on the future of pig rearing. What we need is a broad policy aimed at constant production rather than speculative production. The pig industry is one in which people are inclined to get into and get out of rather quickly, so unless we can guarantee pig rearers some future we will not succeed as we would like to.

I should like to touch on the flight from the land. It is unfortunate this problem has been steadily increasing over the years, particularly when we consider that all our best traditions were built up by our peasants. The loss of them now is a disaster for Irish society. Goldsmith, in his Deserted Village, had this to say:

A bold peasantry, its country's pride, When once destroyed can never be supplied.

I wonder how we are to tackle this problem of the flight from the land. I know many of the causes that give rise to it, and to my mind, one of the main reasons is the takeover of the work on our farms by machinery instead of manual labour. Here I want to sound a serious word of warning to the Minister and to the Government: I believe it is a very bad thing for this country that so much agricultural machinery is allowed to be imported.

A considerable lot of this machinery lies idle in farmer's haggards for 11 months, sometimes 11½ months, each year. The oil for that machinery, the spare parts, are all imported. Therefore I suggest we should devise a scheme whereby all this machinery would be bought and held on a co-operative rather than an individual basis. In this manner we would be helping to achieve an improvement in our adverse balance. I do not think any Minister or Deputy will disagree when I say it is bad policy to have machinery costing thousands of pounds thrown around farmers' haggards for 11½ months of the year while it is used perhaps for a month, perhaps for only a few days each year. If our grain growing policy is to be continued in earnest, I suggest we should tackle this problem of excessive agricultural machinery immediately because nobody can say that it pays a man with a hundred acres or less to acquire machinery and have it lying idle in his haggard for the best part of the year.

I began to refer to the flight from the land and mentioned machinery only because I thought it contributed largely to this problem. It is one of the reasons why there is less employment on farms. Of course there are also social reasons. We have now arrived at a stage when it is hard to keep farmers' sons and farm labourers isolated, far away from the community spirit and the bright lights. We cannot expect them to stay on the land either if we do not give them adequate compensation for the work they do. While most farmers would be only too anxious to pay their sons or their workers adequate wages they are limited in what they can afford by the facts I have already mentioned. This of course brings us back again to my submission that we do not give the farmers adequate compensation for the work they put into the land and we have the full circle in that the farmers are therefore unable to pay proper wages.

The last problem I want to deal with is that of credit facilities for farmers. Nobody has any doubt that the credit schemes and facilities available for farmers over the years have been anything but adequate. There is no doubt that lack of these credit facilities is at the root of our problem of getting higher production. This applies with particular emphasis to the smaller farmers. The Minister knows this very well, coming from a county where the average farm is smaller than in my constituency of North-East Cork. I am sure the Minister is as well aware as I am that many small farmers are starved for capital.

If these farmers could only get the wherewithal to manure and fertilise their land properly, I have no doubt we would get the extra production we require and the farmer would enjoy the independent position in society he so richly deserves. The trouble in this country is that if you have got money, you can get plenty of money, but if you have not got money, you are left high and dry. The Industrial Credit Company are there to help farmers and I know they are doing a good job of work, but where they are falling down on the job—and I am afraid this is because they are restricted by legislation—is that they are not providing better credit facilities for small farmers.

I would appeal therefore to the Minister to have these problems tackled more enthusiastically, with a special eye on the small farmers, many of whom are suffering from under-production because they have not the capital to do the job properly. Having said that, I want to appeal in general to the Minister and to the Government to note the fact that the grain-growing farmers of North-East Cork have very genuine grievances. The Minister should listen to those grievances, to those protests that these farmers are not getting their due share of the national loaf. In making these protests, they are doing only what they are genuinely entitled to do. I want to appeal also to the Minister to make an all-out effort to develop constant rather than speculative prices in the pig trade so that more people will go into it in a businesslike way. I repeat my suggestion about making available better credit facilities for small farmers. If the Minister does all these things, he will be doing a great national job in helping farmers to get the added production from the land for which all Deputies appeal as I do now.

Mr. Blowick

I want to make a few brief remarks only on this Estimate.First of all, I should ask the Minister what plans he and the Government have, that is, if they have any plans, to check the dereliction of the small and medium-sized holdings all over the country. All Deputies who spoke, from north, south, east and west, have given ample evidence that the flight from small and medium-sized holdings is going on apace. The Minister himself, coming from a constituency of medium-sized and small holders, must see what is going on there just as I see it in the west of Ireland and as Deputy Barry who has just spoken sees it in Cork. These last few years and apparently the next few will be known as the age of extinction of small farmers. They will be drawn off the land for one reason and one reason only, that the job does not pay. They cannot make a living on it.

The Minister lately decided on a subsidy for heifers calving after 1st January next. That is something to the good. However, if we are to go by what the Minister said, these grants will be so hamstrung with regulations that the scheme will be abortive. I suppose he is taking a leaf from the book of the British Minister of Agriculture.The British have poured more than £800 million in subsidy into farming. There is an unlimited market right on their doorstep and still the British Government decided that small as the agricultural industry was in England, Scotland, Wales, it must be kept alive at all costs. The Minister must have come across these statistics gathered from various farmers there, most of whom admitted that 70 per cent of their income was subsidised in one form or another.

I do not want to be taken as begging on behalf of the farmers but the prices farmers are getting for their agricultural produce are so small that they are being forced off the land. The Government have been giving such meagre scrappy help that the industry has been dying for a number of years. It has suffered blows that would put any other industry under the sod.

When a farmer applies for building scheme grants or for something to improve his land, it takes all the work in the world to get a few pounds. On the other hand, a foreigner of any nationality, from Japan or Peru, has no trouble in getting £100,000 as a grant to set up a factory. There is nothing to stop that man finishing with the profit of that business in a year or two as happened in the case of an industry in which the Government put £350,000 of the taxpayers' money.

We are not so far removed from the days when there was a terrific fight by the tenant farmers to own their own land. They thought the great battle had been won, as it was, when the various Land Acts culminating in the Land Act of 1923 were passed, putting an end to landlordism and giving the farmer the right of sale and other rights in connection with the land. Quick on the heels of that comes home Government which proceeds to treat the farmer as if he were a working horse pulling every industry and every white elephant out of the mire.

Agriculture has been used all down the years to bolster up, particularly, foreign industries. I am all for industry because I realise the land can put only a certain number in useful employment and the surplus has either to emigrate or to find employment in industry here. However, agriculture has been flogged unmercifully for the purpose of supporting industry which has given nothing back. That is why I am raising my voice in this regard and it is about time somebody did it.

If the Government want to help the small farmer, they must devise some means of supplementing their income by part-time employment in the localities where they live or by direct subsidy.The Minister and his advisers and the Taoiseach and his advisers will have to determine what way that will be done.

The heifer scheme is a step in the right direction. I hope the Minister has put an upper limit on that scheme. Long before the scheme was announced, one person, I am told, seemed to know it was coming and prepared by buying enormous numbers of cattle and scrub bulls. I have no objection to the bigger farmer who can afford it taking advantage of this scheme but a person who is a gambler like that cannot be described as a farmer. Therefore, I hope there will be a ceiling in regard to this scheme.

In regard to the farm buildings scheme, it is time we looked at what the British Government and the Northern Ireland Government have done for their farmers. The time has come for giving more generous assistance to our farmers for farm buildings and so on. The grants for cowbyres and piggeries is exactly one-third of what is given across the Border. The time has long passed when the farmers should be taxed for any improvements carried out. I am referring to the old British and Northern Ireland system, which they abolished years ago, of putting rates on agricultural buildings.

The mismanagement of agriculture has been very clearly shown up by the way people are leaving the agricultural industry. Agricultural prices have not increased by one-tenth of one per cent since 1949, while the cost of living and the cost of everything the farmer has to buy, fertilisers, seeds, chemicals, tools and so on, have gone up in price and the wages of other sections of the community have been doubled or trebled. The agricultural stamp in respect of abatement for employment on land has gone up from 2/6 to 6/-. When it was 2/6, the agricultural abatement was around £8, £9 or £10. Some years ago, the Minister brought in an abatement of £17 but it does not cover the cost of a workman's compensation policy, plus the 6/- stamp. It is time the Minister had another look at that if he wants to give agricultural employment any fillip at all.

The income of small farmers does not pay them any more. At one time we had families, with the exception of perhaps one member, clearing off to England or America, or perhaps they might have been fortunate enough to get jobs here, but now whole families are clearing out and in my part of the country, it is quite common for boys and girls who have gone to England to bring their parents over. The Government should do all they can to stop this drain from the land. It can be done and the way in which it can be done is to give some security of income to the farmer. If the Minister wants proof of that, I can give him one pointer from Mayo. Some years ago, there was not a single creamery in the county but today there are at least three, one in Killala, one in Castlebar and one in Claremorris. While the price of milk is not exorbitant, at least the people know what they are going to get. The price of cattle at present has completely flopped and is down by anything from £10 to £20 a head on last year. The bacon trade is also down and only a born gambler would go into it; poultry and eggs are things of the past. The markets have gone and the farmers must clear out or starve at home because they will not qualify for the dole. If the Government want to retain even a few of those who are left on the land, they will have to give them some security of price and some help to bridge the gap between the cost of living and their income.

The Minister must be well aware that the farmers have no say whatever in the fixing of prices. It is always the man who buys the produce from the farmer who determines the price and the same man determines the price at which he will sell it. So much the luckier for him. All this neglect and carelessness, amounting at times to contempt, has left village after village bereft of manpower. We will be lucky if we have even one family left in a townland inside the next ten or 20 years.

Other Deputies mentioned the farmers' protest meeting in Limerick some weeks ago and it was certainly disgraceful to read in the newspapers that there were as many guards drafted into the city as there were farmers. One would imagine that the occupants of one of the big penitentiaries in the United States had broken loose, that a crowd of dangerous killers or gunmen were at large——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister for Agriculture had no responsibility——

Mr. Blowick

He should have stopped that blackguardism by his pal and colleague, the Minister for Justice.

Mr. Smith

So we did stop the blackguardism.

Mr. Blowick

The way that protest march was treated was blackguardism. It was just similar to the Minister's threat years ago that he would fill every field with inspectors. The sooner the Minister gets rid of that landlord idea, the better. Farmers will not be bludgeoned in that sort of way. They suffered it long enough under foreign rule and they are not going to take it under native Government.

The farmer is anxious to be led, but the farmer is the kind of man who will not be driven. The Minister should have realised that by now. This is no place for caustic comment and I hate being dragged into it, but when I see the principal industry of the country being neglected and mishandled, somebody has to raise his voice. Our agricultural manpower is being driven out and so many holdings are being left derelict that it will be beyond the capacity of any Government, with the financial resources at their disposal, to make good the ravages of the diseases going on to-day.

Mr. Desmond

I assure the Minister I shall be brief, not because I do not think agriculture worthy of a full discussion, but because we are practically 12 months behind in our consideration of the Estimates. Indeed, soon we will be back discussing the Estimates all over again. I am sorry the Estimate for Agriculture is being treated on a political basis. I believe there is a certain amount of good in the policies of each Party so far as agriculture is concerned. But we are still so childish that we are not prepared to say there are good points in each programme and that we should try to amalgamate the best points in each in order to take agriculture out of the political cockpit it should never have been allowed to get into.

We must realise how agriculture will be affected here by our entry into EEC. At present, the French are forcing the issue so far as agriculture is concerned, because they know what they can gain. West Germany are playing a different game because they have a different view of agriculture. The nearest market to us at present is the British one, but our share of that is small compared with that obtained by Denmark and other countries. It is a pity we are not prepared to devote as much time to considering the effects upon agriculture of our entry into EEC as we devote to its effects upon industry. Last Sunday I read a report in an Irish newspaper dealing with the question of our possible entry into the Common Market. This report, written by an eminent expert, did not contain one word about agriculture. There was not a word about the farmer, or, equally important, about the farm worker. These people outside, who seem to know more than all the politicians, talk about the great advantages that may accrue from our entry into the Common Market. However, they should realise the danger confronting us. When we realise the competition with which we will be faced, we may have to approach the problem in a different way.

Deputy Barry talked about prices and, more important, a guaranteed market over a long period. There is no use telling the farmer what he will get for one year or offering him a bounty for one year. It is far more important for any Minister for Agriculture to concentrate on securing satisfactory markets at long-term prices. We must admit what has been happening all along. When Fianna Fáil are in office, Fine Gael, as the main Opposition Party naturally offer the farmers certain advantages. But the farmers are no fools.

Mr. Smith

Hear, hear.

Mr. Desmond

We know from every election in this country that the farmer's attitude is: "If one crowd are in government, we will put in the others, because they will give us a couple of bob more".

Mr. Donnellan

That is not right.

Mr. Desmond

That is what is happening. The results of the elections show that. It would be far more honest and more fair to the farmers if, instead of offering them some small bounty which will last only for a year or two, we gave them a guaranteed market with a guaranteed long-term price. Then the farmers would be able to plan for the future the same as an industrialist can plan for the future when he knows he has a secure market and a fair price.

Deputy Barry also mentioned the question of machinery. In addition to all the other surveys being carried out, we need a survey in regard to the wastage of machinery in the country. Some machines costing a lot of money are idle for over 11 months of the year. The Minister should initiate a survey related to the cost of operating these machines and the results achieved.

My last point refers to the farm worker. When discussing agriculture, we cannot divorce one from the other. I know that in parts of the country the small-holding farmers employ only family labour, but there are other parts of the country where the holdings are not large and where employment is always given on the farm. I think statistics show that, irrespective of whether Fianna Fáil or the inter-Party Government were in office, there has been a continuous drop in the number of farm workers employed. Year after year there has been a steady drop in the number of farm workers employed on farms. That is not a healthy sign. In 1947, wages were disgraceful—35/- a week, but the farm worker at present is not adequately paid. If he is considered as a human being, against what it costs to buy machines that are idle for 11 months of the year, we find if we are prepared to operate agriculture in a truly Christian democratic way, we must have much more respect for the farm worker.

Not until the Agricultural Wages Board that is packed against the worker at present with its so-called independents who all the time vote against the workers' representatives, is smashed and then reorganised, we can never hope for fair treatment and adequate conditions for our farm workers who are proving their worth even in the far-off countries where they have had to go, not because of the activity of one Government or political Party, but because of the inactivity of different Governments in regard to agricultural workers.