asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if the fertiliser industry have carried out the recommendations of the CIO report.
Ceisteanna—Questions Oral Answers. - Fertiliser Prices.
18.
The CIO's main recommendations related to the need for joint action in buying, shipping, storage, research etc., and to the desirability of establishing a concentrated complete fertiliser plant based on ammonia produced at the NET factory at Arklow.
The aims suggested by the CIO in the field of joint action have been largely achieved through rationalisation within the industry that has taken place since the CIO reported. NET is now building a CCF plant at Arklow and the principal private manufacturers are also embarking on the production of concentrated complete fertilisers.
The other recommendations of the CIO are still under consideration by the industry and by my Department.
Does the Minister feel that if the CIO recommendations had been fully carried out, it would still be necessary to allow the increase in price of the point agreed to by the Minister?
The rationalisation of the industry suggested by the CIO has been carried out. I thought the Deputy's Party's attitude was that we should have allowed this increase a long time ago.
I am speaking for myself on this matter.
19.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he is aware that the fertiliser price increase announced during the week adds a quarter of a million pounds to the farmers' production costs; and if, in view of the desirability of increasing fertiliser usage, he will provide a subsidy equal to this amount.
The increases in price recently authorised by the Minister for Industry and Commerce will involve an increase of not more than about 3 per cent in total expenditure by farmers on fertilisers. Because of the State subsidy, which is now costing between £3½ and £4 million per annum, the prices of these fertilisers will still be amongst the lowest in Europe, and there is no doubt that, at present prices, increased use of fertilisers will repay the expenditure incurred many times over.
Can we take it that the Minister is not concerned about the fact that farmers' costs have increased by £¼ million as a result of this increase, and that he is unconcerned about the fact that there has been a very big drop in fertiliser usage in the past 12 months?
That is complete nonsense. I am all the time keeping farmers' costs under review. As a matter of fact, I initiated some arrangement recently under which the question of the consumption of fertilisers by our farmers is thoroughly investigated by the people concerned, to see what steps we can take to promote an increased use of fertiliser. Let me remind the Deputy that not very long ago this Government took positive and concrete action to increase farmers' incomes by something between £5½ million and £6 million a year.
That was to win the Presidential election.
(Interruptions.)
You abolished the fertiliser credit scheme under the Land Project.
Land Project grants were increased.
I said "credit facilities". There is no use in having grants if you have not credit to bridge the difference.
Land Project grants were substantially increased.
I am not talking about grants; I am talking about credit facilities.
When I increase the grants under the Land Project, you want to forget about it and talk about something else. There is plenty of credit available for productive purposes to farmers. All the credit they want is available to them.
It is not.
(Interruptions.)
Question No. 20.
I distinctly heard the Minister saying: "I will give Clinton his answer." He has not yet given me my answer.
I did not say anything about giving Clinton his answer.
You were talking to your colleague.
I did not.
I clearly heard you.
I did not.
It is typical of the smart Alec answers we get from time to time. Now the Minister is going to call the people together and exhort them to use more artificial fertiliser when he does not agree they are paying a £¼ million more for it.
Do not talk nonsense. Before the price increase was allowed and the fertiliser manufacturers have been looking for this increase for about nine months now——
You held it until the day after the election.
I will not be shouted down. Before that increase was permitted by the Minister for Industry and Commerce, a Prices Advisory Committee was set up on which we put a prominent member of the NFA to look after the farmers' interests.
I was slated for not allowing it before setting up that body.
Are the NFA satisfied with the result?
I do not know whether they are satisfied, but they had a representative on the Prices Advisory Tribunal. Does the Deputy deny that the increase was justified.
It was held until the day after the election.
(Interruptions.)
That is patent dishonesty. You are trying to have the best of both worlds. You will not face up to your responsibilities.
Question No. 20.
(Interruptions.)
I have called Question No. 20.
Remember you are supposed to be an alternative Government. Try to act like it.
You have ceased to function as a Government.
Except for drawing the salaries, they have ceased to function as a Government.
The best Cabinet in Europe.
That is surely the worst shadow Cabinet in the world.
(Interruptions.)
When Deputy Sweetman was Minister for Agriculture, he did not commit these irresponsibilities. He just said nothing at all.
Would the Minister go home and cut his weeds? They were a disgrace yesterday.
Des Foley cut them for me the week before.
He did not get you the votes in County Dublin.
I have a letter in from Westmeath and I may have to quote it for the Deputy.
Could we have order, please? I have a question down and I am very anxious that it should be reached.