Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 22 Nov 1973

Vol. 269 No. 3

Committee on Finance. - Vote 37: Agriculture (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:
That a sum not exceeding £55,892,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1974, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries, including certain services administered by that Office, and for payment of certain subsidies and sundry grants-in-aid.
—(Minister for Agriculture.)

I should like to contribute a few words on this Estimate. I was not in the House when the Minister introduced his Estimate but I have read his opening statement. I congratulate the Minister. He is doing a good job. He came up in the same school as I did with Macra na Feirme and so on. His is a difficult task.

Coming from the west of Ireland, I had certain reservations about our entry into the EEC but I supported our entry as strongly as possible. I was in Paris about 12 years ago at an international conference of agricultural producers and I knew what we were up against; I knew the competition we would have to face. I knew the small man would have a hard fight for survival. I also knew there was no alternative. I knew we would have to drive a hard bargain to get the best we could, particularly for agriculture. The principal base for us was the common agricultural policy and I am glad to note from the Minister's speech that he is trying to get that applied to sheep as well as to land. This is of vital importance. More important still from the point of view of the west is the question as to what we are going to get out of the fund and what directives there will be in relation to making farms in the west viable.

What is the attitude of the EEC towards directing funds for the purpose of land drainage? The first thing we have to do is to drain the land. It is no good ploughing money in unless you first drain. I was astonished to learn that drainage is not a priority in the EEC. I was rather disappointed about this because we sold the EEC to the people in the west on the ground that we would be able to get plenty out of the fund to do land settlement and to drain land. We have several major rivers; we have the Shannon, the Dunkellin and the Fergus.

I am glad the land project is to continue. It is most important that these schemes should continue. Several LIS are held up because the levels are wrong and so drainage cannot be done; neither can any land project scheme be done, or anything else, until drains are opened. It is of vital importance to make the holdings in the west viable and, to make them viable, something will have to be done about drainage. If we do not get money for that, then I do not know how a man can be expected to prepare a farm plan. I am all for farm planning and keeping accounts. But these things are useless unless he is put in a position in which his farm is viable. Perhaps the Minister will tell us what pressure is being put on the EEC. Where does drainage stand in the list of priorities?

People may accuse me of being parochial. That may be so, but I know a great many people in the west who are looking forward to what will come from the directives designed to make small farms viable. I may be knocking at an open door where drainage is concerned, but I urge the Minister to press this matter.

Money will also have to be directed into land settlement because, unless the farmers have the land, we cannot have a viable agricultural industry.

I have always been very keen on balancing the economy even before we entered the EEC. I actually wrote an article on it. I believe not enough is being done about it. Since I was a boy, and that was not yesterday, I have heard various Ministers plugging different commodities. I remember when we were to drown Britain with eggs. I remember other commodities being plugged. Supply and demand govern world markets and they will continue to do so as long as the market is there. Not enough effort is being made to balance our economy. We go all out for a particular commodity. At the moment we know beef is good and will be good for some time. Where the tillage farmer is concerned, it was not economical to till for the last two years. I heard a great deal about the fierce shortage of potatoes last year. Two years ago I had to throw them out on the side of the road because I could get nobody to buy them. No attempt has been made by the Department to balance the economy and ensure an adequate supply of all agricultural commodities.

Now how can this be done within the context of the EEC? This is something I tried to point out before we entered the EEC. Within the context of the EEC it is not possible to subsidise by way of price but there are other ways to subsidise and thus balance the economy. It would be possible to subsidise the man who engages in tillage to ensure that his income is nearly on par with that of other sections. I congratulate the Minister on having a floor price for potatoes, although I do not think it is high enough.

I am convinced there is nothing in the Treaty of Rome that prevents subsidisation. I think the Department have made a big mistake in this matter. I remember when we were told we could not produce enough milk, but now the EEC are paying farmers to get out of milk production. It is important that we balance our economy and ensure we do not have all our eggs in one basket. I am glad that the land project and other schemes that are of vital importance to farmers can be continued. Worthwhile results have been achieved by the land project scheme, particularly in my area.

The Minister referred to the eradication of disease in cattle, particularly brucellosis and tuberculosis. These schemes are in operation in County Galway and there has been a considerable number of reactors. It is wrong that a month should elapse before these animals are bought from the farmers. I do not think we tightened up the TB eradication scheme sufficiently; a considerable number of cattle have reacted and this should not have happened.

There are a lot of reactors in the Fianna Fáil Party.

I agree with the Deputy, but there are many on the Deputy's side of the House and a dose would do them no harm. I should like to refer to a scheme the Minister mentioned—it is one for which I can claim a certain amount of credit. Years ago the son who was not much good at anything else was given the farm to manage. Rural organisations such as Macra na Feirme—I should like to pay a tribute to them—decided this was not right. They realised it was necessary to study all aspects of farming and a number of enthusiastic people got together to consider the matter. I came to Dublin and met a very able man in the IAOS. I asked him a question about fat lambs in the west of Ireland. His answer was: "Where would you get fat lambs in the west of Ireland? You use the manager for hayseed down there." That was the opinion of people regarding the west——

On a point of order, we have the matter of a statement by the Taoiseach ordered for 3.30 p.m. Is there a reason why we have not had that statement? If there is news from Westminster——

Is the Deputy making a point of order?

We are waiting——

I am awaiting the arrival of the Taoiseach and the Leader of the Opposition in connection with the matter. I understand there will be some slight delay but I am sure the House will bear patiently with it.

I do not in the slightest resent the delay, but what I am perturbed about is that at 3.30 p.m. there would have been news available to some of us had we known the statement by the Taoiseach was not to be made at 3.30 p.m.

The Deputy has made his point of order.

The House ordered the statement for 3.30 p.m.

I am calling on Deputy Callanan to resume his speech.

If there is an order for 3.30——

The Deputy is showing a disregard for the Chair. The Chair has explained the position and has no other function in the matter.

If the matter is ordered for a particular time?

The Chair has no control over the matter and the Deputy knows this. I am calling on Deputy Callanan.

It is not the Chair who is responsible.

The Deputy should behave himself. I have called Deputy Callanan.

I am behaving myself. I am trying to keep the House in order.

Due to the efforts and enthusiasm of a number of people there have been tremendous changes in rural Ireland. Years ago it was considered that farmers in the west knew nothing about producing fat lambs. However, with the help of lectures and other aids the farmers were educated about all aspects of farming. We received help from voluntary organisations and the advisory services of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries and in the last 20 years there have been tremendous strides.

In the early days we suffered from an inferiority complex but that is gone. However, I always make an appeal to the farming community not to get a superiority complex. I regard myself as a rank socialist. Because of the efforts we made in the matter of education the farmers in the west are doing as good a job as those in other areas. If the small farmers were given the opportunity they could compare favourably with the best in Europe.

In the early days we thought it would be worthwhile to organise a farm apprenticeship scheme. I was chairman of that committee and we went on a deputation to the then Taoiseach, the late Mr. Seán Lemass. The Minister for Lands at the time was Mr. Michael Moran. We were seeking land for congests but were told that there was not sufficient land available for this. Instead we were offered a scholarship scheme, which we availed of. This was the farm apprenticeship scheme. The course comprised two years at an agricultural college and a further two years apprenticeship to a master farmer. It was not an easy course by any means but was a very good one. I am glad to note now that the Minister proposes an educational course for those who may not find it possible to leave their farms.

Regarding free trade within the EEC, I should like to draw the attention of the House to the imposition of a tariff on calves exported last summer to Italy. When I raised this matter here I was informed by the Minister that this tariff would not have any effect on calf prices, but I can tell the Minister now that he has been proved wrong. This year was a bad one for the hay crop. Baled hay, in particular, was very bad. The farmers in my area are mostly small farmers and they must specialise in either milk or beef. If they are in milk production they maintain the maximum number of cows possible and they sell the calves as dropped calves, whereas if they specialise in beef production they sell the calves as weanlings because they would not find it possible to keep both cows and calves during the winter months.

The position this year is that these farmers must accept a reduction of between £5 and £7.50 per calf on last year's prices. In some cases there is difficulty in selling calves and this results in the calves eating the silage that should be kept for the cows. Cattle generally are fetching prices as high as £20 more per head than last year, but this is not the position in relation to calves. We were informed that there was a shortage of cattle, but I fear that the whole idea was to ensure a plentiful supply of cheap cattle in the west for the midland breeders. I am not in a position to state the extent of the effect on prices which resulted from the tariff I have referred to, but we had been told that the price of calves this year would be as good if not better than last year. We consider the situation to be one of discrimination against the western farmer. When are we to be put on an equal footing with people from other parts of the country?

It is my belief that the Minister has the interest of agriculture at heart but I would like him to bear in mind the points I have made. It is our duty to concern ourselves with the interests of the small farmer and to ensure that he benefits from our membership of the EEC. The difficulty in relation to small farmers is that their outgoings are very great. I consider the EEC to be a club for the bigger man but we must not allow such persons to benefit at the expense of the small farmers. If the small farmer is to remain in business he must ensure the maximum output from his land. This requires the maximum application of fertilisers but we all know that the cost of artificial manures has increased by 30 per cent and that all other items have increased in cost also.

On a point of order, can the Chair tell us when we will have the statement from the Taoiseach that was ordered for 3.30 p.m.?

The Chair has no idea but it is anticipating it every moment.

They will not like it.

The general cost of living has risen considerably. It will be seen, therefore, that the lot of the small farmer has not improved very much as a result of our membership of the EEC.

The question of drainage is very important especially to the people of the west. I trust that the Minister will spend as much money as possible in this area. We must subsidise the small farmer in every way possible. His fight for survival in the future will be a hard one. Those people involved in sheep production are faring out all right now but we must give every help and encouragement to the tillage farmer so as to ensure that he does not go out of production.

I noticed recently that the artificially-inflated cost of potatoes was the biggest factor in the price rises in the cost of living index. The reason for this was that people would not sow potatoes because of the difficulty in selling them.

I give the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries credit when it is due to him. I know he has a hard fight. The Minister before him did his best. I believe in trying to be constructive. I put my case to the Minister on behalf of my constituency, on behalf of my area, which is the whole western seaboard. I want to tell him what we want and appeal to him to give it to us. In order to survice we want a fair share of EEC grants. We have made our preparations. We have got cooperatives together. We have pig fattening stations which are doing a good job, particularly for small farmers. I appeal to the Minister to see to it that we get our fair share of EEC grants.

Do not forget that at one stage we were sent to hell or to Connacht. Do not forget that Pearse said of us that we had in the west everything that was beautiful and Gaelic. I ask the Government to think of the people of the west. I will not say anything about the east or the people there—I have nothing against them—but as you cross the Shannon you get the real Irish, not that anybody else is not Irish too. We want a certain amount of money in the west. We do not want charity—we are prepared to work— and I ask the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries to see that we get a fair cut of EEC moneys.

First of all I compliment the Minister on the feat he achieved in Brussels in the matter of benefits where dairy cows are concerned in hill farms. It was a personal feat which was lauded by most of the Press. His work there will mean substantial benefits to farmers, particularly on small farms where Deputy Callanan and I come from.

The Minister referred to the matter of land resource development and I should like to make a few comments on it. Two months ago the Minister visited the Glenamoy Station in County Mayo where a great deal of experimental work has been carried out on peat land. During the debate on the Estimate for the Department of Lands recently there was a great deal of comment by Deputies, particularly those from the western areas, in regard to the necessity to make much more of our land productive. There has been a great deal of controversy in regard to our commonage system. Unfortunately there is not a great deal of incentive in lowland commonage to make this land productive and there is a very strong case to be made for the division of commonage in the interests of the farmers there. With the great advances that have been made in agriculture in the last few years, with the startling improvement in farm incomes and the substantial increase in the value of agricultural land, a position has been reached in the matter of land resources where there is a very large acreage of land developed which until now was not considered viable. However, because of the increase in land values through development, because of better machinery with which to do drainage work and land reclamation, more land is now available than ever before for productive agricultural use.

I would urge the Minister therefore, in examining this resource, to take the steps that are possible, in conjunction with the Minister for Lands, to see that one of the major planks of policy in the Department will be the greater utilisation of this land. When we are talking about developing resources—industry, fishing and agriculture—it is an extraordinary thing that in this country, which is basically rural and agricultural, the under-utilised resource is land.

It is unfortunate in these circumstances that there should be so many problems from the point of view of the land project section of the Department. In the part of the country I come from there is an enormous backlog of applications under the land project. Until quite recently it was running to one year before applications were even looked at, and the backlog in the carrying out of the work was running very much longer than that. This is a most unhealthy state of affairs in circumstances where there is the possibility of further increasing farmers' incomes through the development of this land. The Minister has told us he proposes to speed up the operations of the land project. I strongly urge him to do this, because what is happening now in this regard is detrimental to the agricultural economy of the country. The Minister also referred in his speech to the continuing decline in labour requirements where agricultural production is concerned.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.
Top
Share