asked the Minister for Local Government when he proposes to increase the employment allowances under the Rates on Agricultural Land (Relief) Acts, in view of the need to maintain and increase employment on the land.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Employment Allowances.
3.
The Government have recently decided, in the light of the current budgetary situation, not to continue the grant of the employment allowance and county councils have been so informed.
Is this not a retrograde step? People were getting this little bit of relief and several organisations were prepared to see it doubled or trebled. Would the Minister not agree he has his priorities wrong in doing away with this small bit of money which was helping to keep sons employed on farms?
I am afraid I agree with the Deputy's description "this small bit of money". I do not agree with him that £17 would encourage any farm worker to stay on the farm. He will admit that £17 bears no relation to a farm worker's wages. If Deputy Callanan tells me that a farmer would keep his son at home for £17 a year——
We have been talking about doubling or trebling the amount.
It still would not keep sons at home.
Would the Minister not agree that the principle behind this scheme at the beginning was a good one?
I like to hear Opposition Deputies asking in one breath for increases in such things and saying in the next that they want public expenditure reduced—that they do not want either borrowing or increased taxation. There is no crock of gold from which we can get these moneys. Deputy O'Leary is aware that in the thirties the allowance was £6.10s. and in 1953 it was increased to £17 at a time when a farm worker was paid £4 per week. The lowest any farm worker is paid now is £34 a week and there is no way in which the money for this relief could be increased to such a level that would encourage farmers to employ farm workers.
Could the Minister tell us what is the saving by the elimination of this scheme?
About £500,000.
Will the Minister not agree that this, in effect, is an increase in taxation for a certain category of farmers, outside the budget altogether?
I do not.
This is a supplementary budget before the budget.
The position is that in cases of up to £20 valuation it does not affect farmers because they do not pay rates at all. Most of the people who got this relief were bigger farmers who employed a certain number of people and I do not think anybody will cry salt tears for them.
Will the Minister channel the savings into agriculture?
You have got £500,000 put into the LIS. Will that not do?
It is an increase in taxation.
The Minister will agree that it represents £½ million taken from the people living on the land, irrespective of where it is going.
That is the sort of cod I am surprised at Deputy Callanan talking. He is talking about £½ million being taken out of the pockets of farmers. It is about 30p a week.
It is £½ million.
The Minister is making little of his local improvements schemes.
If you do not want it in Sligo, just let us know.
We could spend it in Sligo if you give it to us.