I was referring to the necessity for specialists in the agricultural advisory scene. I pointed out that we were dealing with a very sophisticated area with a need for specialists in all fields. Let us look at the area of finance. For the most part the farmer depends on himself for guidance as to whether he should buy additional land, spend a great deal of money on an expensive machine or if he should change his system of farming. The time has come when our advisory services will have to provide advice for farmers, not the advice of a company or of a particular group, but somebody who is trained, competent and independent, who will be able to advise the farmer that, in view of his circumstances, of the soil type and so on, he should spend his money along certain lines and then spell it out for him.
The farmer may already have decided to do that but he would now have the benefit of expert advice before venturing into what is very often an area of imponderables. When a farmer needs to borrow the advisory services should be in a position to tell him where the best finance is available because, as we all know, the rates of lending agencies vary from time to time. The adviser should be able to prepare an efficient and businesslike case for the farmer before he approaches his financier.
The structure of the advisory services has not lent itself sufficiently to encourage the enthusiastic adviser to forge ahead, to take the initiative and branch out into new fields. If such an adviser were to let everybody know that he was prepared, over and above the call of duty, to advise, encourage and get farmers to adopt new schemes, that endeavour could be rewarded by a better promotional structure.
The advisory service of the future will have to involve themselves in land use study in co-operation with local authorities. Sometimes figures show that dairying is the best way of making money but obviously one cannot accept that as a broad statement. Up to now these statements have been coming from the advisory services. Even from one farm to another there will be variations. The adviser in a particular area will have to be able to tell a farmer, bearing in mind the type of soil and so on, that he is better off out of a certain type of farming. That is the kind of advice that will have to be given in the future.
I would like to see our advisers having more liaison with the co-operatives and the companies. In this new structure the Minister should have involved more co-operatives and companies. Co-operatives and companies involved in farming have their own advisory services and do their own thing but obviously there is a great deal of overlapping. I would like to see the advisory services helping companies and acting as procurement officers. For instance, the adviser could sit in with the creamery manager or the manager of a food plant and find out what his requirements for the future will be. Does he need a 10 per cent increase? If he does then the adviser should go to the farmers and have the right quality grown. This is important. In the short-term, the farmer may not be interested in the best quality because the varieties he is growing are more productive but in the long-term we will have to rely on quality to sell our products. In the long-term it is best for the farmer to get the right advice, which in future will have to come from our advisers.
It is well known that there is vast potential here for more production in the newer areas of food, especially horticultural products. The institute and Erin Foods have been doing a lot in this area but I do not believe we have a sufficient number of experts who can tell us in the long-term what the potential in these areas will be. To date, we have a stop-go arrangement in horticultural products. This has a discouraging effect. The Minister of State knows something about that from his own area, and I will not go into detail now.
The advisory services would need to be tied in firmly with marketing. The Minister is making a mistake by not having more genuine commercial people on the board because if we have the right people on the board, experts in their own fields of marketing, processing, and production, then we will have a board that will be competent to pass the word along the line. This is something which is lacking. Very often we produce something because there is a factory in an area and food is often produced because of a tradition in an area. It may well be that our future lies in a different type of farming.
Any board set up now should be competent to deal with growing problems, even the problem of land use. With massive industrial growth in the future, we must look at the desirability of the acquisition of good land for industrial purposes. Lesser land would often be suitable for these purposes. Once good land is under concrete it cannot be used again for agricultural production. In the past reasonably good land was used for forestry, and this might be an opportune time to look again at that land to see if better use could be made of it. The field is still wide open for the expansion of forestry in areas of poor land, but there are some areas in which I believe planting should not have taken place.
Agricultural advisers are dedicated men. The evidence of their work is that Irish agriculture was in a position to take its place in the marketplace of Europe. We are very short of advisory help. Far too much of the advisers' time is taken up in the office doing work which could be carried out by clerical staff. Much work could be done by soil technicians. If a farmer wishes to know whether he should or should not spray a field he must rely on his own judgement or go to a commercial firm. We need more technical experts who can give such advice. It is important that this advice should be available to farmers within a matter of hours.
There was a misunderstanding between the Minister and myself regarding the money available in Cork. I have checked on this and it is true that we are still short of money for advisers. We were holding a little fund to pay men whom we have already employed but who are not yet free to come to us. The adviser in my own area is covering a vast territory and it is completely impossible for him to give the service he would like to give. We are looking for two additional advisers but we do not have the money to spare. The new board would be worth while if they did nothing else but put more men in the field. They must realise the urgent need for more trained personnel to give advice on the various aspects of farming, and I hope that sufficient funds will be made available for them. It might be possible to get from abroad the funds necessary for a first-class advisory service. The EEC tell us they are prepared to help in deprived areas and in the field of social welfare but they are very inconsistent because, while saying they are prepared to help, they are trying to prevent us from producing more milk. Their latest directive encouraging farmers to move out of dairying is disastrous.
Agriculture is an area in which jobs can be created. For years the Farm Apprenticeship Board have been training people but we now find that they have not enough funds. That money should be provided forthwith. More advisers should be put in the field to direct farmers along the correct lines. The Minister of State should ensure that farms are brought up to a proper acreage so that people can make a living. All this can create employment not only on the land but in co-ops, transport services and factories. Agriculture is our greatest industry and we are dependent upon it whether we like it or not. We have small resources of minerals and offshore gas and oil, but the real wealth of this country is the first nine inches of soil.
I hope the Minister will bear in mind some of the constructive suggestions we have been making. We now have to face up to the autonomy of the institute. Why not give more autonomy to the new body? It is being financed by State funds and so we should have supervision but the same applies to the institute. They too have to rely on funding from some source or another. Is it that we trust the one and do not trust the other? I cannot accept that. I ask the Minister to give the new body autonomy and let them do what they think they should be doing, as in the case of a commercial operation such as the Sugar Company. Only then will we get results.
