I shall quote from a Dáil debate when the Leader of the Opposition, Deputy Lynch, was speaking on the Financial Statement. When they were in Opposition they promised the sun, moon and stars to the farmers and other sections of the community but when they came into power the opposite was the case. The present Taoiseach is trying to convince the people that the house that Jack built is in ruins and is falling down around our ears. We will not let him away with that because he is as much responsible for the last two and a half years as the ex-Taoiseach, Deputy Lynch, Deputy O'Donoghue and Deputy Molloy or any other Minister who got his walking papers very quickly when he became Taoiseach. Deputy Lynch, on 4 April 1974, was advocating extension of the relief on rates on private houses and agricultural land, that is if income tax was to be introduced for the farming community. He said that a good case could be made for derating agricultural land completely and he practically wept for the farmers. I shall quote from the Official Report, column 1515 of 4 April 1974 where he stated that:
...they indicate that rates are already a heavy imposition on many of them, especially the progressive ones. Therefore, there would be now a much stronger case to extend te Fianna Fáil policy of relieving homes, to relieving agricultural land from rates, if the incidence of income tax is going to bear more heavily on farmers as time goes on. It has been pointed out—and I think the point has been well taken—that farmers are the only producers whose means of production would be subject to income taxation. Another point which I think has been well taken is that about 50 per cent of their output, 50 per cent of their products, goes for export, whereas those in industrial production enjoy complete freedom of taxation from profits deriving from those industrial exports. This is a point the Minister will have to take into account—obviously he has not done so at this stage—in order to ensure that fair taxation will be applied across the board.
What has happened since? One cannot blame farmers who turned against the Government in 1977—who, because they believed in equity, introduced taxation on large farmers—when they heard those statements that Fianna Fáil would relieve the farmer of his rates. We know that the rates in every county are about £5 higher than they were then and that instead of only farmers with £75 poor law valuations paying income tax a farmer from £40 upwards will pay. Under this Bill the subsidy which was available to them for many years has been abolished.
Deputy Lynch went on to compare farming with industry. In industry if a man were to buy a tractor or machinery he would get a full allowance in his income tax but the farmer will only get one-third of the cost of a tractor or other implements if he purchases them for his land. Is that equity? Is that what the former Taoiseach, Deputy Lynch, promised the farmers when Fianna Fáil were in Opposition? It is nothing new. They have broken their word very often in the past. He called at that time for fair taxation which would be applied across the board. This is not fair taxation but a heavy and savage imposition on small farmers. It also flies in the face of the main objectives of the Minister's statement in the budget. The three main objectives stated by him were, first, to introduce greater equity in the taxation system. Where is there greater equity in this? There is very little equity between the taxation on farmers and industry. A farmer with £39 valuation gets the full subsidy while a man with £1 more valuation, even if he has ten children, has to pay rates which are increased by almost £300 per year. Secondly, the objective was to protect and to improve the position of those on lower incomes. Surely a farmer with a £40 poor law valuation is on a low income. Is anything done to improve this position? There certainly is not. A farmer with a PLV of £40 is in the £50-£60 per week bracket. This is another savage attack on those unfortunate people.
The third objective was to protect the source of economic growth. Small farmers were excellent producers in the past. During the last war they stood between us and hunger and want. They worked long hours to increase production when the call went out. For many years they were hewers of wood and drawers of water. There is no denying that from 1973 to 1977 or 1978 their incomes increased but last year was a disaster for many small farmers. Anybody who knows anything about farming will remember that between May and November last year cattle prices dropped from £50 per hundredweight to as low as £34 per hundredweight. Prices increased recently but unfortunately the Englishman or the factories are benefiting while the small farmer is not.
The last election was fought on the platform that we were trying to tax farmers out of existence. We introduced farmer taxation. I lost votes because I had to defend our action. We believe in a fairer and more equitable distribution of wealth. In 1973 when we came into office 5 per cent of the population controlled 75 per cent of the wealth of the country and the other 95 per cent of the population had to make do with what was left. Our Coalition Minister was a hard-working intelligent fighter who went to EEC meetings and brought home the bacon. What happened since 1977? Is it a coincidence that since he left office farmers' prices have remained static while their overheads are increasing and the Government are piling more and more taxation on them.
Before the last election I saw Deputy Clinton on television discussion programmes with Fianna Fáil Shadow Ministers for Agriculture. I remember the performances of some of those gentlemen and the promises they made. They claimed that all the taxes the Coalition had showered on the small farmers would be removed as soon as they got back into power. Has that happened? It has not. We were told farmers would be given more subsidies to increase further production, more assistance and less taxation. Those were the words used on a television programme. What happened to those promises? The opposite happened. We have more and more taxation of small farmers. The large farmers are reasonably well able to look after themselves but the small farmers are not.
Since the subsidy was taken off lime the price has doubled. Because the subsidy was taken off artificial manure the price has increased by 70 per cent to 80 per cent since 1977. Subsidies have been taken off food. The small farmer has to buy food the same as everybody else. That is another increase in indirect taxation. Last year the 2 per cent levy was introduced. Small farmers who did not pay income tax were obliged to pay £10 or £12 on each beast sold. If they sold 10 cattle they had to pay from £60 to £80 tax. That was unfair and unjust as the Government realised later.
When the Coalition left office a farmer with a PLV of £75 had to pay income tax. In 1978 Fianna Fáil reduced that figure to £60. Last year they said that would be reduced to £50. Did they keep their word? Not at all. They were not satisfied because in two years they had squandered the peoples' money, the country was in a mess and they had to get the money somewhere. This new form of taxation was introduced.
Will it be down to £30 next year and the following year down to £20? The Drover in the Saturday Independent and many others, even Fianna Fáil backbenchers, people one would expect to speak out on behalf of the small farmers are silent. Do they see any ray of hope for the small farmer? The farmer with a PLV of £40 will pay at least £6 extra in rates and taxation as I will explain in detail later.
Take the counties I represented so far—I do not know what will happen today when we see the new constituency boundaries. This year a County Westmeath farmer with a PLV of £60 will pay £571.80 rates. Had the subsidy remained his rates would be £304.96. He is paying an extra £266.84. A farmer with a PLV of £50 is paying £476 rates this year, losing a relief of £238. A farmer with a PLV of £40 is paying £381 this year. Had the subsidy been allowed his rates would be £171.54. Because of the actions of the Government who promised to reduce farmer taxation and who always claimed that the small farmer who for many years supported Fianna Fáil, was the backbone of this country, this farmer's rates have been increased from £171.54 to £381.20. He is paying £209 more. Is that fair? Where is the equity, where is the justice?
The number of holdings affected in Westmeath is 928 and the reduction in the agricultural grant this year is an average of £217,000. Would you call this a relief Bill for farmers? It is certainly a relief Bill for the Department because they are saving £217,000 in Westmeath alone. So much for the Fianna Fáil Government who have always claimed they represent the small farmers of Ireland. But could one expect anything else? We can remember a few years ago when the small farmers, from Cork to Donegal, marched to Dublin to protest against their low standard of living. They demonstrated peacefully outside Leinster House and they were arrested. When the present Taoiseach was Minister for Agriculture he left them sitting on the steps in Merrion Street, passed them by and refused to meet them. I admit he has changed since then. He seems to be all things to all men. He is trying to get all the votes to keep him there as leader of his party.
In County Longford the rate this year is £12.67 in the £. In 1979 it was £11.52 and the gross rate of a farmer with a £41 PLV was £161.68. With the cut in the subsidy that man's rates will amount to £418 this year, an increase of £256.32; but we must add to that the 10 per cent increase in rates. This means that that farmer will be paying roughly £460 in rates this year, an increase of £299. Where is the equity there?
A single farmer with a PLV of £39.99 will pay about £170 in rates because he will enjoy the subsidy, but his brother or neighbour who lives next door, with ten children and 2p more PLV, bringing it up to £40.1, will pay £460 in rates. Where is the equity in that? This is a Government who spoke about cherishing all the children of the nation equally, about representing the small farmers of Ireland. They are misrepresenting and crucifying them.
Take a farmer with a £50 PLV in Longford. In 1979 his rates were £188. This year without the subsidy his rates would be £576, but we have to add the 10 per cent increase in rates which means that he will be paying £316 more in rates, roughly £6 per week extra taxation. According to the farm management survey, the income of that farmer would be £3,078 in 1979 figures, less than £60 per week, less than a road worker receives, less than a large farmer pays to his agricultural labourer. As a result of this Bill that man will be paying £316 a year more in 1980, reducing his income from £60 to £54 per week. We must add to that the drop in cattle prices and the projected reduction in the price of barley. We must also take into account the increased cost of living and the increase in the price of feeding stuffs. All this will bring his income down to less than £46 a week. Is that justice or equity or fair play? How do the Government expect any such farmer to survive let alone use initiative or have confidence? Many farmers in Longford are trying to get work. They will be competing with workless in the towns for any jobs there may be going in factories or on the road. The Government are piling up more and more trouble for themselves.
In North Longford there is a lot of bad land and in south Longford farms are subject to flooding by the Shannon for many months. Take a farmer there with a PLV of £59. In 1979 his rates were £361. This year that rate will be £678, a difference of approximately £300, but we must add the 10 per cent increase in the rates and we find that such a farmer will be paying £350 more this year. In County Longford there are 223 farmers with a PLV of between £40 and £50 and 137 between £50 and £60—360 farmers who are being caught by this Bill. They did not expect this kind of treatment following the promises made in the manifesto. They were fooled in 1977 by announcements on radio and TV which told them that Fianna Fáil would reduce their taxation. Many of them voted for Fianna Fáil.
The people are slowly but surely finding them out and are waiting for the day when they will wreak their vengeance on a Government which so deliberately misled them to get back to enjoy for themselves, not for the rest of the country, the fruits of office. Those 360 extra farmers are caught with this extra burden of increased prices. What the farmer has to sell is static. As I said earlier on, the price of cattle dropped from £50 a hundredweight down to £34 and the cost of living went up due to the higher prices than in 1977. The question must be posed as to how this treatment of the small to medium sized farmer—because that is what those who are now caught in the net are—fits in with the three objectives stated by the Minister for Finance in his budget. Does it introduce equity? Does it improve the position of those on lower income? Does it protect a source of economic progress? The answer must be no, no, no, to the three questions.
The country today is certainly in a mess of the Government's own making because of their manifesto of 1977 to get into office, because of their promises to reduce, instead of increase, taxation. The Government at that time gave the impression that everything was up for grabs. They abolished wealth tax and rates on houses and castles. A millionaire could have a home on an island, a house in the city and another house in Cork, Donegal or other parts of the country. Those are all free of rates. The speculator in the city could have five, ten, 15, 20 houses let out to tenants and those are all free of rates. Where is the justice and where is the equity there, when a small farmer living at the end of a boreen with no amenities of any description with potholes that you could be lost in cannot get money from the county council even to make a road into his house? As somebody said, GNP now means gross national potholes and they are not too far out. Westmeath and Longford County Councils cannot make any improvements to the roads. The men they have have to be kept busy patching the roads and fixing up the potholes.
