asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will consider introducing legislation to provide the necessary legislative authorisation for ACOT personnel to enter on, inspect and take soil samples from all agricultural land in the State; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Inspection of Agricultural Land.
5.
ACOT advisory personnel visit farms at the request of farmers and compulsory legislation of the kind suggested by the Deputy would undermine the relationship of trust and confidentiality, which is the basis of effective advisory work.
Is the Minister aware that the lay land commissioners have had such powers and status for many years and there have been no objections to it? Is he further aware of the large amount of agricultural land either unused or underused and what methods therefore has he in mind for gaining the information which is essential to the Minister for Agriculture in regard to land values and grading of these farms which are under-utilised? It would be of the greatest benefit to farmers and to the country as a whole if they were used to their full value. How does the Minister propose to proceed to gain this information?
I think the Deputy has got various agencies mixed up. ACOT is primarily an advisory service and because of that it has to be on the basis that farmers invite the advisers in. There is a great bond of friendship, trust and confidentiality between an agricultural adviser and an individual farmer and I would not like to see that upset in any way. What the Deputy is speaking about is another area of activity and would have nothing to do with the agricultural advisory services.
I am asking the Minister, has he any alternative method of gaining the information if he is not prepared to gain it through the ACOT personnel who already have the capacity and the personnel, and who are in touch with the farmers? If he is unwilling to do this job through the ACOT personnel, has he any alternative method in mind to gain the type of information which is absolutely essential to his Department if they are to make any progress in this regard? The figure was estimated at between £2 million and £3 million by Dr. Tom Walshe about five years ago. Probably it is more now.
There is a question further down on the Order Paper on land policy. Through their soil surveys over the years the Agricultural Institute have data and information which could be very useful. If we want such information it is reasonably readily available.
Not for every holding in the country.
6.
asked the Minister for Agriculture his proposals to provide additional funding for ACOT as requested by their committees.
The total income of ACOT in 1983 is estimated at £24.5 million and there are no funds at my disposal from which an additional grant could be made to that body.
I am sure the Minister is aware that the Galway ACOT committee have scarcely enough money to hold meetings. I understand the Minister is a member of that committee. Will he do something to enable them to have enough money to hold meetings?
The total allocation to ACOT was the figure I mentioned. It is not possible in this year to make any changes in the grant-in-aid for the purpose mentioned by the Deputy.
(Limerick West): Is the Minister aware that there is a severe curtailment by ACOT on the visits of agricultural advisers to the farming community? If he is so aware, will he remedy the situation?
I am a member of the ACOT committee in Galway and that does not seem to be one of our problems. It has not been brought to my notice very often.
The Minister should get out and about more.
I have done as much travelling as the Deputy in the past six months. I have to acknowledge the fact that there are cutbacks in members' travelling allowances. At a time when it appears that because of very prudent cost cuts by the various committees——
I am not talking about members. I am talking about advisers.
I am talking about advisers as well. I am not aware that that is a big problem.
Would the Minister make himself aware?
If this were a very big problem it would be brought to my attention.
Would the Minister agree it is a national scandal that the ACOT committees in the various counties cannot afford to hold meetings to discuss our major industry? Local authorities cannot pay their allocations to ACOT in various counties including South Tipperary. Is he aware of that? It is a disgrace when we are talking about creating jobs for our young people, thousands of whom are unemployed——
The Deputy has asked a question. He should allow the Minister to answer.
As I pointed out, the allocation to ACOT was made and ACOT have devised the various methods by which they will work within that budget. I would not like it to be construed that, because of the cutbacks, the effectiveness of the ACOT committees would be undermined in any way. They perform a very useful function. Their work is acknowledged to be very important.
Deputy Treacy.
I indicated to you that I wanted to ask a final supplementary.
The record will show that Deputy Byrne got a fair innings.
Not on this question.
Deputy Treacy did not get in at all.
This is a separate quesiton. I want to ask a final and short supplementary.
I am calling Deputy Treacy for a supplementary on this question. Deputy Byrne might sit down.
Is the Minister aware that there is a great shortage of administrative and field staff within the ACOT system? Is he further aware of the inclement weather we had in the spring? Farmers who needed advice have not had this advice available to them. Will he take the necessary steps to ensure that the staff and the advice will be available to the farmers as soon as possible?
For a moment I thought Deputy Treacy was about to suggest we were the cause of the bad weather.
I would not dare suggest such a thing.
If I can be given any instances where agricultural advisers are not available I will guarantee that I will look into them.
What about the administrative staff?
I would like the Minister to assure the House that it is not the Government's intention to phase out county committees of agriculture. Is he aware of the contribution these people make in their own time? They are some of the best farmers in the country.
This is an Estimate speech.
The Government acknowledge the great contribution made by voluntary people on the various ACOT committees. Certainly it is not the Government's intention to phase them out.
7.
Mr. Leonard
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will ask ACOT to request their agriculture advisers to concentrate on farmers who up to now have not availed themselves of their service.
ACOT advisory personnel visit farms at the request of the owners and the great majority of farmers avail themselves of the advisers' services according as the needs of their holding require. I am satisfied that ACOT is taking adequate steps to publicise the availability of its services to all farmers.
Mr. Leonard
Does the Minister agree that the statistics show that only a small percentage of farmers of the better type avail themselves of these services? If we do not concentrate on the weaker type of farmer we will never correct the serious imbalance?
It is hard to argue with the tenor of Deputy Leonard's contribution. According to a report compiled some time ago by the General Council of County Committees of Agriculture, as they were at the time, about 20 per cent of farmers had a high interest in getting advice from agricultural advisers. Another 50 had some interest in it, and 30 per cent had no interest. In other words, they did not want to know. Over the years a certain category of farmers did not have the benefit of this service through no fault of any Government.
Mr. Leonard
Would the Minister not agree that if we are ever to make any headway, the ACOT officers will have to at least whisper in the ears of the advisers to disregard completely that 20 per cent? They must concentrate on the weaker sections to get rid of the imbalance which we cannot afford to have.
(Limerick West): Is the Minister aware that the thinking within his own Department and within ACOT is that more emphasis should be placed on the farmers with the greater production rather than on those with the lesser production, and would he indicate in what way he would reverse that trend, because the important thing is to bring the farmer with the lesser production up to the level of those with the greater production?
There are two sides to that argument, as Deputy Noonan will be well aware.
Question Time is not a time for argument.
First of all, it is very important that every assistance be given to the headline farmers to put them on a par with their competitors in Europe, but I accept there is a huge body of other farmers who are perhaps reluctant to come forward and look for advice.
(Limerick West): That was not the question. Would those with the lesser production be given assistance to bring them up to the level of those with the greater production?
I would not accept that the advisory services have forgotten about the people with the lesser production.
(Limerick West): I did not say that. I am thinking of the people in the Minister's own Department.
I believe the ACOT advisers are paying particular attention to the problem in particular areas and as far as I am concerned — I have said this before on several occasions — I would like to see farmers using the service more. Recently as a result of publicity on the media there is hardly a day passes without some message from ACOT imploring farmers to do this, that and the other in their own interest. As far as I am concerned the trend over a broad mix throughout the country is in the right direction.
Would the Minister agree that the charge imposed for a visit discriminates against the smaller farmer who is the person most in need of help?
What particular fee is that?
A charge has been imposed under the farm modernisation scheme.
As far as the advisory service is concerned there is no charge.
Is the Minister aware an 18-mile limit has been imposed on the ACOT advisers and does he agree that that curtails their visiting the people we are talking about? Would he ask the Government to provide the necessary finance to enable ACOT advisers to be out in the field with the farmers?
It is not today or yesterday the agricultural advisers have found themselves cramped in their offices because of all the form filling and so on since we joined the EEC. I accept the proper place for the adviser is on the land talking to the farmer at his own level. So far as the rearrangement is concerned it is working out reasonably well. If it is proved otherwise in the not too distant future I will be quite prepared to look at it.
Would the Minister agree that the greatest need in the industry today and in the years ahead is the training and education of our farmers, and would he agree that the level of advice is about 30 per cent of what the advisers and the farmers believe it should be and, within the limit of his resources, would he agree it is not possible to provide the essential education?
That almost seems to be a speech. There are far too many speeches at Question Time.
The kernel of the problem is that there are not sufficient funds available to give farmers the advice they need. Would the Minister agree with that?
I am an advocate of education. It is vitally important that we maintain very good advisory services. I accept that over the years, particularly in the last two decades, we could have done with more advisers. People on the ground will understand that but, because of the limitation imposed due to economic factors, it has not been possible to rectify the situation. On the point of better education, we could do with more advisory services.
Is the Minister aware that ACOT advisers are now spending three days a week in their offices and that means they are out in the field on only two days?
This sounds like repetition.
The Minister said he believed there is no change. I am asking him, is he aware there is a change because the advisers now spend three days a week in the office and the Minister agrees they should be out on the field on all five days? Because he believes that, would he ask his Government to provide the funds to enable them to do what they should be doing?
This problem has been around for quite a long time. There were many reasons why in the last nine or ten years the advisers were cramped up in their offices, as I have already mentioned, but the work is now becoming more streamlined and I expect that the advisers will spend more time henceforth out on the farms.
8.
asked the Minister for Agriculture (1) the total money paid to ACOT advisers for the year 1982, excluding clerical staff, CAO's and deputy CAO's; (2) the total budget for ACOT in 1982; and (3) the total budget for ACOT for 1983.
The information sought at (1) is not readily available. It is being compiled and I will have it furnished to the Deputy shortly.
The figures sought at (2) and (3) are £22.03 million and £24.53 million respectively.
I am disappointed the information is not available. This is a slur——
A question, please.
This is a slur on the farming community. This motion was tabled a week or more ago and I cannot see why the full information is not available.
I do not blame the Deputy for thinking these questions are all motions.
A question — whatever they are. We are trying to get information in view of the Taoiseach's statement at long last after the budget has been passed that no other section of the community would have remained so quiet over the last five years with such a drastic reduction in their incomes. It is a disgrace that we cannot get this information.
A question, Deputy.
Is the Minister worried or does he agree? I put a question a while ago and he did not reply to it. We have the situation where the ACOT committees have not got the requisite funds. Will they have to let off their staffs because they cannot pay them or is the Minister worried about them? Last week the Minister for Agriculture——
Please, Deputy, a question.
I apologise first of all for the information not being available. I understand it takes two weeks to compile the figures required. There are 27 offices around the country and salary, travelling expenses, PRSI contributions and so on have to be checked and correlated.
Is there a go-slow also in ACOT, because the staff scheme has not yet been agreed upon? What is the up-to-date position?
I am not aware that there is a go-slow. It has not been brought to my attention. I have no up-to-date information on the staff scheme but I will be in touch with the Deputy about it.
Is the Minister aware of the importance of the establishment of that staff scheme and, if so, will he insist that in the interests of agriculture, it be agreed upon immediately?
I accept that the staff scheme is extremely important and everything possible is being done to rectify this matter.
It goes on and on.
Like Question Time.