Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 3 Dec 1930

Vol. 14 No. 3

Public Business. - Position of Agriculture.

Mr. Comyn

I move:

That in view of the desperate position of agriculture following the unfavourable harvest, in the opinion of the Seanad steps should be taken by the Executive for the immediate provision of employment or relief for those engaged in agriculture.

In moving this motion, my desire is to promote a discussion on a question of the greatest importance in this country at the moment. I hope that it will be discussed in a national spirit, as it is certainly my desire that the facts should be brought out as fairly and impartially as possible, and that we may have the benefit of the wisdom of Senators from the various parts of this House upon a question of such immediate importance to the people of this country, especially the agricultural community. What is the condition of agriculture at the moment? I will allude only to three or four general heads. I find that in the County of Kerry, where the farmers are more industrious than in any other county in Ireland—quite as industrious as those of any other county—where the people have climbed up the hills and cultivated to the hilltops, at the present time farms are derelict, and when the Commissioner who has been sent down to take up the business of the County Council went to Tralee his first pressing duty was to call together his inspectors from the various districts and find out what is to be done with the derelict farms. Anybody acquainted with the position of this country, with the love of the people for their lands, will at once conclude from that that there must be something very wrong and very bad in the conditions of the present time.

Another matter which to those acquainted with agriculture is of serious portent is this: all over the country farmers are selling their milking cows. They are doing that only under the pressure of dire necessity, and the Minister for Agriculture, who comes from the west of Ireland, will, I am sure, be familiar with an old Irish proverb which says "When a man comes to sell the cow, famine is not far distant."

Another indication of the condition of the country is that civil bill decrees and civil bill processes are flying like snowflakes all over the country, and the only industry that is prosperous is the industry of the civil bill officer and of the solicitor for the Department of Lands and Fisheries. These are the industries that are prosperous. We had figures some time ago, and there are Senators here who will bear me out, showing that the costs in one county alone awarded to State solicitors for civil bills against unfortunate tenants for rents amounted in all to £3,500, and as I firmly believe in reality to £7,000. These are three signs of the times. I think you will admit that they are very serious signs.

There is another thing which I would like to refer to, that the land of Ireland is going out of cultivation. In the past ten years 350,000 acres of land have gone out of cultivation. The rate at which the land is going out of cultivation is accelerating. It is a geometrical progression, and my submission is this: in the last twelve months 104,000 acres went out of cultivation. That means serious diminution in the amount of the production of the soil. It means serious loss to the farmers, it must mean starvation to the farm labourers, because, of course, the farm labourer only gets his employment by means of the tillage, and if the land goes out of cultivation there is no employment for the working man. These are four indications of the condition of the rural population at the present time.

The Minister has made regulations, some of them very good regulations, and some of them perhaps more than doubtful, but I would prefer to see the Minister make a regulation that would keep the worker on the land. I would rather see him do something to put a stop to the divorce between labour and the soil, because if depopulation goes on at its present rate we will have nothing in the country but deserted villages. These are four or five of the main matters to which I would direct your attention, as indicating the condition of the agricultural population at the present time, both farmers and labourers.

In order to enable you to suggest some solution I propose to indicate some of the causes which have brought about that result. The causes so far as I can see are these: there has been a failure in some cases to produce the best quality of agricultural products. Our butter is 30/- a cwt. cheaper than the Danish butter. Bacon on the other hand is 20/- a cwt. dearer than the Danish bacon. It is a curious commentary that our butter is under State control and our bacon is in the hands of private people, thoroughly efficient private firms. There is a fact for this Seanad to consider.

Mr. Johnson

Do I understand that the bacon industry is efficient?

Mr. Comyn

I say Irish bacon is 20/- a cwt. dearer than Danish bacon. I also submit to the House that Irish butter is 30/- a cwt. cheaper than Danish butter. I ask the House to examine the reasons for that, and to draw their own conclusion. There is another cause of the depopulation of the countryside, and I think it arises from the increase in the taxation of the rural people. There has in the last four or five years been an increase in the incidence of taxation so far as it relates to farmers and farm labourers. I think I will not be contradicted when I say that they are paying an increase of more than a million a year. That may be partly the result of tariffs that have been imposed. I am in favour of tariffs, but I am in favour of so regulating tariffs that they will not press unduly on the farmer and farm labourer. I think that that increase in the taxation of the farmer and the farm labourer, due partly to the existence of tariffs, is mainly due to the fact that the tariffs have been mismanaged.

Mr. O'Hanlon

How?

Mr. Comyn

I will explain how. I am making an opening statement on this question. I hope I am making as moderate an opening statement as anybody could desire. I do not desire at this stage to be interrupted by hows or whys or wherefores.

Mr. O'Hanlon

A simple question.

Mr. Comyn

The Minister for Agriculture has not interrupted up to the present. I am sure he has not asked the Senator to act for him.

Mr. O'Hanlon

Not at all. He acts for himself.

Mr. Comyn

Another cause of the ruin of the farming classes is that there is in this country excessive, unproductive expenditure. That expenditure which is unproductive is partly Ministerial. There are 53,000 people getting their way of living by salaries from this State. They are, in a sense, doing unproductive work, and they cost the farmer and the farm labourer, who are the only producers, 10½ millions of money a year. I say that is one of the causes of the bad condition of agriculture. But the unproductive expenditure is not merely Government expenditure. There is unproductive expenditure in other directions. I think myself that the expenditure on bevelled roads was unproductive expenditure from the point of view of the greatest class in this country, the farming class and the farm labourers. I think a lot of money has been spent without any direct productive result on those roads for motor cars.

While I am on the subject I think that motor cars themselves have been to the farmer a great curse, for this reason—there are about three millions of money spent every year on motors and on petrol. Not one shilling of that money is spent in Ireland. That is a direct loss; it is unproductive expenditure. To pursue that for a moment, some 15 or 20 years ago we had the smith, the harness-maker, the breeder of horses, and the farmer supplying oats. We had circulation of money in this country. That circulation of money has been put an end to, while three millions a year go out. These matters have a deeper significance than many people imagine. To a great extent, they are the cause of the depressed condition of agriculture at the present moment.

There is another matter which affects the west of Ireland and has caused depression there. Up to 1925 the west of Ireland received as compensation for the clearing of the people from the east of Ireland £250,000 a year under the Congested Districts Board. I think that £250,000, minus £18,000, has been taken from those districts in the west, and you know that these things must cause a serious dislocation in the economic life of the west.

These are, I think, four of the main causes for the present condition of agriculture. I have mentioned them rather briefly, because my desire is rather that there should be discussion amongst the members of the Seanad than that I should be supposed as laying down any propositions in regard to agriculture for which I might not have sufficient authority. But I think I have stated enough now to show that the condition of agriculture is very bad. I have indicated three or four of the causes, so that the members of the Seanad and the Minister may consider how a remedy is to be provided, because once you diagnose the cause it is an easy step to find a remedy. A remedy must be provided. We have only one resource in this country, putting out the four manufacturing firms— Guinness's, the distilleries, the biscuit factory in Dublin, and Fords in Cork. These are the four exporting firms. They practically monopolise all the export trade in manufactured articles. Our great export trade is livestock and farming products generally. Therefore, I say that the resource of this country is the land. The land must be made to produce more; it must be made more fertile; it must be cultivated or this nation will die. Our population has been reduced, I think, in the last ten year by 350,000, taking into account now that there should be a natural increase in population. There is a reduction in population of, I think, 350,000. There has been an increase in the population of the towns. So that this is a diminution in the rural population. I confidently submit to this House that there must be a decrease of about 600,000 in the rural population. There should be no decrease in the rural population. There should be an increase. The Minister for Agriculture, who has been praised in many quarters, who has done some things efficiently, is responsible to a great extent for that. Probably he could not himself remedy it, but the Cabinet, of which he forms part, if they were determined to do what is right in this country, could have supported him in providing a remedy. The condition of this country requires immediate measures, and it requires measures which will have operation through a series of years.

The remedy I propose for the immediate relief of agriculture is twofold. I propose to stop the issue of civil bills and the marking of decrees in respect of the instalments of the annuity which is now due. Wipe out this instalment of the annuity that is falling due at the present time. The Minister smiles as though this were a new idea. I suppose he is old enough to remember— if he is not, those on whose knees he sat as a boy are—that whenever there was depression in Ireland, even in the days of landlordism, a year's rent or a half-year's rent was allowed to stand over. The farmer was not exactly smashed. In '79 the rents were not collected, not with the same vigour, not with the same determination, not with the same cost of civil bill officers and sheriffs officers as they are to-day. I make this statement deliberately to the House, that for the relief of agriculture, and in order to prevent the farmers from selling their milking cows, there ought to be a remission of this half-year's gale of the annuities. That is an immediate measure which I would propose. The second measure I propose is this, that all impediments to the draining and reclamation of land should be removed at once. I suggest that in order to relieve the labouring men in the country. I wish to explain to the Seanad what I mean. There have been a number of statutes dealing with the drainage and reclamation of land.

They began in 1842. They went on through 1847 and 1883, and finally came to the Act passed by the Oireachtas in 1925. Under these earlier Acts when, of course, taxation was not high and when all that a man owned was his own, when the total revenue collected in the country was eight or nine millions instead of being forty or fifty millions, as it is now, the owners of the lands proposed to be drained were required to pay the cost. The Board of Works carried out these maintenance schemes, but the owners were obliged to pay for them. Under the Act of 1925, at present in operation, the Minister contributes as much as he desires. The words of the statute are that the Minister contributes as much as he thinks proper, and the county council contributes as much as it thinks proper, while the local farmer has to bear the cost of the main drainage scheme, over which he has no control. The result of that is that many useful drainage schemes throughout the country have been held up because the local farmers, situated as they are, cannot afford to incur the risk of the cost of these schemes. I submit to the House that the cost of this work on rivers, canals and arterial drains ought to be a national charge exclusively. The main roads have been made through this country in order to give access to the land. I say that these arterial drains, canals and rivers ought to be cleared at the public expense in order to give access to the fertility of the soil. If the Minister were to accept my suggestion it would have the direct effect of enabling a series of schemes in every county to be taken in hand at once. In that way the Minister would be giving relief to the agricultural labourers. My friend, Senator O'Hanlon, who was at the birth of the Labour Party——

Mr. O'Hanlon

Not at all.

Mr. Comyn

I should have said of the Farmers' Party and followed its hearse—says that it is a nice time to do drainage work.

Mr. O'Hanlon

In the dead of winter.

Mr. Comyn

Is the Senator prepared to support schemes for farmers and farm labourers?

Mr. O'Hanlon

Yes, if they are intelligently conceived.

Mr. Comyn

The Senator was the wet nurse and the undertaker of the defunct and bogus Farmers' Party, and I hope he will not interrupt me any further in the course of this discussion.

Mr. O'Hanlon

The Senator does not like my interruptions.

Mr. Comyn

I would like if this suggestion of mine had been made by a member of some other party in the House. As that has not been done, I make it from these benches on the grounds that it is a national necessity. I do not want to claim any party advantage for having made it if it should happen to be accepted by the Minister. The suggestion is made so as to give immediate relief to agriculture. The two remedies which I propose are: (1) relieve the farmers by stopping the snowfall of civil bills, and (2) reduce or remit the land annuities or the annuities in lieu of rent for this half year.

Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Hogan)

What is to happen at the beginning of the next half year?

Mr. Comyn

I ask the Minister to wait for a moment. Brilliant though he is he has not probably the experience which some of us here have. He asks what is to happen at the end of the half year. Well, we may have a better spring and a better summer and the times may improve. In the old days there used to be a hanging gale —a year's rent in arrear.

Mr. Hogan

My only reason for intervening was that I wanted it to be clear that at the end of the half year they were to start paying again.

Mr. Comyn

The Minister, with his forensic skill, is endeavouring to put me off my track, but I come on the rails again, and I insist that here we have one remedy for the hungry farmer in the present winter by remitting the half-year's annuities. We have another remedy for the labouring man. It is this: Wipe away all your restrictions in connection with the drainage and reclamation of the land and allow these drainage schemes to go forward. We could send Senator O'Hanlon down in overalls to supervise the work. It is very hard at this hour, and in an opening speech, to elaborate the suggestion I have made in reference to drainage legislation, but I think that up to the present I have made it clear enough that drainage schemes have been hung up because the farmers will not consent to be made responsible for the arterial drains and the big canals which are being constructed by the Board of Works, which are not under the control of the farmers and which may cost more than the farmer can afford to pay. The farmers are timid of that. At the present time they are not able to do that. Therefore, I say the State should take on that work altogether, bear the expense of it and allow the farmer to drain and reclaim his own land. I would not allow any State officials to interfere unnecessarily with the small farmer's control of his own land. I say that the drainage of a man's farm should be under his own control and that the money for the drainage of the land should be supplied cheap. It should be cheap money, as it was in 1883 and in subsequent years. My defence of that is that the improvement of land is a benefit to the State as well as to the individual farmer. The State which derives a benefit from it ought to contribute part of the cost.

These are the two remedies which I suggest for the immediate amelioration of the condition of the farming classes. It is desirable that these immediate measures should be of such a nature that they would fit in with a general scheme. I think a measure allowing drainage to proceed would fit in with the general scheme for the drainage and reclamation of land. It may be said to me: "You are only going to benefit those farmers whose lands are waterlogged." I would not put forward a proposition so absurd as that.

I find in an Act of Parliament passed in 1847 that a number of ways are laid down in which land could be improved. These include measures for dealing with rocky land, with light land and, in fact with every description of land. The legislators of that time may have been hostile to us as they undoubtedly were. They may have, by their measures, caused great suffering in this country, but they were good draftsmen. Of the ways they laid down in which land could be improved drainage is only one. Other ways they suggested were the trenching and deepening of land, fertilisers, fencing of land, the making of dams and the clearing of streams and watercourses, the reclamation of waste land, the making of farm roads and the clearing of land of rocks and stones. In that list, contained in a section of an Act of Parliament passed in 1847, I find there a means of ameliorating the condition of every farmer throughout the country. I have spoken of drainage, but that is only one way in which land could be improved. I have the best authority for saying that money expended on drainage in this country will yield a return of ten per cent.

Sir John Keane

No.

Mr. Comyn

Senator Sir John Keane, who is the statistician of the Seanad, says no, and therefore I must yield to him, but if it is not ten per cent. perhaps it is nine. In any case the drainage of land will yield a good economic return. After that you have the fertilisation of the land. If land is going out of tillage you must find some means of making it grow more grass. These are matters to which I wish to direct the attention of the Seanad. They are deserving of very great consideration, and if the Minister finds himself hampered in his own Cabinet he ought to come out and stand for them. There is another matter to which I would direct the Minister's attention. It is perhaps more than what one man can do, and perhaps with his official machinery the Minister cannot do all that I have suggested to him, but I make this further suggestion: that instead of all these microscopic boards that are being established—we have a board for almost everything—we ought to have one great development board with the Ministers, if they choose, as members of it. That board ought to have the best professional assistance. It ought to consist of unpaid men and be something on the lines of the old Congested Districts Board. It ought to be composed of experienced men, men of standing who found their experience in various walks in life. It ought to be in close contact with the various Departments and accessible to persons throughout the country, no matter what avocation they follow, who have ideas to bring before it for development and exploitation.

I think the present Ministry has suffered too much, and I say this not in any disparaging sense, from the official mind. I think the Government ought to bring into the business of this country more of the mind of the ordinary commercial man, trader and farmer. I suggest that a board, such as I have indicated, should be established, that it would be the best means of promoting and using the fertility of the soil and finding out what is under the soil. It is by developing what is in the soil of Ireland that we can hope to live and keep up the very expensive establishment which exists here to-day. If the measures which I have indicated were adopted, I suggest that greater prosperity would result to the country and that it would enable us to maintain the weight of our present establishment. In moving this motion I will be quite content if I have caused more experienced members of the Seanad to think out this question for themselves. I had wished for an adjournment of the motion because I desired to have a full House for its discussion. I desired to have a full and free discussion in a really national sense to meet a national calamity and a national danger.

As long as I have been in the Seanad I have not been an alarmist. In describing the condition of the rural population, if I have used any language that may be thought to be extravagant, I desire to say that in my opinion these words are not extravagant, and that the condition of the rural population is worse than it was in 1879 and almost as bad as it was in the hungry "'forties." That is the problem which the Minister has to face, and if he chooses to face it he ought to have the assistance of the Seanad. I am not despondent as to the future of this country. I think we will get through our difficulties and that the country will ultimately prosper, but at present it is getting depopulated. The country must be going down when the rural districts are getting depopulated. I hope that depopulation will stop and that an end will be put to it by any measures that are possible. I hope whoever undertakes that work will receive the support which such measures deserve.

Mr. Robinson

I second the motion.

Miss Browne

As a practical farmer I suppose I ought to be greatly touched and moved by Senator Comyn's speech, but in fact it has had quite the opposite effect on me. It has left me quite cold. The Senator, when referring to the reasons that in his opinion have caused the great depression which everyone knows exists in the agricultural industry, did not mention the world-wide depression that is really responsible for it. The Minister for Agriculture is here to speak for the Government, but speaking as a practical farmer, I desire to say that I consider this motion not only wholly unnecessary, but mischievous. I desire to make a protest against all the talk we have heard, not only here, but all over the country, about tariffs, land annuities, the hopeless condition of the farmer, unemployment, and all the rest of it. All this kind of talk seems to me to have arisen in some people's minds very suddenly. The depression from which the country is suffering dates back to about the year 1922. It has been coming on gradually since then. Like other working farmers, I have had my difficulties in working my farm. Every farmer has had them, and I may say that I know perfectly well the condition of our farmers. What I want to protest against is all this talk we have had to listen to because, in my opinion, it is having a very bad effect on the farmers. It is sapping their courage at a time when they most need courage. It is causing discouragement amongst them, and even panic.

Anybody who knows anything about the farmer's business is quite aware that if a farmer loses his self-confidence and a grip on his business, he is never going to recover. He is finished, and that is all. Now our memories are not quite so short as perhaps some people would wish. I have a very vivid recollection of the time when there was not so much sympathy shown to the farmer as there appears to be now. I remember the time, not so long ago, when roving bands of gunmen went through the country and quartered themselves on poor farmers for two and three years, eating them out of house and home, the time when farmers were boycotted, and were prevented from carrying on their business. That was the order of the day at that time. The business of many farmers was ruined in that way, and they have never since been able to recover from it. The farmers were prevented from going to their market towns to do their business. They could not travel over the broken roads and bridges, for the destruction of which the country is still paying.

Mr. Comyn

I must protest that this is not relevant to the matter under discussion. Of course, a lady has every privilege, and I would be slow to interrupt her. If she wishes she can go into the history of the Civil War, the British War, and every other war if she likes, but what we are dealing with at the moment is the depression in the agricultural industry.

Cathaoirleach

I think, Senator, that Senator Miss Browne is quite entitled to proceed.

Miss Browne

I hold that I am entitled to go into matters which led up to the present depression. As I have said, there is a great deal of harm being done to farmers by all this talk that I have alluded to. It comes generally from people who are not farmers, but amateurs.

Dr. Gogarty

K.C.s.

Mr. Comyn

The K.C. is also a farmer.

Cathaoirleach

You must not interrupt, Senator. You will have a full opportunity of replying at the conclusion of the debate.

Miss Browne

Nothing could possibly be worse for the farmer than that he should lose confidence. During the course of the debate to-day we heard of Mr. Macawber. The suggestion seems to be that if a Macawber-like spirit is adopted, of waiting for something to turn up in the form of tariffs or something else, it will cure all the ills from which the farmer suffers. My own conviction is that in the long run the farmers of the country would be better off if there were no tariffs. One would imagine, listening to the last speaker, that the Minister for Agriculture and the members of the Executive Council had not yet begun to think of the situation in which the farmers of the country find themselves. I am not speaking for the Government, but everyone knows that the Executive Council have been giving the most anxious thought to this problem. Why we should be called upon to pass a motion which seems to suggest that the Government are doing nothing is beyond me. If those who are so interested in the farmers would preach a little courage to them to help them to keep up their spirits in these most difficult times, it would, in my opinion, be a very good thing. It would be well if every farmer could say when he puts his hand to the plough or goes about his other work: "My field may be stony or swampy, or my land poor and the weather bad, but if I keep right on and look not back, I am no failure."

Colonel Moore

The last Senator who spoke objects very much to any criticism. According to Senator Miss Browne everything is to be allowed to go on perfectly smoothly as it is, whether it is going over the precipice or not. We must all hold our tongues and wait. No criticism is to be allowed for fear it may frighten the poor farmer and put him out of his stride. Of course, that is what is always said in this country: you must not criticise anyone, you must not criticise the Government, whether that Government is in England or here. Let them alone and everything will get on splendidly. The last Senator said that if there were no tariffs of any kind our farmers would have got on much better than they have. I would ask her, what has led to the depopulation of the country? It is only now about half what it was fifty or seventy years ago. Was it free trade or tariffs that led to that depopulation, that ruined the country, lessened its agricultural production, and left it without factories? I think if the Senator looks into the matter she will see that it was free trade brought about that situation. Everyone in the country in the last fifty or sixty years has recognised that fact. Free trade has led to the depopulation of the country and to the fact that so many thousands of acres have gone out of cultivation.

According to the official reports prepared by the Government the amount of land under corn last year decreased by 26,000 acres. The amount of land under root and grain crops and flax decreased by 62,000 acres, while in the case of hay the reduction has been 38,000 acres. Altogether, there has been a decrease in the case of land under cultivation of 101,000 acres. During the last seventy or eighty years the land of this country has been going continuously out of cultivation, and the position since the present Government came into office has been just as bad as it was before. They have not done anything to stop that. Everyone remembers that for years before the State was set up people everywhere urged that the whole system should be changed in this country from beginning to end, and that otherwise the country would be ruined. The object of the rising here was due to the desire that that should be done. It has not been done, however, and the old system has been continued as much as possible. In fact in some respects the present system is worse than the old.

The Minister for Agriculture said at Carlow some time ago that butter was the only export from Ireland that required protection, that protection in the case of our other exports would be impossible. I do not know whether that is likely to prove to be correct. There is a great deal of reason for believing that a great many other things besides butter require protection. I know the Minister will not agree with me, but there is the question of bacon. The situation with regard to these things changes every other day. What is suitable and opportune at one time is not suitable or opportune at another. If one is to believe what one reads, a serious crisis has arisen in connection with bacon. Irish bacon has been quoted at a higher price than bacon from other places.

Eight of the largest professional importers in Manchester made a statement that the whole situation with regard to the bacon trade has changed, and changed very rapidly and seriously, within the last few years, that all the Continental States have been increasing their pig and bacon exports year after year, and now it has come to such a point that in Poland they are killing 165,000 pigs per week. It states that the price of bacon in England has nothing to do with Ireland, except so far as we are exporters to England and further, that bacon will be landed at the rate of 6d. or 7d. per lb. for Danish and Swedish, Dutch 5d. to 6½d., and Polish 5½d. to 6d. The result of these reductions will be that bacon will be sold in the shops at 11d. or 1/- per lb. That is a statement made by important people not connected with our politics but with the English bacon trade. The statement goes on to say this is a matter of the utmost importance. What possible chance has the home producer whose best quality bacon is retailed at from 1/8 to 2/- in the lb.? How could he possibly sell cheaper? They go on to ask what hope is there for the home producer when the last week's figures of 80,000 bales of bacon, equivalent to 65,000 carcases, to the value of £600,000 are imported? The bacon is not ordered by the trade. It is dumped on consignment and none goes back. It is all sold and paid for in fourteen days.

The Minister, I dare say, has more information than that as regards our bacon trade, and probably in due time he will do with regard to bacon what he has done as regards butter. When in Carlow he was hesitating on the brink. He was not sure was it right to impose a tax on butter. Suddenly he took the dive into the cold water and he excluded butter. I hope he will go on in that way and take a few more dives. Apparently, however, the Minister, and other Ministers, are tied up with the old theories that suited England at a particular time. England became very wealthy as a result of free trade, but the people who wrote on the subject at that time did not get any real general statement in favour of free trade. They said it was suitable for the time, and so it was for England but it ruined us. Great harm is bound to be done if people do not follow the times and act in accordance with what is necessary for the times. Ministers are struggling hard against a tax on imports and against helping in any way they can. Free trade killed agriculture in England, and they are regretting that now and are trying to get back the old conditions, and get the people back on the farms, but they will not succeed, for people do not go back from the pavement to the farm. Once you get them out of the country they will never go back. Once the Irish farm population move to the towns, as they are doing, it is not back to Connemara they will go.

The Senator who proposed this motion suggested that there should be a remission of the annuities for this year, and when that suggestion was made the Minister asked: "What would happen at the end of the year?" I am not talking now of the old controversy. This is merely a question of remission for one year. When the Minister says: "What is going to happen," he means that nothing will be done, and that the English will insist on their money. That is not so. Even on the Minister's own way of thinking, that the annuities are due to England, there is not the least reason why the annuities should not be reduced. Annuities are the old rents imposed by the landlord on his tenants. He raised the rents when he wished, and he lowered them at other times when things were bad. There was no such thing as unchangeable rents. When bad times came the landlord reduced the rents or he was forced to do so. They were not considered by the State to be irremovable. The State came in and said, "You cannot say that. The people are starving and we will reduce the rents whether you like it or not." Rents were reduced three times at intervals of fifteen years. What turned them into annuities? The State bought out the landlords, and it bought out nothing except what the landlords had, and the landlords had not the power to charge rents that the tenants could not pay, and, therefore, the State cannot do so. The annuities are only based on what rights the landlords had, and those rights were tempered by the power to reduce the rents when necessary. Therefore, as the State only bought what the landlords had, it has the right to reduce the annuities when that becomes necessary and the people are starving. Supposing, for instance, things were much worse than they are, and that no one could pay annuities as the land would not produce, what would happen is that the annuities would stop automatically for there would be no money to pay them.

The Saorstát has as much power to reduce the annuities as the British Government had to reduce the rents. It is quite applicable to the position to say the annuities should be reduced for a year owing to the state of the country. Quite apart from what other argument may be used, I think that is a matter that is not generally thought out by various people who consider the question. We have got the best ecclesiastical authority on this—Dr. Walsh, Archbishop of Dublin, and Dr. Croke, Archbishop of Cashel, and also Joseph Chamberlain, and such people, who at the time did not regard the annuities or rents as above criticism or reduction. I consider that something ought to be done in a serious way for helping people over the bad times. I remember the years 1878 and 1879 when there was a state of great hardship in the country, and when the Land League sprung up, and a Land League may spring up again to fight the new rents or annuities. These are matters to be considered when the country is in a state of very great hardship, and something has to be done to relieve it.

Mr. MacEllin

I support the motion. I would seriously ask practical farmers in the House, taking the last five years, did they make ends meet during that time in farming? Surely they could not have done so unless they had other means. For instance, there are members of this House who have a salary coming in to supplement what they are making on farming, but surely nobody working on a farm could possibly keep up with the prices that prevail for the articles they produce. One week or month there will be abnormal prices, and the following week or month the prices will be coming down again, so that taking things in and out, it was almost impossible for practical farmers, no matter how conscientiously they worked or how saving they were, to make ends meet during the last six years. Take the whole circumstances as they exist. The position as regards farmers is that everything they have to sell is at pre-war prices, and everything they have to buy, and the cost of living generally, is almost 75 per cent. over pre-war. Realising that fact, it is extraordinary how many farmers have succeeded in keeping out of the bankruptcy courts so far.

There are various reasons for the conditions under which they are working at present. To give an instance, take the people who have tried to better themselves as regards housing conditions. Take typical farmers in the West of Ireland with a valuation of from £10 to £20. A good many of these people, eight or ten years ago, were living under vile housing conditions. They were anxious to get out of these houses, and they availed of the housing grant. Immediately an assessor came along and increased the valuation by a third, and in some cases doubled the valuation, although there had been no increased revenue. Doubling the valuation means that the grant of £45 given is paid back in rates in fourteen years or fifteen years, as a result of the increased valuation. Surely, that is a rotten system, and to call such a grant a free grant is dishonest, or certainly misleading. That is undoubtedly a distinct hardship on the farming community, who can ill afford not alone better housing conditions, but are poorly able to meet the ordinary demands made on them. Senator Comyn stressed the point of drainage. In the county I come from, that is one of the most serious questions the people are up against. Almost half the county suffers from flooding owing to failure to drain the Robe, the Alb and the Moy. In Mayo there are thousands of farmers living beside these rivers, and no effort, or very little effort, has been made to see that the rivers are deepened to relieve the hardship and distress the people have suffered as a result of the flooding in these areas.

It was a common sight to see turf and cocks of hay floating about in different parts of the county. A question was asked in the other House by a Deputy on this matter. The only thing that happened about the Robe is that an assessor went around to see by how much the holding would be improved, and consequently the valuation increased, so that the people would have to pay for any increased income they might derive as a result of the drainage, while at the same time there is a failure to realise the terrible loss they suffered when their farms were flooded with water. I think this is following up the old system that is reminiscent of landlordism in the days gone by, when, if a man showed externally that he was getting prosperous by whitewashing his house, he would have to report to the landlord and give free labour for a week, and failing that he would be evicted. That was a most degrading system, and the unfortunate people trying to bring themselves out of the dirty houses in which they are living are treated much the same way. I think that is a policy which should be ended. Another aspect of the situation is that as far as Mayo is concerned the trunk roads are a terrible burden on the farming community as a whole. Since the present Government forcibly took office, if I might say so, there has been practically nothing done in the case of by-roads or bog roads. It is no exaggeration to say that the majority of the farmers of the county this year found it impossible to get into the bogs for turf, owing to the absolute neglect of the authorities in putting the bog roads into a passable condition. In the by-roads there has been nothing done. These are things that are creating great hardship and misery to the farming community.

The trunk roads and the mental hospitals of Mayo cost between £60,000 and £70,000 per annum, and I submit they have been of no direct benefit to the farming community. I suppose what is typical in Mayo is also true of other counties. The farming community should be relieved of rates for trunk roads. In Mayo that would mean reducing the rates roughly by one-half, and it would give the opportunity of turning attention once more to the by-roads and bog roads. By giving the relief I have suggested it would go a long way towards solving the problem in the West and the difficulties the people are up against at present.

Mr. Connolly

I did not intend to intervene in this debate, for the simple reason that I am more at home in industrial than in agricultural matters, but I was very interested to hear all the arguments that have been put forward. One must in facing this problem realistically appreciate the great difficulties that any Government has to face in attempting to solve the social conditions of the agricultural community throughout the country, especially in a year when the harvest prices have made it almost impossible for the people on the soil to exist at all. But whilst having that sympathy with any Government that may be in power, we must realise that a great deal of the trouble is due to the fact that we in this country carrying on the traditional methods after the period we went through before the establishment of the Saorstát. We thought in the old days we were going to put an end to that bad period. Unfortunately we seem to be deeply embedded in the old grooves and methods of red tapeism and officialism. There are one or two points, as far as the agricultural labourers are concerned, that merit the attention not only of this House but of the Oireachtas generally, and particularly the Minister. We have in operation an Insurance Act, which is nothing more or less than the carrying forward of the old British Insurance Act which was framed, launched and put into effect for an industrialised community but that in no way met the needs of an agricultural community such as Ireland.

The greatest hardship, to my mind, that is imposed by legislation in this country is the position whereby the agricultural labourer is not insured and is not insurable. Practically every other man if he is engaged in an industrial occupation is covered, to some limited extent at least, for a period by unemployment insurance, but this unfortunate man who needs it most, and who is living closer to the starvation line, and is unable to save when employed, is left derelict, or is dishonoured at having to apply for outdoor relief for himself and his family. I admit that the problem is a serious and difficult one, but if one person more than another ought to be insured in this country it is the agricultural labourer who has no possibility of being able to put up any reserves for a period when he would be out of work. I have said on other occasions in this House, and I mean to repeat now, that until we have money available at an economic rate for development in this country we are not going to make progress. What we know as an economic rent means paying the banker 5½ per cent. for loans and a certain amount for sinking fund. That makes housing impossible, no matter how well intentioned the Minister may be and no matter how much the Government realise the need for decent housing conditions. If they are going to build these houses at what they call an economic rent they will have to pay a ruinous rate of interest for the capital necessary for the rehabilitation of the country.

We know that a protective policy is necessary for agriculture more than for any other industry in this country. The Minister's attitude about that is also wrong. I suggest to the Minister for Agriculture that the two things he has got to face arising out of this debate are, first, how he is going to deal with the unemployed agricultural labourers; what system of insurance or dole, if necessary, he will provide for the unfortunate employee when out of work. The second point is, how he is going to launch or develop a housing scheme at an economic rate, and what steps he will take to secure capital for the building of houses and providing proper sanitary arrangements in houses and the proper drainage necessary. These are some of the lines on which the Executive ought to think if they are to solve the problem, particularly of the agricultural labourers in this country.

Mr. Kenny

I have not been engaged in agriculture for a number of years, but I had been for many years, and I think I have a good idea of the mentality of the agricultural labourer. He is wedded to the soil. He has been brought up to the soil, and he knows no other craft or business but the production of food and crops from the soil. We have rural depopulation, and the reason of that is that once the agricultural labourer is thrown out of employment he does not know what to do with himself. He either has to migrate or gravitate to the nearest town or city that offers the prospect of work. What is happening to-day is that these men hang on to their cabins or their agricultural holdings as long as they possibly can, and, through sheer want, when a housing scheme or a sanitary scheme is put into operation in the nearest township or city they gravitate towards that, and they are picked up by the contractors, for they are strong, stout, healthy fellows, able to dig foundations and that sort of thing. After five or six weeks when the foundations are dug they are cast aside, and the carpenters, masons and others come along. In the meantime the little holdings they had in the country have possibly been taken over by some person, or they have disposed of their interest in it.

They are fixed as citizens of the city or town to which they gravitate. They are held there unable to get out, and they become a burden on the local rates of the community in which they found temporary employment. When you are met with the fact that tillage is decreasing, and that in the past twelve months, according to figures quoted by Senator Comyn, land has gone out of cultivation to the extent of 200,000 acres, or whatever the number may be, that means a considerable displacement of agricultural labourers in the Irish Free State. For the time being emigration is stopped, and a large number— possibly 90 per cent.—who might emigrate, are prevented from doing so through lack of means, or through other disability.

What I want to get at is this: What is going to be the result when we get back to normality? We hear a great deal about depression in the farming community. I suppose it is pretty general in every country. It is a passing thing; an aftermath of the Great War. We will get back to normal conditions in time. One Senator advised us to keep our hearts up, not to be depressed, and that we would get over the present set-back. When we get back to normal where will the agricultural labourers be? What will have become of them? That class is decreasing from year to year, is gravitating towards the towns or cities, or emigrating. It will be very difficult to replace people brought up on the land, who have an affection for it, when there will be demands for further tillage. What I want to do, if possible, is to hold these people on the land. They are a bold peasantry, a country's pride. Hold them on the land for the time being at any cost. Do not let them get contaminated by an affection which will gradually grow for life in the cities and towns. When that day comes they will not go back to the land. How can they be held on the land? If we are to have tillage, if the land is to be cultivated, and if the agricultural labourer is allowed to go away what will be the position? The labourer has his little house and family. Possibly he has an acre more or less. Many of the young people live with their people. How are you going to hold them? They are a class that do not follow any other craft beyond handling a spade or a shovel. They can do good work with that. They are walking on idle land every day that could produce great wealth, if only they were allowed to get at it with spade and shovel. It is an anomaly that in this country, where there is a great desire to make the land produce all that it possibly could, that we have people who are the potential producers of wealth, walking over the land with their hands in their pockets looking for work. If facilities were given to them to work the land they would do so. I think that is a Government job.

I will hark back to the time when there was an avid desire for the production of food, when a Minister for Agriculture, with great wisdom and great energy, introduced a Bill to give agricultural plots for the production of food. I was associated with that movement, and gave three acres of my land for the purpose. I was a member of a Food Production Committee that arranged to put agricultural labourers who were out of employment at work on the land, and I was amazed at the amount of wealth, in the shape of vegetables, that were grown on three acres. If I could have displayed the same energy, and if I could have produced the same amount of produce, or 50 per cent. of it on my whole farm, I would have been a millionaire in the course of a few years. That experience made a notable impression on my mind. The Act that provided these plots is still in existence. There are certain little flaws in it. We found when we came to the end of the term that the people to whom one-sixth or one-eighth of an acre had been let were loth to yield it up. We had some difficulty with some of them. It is a very ticklish thing to let land in that way, or to give what might be a vested interest in it. Some of those who got it consulted lawyers, and we had some difficulty in getting the land back into the possession of the Committee. That difficulty was overcome afterwards, because, when making further lettings it was by way of conacre, which only permitted the holder to take one crop each year and established no vested interest. That provision is in the Act, and I suppose there will be no difficulty in working it.

In the position, as we find it, with the gradual depopulation of the rural districts, serious consequences will flow from that in the course of time, so that the sooner we get back to normality the better. Meantime it is the duty of the Government to see that the rural population is held, and in order to do so I suggest that the Minister has in that Act the whole machinery at his disposal. The Minister also has at his disposal the agricultural and technical instructors throughout the Saorstát. Voluntary committees were at work in the past. Whether there is enough civic spirit abroad now to form these committees again and help to revive such work, I cannot say, but I believe, with a little activity on the part of the Department, that could be brought about. I am sure that when people saw the gravity of the situation they would enter into the working of these committees.

It may be said that there may be a difficulty about getting land. The thing to aim at is to get it near large communities. I do not think it would be any hardship if the Minister approached farmers who are now pleading very great distress, and who say that they cannot cultivate any crops with advantage, to give some of their land for such a purpose. If committees approached farmers and agreed to take three or five acres of second-class land, and to pay a grazing rent, or a little more, for it for five years, and then to return it after it had been dug by spade labour, when it was very much improved in value with a Government guarantee, I do not think any farmer would have reason to grumble. It will be found that some of them will put an extraordinary value on land when they are approached. We found that difficulty in Waterford. In fact I was the only one who voluntarily gave three acres. Compulsory powers had to be applied in order to get more land around Waterford. It was wonderful how valuable the land was when the owners were approached for some of it! This question can be settled at once. There is an Act of Parliament in existence, and it only requires a little amendment in order to put it into working order again. The time is ripe for doing so. This is the time for digging in order to prepare for the spring crop. I throw out that suggestion to the Minister. There may be something in it. At least there are great potentialities in the provision of plots of two or three acres, similar to those provided in 1922 or 1923.

Sir John Keane

I beg to move the adjournment of the debate.

Colonel Moore

I second.

Cathaoirleach

Would we not be able to finish to-night?

Mr. Comyn

I submit that this question is of such importance that it demands not one day, but two days or ten days.

Mr. Johnson

I would point out that the question on the Order Paper has not been discussed except by the mover of the motion. Since then there has been hardly any reference to the issue raised.

Cathaoirleach

I beg to differ with you. Senator Kenny has made a most instructive suggestion which would turn this country into a sort of cauliflower garden, in which every man would be employed with a spade and shovel. Other Senators had other methods of improving agriculture.

Mr. Comyn

I am sure the Minister will have no objection to coming to-morrow.

Cathaoirleach

The Minister may not find it convenient to be here to-morrow. The position is this, that we are not likely to have any Bills from the Dáil this week and, as far as I can see, we will probably have nothing to do next week. If we carry on for half an hour we might finish to-night.

Mr. Comyn

May I say, with great regret, that we cannot finish in half an hour? It is quite impossible. We have not heard any of the farmer Senators yet.

Cathaoirleach

We have heard Senator Miss Browne and Senator Kenny.

Mr. Comyn

We have not heard all the farmers.

Cathaoirleach

You do not know, Senator, if they desire to speak.

Debate adjourned, on a show of hands.

The Seanad adjourned at 7.15 p.m.sine die.