This motion deals with pigs and pig products. The last time a census was taken of the agricultural output it showed that the pig industry was a very important one. At that time the figures showed that pigs and pig products were valued at £9,000,000 out of a total agricultural output representing £65,000,000 for the year. A sum of £9,000,000 formed a very considerable portion of the agricultural industry and should get serious consideration. At first sight the motion appears to be of a legal character, but on examination it will be seen that every single part of it is necessary. Part I deals with the effect of the different products on one another. That is to say, that sometimes there is a good price for bacon pigs but porkers bring less. Perhaps we lose a certain market for pork, and by the time there are big numbers available again the price of bacon goes down, or when we get back to pork the market is not there. The inter-relation between bacon, pork, and live pigs is a matter to be investigated. Part II deals with quality. As the Seanad is aware, we put a tariff on bacon and pig products coming into this country in January, 1932. About the end of July these tariffs were increased, and were made operative against countries within the Commonwealth of Nations. As a result no bacon or pig products whatever are imported except under licence, and a licence is only applicable in cases where the meat is being used for further manufacture. Really there is nothing allowed in except pigs' tongues for tinning, because the people in the tinning trade here were not able to get sufficient pigs' tongues and we had to allow them to import under licence.
No investigation has been held to ascertain whether home curers are supplying the home market with what home consumers like. For instance, before the tariff went on home consumers were accustomed to getting either Irish, American or Continental bacon as they wished. The American bacon was of a different type, but there were people in this country who were keen on it. We never had any proper investigation to know whether the home curers have supplied that type of bacon or not. This part also deals with supplies for export, in order to ascertain whether the bacon and pork is the best type for the market to which it is sent, and whether by some change in the quality of the pigs, we might not get a better price and a better name for Irish bacon and pork, and also get an economic price. The experience in the pig trade is that when prices are bad the number of pigs go down, and that when the number of pigs have gone down prices improve, but that then farmers reap no benefit. There is a sort of cycle right through for years, of a rise and fall in prices and a fall and rise in the numbers. It is a rather ambitious plan to try to establish some sort of an economic price. This tribunal will be asked if they can do something in the way of price stabilisation. Part III deals with proposals for reorganisation of the industry. Many plans have been submitted to the Department of Agriculture during the last 12 months, and probably before that, by the bacon curers and by other people interested in the pig trade. Plans have been given to us which purported, at any rate, to solve the whole question. When we came to examine these plans we found, as a rule, that there was some difficulty or other: that they were not ideal in themselves and were not an obvious solution of the whole difficulty. Some of these plans appear to be fairly good and might conceivably, with certain improvements, be made satisfactory and submitted to the tribunal for examination.
Sub-section (4) of the motion deals with the measures which, having regard to the national interests, should be taken to "encourage the production of pigs of suitable and uniform type." There again we have a certain difficulty all the time. There is a problem about the breed of pig that should be encouraged in the country. There has been a considered policy in the Department of Agriculture for some time for the encouragement of the large White York. In the greater part of the Free State there is no great difficulty with regard to that. Producers, bacon curers and everyone concerned seem to agree that that is the best type of pig for the greater part of the Free State. When we go towards the Six County Border we are met with a difficulty. There is a good deal of trading across the Border in small pigs and porkers. As Senators are aware, in that part of the country there is a peculiar trade. The farmer kills the pigs on his own premises and brings in the carcasses for sale to the market. The pigs that do best in that market are what is known as the Ulster breed. Now, there is a great deal of dissatisfaction amongst producers where the two lines meet. We in the Department permit Ulster pigs—boars and sows—to be kept in certain counties such as Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan, but when you come to, say, the northern part of Leitrim or of Meath, the pig producers there say that they would do better with the Ulster pig than with the large White York. There is, therefore, at least certain dissatisfaction with the policy the Department is pursuing along the Border lines— between the two zones where the Ulster pigs are kept and where the large White York pigs are kept. That is a matter that the tribunal will have to consider.
Paragraph (b) of Section 4 of the motion deals with the marketing of pigs. Some people believe, and I think there is a certain amount of substance in it, that there is great waste in the marketing of pigs in this country. At places where pigs are offered for sale, whether it be at fairs—they are not now offered so much at fairs as they used to be—or, as is more often the case, at railway stations the practice is to have three or four buyers representing three or four different factories. It is obvious that there is a certain amount of waste in that way. That is also a question that the tribunal will consider. The question of curing comes under paragraph (c). We had a great reputation for bacon in this country. I believe we still have a great reputation for the bacon we produce. That was due to various causes. Probably one of the reasons for that reputation was the type of curing that was done here. That type of curing is being departed from, to a certain extent. It, too, is a question that will have to be investigated by the tribunal. The question of veterinary inspection comes under paragraph (d). That is a paragraph that has created a certain amount of comment. We have been asked why should we want to interfere with people with regard to the hygiene of pig production. Well, we know from experience in the Department—I think people generally know because figures have been published from time to time—that in certain areas pigs are much more liable to tuberculosis than in others. The popular belief is that it is due to feeding on milk. Whether that is really true or not it is hard to say, but there is very strong evidence to show that it is due to milk feeding that these pigs get affected with tuberculosis. An investigation into that matter and the getting of some knowledge on the subject might lead to a big improvement in the position. It might not entail very much expense if the thing is done in a proper way and the proper remedies are pointed out to the farmers living in the areas concerned.
The bigger question about veterinary inspection comes in on the bacon side. Under the Fresh Meat Export Act we are bound to examine the carcasses of pigs that are exported as pork. We are bound under the Act to give a certificate that the meat is of good quality and free from disease before it can be exported. On the other hand, there is no provision for the inspection of pork that is to be consumed at home, and there is no provision for the inspection of bacon. We have, to a small extent, got markets outside of Great Britain for bacon, and in some of these markets we are bound to give a veterinary certificate that the bacon is free from disease and so on. It is not so easy to do that in present circumstances, although of course, we naturally do it when these markets require it. We think the tribunal should examine the position to see whether the provisions of the Fresh Meat Act should not be extended both to the fresh meat that is offered for consumption at home and to bacon, whether it is offered for consumption at home or abroad. Section 5 of the motion deals with the control of exports. In every market, practically, that we had any touch with at all there were quotas for the amount of bacon and pork allowed in. Even on the British market now there is a proposal that a quota system be instituted. If quotas are put on in any of these foreign markets and if our consumption at home is limited, as it is of course, we may be up against the position that we can only produce a certain number of pigs and must not go beyond that. Therefore, the question of the control of exports of live pigs is rather an important question now, or probably will be in the near future. Section 6 of the motion is one that is usually put in when a tribunal like this is being set up. The purpose of it is to cover matters that we might forget.
Section 7 is to meet a situation where the tribunal might make recommendations to the Executive Council that would involve legislation. It would, of course, be a great help to the Executive Council and afterwards to the Oireachtas—if the Executive Council were to put any proposals before the two Houses—to know what would be the probable administrative expense. We could, of course, without coming to the Dáil or the Seanad appoint a Commission on this matter, but it would not have the same legal authority as a tribunal of this kind. The reason why a tribunal like this is being set up is because it can subpoena witnesses to deal with certain matters which, I think, it should have power to inquire into. I need hardly say that information of a confidential nature that the tribunal might require from a bacon factory with regard to costings and so on, would be treated as confidential and not issued to the public. But the tribunal might also require information that would not be confidential which, unless it had the power to subpoena witnesses it might find it very difficult to procure. The tribunal will have much the same power in that way as the Tariff Commission.
I expect that when the tribunal has examined the position the members will draw up some sort of a report. Whether they will draw up a unanimous, or majority or minority reports, of course remains to be seen. It is only when these reports have been presented that the business of the Executive Council and of the Oireachtas would commence. As in the case of the Tariff Commission they will present, I take it, a report to the Executive Council. The Executive Council then would have to consider the report. If the Executive Council decide to promote legislation as a result of the report of the tribunal, of course that legislation would come before the two Houses. I am not sure, however, that the tribunal is certain to present a report of that sort, because a big number of the proposals or suggestions that were put to us for dealing with the whole industry were of a kind that might be dealt with without any legislation at all. That is to say they were proposals that could be adopted by the producers and by the bacon factories, at least for a time on a voluntary basis. I do not know of course what view the tribunal may take of these proposals when they come to examine them, but it is possible the tribunal might make a report which would not involve legislation, and of course it is possible that they would. In any case, if legislation were necessary it would have to come before the two Houses. I do not think there is anything further I need say at this stage.
