Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 18 Mar 1936

Vol. 20 No. 30

Public Business. - Agricultural Seeds Bill, 1935—Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Agriculture (Dr. Ryan)

This Bill provides for the better regulation and control of the seed business, particularly in relation to the import of seed, in order that where seed is imported it will be properly invoiced so that the farmer who is buying seed may be in a position to know exactly what he is getting. He is also safeguarded at a later stage as against the person from whom he purchases the seeds, if he has been in any way deceived or wronged. The Bill also provides for the growing of seed. Under Sections 11 and 12 regulations can be made to deal with the flowering or even the growing of plants in certain prescribed areas where an attempt has been made to produce certain agricultural seeds. The Bill also deals with the cleaning of seeds, making the cleaning of seed a business. Under the Bill it will be necessary to have a permit to carry on the business of cleaning seeds. That business, of course, is well defined in one section. The Bill codifies the legislation on seeds, previous legislation being repealed when the Bill comes into operation.

I should just like to deal with some of the sections in order to clear the minds of Senators on certain points that may arise. Sections I and 2 will not give any trouble to anybody. Section 3 gives power to the Minister to prohibit the import of seeds, and then Section 4 gives the Minister power to give permits for the importation of seeds. The necessity for these two sections is that I am afraid we cannot regulate this business properly unless we take power to prohibit the import of seeds, because there are many foolish people who are impressed by advertisements etc., of certain varieties of seeds, which have been already tried out in the various agricultural colleges here and by the county instructors, and found not to be suitable. The only way we could deal with those seeds would be to prohibit the import of them entirely. If, on the other hand, a farmer has a good case for the importation of any particular variety of seed, he can get a permit under Section 4, or the seed importers and wholesalers may import certain varieties under the same section. Section 5 exempts seed in packets from this particular part of the Bill. These are samples that come into the seed merchants or importers under 1 lb. in weight, and they will, of course, be exempt, so that the seed merchants may have freedom at least to get in samples of certain varieties without going to the trouble of getting a permit.

Sections 6 and 7 deal with the business of cleaning seeds. For the moment there is no intention to classify any business as a seed cleaning business except that of cleaning grass seeds and clovers. It may be necessary later, although I do not see the possibility of it at the moment, to classify the business of cleaning other seeds besides grass seeds as a business under this section. The business of cleaning grass seeds or clovers is a rather technical business, and it needs a certain amount of inspection and supervision to see that the farmer is safeguarded in getting the seeds for which he pays. Therefore, it would require the supervision provided for in this section.

Section 8 is taken from the old Act dealing with what may be prescribed as injurious weeds or impurities in seeds, and does not require any explanation. Section 9 is a section that has given a great deal of trouble. It is the only section, as a matter of fact, that came in for discussion in the Dáil. That section deals with packet seeds. It lays down certain regulations —that they must have on them, under certain circumstances, the name of the firm and the date on which they were packed, and certain other particulars that may be prescribed. The section, as amended in the Dáil, is, I think, as satisfactory as we can hope to make it.

Section 10 deals with invoices and is necessary, as Senators who have had any experience of the import of seed wheat will admit. A great deal of wheat was imported during the spring of 1934 and the spring of 1935. Some wheat was imported as seed wheat and, when it was sown, it became obvious that some winter variety had been sold as spring seed. It was doubtful, as the law stood, whether these particular farmers had any case in law unless they had got a written guarantee with the seed that they bought. Luckily, however, I think they were in all cases compensated, but it is well to see in such cases in the future that the farmer will be perfectly safeguarded.

Sections 11 and 12 deal with the growing of seeds. Some experiments have been carried out during the last few years here in the growing of root crop seeds such as beet and mangolds in particular. So far as these experiments have gone it would appear that if we are to produce good seed for these crops, if the experiment will prove in the future years that they can be produced; if they are to be as successful as we expect them at the moment to be, and that we are getting down to the growing of these seeds in a commercial way, it will be necessary to have areas where cross-fertilisation can be eliminated. For instance, if the grower tries to grow beet seeds and if in the adjoining field mangolds go to seed, his whole crop of beet seeds would be destroyed because, of course, there would be great danger of cross-fertilisation between the mangolds and the beet and we would get sugar mangolds instead of beet seed. This would not be at all satisfactory for the manufacture of sugar. We are, therefore, providing in this Bill that in prescribed areas we may make an order prohibiting the inflorescence of certain plants.

If these mangolds do not come to the flowering stage there would be no danger. In most cases that would be sufficient. If it is not sufficient, then recourse would have to be had to the powers in Section 12—control of the growing of plants in certain cases, that is prohibiting the growth of certain plants in that area. I am only giving that as an example of how this Section 12 may be operated. It may be necessary also in the case of other seeds such as cabbages, brussels sprouts and so on that there should be some such powers in special areas. Section 13 is not a departure from existing powers, the powers of inspection and taking samples, except that it gives somewhat wider powers in regard to taking samples at fairs and markets. Apart from that, the powers are quite the same as at present. Sections 14 and 15 are the usual sections in a Bill of this kind, and Section 16, as I have already said, repeals the existing legislation and, in fact, makes this a codifying Bill of seed legislation.

Mr. Baxter

I am not going to enter into any discussion of the Bill because, on the whole, there is no objection to the general principle. I want to raise a couple of points. There may be nothing in them but I am raising them to get information. Of course, it is right to say, no matter what the Minister thinks about this question of licensing, that as a principle it is very unacceptable. It may be necessary but all this policy of restrictions, harassing and annoying is definitely putting certain people in the community under a disadvantage that they are not accepting very gently or quietly. Under this Bill the farmer would not be able to be certain that the best seeds are sold to him unless certain regulations or restrictions are observed. In Sections 2 and 3 there are powers about the restriction of the imports of certain seeds. Section 4 indicates that these seeds may be imported under licence. The Minister informs us that a farmer or dealer in seeds will be able to obtain a licence. I have not read the Official Report of the debate on this Bill in the Dáil, but we should have a definite assurance from the Minister that any legitimate trader with a reputation for having been straight and fair in his transactions with regard to the imports of seeds in the past will be entitled to get a licence, and that there will be no picking and choosing between one or two men in a town, a system of choosing in which one would be able to obtain a licence to import something that the other will not. Section 6 indicates that "no person shall carry on, otherwise than under and in accordance with a licence... the business of cleaning for commercial purposes agricultural seeds to which this section applies." I wonder to how many people is that section going to apply. I wonder to how many businesses is it going to apply.

At the end of the page in (5) (b) there is a point I should like to see cleared. Under that sub-section there are certain people exempted. "The following transactions shall not be deemed to be the carrying on of the business of cleaning agricultural seeds" and then we have (b) "The cleaning, by a farmer on his own premises, of seeds produced by him on land in his own occupation." I want to know does that mean that the farmer is exempt and that the section is not going to apply to a farmer and that he need not get a licence to clean seeds on his own premises? Is the farmer free to sell these seeds produced by himself on land in his own occupation and cleaned by himself? It is the custom in my part of the country for a great many small farmers to clean grass seeds and take them to the market or to the business men in the town. They sell these to the seed merchant and he sells them to the public. Is it the idea that the farmer can clean these seeds in his own premises and that they are cleaned for the purpose of sale? I think that sub-section needs to be made clear.

With regard to Sections 11 and 12 I suppose if we are going to continue growing beet it is quite right that we should produce the seed in the country. I think the Minister ought to take powers for that purpose. But if the powers are going to be made available, it is in my opinion going very far when you have a situation like this: that a farmer may have grown say two acres of mangolds, and in that area there are a few men growing beet seeds. It is very hard if you have to go to the man who is growing the mangolds and tell him "Extra labour will have to be employed by you; there are mangolds in your farm going to seed and you have got to pull them." This is, very definitely, a harassing restriction and it seems to me an injustice. If that type of development is going to take place in an area, I presume the growing is going to be done under some sort of control by the beet factories and under some system of subsidising the grower. I think it is rather unfair to the man next door that he is going to be asked to pay extra labour in order that a certain type of seed may be raised, seed which may be absolutely no use to him as being for a crop which he may not grow on his farm at all. The man is to be restricted in the management of his farm. Somebody is to be in a position to go to him and say he is not to grow a certain crop at all. I am not suggesting that is going to be done. I think on the whole that the Minister and the officials of the Department are all sensible and reasonable human beings. They understand farming. But it seems to me that it is going too far to put the farmer in the position that an official may come to him and order him in that way. The Minister ought to reconsider the question as to whether or not it is essential to take such an extravagant power. He should consider whether that provision might not be deleted because, I think, it should be possible to achieve the desired end without any power so drastic as that. The Minister for Agriculture of to-day is not going to act so drastically but we do not know what the next Minister may be like. If he desires to act drastically, then we should place him under the obligation to introduce the necessary legislation. I do not think that it is right to put such power in the hands of officials.

On Section 15, I should like to inquire how the measure is to be made operative. The Weeds and Seeds Act is generally enforced at present by the county instructor. Are any additions to be made to the staff in order to give effect to this measure, or is the work to be done in the same way as samples of seed are taken and general supervision exercised in respect of the distribution of seed in the country? I should like to have information on that point.

Mr. Toal

The only part of the Bill in which I am interested is that which refers to grass seed. That is a very important crop in the county from which I come. I am sure it is not the intention of the Minister or the Government to interfere with the cleaning of the seeds by the farmers for marketing purposes. If it were so intended, it would be a very serious matter for the farmers. As I understand, the intention of the Government is to safeguard the farmers in the buying of seed for spring sowing purposes and to see that it is machined properly. I know that that is necessary. A great variety of seed that is not suitable for sowing again gets into the grass seed and it is necessary that it should be removed from the grass seed. That is essential, but a monopoly should not be given to cleaners in any particular district or county. In County Monaghan, which produces an enormous quantity of grass seed, there is, so far as I know, only one cleaner. I do not think it would be right that any monopoly should be given as regards cleaning. The Bill is, so far as grass seed is concerned, a step in the right direction so long as it does not interfere with the cleaning of the seeds by the farmers themselves for marketing purposes, which I am sure is not the intention.

Mr. Jameson

The remarks we have heard from our farmer Senators astonish me. When I read this Bill, I asked myself if I were living in a democratic country or under what sort of order I was living. We are going to give our Minister for Agriculture power to do whatever he pleases with the whole of our seed problem. I wonder if farmer Senators have read the Bill. This Bill provides, in the first place, that the classes of seed which shall be called "agricultural seed" for the purpose of the Bill may be named from time to time by the Minister, and any seed whatever which is imported at present may, on the ipse dixit of the Minister, be regarded as “agricultural seed” and come within the provisions of the Bill. I am interested to a small extent in growing garden seeds, and one carries on largely by importing seed. That is the most interesting part of the work. Hereafter, if influence is brought to bear on the Minister by some section of gardeners he can prohibit the bringing in of any of this seed and stop the whole of our operations. Already the conditions connected with the importation of plants have practically prevented any of us in the Free State from competing with our neighbours across Channel. One cannot get these small plants through the Customs in time. They are dead when they arrive, so that the whole arrangement of our horticulture is knocked out. I do not think that any benefit is to be gained by this country by giving the Minister the powers outlined in this Bill.

Coming to agricultural seeds which are, I suppose, what farmers are interested in, it is a strange procedure to tell any farmer that he is not to buy foreign seed except he gets a licence, although he knows his land requires some particular seed. He is to go with his hat in his hand to the Minister and beg a licence to buy seed which, he knows, is absolutely necessary for his land. What are we coming to? I remember a time when there was not good malting barley in some areas. We, who were buying large quantities of malting barley, imported a lot of special seed and sold it to the farmers. We picked out those farmers and sold their seed for them next year if they were not able to sell it themselves. That led to a great improvement. At the end of some years, it was necessary again to import seed because the home seed had gone down in quality and was not producing the high standard of barley which was required. I do not know how farmers manage this matter now. They must import seed somehow because the quality of Irish barley is very good. To give the Minister power to say to a farmer who knows the kind of seed which ought to go into a barley field that he cannot import that seed without a licence is to go very far. It is a terrible power to give to any Minister and I cannot understand why our farmers are allowing such a Bill to pass without comment. I do not know what our Minister proposes to do. He is getting power to regard any seed as agricultural seed. He is getting power to prohibit the importation of that seed. He is getting power to issue licences to people to import a certain class of seed which may be either for direct sowing or for selling purposes. This is a wonderful country for honesty but if power were given to a Minister in some other countries to deal with all the people in a certain trade by means of licences, I know what would happen. It would be a very remunerative job, but there can be no question that it would be a very bad principle to go on. Our farmers surely know their own business, and therefore, I suggest, it would be a very bad thing indeed, so far as this seed question is concerned, to make them subject entirely, in the carrying on of their operations, to the will of a Minister: that they must have permission from him as to whether or not they can import the seed that they believe is most suitable for growing on their land. If this Bill is passed, the farmers of the country are going to be put in that position. Under this Bill the whole tillage system of the country is being put into the hands of the Minister for Agriculture. I do not care what the Minister's knowledge is, I submit that what is proposed in this Bill is not only entirely undemocratic and wrong, but that it is putting bureaucracy into a position in which it can do an infinite amount of harm to agriculture, our greatest industry.

I ask, how in the world is anyone to know what particular class of seeds best suits the land that I hold? It is nonsense to suggest that anyone knows that better than I do. Evidently there is not much use in my talking in this strain if the farmers in this assembly are going to let this Bill go through, and if a Minister for Agriculture is going to be allowed to do what he likes with the seed problem so far as it concerns our tillage farmers. If the tillage farmers of the country are satisfied to be placed in the position that I have outlined, then I suppose there is nothing more to be said except to say that all this kind of legislation shows where the country is going.

I take it the idea behind this Bill is to get all the seed required produced by our own farmers, and to be in the position eventually of not requiring to import any seed. People who have had experience of the growing of corn know quite well that if all foreign seed is to be kept out of the country, and that if none is to be imported to improve the breeds cultivated here, then the country is taking a path that is going to lead to disaster. If the Minister knows anything about the growing of corn he ought to know that. I do not see why we should take away from our farmers the management of their own business. The Minister has not told us what gain this is going to be for the country. He did tell us about the experiments that it is proposed to carry out, with the object of getting the wonderful new beet that he spoke of. He said that in order to carry out these experiments it may be necessary to stop people growing other crops in the adjoining fields. The Minister told us all that, but he did not tell us why he distrusts the farmers in the matter of importing the seeds that they think best to grow on their land.

We all remember what happened some years ago in connection with the potato crop. In order to save that crop in this country we had to import a special type of seed. The result is that we now have good potato crops and good seed. If the Minister does not wake up to the importance of this in time, it is not unlikely that we may be faced with a similar disaster in the case of other crops some time in the future. That may be the outcome of the policy we find outlined in this Bill. I do not care how good a man may be in a matter of such importance as this, I should much prefer to trust to the commonsense of our farmers to select the seed that they think best for their land and to manage their farms in their own way rather than put that power into the hands of any Department or any individual. I believe that our farmers are absolutely wrong in allowing a Bill of this kind to go through and in giving power to any Department or to any individual to interfere with them in the carrying on of their business. I cannot understand why our farmers should not be allowed to buy any seed except the seed selected by the Department or what benefit the country is going to get out of a policy of that kind. It is provided in the Bill that farmers who act contrary to what is laid down in it will render themselves liable to very heavy fines. It is right, of course, that if regulations are made they should be observed.

The Bill places a restriction on the business of cleaning agricultural seeds. It is not easy to understand how that provision will be operated. As far as I can gather, the farmer who merely cleans seed on his own premises which is intended to be sown in his own land is going to be allowed to do that. What is the restriction on the cleaning, by a farmer on his own premises, of seed produced by him on land in his occupation? It is this: that it will not be deemed to be the business of carrying on cleaning. The section does not say what the farmer is to do with that seed. The position is clear enough if he sows the seed on his own land, but it is not clear as to whether he can sell any of the seed that he does not require to a neighbour.

Mr. Johnson

If there is no prohibition against selling, then is it not obvious that he can do so?

Mr. Jameson

In that case, would he not be deemed to be carrying on the business of cleaning agricultural seeds? If he carries on that business, then he cannot sell without a licence. The wording of the section seems doubtful to me. I think that even Senator Johnson would find it difficult to say what the section really means.

Mr. Johnson

It seems to me to be simple enough.

Mr. Jameson

Then there are Sections 11 and 12. I listened to what the Minister had to say on these sections. I gathered from what he said that, in cases where experiments are being carried out for the improvement of some particular seeds, people in the neighbourhood who may be growing mangolds or other crops may be prohibited from doing so if the opinion is held that their doing so would interfere with the seed experiments. Yet, as far as I could gather from the Minister, the experiments undertaken by the Department have not quite reached a sufficiently advanced stage to enable it to say whether the particular seed that they are trying to get can be used with advantage. In view of that, I do not think the Minister should take the general powers that he is taking in this Bill to prohibit the growing of other crops in areas where these seed experiments are to be carried out until he is positively certain that the cultivation of the seed that he has in mind is going to be a success. The Minister is seeking power in this Bill the exercise of which is likely to cause annoyance to a great many people. The Minister's excuse for that is that the experiments must be protected. It strikes me that this is a most extraordinary Bill to be brought into the legislature of a country which claims to be a land of freedom. I have never read anything like it. It is exactly the sort of thing that one would expect a Russian Minister to bring in dictating to his farmers, but that the Minister for Agriculture in the Irish Free State should dictate to our farmers in the way that he is doing in this Bill and that they should stand for that passes my comprehension.

Colonel Moore

There is a matter of some importance that I wish to draw attention to. It concerns people who live in what was formerly part of the County Dublin. It is now within the city boundary. When their district was in the county they had the services of the horticultural instructors employed by the Dublin County Committee of Agriculture. They are no longer able to get the services of those instructors. The city authorities do not engage horticultural instructors or send them around to instruct the people. Senators are aware that a great deal of damage is done to fruit trees of all kinds by the parasites which infect them. Apple and pear trees can be very badly affected by these parasites. Most people are not very well informed about the best methods of dealing with parasites. I am sure if they knew what to do they would take the necessary steps to increase and improve their supply of apples. As many sorts of trees are liable to parasitical attacks it is a great misfortune that they cannot be kept apart from others. The matter really depends upon the city being induced to appoint horticultural instructors in the new districts within the city boundary.

Mr. Wilson

I want to say a word or two about Senator Jameson's remarks, as to the lackadaisical attitude of farmers towards a Bill of this sort which gives power to the Minister to deal with seeds. As a matter of fact the position is that the Minister has the power already. This is legislation to deal with matters that have been already dealt with in the manner described. For example, seed wheat cannot be imported without a licence. The Minister has that power under the Cereals Acts, so that this measure more or less codifies the various steps taken during the last few years to deal with seeds. I had no difficulty whatever in getting British seed wheat. I sow Essex seed every year. The local price is comparatively high, but it can be got from Essex, cleaned and double cleaned, for the same price at which the ordinary supply is sold here. There is no objection so far in getting it under licence. The same thing applies to oats. I believe it is now difficult to get Scotch oats. I have very good oats and very good barley. I do not know if the seed will deteriorate. I had no difficulty in getting seed barley, and I had a yield last year of 32 barrels to the Irish acre. I never had such a yield, I also managed to get it sold at 16/- a barrel before the market price was fixed. I am not interested in the growing of beet seed as that does not affect County Dublin.

I know several people engaged in the cabbage business who grow a certain class of seed, and who also supply their neighbours. They are seed merchants of a small kind in their own way. There are also specialists in cauliflowers and savoys. I do not see why that class of people should not be helped. They get £1 per lb. regularly for cabbage seed that is grown locally. It is a remunerative business, and if it can be developed by any regulations that are brought in there is no harm in doing so. The Minister is there as a guide for farmers, and in case of necessity he is not going to refuse to permit of the introduction of whatever farmers consider to be necessary to develop their business. As far as my experience goes I have no complaint to make of interference.

Dr. Ryan

As to the point raised by Senator Colonel Moore, while it does not come under this Bill, it would come in under the Agricultural Act of 1931 as amended in 1933. Under that Bill the city was empowered to provide horticulture instructors for residents in the city. I am afraid if instructors are not being provided any complaints should be directed to the City Council.

Colonel Moore

I did that, and I was repudiated. They stated the city had nothing to do with it.

Cathaoirleach

It is outside the scope of this Bill.

Dr. Ryan

I am afraid I am powerless so. Senator Baxter wanted to know if licences were being issued for certain seeds would all traders be treated alike. Certainly. Senator Wilson told the House that the powers sought in this Bill have been in operation for the last two or three years. Supposing we decided to allow in Red Marvel wheat seed everyone would get a licence, irrespective of who the applicant might be. On the other hand, if we decided not to allow in what is called imported Scotch seed oats—a high sounding name that brought a certain price—we would not do so.

That is the sort of thing we want to deal with. If some pure line pedigree seeds are allowed in then we say that every farmer is entitled to import them. We might allow 2 cwt. or a barrel but if we allow in any of these seeds every farmer gets the same privilege. That is how this power has been used up to the present. I was asked to how many businesses would the provision dealing with seed cleaning apply. It applies only to two firms at present. I believe that in the grass seed cleaning business there will not be more than three or four firms at any time. It would be an advantage to have more than one because, as Senator Total pointed out, where you have only one buyer farmers are not likely to do as well as if there was competition. We are anxious to have at least three or four seed cleaners so that there will be sufficient competition for what farmers produce. A farmer is free to sell seeds cleaned by himself. Senator Jameson held that that position was not clear. It is perfectly clear. When we ask the Oireachtas to pass a Bill making certain restrictions with regard to the cleaning of seeds, and if certain people are to be exempt from the restrictions, it is perfectly clear that they are exempt altogether from that clause and can do what they like. If farmers clean seed that they produce they are free to sell it, to sow it or to give it away for nothing. They can do what they like with it. A farmer who buys seed may clean it for use by himself. That is not called a seed cleaning business.

Senator Baxter said that we should be very conservative about compelling farmers to pull flowering seeds. No doubt we will be. There are two sections dealing with that question. The first section gives power to stop certain plants from flowering. That is as far as it will be necessary to go. There is power also to stop farmers in an area from growing these plants at all. There are, of course, certain people in the country with whom it is very hard to deal, and under certain of our Acts power is taken to compel them to do certain things. They will not do them in certain cases, and then we have power to get the work done ourselves and charge them with the expense of doing it. That, however, takes a long time as you have first to go into court and get the order. If the same thing were to occur year after year it would involve us in a very tedious procedure. We, therefore, take power to say to such a farmer: "Well, we will not allow you to grow that plant at all in future because it is so very difficult to get you to comply with the regulations." That is a power that will only be used in the last resort. I am only taking beet seed as an example.

I am told that in places where they grow this beet seed in Germany and Holland, there are other beets grown side by side, but they are, of course, harvested before they come to the flowering stage. In the same way mangolds can be grown beside those which are intended for seed if they are not allowed to come to the flowering stage. Senator Baxter does not like giving those drastic powers, because he says another Minister might come along in the future, who might not be so reasonable as the present Minister. I agree with him to that extent, that you may get another Minister who may not be so reasonable, but if you do get an unreasonable Minister, who feels that he should have these powers, he will look for the powers, and the fact that they are not given now will not prevent his looking for them. I have found it necessary on certain occasions to take rather drastic powers here, and I have found the Seanad always willing to give them to me.

I am asked who will administer this Act. The very same people. We shall have three or four inspectors who are in charge of the Weeds and Seeds section and they will have the assistance of the county instructors. I believe there will not be any necessity to increase the number of inspectors. If there is any increase of officials required, of course, it would be in the number of inspectors in the Department, but I do not think there will be any necessity. It is quite true, as Senator Jameson suggested, that under this Act I might include any horticultural seeds. I have not any intention of doing so at present, whatever way I might be influenced as time goes on. I do not think, as long as I am Minister, that any farmer will ever come to me hat in hand. That has been done away with. In fact, when they do come, they are more likely to come in a menacing attitude. In any case, I should not like to see a farmer coming to me hat in hand. As Senator Wilson pointed out, we have already these powers. We have exercised these powers for the last three or four years. We have not allowed any seed barley in from other countries, apart from a number of samples for the agricultural colleges and for other experimental purposes to see if it was possible to improve the very good variety of barley we have in the country. No farmer would think of importing seed barley because he knows that Sprat Archer which we have here is the best that we can get. In fact, other countries think the same thing.

The same remarks apply to potatoes. We may import perhaps a number of small samples of potatoes in order to try them out in the agricultural colleges to see if they are as good as the varieties we have already or if we can get a cross between one of those varieties and our own varieties. We are getting a reputation in very many countries for our seed potatoes. I think we are exporting seed potatoes now in a commercial way with very great success to a number of countries. That is a business that has been built up in recent years and it is a business that is increasing. We are getting a great name all over the world—in at least three continents—as a country that is producing the best seed potatoes. There is, therefore, surely no necessity why any farmer should send out for a large consignment of seed potatoes. Some agricultural colleges carry on the business of bringing in small quantities of different varieties of seeds which we want to try out here. That applies to oats, barley, potatoes and the other principal crops.

Senator Jameson says that this Bill shows where the country is going. I think it really shows where the country has gone. I would point out to Senator Jameson as regards the powers in the Bill, that we have all these powers already, and that this is really a codifying measure. I admit that we are taking certain powers here that we had not before, but not in the direction that Senator Jameson thinks. We already had power to prohibit the importation of certain seeds, and also power to let them in under licence. We are merely seeking now to have this power incorporated in legislation relating to seeds instead of having it in Cereals Acts and Imports Acts. Senator Jameson says that as we are only experimenting with the growing of beet seed, we should not take these powers under Sections 11 and 12, until we see whether these experiments are a success. I only took beet seed as an example. Senator Wilson has given the House examples of other seeds, such as brussels sprouts seed and cabbage seed. Is it not perfectly obvious that these powers will not be used unless the growing of seeds on a commercial scale is going to be embarked upon? We are not going to use these powers under Sections 11 and 12 without cause. Surely no Minister, even a more unreasonable Minister than the present one, would use them without cause. I do not think there need be any fear that these clauses will be used unnecessarily.

The only criticism of the Bill is that it appears to be somewhat drastic, but I find in the case of all legislation that when you analyse a Bill, it appears to be more drastic than it turns out to be. For instance, I do not know how we could deal with the question of seed wheat unless we first prohibited the import of it and then say that we will give permits. It would be a very difficult matter to draw up a Bill in which you could deal with it in any other way. I think this is the simplest way of doing it, because when we issue a permit for the importation of the seed we may attach conditions if we have a suspicion of a certain importer—I mean an importer not living in this country, but living outside the country. If we have a suspicion of the exporter from the other country—an importer into this country—we may be somewhat more drastic in our conditions than we would be with a reputable firm. It is really such a difficult matter to deal with that I think we have in certain cases to deal with these people on their reputation and to deal with each case on its merits.

I would, therefore, plead that the Seanad in the first place, is not giving more power to the Minister for Agriculture than he has at the present time; and in the second place, that such power is necessary, as we are dealing with a very difficult subject. This legislation is entirely framed to see that the farmer gets a fair deal in the seed that he is importing, and that he gets an invoice that will enable him always to take action against the seller of the seed if it does not turn out to be what it purported to be.

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 25th March, 1936.