Seanad Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 27 May 1941

Vol. 25 No. 14

Public Business. - Milk (Regulation of Supply and Price) Amendment Bill, 1939—Committee and Final Stages.

Section 1 agreed to.

SECTION 2.

Mr. Byrne

I move amendment No. 1:—

Before Section 2 to insert a new section as follows:—

References in the Principal Act and this Act to the sale of milk shall be construed as including references to milk sold to a creamery and subsequently sent to and marketed within the Dublin sale area, and the Dublin District Milk Board, with the approval of the Minister, may impose such conditions as to purchase and sale of such milk as it may consider necessary to regulate milk supply and price within that sale area.

I should say in passing that when the original Act was introduced there were numbers of people sending milk to Dublin for years and that continued. They were paid at the same rates as people within the area. In two of the areas there were creameries but these creameries have disappeared. The individuals who used the creameries and were the original suppliers continued sending their milk to one of those who acted as a wholesaler. I do not wish in any way to deprive the farmers in one of these areas of the right to send milk by this creamery to Dublin, but I want a guarantee that no individual will have any privilege over wholesalers in the city. From time to time I have heard complaints that one particular firm is able to put milk on the market here cheaper than other wholesalers. It was said that distributors were able to buy milk from this particular concern as cheaply as from the producers. That is the story that is going around. I should like to see some provision so that if there was any abuse of that kind the Milk Board with the consent of the Minister would be able to check it. When speaking on the Committee Stage in the Dáil the Minister doubted if there was any abuse. I am not so satisfied. The reason for my amendment is that if there is any abuse the board could take whatever action they thought necessary, with the consent of the Minister. I do not want to take power from the hands of the Minister. I do not desire to do an injustice to anybody, but I do not want anyone to be in a privileged position. I am anxious there should be some provision whereby the Milk Board would have power and be able to exercise it when they satisfied the Minister that it was necessary to do so.

Mr. MacCabe

The statement made by Senator Byrne was not correct, that people can get milk from one particular creamery cheaper than from the producers. I think the whole idea is to give a monopoly to certain people in certain counties who supply milk to this and other cities. That is going too far. No creamery should be allowed to send milk to Dublin in a privileged manner.

Mr. Byrne

I was not referring to creameries in general. I was only referring to one institution. It has what I claim is a special privilege.

Mr. MacCabe

Is it in order to refer to this?

Cathaoirleach

The Senator can proceed.

Mr. MacCabe

The creameries should be allowed to supply milk here. I have no doubt that, if they were allowed, the creameries would send more milk here, and consumers would receive it at a much cheaper price. If we were honest about our work, and were prepared to supply something to the poor living in the cities in the way of milk, we ought to try to get it conveyed here and sold as cheaply as possible. The price charged in the city here is anything from 1/8 to 1/10 and up to 2/- per gallon, whereas down the country it is sold at 6d. or 7d. per gallon. I admit that you could not convey milk to Dublin at that price, but the producers would be well satisfied to sell it here at 1/- a gallon, and it should be distributed to consumers in this city at 1/4 per gallon. That is what I wish to convey to the Minister, and the only way that can be done is to give a clear field to the creameries in the South of Ireland.

Mr. O'Callaghan

I have no objection to the creameries, particularly those in the south, sending milk to Dublin, but I think that the suppliers of milk to these creameries should be placed in the same position with regard to regulations as the suppliers in the cities. There is a control exercised over them that is not exercised over suppliers to creameries. There is no supervision exercised over the latter regarding the buildings in which cows are housed, or the conditions under which milk is produced. As long as there are equal conditions for all, I have no objection.

Dr. Ryan

The amendment, as worded, would give the board a certain amount of control over the supply of milk coming from creameries and that is already provided for in the Bill. Two classes of creameries send milk to Dublin. The first class had the right to send milk in under the Principal Act. They are being limited as to the amount they may send in. The second class includes those who supplied milk to Dublin during the stoppage at the end of 1939. They are limited to the amount they sent during that period. The point with which Senator Byrne desires to deal is not covered by this amendment. The place which Deputy Byrne wants to get at is, I think, Edenderry. They were a creamery but they failed and they went into the liquid milk business in Dublin. They hold a licence to collect milk from suppliers and send it to Dublin, but that licence limits them to their present suppliers, so that they cannot enlarge their business to any great extent. The only addition they could make to their business would be by their suppliers getting more cows. They can get no new suppliers. There is, I think, no danger from that source and this amendment is not necessary. I am afraid the amendment would not cover the case the Senator has in mind because the limitation would have to be made under the Creamery Act and not under this Bill.

Mr. Byrne

I accept what the Minister says, that the amendment is loosely drafted. I have no desire to give the Dublin Milk Board any more control over creameries than they have. I do not want to prevent people sending in milk from Edenderry, but I do not want people to be in a privileged position so that they can sell more cheaply than others. When the south of Ireland creameries send milk to Dublin, they get the same price as I get or anybody else gets. It is not fair to the people who have to pay that price that somebody else should supply milk more cheaply. All I am asking is that no section have a privilege over the other.

Dr. Ryan

They have not.

Mr. Byrne

In practice, they have. I have a great deal of experience and I know something about the matter. I am not antagonistic to anybody. I merely want to see that everybody gets fair play.

Dr. Ryan

Is the Senator referring to what Edenderry pays its own suppliers?

Mr. Byrne

No. They have to pay them but I want to see that they will not be able to sell more cheaply than other people.

Dr. Ryan

They cannot sell under the regulation price unless they do so illegally.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Sections 2 to 14 agreed to.

SECTION 15.

Professor Johnston

I move amendment No. 2:—

To delete sub-sections (2) and (3).

My object in putting down this amendment was to give point to some rather general remarks I made when this Bill was receiving Second Stage consideration. So far as I understand the position at present, there is a kind of protectionist ring around Dublin. Those who live in Dublin production area have the right to sell milk in the Dublin sales area and nobody living outside Dublin production area has got that right. Am I correct in that?

Dr. Ryan

That is right, except in relation to those who were suppliers when the Principal Act was passed.

Professor Johnston

The only exception to that general principle is that certain creameries, in Tipperary, I think, have a limited right to sell a certain amount of milk in the Dublin sales area. This Bill proposes to preserve that limited right but to preserve also the limitation. The object of my amendment is to allow creameries or anybody outside Dublin production area to sell milk in Dublin sales area on exactly the same terms as if he lived in Dublin production area. The proposal is that there should be complete free trade in milk and that the Dublin consumer should benefit by that. I suggest that the only way we can get a supply of milk for the Dublin consumer which is cheap as well as reliable is to facilitate the import of milk from foreigners in Tipperary and other parts of the country where milk production is one of the primary agricultural activities and where it can be produced more cheaply and under more natural and convenient conditions than it can in almost any other part of the country.

The principal effect of leaving out these two sub-sections would be to remove the limitation on these extern creameries as a source of supply for Dublin sales area. I think I suggested that it would be desirable, in the public interest, that a supply of milk from such a source should replace the present supply of milk which comes from Dublin cowsheds which, in the nature of things, cannot be satisfactory, as they are said to be somewhat insanitary. I would go further and say that the only hope of providing a cheap supply of reliable milk for the Dublin consumer, which ought not to exceed 4d. a quart in price, will be if you develop these somewhat distant creameries as a source of supply even if it means that there be some restriction on the production of milk in the Dublin production area.

Mr. Byrne

I am not clear as to what Senator Johnston wants to do. He is a man whose opinions I value and on most subjects he is well informed. I do not think he knows as much about this subject as he does about other subjects. I presume that his proposal is that the Twenty-Six Counties should be at liberty to send milk into Dublin. They would, I presume, get the fixed prices and we would have so much milk that we would not know what to do with it.

Mr. Quirke

At times.

Mr. Byrne

The whole point about this "ring" is that five counties have been supplying Dublin for many years. Everybody else who was sending milk to Dublin for a year or two years before the Act was passed is still entitled to send milk here. There are men from Tipperary, Cork and Kerry still sending milk to Dublin. Members of the Oireachtas who do not live in Leinster at all are sending milk to Dublin. At the time the Act was passed a large number of people in those five counties and other counties dairied the whole year round—even in winter, when it costs much more to produce milk than at other periods of the year. The result was that, when other people flooded the markets at other times of the year, the distributors brought milk down to such a price that the people sending it to Dublin could not possibly produce it. The idea underlying the Bill was to give those farmers sending milk to Dublin the cost of production and something for themselves.

We hear from time to time about farmers getting higher prices, and we have had many discussions and motions in this House about giving farmers a living wage, putting them in a position to pay a better wage to employees, and to employ more, and thus to get more people to live on the land. In this instance, something was done for a large number of farmers, not alone in the County of Dublin, but in the Counties of Wicklow, Meath and Kildare, and others not in the scheduled areas, such as Carlow and part of Wexford, where there are individual farmers who have been all the time sending milk to Dublin, and trying to get a price which would enable them to continue even under difficult conditions. We know that the milk had to be produced under the Milk and Dairies Act, or, as it was generally known, "The Clean Milk Act." The result was that anybody sending milk to Dublin had to get a special licence from the Dublin Board of Health, and had to have the premises in a certain state of repair, and so on.

It is ridiculous for Senator Johnston to tell us now that milk could be produced at a lower rate. If it is to be produced in Dublin, we should get the cost of production and a decent living. It cannot be produced and sold in Dublin at certain periods of the year at 1/4 a gallon. As I said the last day, what Senator Johnston visualises could be arranged if there were an all-the-year-round price. That could not be done under present conditions, where we are working on summer and winter prices, and I defy anybody to say it could. I have been in the trade long enough to know that. It cannot be produced in the winter at the prices suggested. I say, from practical knowledge and experience, that if this amendment is carried, it will simply nullify the Act.

Mr. Honan

The only circumstances that would prevent me from supporting the amendment by Senator Johnston is that it would not cure the existing evil. We are exporting subsidised milk to another State at the rate of about 6d. a gallon, in the form of butter. While we are seeking cheap food for our own people, if we are to subsidise milk or butter for anybody, why not do it for our own people of the towns and cities? There is a certain amount of free milk given to the very poor in the towns, I admit, and everybody is thankful for that, but free milk is not what is required at all. Cheap milk is needed. If this milk which is sent away in the form of butter, and subsidised by the taxpayers, were pasteurised at the creamery, it could be distributed to the people as food, and that would be a more practical use of the money than subsidies for people in another State. I am sure an organisation for distribution is not beyond the power of the Minister and his staff.

Practical people believe that that butter exported and subsidised at a very cheap rate should be used at home, either in the form of milk or butter—and especially in the form of milk given to the poor people. I would not in any way interfere with the legitimate business of the dairying institutions in and around Dublin, but twice the amount of milk could be used as is used at present if the price were reasonable. The subsidy on exports could be withdrawn and used at home and in that way the dairying communities around Dublin would still have their own market for their own milk at their own price.

Professor Johnston

In answer to Senator Byrne, I would like to say that I am not at all in favour of encouraging an outside supply of milk to the Dublin market, if that supply will come only in the summer time. Any contracts made with creameries or with anyone supplying milk should insist on an all-the-year-round supply, and no contract should be tolerated which does not include a provision that a reasonable proportion of the milk be supplied during the six winter months. Surely the creameries sending milk to Dublin from the south-west—although their milk supply does fall off considerably in the winter time—retain even in the winter months far more milk than is necessary to maintain any volume of whole milk sales they are likely to arrange with the Dublin consumers? The total amount of milk processed in that part of the country, even in the winter time, must be far in excess of the requirements of the Dublin consumers in the winter time.

I agree with the Senator who spoke against the policy of subsidising butter for export. It should be possible to sell butter at a price which includes no element of subsidy from the taxpayer. If by expanding that proportion of the creamery output which is consumed as whole milk in Dublin, a larger return can be made to the farmers in the dairying districts, that would go some little distance towards solving the problem which is now solved by the very undesirable method of subsidising the export of surplus butter.

Further, I would say in answer to Senator Byrne that the producer-retailer who lives conveniently near Dublin—say, within a radius of 20 miles—should be in a position to produce a tuberculin-tested grade of milk which does not require pasteurisation and which is better because it is not pasteurised. That kind of milk is admittedly the highest of all qualities of milk for human consumption and should command a price higher than the price I contemplate for this other milk from the creameries which is pasteurised. The main problem, as I see it, is to provide for that majority of the people of Dublin which is not very well off, a quantity of milk which is safe from the point of view of health and at the same time cheap. By cheap I mean that it should not cost more than 4d. a quart. I believe it should be possible to get milk at 4d. a quart for the people of Dublin, if these sources of supply in the large-scale producing areas are properly developed.

Mr. Madden

I was glad that Senator Honan raised the particular point which he raised. We had a very important meeting on Saturday, at which there were present representatives of all the Parties in the county, representatives from the county council and practically complete membership of the county committee of agriculture. The whole discussion hinged on what could be done to relieve the dairy farmer. It was pointed out that the Minister for Agriculture, some date anterior to this, said that the dairy farmer was hard hit and that his sympathy went out to him. We all appreciate that something must be done to rehabilitate agriculture in the country. Sixpence a gallon, which is being obtained at the moment, is not an economic price and, as a result, the very minimum of labour has been employed in the last four or five weeks, at a time when the farmer ought to be encouraged, because of the necessity for the increased production of food, to employ the maximum of labour. There was a great discussion on the terrible position of the agricultural community over a great many years.

It is all right to appeal to the Minister, to make speeches in the Seanad or Dáil, and to have all the broadcasting on behalf of the agricultural community, but as I said at the meeting on Saturday, you must have some tangible premises—you must have something to go on—if you go to a Minister, or the Government, and ask them to do something better for the farmer. In any case, the general consensus of opinion was that sixpence a gallon was not economic. That being so, something must be done to get a better price for milk. There, of course, you are up against many problems. The cost of living goes up. It was agreed that, at least, it should be 2d. per gallon more. Somebody pointed out that 1d. a gallon meant nearly £1,000,000. Then you are right up against it again. In the course of the discussion somebody made a point analogous to the point raised by Senator Honan. It was pointed out that a certain quantity of butter is used for home consumption—it is quite easy to determine the exact amount— and that a considerable quantity of butter is manufactured for the export trade. The meeting held that there should be a dividing line drawn between the home market and the export market. If the farmers generally were permitted to sell in the city and urban areas the milk that is being used for the manufacture of butter for export, they would get at least a uniform price, in season and out of season, of 1/- per gallon. We, and other members of the boards of health, know very well that the price we pay under the free milk scheme in the board of health is much more than that, but it was agreed at our meeting that 1/— could be realised.

I may say I was amazed at one point. The statement was made by a very responsible citizen at our meeting that there were thousands of poor people and others who want more milk and cannot get it in the City of Limerick. I state here authoritatively that I know exclusively rural areas where poor people and others can get scarcely sufficient milk for use in their tea, apart from having milk to drink, although it is recommended by medical opinion as being one of the most essential foods. In rural Ireland, in a dairying county such as County Limerick, they can get very little milk to drink. There is a scarcity of milk because the farmers are precluded from selling it. Only a limited number are allowed to sell it. The point raised by Senator Honan is very important and, as I said, it was analogous to one raised at a very serious discussion to which, I may say, Senator Martin O'Dwyer contributed. Farmers cannot sell milk indiscriminately. They must conform to the legislation passed in 1935. But while that legislation had some good effects, such as pasteurisation and improvement in hygiene, it has had serious reactions upon a big section of our poor and struggling community. Therefore, if something could be done along the lines suggested, if the farmers could be accommodated in that way, it would help to stabilise conditions and would result in a generous supply of a splendid food to the masses of our people who are precluded from having it at the moment.

Mr. Healy

If I understood Senator Johnston correctly, he is definitely opposed to the production of milk by the Dublin cowkeepers. In my opinion, milk can be produced as hygienically in Dublin as anywhere else, if proper restrictions are applied. The Dublin cowkeepers are producing milk under very strict supervision. There are dairy inspectors, sanitary staff and veterinary surgeons to inspect the herds and the dairies and the dairy yards where milk is produced. Senator Johnston should know very well that the Dublin cowkeepers put their cattle out to graze in the summer-time in the fields in the vicinity of the City of Dublin. The Dublin cowkeepers' cattle are out grazing in the open fields from some time in April, according to the conditions of the weather, up to the 1st November. It is true they are in the stall for the winter months. But some of us know the length of time that cows in farms in the country spend in the open fields and the length of time they spend in the cow-sheds during the winter months. How much time do cows in rural areas in the months of November, December and January spend in the fields as against the time they spend in the cow-sheds? I know perfectly well most of the time is spent in cow-sheds. In my opinion, the cow-sheds in Dublin are under much more strict supervision than are the cow-sheds in the farmyards throughout the country.

There is another advantage in milk being produced in the city or in its vicinity. If a strike should occur the milk is convenient to the city and can reach the consumers without any trouble. Other considerations also arise. Cowkeepers are heavy ratepayers in the City of Dublin. They pay big wages. A number of dairy boys are employed in the city. A very big percentage of men are also employed in milking operations. If it does mean that all that employment should be moved from the city to the country it would be a very serious matter for all those who follow their livelihood in that direction. I said before and I repeat now that Dublin milk is produced, in my opinion, under stricter supervision than it is being produced throughout rural areas and I cannot for the life of me see—I would like to be enlightened—what objection anybody can have to milk being produced in Dublin if it is produced under proper conditions, and I submit that it is produced under proper conditions in the City of Dublin where it is properly looked after.

Liam O Buachalla

I am afraid that I cannot agree to the recommendation of Senator Johnston that these two sections should be left out of the Bill, because the object of the Bill is to secure some reasonable measure of orderly marketing, and to secure as steady a supply of milk of high-grade quality at reasonable prices. If these two sections are deleted, as Senator Johnston suggests, and the market is thrown open to what he describes, for want of a better term at the moment, as free trading in milk, I see nothing ahead but chaos—irregular supply, difficulty in guaranteeing quality, and difficulty in regulating prices. I do suggest that if his suggestions were adopted, the position would be very much worse than it is at the moment; that, in fact, the deletion of these two sections would defeat the whole object of the Bill. Consequently, I would suggest to Senator Johnston to consider seriously the withdrawal of these amendments, because I do not think they are in the interests of the milk supply, either in the quality, prices, or any other aspect of the matter.

Mr. O'Dwyer

I would like to refer to the provision in these sections regarding the licensing of sending of milk to Dublin from the creameries. At the time the milk supply to Dublin was stopped an order was made that creameries in County Limerick could send up a supply of milk and I may say that I myself was very much in favour of sending up the milk; indeed, if I myself had had my way the milk strike would have been treated in a very different manner. I must say I was in a minority of one. The farmers objected to sending up milk. I did not agree with them, but after all, they looked upon it in the trade union spirit and I would ask the Minister very seriously not to insist on this because, undoubtedly, it will lead to a perpetuation of the bitterness and strife. It will enable certain creameries to pay larger prices and that will cause the cutting of supplies from other creameries and it will lead to great bitterness between the creameries.

On this main question of main supplies to the cities I would like to point out that, when all is said and done about the necessity of organising local supplies and having regulations as to the quality and security of contract, the fact remains that milk in Dublin and other cities is being sold at a price that the majority, or half, the population cannot pay. People cannot drink milk at the price it is being supplied. When milk is cheap in the country there ought to be some way of supplying cheaper milk in the cities. It may be that the cost of distribution may be too high and depôts were established to reduce costs considerably, but we must remember that there is not the consumption there should be. It might be possible that milk produced within the vicinity of the city could be produced at one price and it might be possible to allow in a cheap grade of milk to supply those who are not able to pay the higher price. The main thing is not a question of creameries or producers or anybody else; it is a question of supplying cheap milk to the inhabitants of the cities and towns.

Dr. Ryan

Senator Johnston I think was trying to achieve by this amendment that there would not be any limitation of milk coming in from the creameries. Well, this section applies only to creameries that are coming in as the result of supplying milk during the strike. That is a matter not worth bothering about because I presume that if the Seanad agrees with Senator Johnston's view the matter could be made right at the next stage, but I am afraid that the general principle Senator Johnston seeks to achieve by this Bill is in direct conflict with the whole legislation. Legislation was brought in to regulate the marketing of milk here and practically to confine the supply of milk to the five counties surrounding Dublin. When we brought in the 1935 Act it was recognised that suppliers outside these counties would have a distinct grievance if they were prevented from supplying milk, so it was provided in the 1935 Act that any supplier outside these counties who had established his connection would be permitted to continue to supply milk. It was also provided that all those creameries which had supplied milk more or less regularly—I think it was 45 weeks out of 52—would have the right to continue. I think Senator Johnston's intention is that all these creameries—that is the creameries who supplied milk before the strike and the outside suppliers—should be permitted to supply milk without any limitation. Well, that of course, if it were permitted, I am afraid would nullify practically everything we have done in the Principal Act, and I think the Principal Act has done a certain amount of good for the suppliers.

Professor Johnston

Has it brought cheaper milk?

Dr. Ryan

No. I remember when I was bringing in the Act I did not claim that it was likely to bring cheap milk, but I said the consumer would still get milk at the price he was getting it at but that the producer would get more. The consumer did not have to pay more, but there was a regular market and more satisfaction generally in the scheme. There were other matters raised. Another matter was this—take the creameries that came to our rescue during the strike. I promised these creameries on behalf of the consumers—I said, if you, the creameries, came to the rescue of the consumers here in Dublin I promise you will be permitted to continue when the strike is stopped.

It was obvious, of course, that we should reward them according to the effort they made. In other words, if they made a great effort to supply a good deal of milk, they should be permitted to supply a good deal in future. It is hardly reasonable to expect that those who only came to the rescue, more or less in a token way, by supplying a few gallons of milk should be allowed to send unlimited quantities now. Really what we are doing in this Bill is to permit them to send the same quantity, taking it on a weekly or monthly basis, that they supplied during that period. There were 47 creameries which came to the rescue at that time. These 47 creameries would be quite free to supply milk to Dublin for all time, but only seven of them have elected to remain in the business so that it does appear, taking the price here in the city and comparing with it the price down the country, that there is not very much in the Dublin business at all. I think the creameries that are in the Dublin business are not making any great fortunes as compared with the creameries that are not. At any rate, the fact is that of the 47 creameries that might have remained in this business, only seven have decided to remain.

Speakers here thought that we should do something to increase the consumption of milk in order to cut out exports of subsidised milk products. That is a very obvious thing, and it is hardly likely that if it were possible to do anything in that direction, it would have escaped the attention of either the officers of the Department or myself. For instance, if we could get every person in the country to consume twice as much milk —and that is rather a big proposition —we could reduce the export of dairy produce only by 20 per cent. There is not the slightest hope of getting consumers in the country to consume twice as much milk as at present, but even if we did, we should still have to export a very considerable quantity of dairy products. Take butter consumed at home. That is all being subsidised. I want to make that clear, because I thought from some remarks made by one or two Senators that the home consumer was contributing to the bounty on exports. He is, of course, contributing as a taxpayer, but this year there is no such thing as a levy being collected. A levy was collected last year, but it was more or less a book-keeping transaction. This year we are not collecting a levy at all, and we are paying 6/- a cwt from the 1st April on all home consumed butter, so that we are subsidising home consumed butter as well as exported butter.

It is all very well to say—I have often thought it myself and have said it at conferences in my Department— that it is a pity that we should have to export butter and pay a subsidy on it while our own people are not consuming enough butter and milk. I know that is true but when you come to try to make any practical proposition to deal with the matter, it is quite a different question. Obviously we could increase the consumption of butter at home by reducing the price by 1d. or 2d. per lb. but that would not achieve the other object we have in view. We would have to reduce it by as much as 6d. to achieve that object and that would cost an enormous amount of money. If we were prepared to pay an extra 1d. a gallon to suppliers of creameries it would cost £1,000,000. If we were to pay 3d. a gallon more, which is the general demand throughout the country, it would cost £3,000,000. All these things are impossible and while I might agree that creamery suppliers are not doing very well, and that it would be a great thing if we could get our own people to consume twice as much milk and butter, it is very difficult to achieve that. It could be done if we had a few million pounds at our disposal because we could provide cheaper milk and butter for home consumption. Senator Johnston advocated bigger supplies from the creameries for the city so that the poor might be able to buy milk at 4d. a quart. I do not think that the consumer would get any better value even if milk came in in greater quantities from the creameries. I have already given an instance where only seven out of 47 creameries thought it worth while to continue sending milk to the city. Evidently the creameries are not prepared to sell milk very much cheaper than the figure at present prevailing around the city. In any case milk is available at the moment at 2d. a pint.

Mr. Healy

I think you will find that is only in cut-price shops.

Dr. Ryan

In quite a number of shops it is available at 2d. a pint, but that is only during the cheap periods of May, June and July. Another point made was that if the farmers were permitted to sell their milk in urban areas we would not have this big quantity of butter for export. I have already told Senators that even if you could get the urban areas to consume twice as much milk, we should still have to export considerable quantities.

These points are not altogether connected with Senator Johnston's amendment. As Senator Ua Buachalla has pointed out, Senator Johnston's amendment is against the whole spirit of this legislation because this legislation was brought in in the first instance to give the farmers of these five counties some hope for the future and some system of orderly marketing. If we depart from that and say that the creameries can send in as much milk as they like, we shall undo a lot of what we set out to do in the beginning. The five counties are a big area and to expect 40,000 gallons from this area is a very small matter, when one realises that Kilrush creamery which caters only for part of County Clare— which is not a very outstanding agricultural county—deals in the busy season with that quantity of milk. To expect these five counties to produce 40,000 gallons—an amount which they do not always send in—is not giving very much of a monopoly. The supply is spread over a very large area.

Mr. MacCabe

The Minister said it would cost £3,000,000 to give an increase of 3d. per gallon in the milk supply to the creameries. Suppose the price of butter were increased by 3d. per lb., from 1/6 to 1/9, could you not get the £3,000,000 in that way?

Dr. Ryan

The consumer or the taxpayer must pay it.

Sir John Keane

I do not want to get into a Second Reading debate but this amendment covers a very wide field. What I feel about the Minister's attitude towards milk regulation is that he has not sufficient regard for the interests of the consumer. That is, perhaps, only right; he is representing agriculture and the farmer has his full consideration. Undoubtedly the whole purpose of the Bill is to protect the vested interests of producers in a certain area. Does the Minister not feel an obligation to discriminate between the efficient and inefficient producer? I think he will admit that a large number of those producers have a very poor record as regards milk yields. Are all these producers in cow-testing associations? If they are not in cow-testing associations and the yield is small, what right have they to be protected? I think that is an aspect of the whole question to which the Minister should have regard. Is the Minister satisfied that the system of distribution is efficient? I cannot believe for a moment that it is efficient when one sees milk cans carried in every sort of conveyance supplying one house here and another house 300 yards away. One can only conclude that the system is most wasteful and overlapping. If the Minister could apply some test of efficiency to the producer and, at the same time, set up some central organisation for distribution, it would enable ample compensation over a number of years to be paid to producers who are displaced. I feel convinced that that would substantially reduce the price of milk to consumers. Milk stands in a totally different category from any other food. While there is undoubtedly inefficient distribution in the matter of bread, the effect on the consumer is different. Most consumers, if they wish, can make their own bread but no consumer can make his own milk.

As I said before on the Second Reading, I am in favour of travelling towards socialistic means to get milk to the consumer at the lowest possible price consistent with a fair wage and a fair price to the producer. I hope the Minister in any future legislation will approach the matter from that angle.

Mr. O'Callaghan

I have a good deal of sympathy with Senator Johnston, but I am opposed to the amendment. I am satisfied that if the Senator was in the position of the Minister and listening to the dairy farmers trying to get their grievances rectified, he would never have put it down. We had a milk strike in this city not so long ago which caused very serious disturbance, and were it not for the creameries throughout the country Dublin would have been without milk. That strike was not without justification. Furthermore, in the five counties around Dublin if even half of the farmers went into milk production they would supply the whole city, but only one out of every three is producing milk. I am not too sure of my figures but taking that estimate as near correct it is one reason for my attitude against the motion. The dairy farmers of this country have been to the Minister many times to get a fair price based on the cost of production for their milk. In this debate we are all agreed that cheap milk is very essential for the poor of this country. We all agree that it is very proper and very desirable also that it should be good milk, and produced in good surroundings where it is properly handled. The bulk of the farmers in this country are not in a position to handle milk as it should be handled for human consumption. To produce milk fit for human consumption you need a proper water supply installed and good hygienic conditions insisted upon. The officials of the Department are insistent on everything being done in the proper way.

It is said that milk is produced and sold at 6d. per gallon to the creameries, and that Dublin is overflowing with milk, with plenty of milk in the country. The big problem is to get rid of surplus milk. It appears to me that a higher grade cow might enable the people of this country to produce milk cheaper than they do. Where we go wrong is looking for a cow to produce 400 gallons annually. On the continent they have animals that produce 600 gallons annually.

The reason that we have a cow giving such a low yield annually is that we produce beef animals for export and more or less neglect the dairying side of the business. I am not at all sure that it would not be a desirable line to tax the live-stock industry in order to subsidise the dairying industry. The dairy cow is the foundation of the live-stock industry and mother of the human race. I agree that a supply of good milk and cheap milk is desirable. But there is the other side of the picture where you have the farmers all grumbling at the cost of production. A higher grade cow might go a long way towards solving the difficulty. I do not know whether that has ever been gone into in this country, but the matters I mention would I believe be very helpful in producing cheaper supplies for the poor. There is also the question of the distribution of the milk in our cities and towns which is very costly and cumbersome at present. If that could be done in a more economic way it would also ease the situation and make for cheaper milk. I sympathise a good deal with the sentiments expressed by Senator Johnston, but I feel I must oppose this amendment.

Professor Johnston

I am not at all satisfied with the way in which this amendment has been treated. The Minister made a considerable point out of the existing legislation governing the milk supply of Dublin, but after all it is not the primary object of the Legislature or of this Seanad to preserve existing legislation, but rather to act in the interest of the welfare of the country as a whole. I would ask the Minister why he should not consider driving a coach and four through the existing legislation to get a cheap supply of milk for the Dublin people without reducing the price paid to the producer. I agree with those Senators who emphasise the important part played in this matter by the cost of distribution as a big factor in making the price of milk in Dublin so dear. The Minister in his remarks did not mention if he has any policy for cheapening the cost of distribution. If I had any assurance that the Minister or his Department were looking into this problem of producing a scheme to cheapen the cost of distribution then I should, with a clear conscience, withdraw this amendment.

Dr. Ryan

I do not know if Senator Johnston was here when I spoke at the conclusion of the Second Reading of this Bill. I dealt very fully then with that subject and informed the Seanad that a considerable number of schemes for the rationalisation of milk distribution had been considered. Some of them were rejected. The scheme under consideration is the scheme recommended by Sir John Keane which has been referred to by others as municipalisation.

Professor Johnston

You are considering that?

Dr. Ryan

Yes.

Professor Johnston

Then I may withdraw the amendment with a clear conscience.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Sections 15 to 35, inclusive, agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Agreed to take the Final Stages now.

Bill received for final consideration and passed.