Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 25 May 1955

Vol. 44 No. 16

Seed Production Bill, 1955—Second Stage.

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

Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Dillon)

The use of quality seeds is a primary requirement in good agricultural practice. The production, processing and sale of high standard seeds is not, however, haphazardly achieved but requires direction and control. Measures for such control are already contained in existing emergency legislation, and the present Bill is designed to replace and amplify in permanent form these existing provisions.

From the time a satisfactory strain of seed is developed by a plant breeder until it becomes available to ordinary farmers, many stages of reproduction take place. The early multiplications can be undertaken under the direct supervision of the breeder of the strain, but, as the quantity of seed available increases, later reproductions must necessarily be carried out on farms. The work of the breeder in developing the desirable characteristics of the strain would be nullified if, through lack of adequate direction in the later stages of reproduction, such desirable characteristics were lost. It is, accordingly, necessary to exercise competent and adequate supervision over the various steps in the development of such strains from the selection of growers, the preparation of the land and the inspection of the growing crops to the harvesting, drying and cleaning of the seed and its subsequent warehousing and sale. Such supervision entails the employment of trained staff and the provision of buildings, plant and equipment which is not readily within the resources of an individual grower working independently. Coordination of effort and centralised direction is, accordingly, required and this Bill provides the necessary machinery for this purpose.

Schemes for the production of high quality seeds of one or other kind are now in operation in virtually all countries. A customary feature of such schemes is the provision of a distinctive designation and a mark, seal or label which will serve to identify the seed as being of some special merit. Many such schemes are voluntarily operated, but, where they are in force, there is necessity for some special statutory provisions in relation to certain aspects of them as, for example, the prevention of cross fertilisation or the protection from misuse of designations such as "certified" or of seals, labels, etc., which are recognised as identifying the quality of the seed.

This Bill embodies these modern developments. It treats of two facts of seed production. The first is the production, processing and sale of good quality commercial seeds and in this respect it is at present confined to the common root or farm seeds, that is, kale, mangel, rape, turnip, including swede turnip, sugar beet and fodder beet. Power is, however, taken to extend the Bill to cover other seeds should the need later arise.

The second aspect of seed production dealt with in the Bill is the provision of enabling powers for the operation of schemes for the certification of seed.

In so far as the production, processing and sale of seed is concerned, the Bill contains no new legislative features and its introduction is in fact in accordance with the policy of replacing emergency legislation by permanent enactments.

It may be well to review the origin and operation of the temporary legislation replaced which is the Emergency Powers (No. 254) Order, 1943, and certain subsidiary Orders made under it.

Before the last war, the bulk of our requirements of the common root seeds, and indeed of vegetable seeds generally, were obtained through Great Britain. Early in the war, the exportation of such seeds from Great Britain was prohibited and a critical situation in regard to supplies developed here. My Department thereupon sought the co-operation of the principal seedsmen here in the production of such seeds in the country. In response, the principal seedsmen organised themselves into two groups and embarked on production in which they have since continued with a good measure of success. Cómhlucht Siúicre Eireann also entered into the production of sugar beet seed and their work in this connection will be familiar to you. It is of course open at all times for other qualified and adequately equipped persons or firms to apply for licences to engage in this business.

It is not outside the bounds of possibility that overseas sources of supply of seeds might again become difficult and for this reason, if for no other, the preservation of a seed producing industry which would render the country as far as possible independent of imports is a desirable safeguard. Also, of course, there is the very real and immediate economic advantage of an additional cash crop which seed production provides for growers. Furthermore, seeds developed and produced in the environment and climate of this country should give better results than those from places in which soil and climate may be quite different.

The production of seeds is in itself not sufficient, but steps must also be taken to ensure that the seed produced will be of the highest quality and equal or superior to anything available elsewhere. With a view to ensuring that these proper standards will be attained the Bill provides that firms applying for licences can be required to show that they have facilities necessary to discharge satisfactorily all stages of production, from the sowing of the crop to the sale of the seed.

An important section of the Bill is that which prohibits the growing of certain seeds in certain areas in order that these areas may be exclusively preserved for the production of other seeds. This is to prevent cross-fertilisation. At present, the growing of mangel and sugar mangel plants to the seeding stage is prohibited in a wide area of Munster in which Cómhlucht Siúicre Éireann is producing sugar beet seed, and this arrangement, which has been in operation for over ten years, has worked quite satisfactorily. You will, of course, understand that this control does not prevent the growing of mangel crops for fodder in the area.

Provisions relating to the operation of schemes for the certification of seed are contained in Part III of the Bill. The merit of certified seed is that it is backed by a State Department or other accredited certifying agency to the effect that its growing and processing has been supervised by the certifying authority, in accordance with the conditions of the particular certification scheme and that, as far as is reasonably possible, the authenticity and quality of the seed can be vouched for.

The production of certified seed is well developed in various countries. One aspect of it, the certification of seed potatoes, has been very successfully operated in this country since 1931, and a valuable export trade exists. A similar trade in other certified seeds might likewise be developed. My Department has been operating on a voluntary basis schemes for the production of certified seed of wheat and of a new strain of perennial ryegrass, and it is intended to continue these schemes, and to develop others on a voluntary basis. Some aspects of them require, however, a certain statutory backing, such as the preservation from misuse of seals, labels, tags, etc., which it is hoped will establish themselves as authenticating the quality of the seed to which they are attached. Also, provision must be made to ensure that the term "certified" is not applied to any but genuine certified seed. Part III of the Bill is directed to providing for this but, in line with my general policy, I do not propose to have recourse to these provisions, unless evidence of improper practices indicates that they should be brought into force.

Mr. Hawkins

We welcome the introduction of this Bill, firstly, because it replaces the provisions made under the Emergency Powers Orders and takes us, as it were, out of that period, and places on the Statute Book permanent legislation; secondly, because in its own way, it gives recognition and appreciation to the great efforts and the success achieved by those people who, during the emergency years, undertook the production of seeds in order that our crops might be produced. The Minister has informed us correctly that, prior to the emergency, our main supplies of seeds were obtained from Great Britain and that. during the earlier years of the emergency, for reasons best known to themselves, a decision was made by English firms to discontinue the supply of essential seeds to this country. Were it not for the fact that our own people produced those seeds, we would be in a very difficult position to-day. For those two reasons, which I think are sufficient, we welcome the Bill.

There is nothing new in it. Its provisions arise out of experience gained during the emergency, and it makes no new provisions beyond those contained in the emergency Orders made during those years. It is very important for our people, particularly for the farming community, that when they purchase seeds a guarantee should be given that the seeds are what they purport to be. I am glad that the Minister makes provision for such certification being provided. On the whole, I think the Bill is one that could be dealt with more properly on the Committee Stage. Therefore, we on this side of the House welcome the Bill. We should also like to express our hope that the Minister will continue to give to those people, who were the pioneers of this great industry which has grown up in this country, the credit and appreciation they deserve. These were the people who made possible the continued production of the many crops grown during those years.

Professor Stanford

There are two reasons why I welcome this Bill. The first is because it is a mark of scientific approach to the main source of our wealth in this country. As a representative of a university, I welcome the possibility that there will be increased employment for people trained in the universities and colleges, in scientific agricultural work of this kind.

As citizens, we must all welcome any sustained effort to increase the products of our rich soil. I speak as a layman on this subject and it seemed to me that the Bill was of such importance, within its limited sphere, that I should take some expert advice. With the caution that everyone must have in depending on other people's advice, I should like to make a few remarks on the general background of the Bill, and on two sections in particular—Section 16 with its regulations which will affect farmers very considerably in the future, and Section 21, which deals with the question of certification.

As a mere layman on this subject it seems to me that the emphasis in producing crops up to the present has been on increasing the fertility of the soil. The ordinary farmer has been led to believe that, the more manure or fertiliser he put into the soil, the better the crop would be. In fact that is not so, because the law of diminishing returns comes in very quickly, and the more artificial or natural manure you put into the soil, the more it will be washed out by rainfall in a few years. The more it is artificially enriched in a wet year, the more it is likely to lose in terms of the amount of money and effort put into it. We must reckon with that all the time. We cannot get our crops simply by raising the chemical fertility of the soil.

We have, as this Bill envisages, to reckon with two other elements. We have to reckon with the fact that our weather is sometimes different from the weather of countries which have been producing our seeds up to the present. That is a very serious point, and it is one which this Bill is seriously tackling. Thirdly, we come to the essential element in this Bill, the variety of the crop, and this is of supreme importance. Variety is the only factor which lends itself to a simple mode of control, namely, to sow seed of the most suitable variety in the most suitable places. That is what we are aiming at. What seems to me to be the most important point in dealing with getting the right variety into the right place is the question of the distribution of the seed. It is essential that when a farmer buys this home-bred seed he should get reliable seeds. Various methods have been tried to ensure that the stock seed will be good.

It may be of some interest to the House to compare the methods that have been adopted in other countries for seeing that the stock seed is thoroughly reliable and ideally suitable. In New Zealand, seed crops are eligible for certification only if they are grown from pre-selected stocks obtained from the pure-seed station. The field must be approved by a field's division officer, the crop is then inspected several times while it is growing, the stocks are sealed after threshing and, after gleaning, a sample is drawn for trial and the bags are re-sealed. If the result of this test is satisfactory, the lot of seed is accepted as Government certified. That, in the opinion of the expert on whom I am relying, is not entirely satisfactory.

A better system is that which is used in Sweden. Then there are three types of certification. The first is the ordinary method of State sealing. This only requires a parcel of seed to be put up to a certain standard of germination and purity for it to receive the State seal. The second—and this is more significant, I think — is a system of after-control. In this, a sample of the seed is taken and sown for trial. The purchaser can, by supplying the number of the certificate to the central seed-testing station, get information as to the results of this trial. If wrong information has been given him, he is thus able to assert a claim for damages. Finally, the most complete certification is given in Sweden by both pre-control and after-control cultivations. In this, a sample of the stock seed from which the bulk is to be grown is submitted for trial, the growing crop is then inspected several times and compared with the pre-control plot as well, to see that it is properly isolated from other seed plots. After gleaning and processing, another sample is taken for after-control certification. If the first control is satisfactory, a certificate is issued and the post-control is to satisfy the authorities that the certificate is not misused—for there is considerable danger there.

It seems to me that in this Bill we have not gone quite far enough in the direction of this proper certification. Now, I speak for a practical farmer in the south of Ireland, who objects to the risk—and I think the Minister may agree that it is a grave risk — that unless this stock seed is tested after it has been produced, a farmer may buy a large quantity of it and have a complete failure of his crop. As far as I can see, there is no way of getting compensation for that—he has just made a bad buy and that is that. It seems to me that if the State is taking responsibility in this matter it should be responsible for the results, for what comes from the State seed. I would ask the Minister whether he is prepared to insert in the certification section, Section 21, some provision for testing the seed after it has been produced. As I read the Bill, it is very good up to the point where the seed is put into the bag and guaranteed, but after that if the farmer finds a failure in his crop he gets no compensation. Am I right in that?

Mr. Dillon

Might the failure not be due to some other cause than seed?

Professor Stanford

That is quite true.

Mr. Dillon

While we can undertake to guarantee the seed, we cannot undertake to guarantee the farmer.

Professor Stanford

I would submit that an expert could tell when the failure of a crop is due to the quality of the seed and when it is due to the quality of the land and the work put into it. Is not that so? Would not a competent man be able to say: "This is a failure of seed" or "This, is a failure of treatment"? On those grounds, I think it might be considered that the seed should be tested after certification, that there should be post-control as well as pre-control. It is the method, as I am informed, that is used in Sweden and I think it might get better results for us.

Mr. Dillon

I think the bulk of certified seed would be so tested, but to say that every bag a farmer buys was to be tested and the crop produced was to be guaranteed, would be going further than anyone could go.

Professor Stanford

No, but a supply of seed from a particular area or a particular field—will that be tested for the further crop, so to speak, after it is produced? Will the test be performed on that?

Mr. Dillon

I think I am in a position to say "yes".

Professor Stanford

I suggest to the Minister it might be well to make that implicit in the Bill because, as I read the Bill, it is not explicitly stated. Am I right in that? I think that is so?

An Cathaoirleach

The Minister will have an opportunity of informing the Senator, when he is replying.

Professor Stanford

I would point out that it was the fact that the Minister intervened spontaneously to reply during my speech which led me into this way of error, perhaps. The second point I wish to raise is on Section 16. It is not a matter of seed certification but a matter of the rights of the ordinary farmer. I would like everyone who values his property and who remembers the Minister's promise that he would never send an inspector inside the gate of any farm in Ireland uninvited, to consider this Section 16 carefully. You will also find that in Section 4, clause (2), the unfortunate farmer who may have been away for some reason or another will get necessarily no more notice than something in the manner of a Wild West sheriff's notice affixed to a tree or some other prominent place, and that is regarded as legal serving of the notice.

Secondly, under Section 16, a farmer may be prohibited from growing a certain type of grass, for example, on his farm at comparatively short notice, as far as I can see. That may seriously upset a rotation in a farmer's land, if he intends to plant a certain type of grass there and suddenly finds, perhaps just before he is going to sow, that by ministerial regulation he cannot sow that particular crop there. I wonder would the Minister consider giving a statutory time for the serving of that notice? I know that one farmer who understands seed-growing fairly thoroughly is perturbed at the notion that he might suddenly be told: "You cannot grow Italian rye grass or something of that kind on your land because we have scheduled an adjacent seed field to grow some seed which might be cross-pollinated by it." I would like the Minister to consider that point and see that farmers get fairly good notice so that they can work it into their rotation and, if it is a question of buying a particular type of seed, will know well in advance what to avoid.

In this Section 16, if the Bill is applied to grass seeds, considerable hardship could be caused. For example, if a perennial rye grass area were in the neighbourhood, a farmer would not be allowed to make hay from Italian rye grass or vice versa. The solution I urge on the Minister is that sufficient notice should be given so that the farmers could sow only the permitted strain in the proper time. If they are given too short notice, there could be considerable loss. These are matters which might be raised again on the Committee Stage.

There is one other general point. I would like the Minister to give me some information. Besides growing the seed, we must breed root plants. Perhaps the Minister could tell us a little more about what is being done about plant breeding in the country. I know some who would be considerably interested. The difficulty is that most of the root and green crops that produce our seed are bred in the eastern counties of England where the differences from Ireland in soil and weather conditions are very marked. As a result, and this is the experience of a practical farmer, we find a good deal of bolting of mangels throughout the country from seed brought from the east coast of England. This is because our winter's are slightly warmer and our summers are slightly cooler. If we can get to the stage where we are breeding the plants, as well as producing the seed, it will be a considerable improvement in agriculture throughout the country. I am conscious that what I have said may seem somewhat muddled. But I am voicing the opinion of a highly trained agriculturist from across the water who has been farming in this country for some 20 years. I am sure that he and others like him would like to see his suggestions put into operation.

Mr. Burke

I am glad to welcome this Bill. It is a most desirable measure and shows that the Minister is aware of the great use that is being made of seeds at the present time and of the activities of our farmers in that direction. One aspect of seed growing, which I think will increase considerably in this country, is the growing of grass seeds. Grass is definitely our most valuable, and at the same time, our most neglected crop. I do some farming myself amongst my other activities and I am growing three or four acres of grass seed this year, but on reading the provisions of this Bill that attach to the granting of licences it seems to me that those who have drafted the Bill are inclined to be rather monopolistic. They seem to be trying to make it difficult for people to engage in the seed business, and for any Irish business man to start in a small way in the seed business would be extremely difficult under the Bill. Section 11 (a) of the Bill stresses "the desirability of ensuring so far as practicable that the total volume of seed of any class that will be available for sale in a particular period is related to the probable market demand for seeds of that class in that period."

Therefore, in the granting of licences the officials of the Department might recommend to the Minister that they think that there are enough people in that particular business or that there might be administrative difficulties in having more people in the business. I think it is not desirable that those provisions should be in the Bill. I remember that Senator Prendergast asked a question here regarding a new entrant to the highly speculative business of exporting meat to America, at the request of the then Minister. The Minister told Senator Prendergast last year that anyone who would comply with the regulations would be allowed to enter into that business. I think that in the seed business anyone who complies with the seed regulations ought to be allowed to enter into the business.

There will be a very large variety of seeds to be dealt with. Some people may want to deal with grass seed only; others may want to deal with wheat seed, barley seed, turnip seed or mangel seed or any or all of the other varieties that go to make up our economy. I would like to ask the Minister to consider that position, because I am aware at the moment of at least one or two people who would like to engage in the seed business and I think it would be undesirable and contrary to the interests of the business people in this country if they were to be kept out.

I do not think there is anything further to say on the Second Reading of this Bill. The powers given to the inspectors seem to be pretty wide but I do not think that such powers have ever been abused. The Department of Agriculture is a long-established Department with wide experience of dealing, not alone with farmers but also with business people and they will have sufficient enterprise and competence to deal with this matter.

Eamon Ó Ciosáin

Cé nach feirmeoir mé ba mhaith liom focal a rá ar an mBille seo. Ar an gcéad dul síos caithfidh mé a rá gur mór an t-athrú atá tagtha ar an Aire maidir lena thuairimí i dtaobh cad é an smacht is ceart a chur agus a chimeád ar fheirmeoirí na tire seo. Ní hé an duine céanna anois é nuair atá sé ina Aire i mbun Roinne Stáit agus an duine a bhí ann tamall gearr ó shoin nuair a bhíodh sé ag teacht anuas sa mhulluch ar dhaoine eile mar gheall ar rialacha a chur i bhfeidhm ar na feirmeoirí. Ba ghráin leis cigirí an uair sin agus bhíodh sé á rá ná cuirfí cigire ar bith taobh istigh de chlaí na feirme chun smacht a chur ar aon fheirmeoir, go mbeadh cead a chinn ag gach feirmeoir a rogha ruda a dhéanamh. Éinne a léifeadh an Bille seo um tháirgeadh síolta chífeadh sé tagairt don mbuachaill sin, cigire, ina lán áiteanna. Má bhí sé mícheart tamall ó shoin an buachall sin a chur i bhfeidhm ar na feirmeoirí conas a thuiteann sé amach go bhfuil sé ceart anois? Is é fáth an athruithe aigne sa chás so go bhfuil an tAire i mbun Roinne Rialtais agus go dtuigeann sé go bhfuil gá le cigirí ar mhaithe leis na feirmeoirí féin. Tuigimid go léir é sin. Ar aon chuma, ní theastaíonn uaimse an bobhta so aon stocaireacht a chur ar bun mar gheall ar seo.

Do dhein an tAire tagairt do phrátaí síl á rá go bhfuil margadh le fáil dóibh sin anois. Is maith an rud é sin agus is é an fáth go bhfuil suim agam sa rud san ná gur dóigh liom gur tionscal é sin a bheadh an-oiriúnach don nGaeltacht. Tá a fhios agam go bhfuil an talamh ann, dá bhoicthe é, oiriúnach do phrátaí agus ba mhór an ní é, im thuairim, dá gcuirtí fás prátaí síl agus prátaí luatha ar bun sa límistéir sin agus cabhrú le muinntir na Gaeltachta an tionscal sin a chur chun cinn. Do mholfainn don Aire agus don Rialtas féachaint chuige sin, mar ba mhór mar raghadh sé chun tairbhe na ndaoine a chónaíonn sa Ghaeltacht.

Ní dóigh liom go bhfuil aon rud eile le rá agam ar an mBille seo. Cuirim fáilte roimis, mar is dóigh liom gur ceart do pé Aire a bheadh i mbun na Roinne Talmhaíochta féachaint chuige go mbeadh na síolta atá luaite sa Bhille i gceart, ní amháin don mhargadh lasmuich den tír ach d'fheirmeoirí na tíre seo chomh maith. Níor cheart talamh na tíre seo do thruailliú le droch-shíol ná an brabús ba cheart a bheadh le fáil ag na feirmeoirí do mhaolú le droch-shíol.

Mr. Cogan

As this Bill simply seeks to preserve the emergency powers legislation already in operation and put it in permanent form, I take it that it will be accepted by the House unanimously. It is, I think, satisfactory to know that the efforts that have been made over the past few years to develop seed growing in this country have achieved a considerable amount of success. In the early stages of providing our essential seeds, this industry was subjected to a very considerable amount of criticism, and some of that criticism came even from the Minister himself. If he will recollect, at that time the suggestion was that the seeds are the raw material of the agricultural industry, and that there should not be any restrictions on their import. I think that, in the main, the criticism which was directed against the production of seeds here came from seed merchants who felt that they were aggrieved by reason of the fact that the two companies promoting the growing of seeds here were given a monopoly in regard to what ever quantity might be required to be imported. I think, of course, that that monopoly was necessary since those companies were engaged in the production of seeds, but we could not allow a position to develop in which more seeds would be imported into the country than would be used, and that the seeds here would be left unsold.

I think that the production of home grown seeds has justified itself, but in this, as in all other matters, the Department must not only do the right thing but must appear to do the right thing. I think it is desirable that it should be brought home to all concerned that whatever restrictions it is necessary to impose upon the importation of seeds are imposed in the general interests of seed growing here, and, in the last analysis, in the general interests of the agricultural industry, because it is desirable that this nation should not be entirely dependent on outside sources for all its seed requirements. Experience has proved that in many cases our home grown seeds are superior to anything that we can import and are better adapted to our climatic and soil conditions.

It is the unfortunate and, perhaps, the monotonous experience of Ministers that they have from time to time to eat their own words, and in Section 16 of this Bill the Minister is compelled to eat many of his past assertions in regard to excluding inspectors from entering upon any farmer's land without the farmer's consent. The powers provided in this Bill are of a very drastic nature. They are not as modest, perhaps, as the powers proposed in the tillage regulations during the war which merely compelled the farmer to till a certain amount. In this Bill, the Minister is taking power to prevent the farmer from sowing certain crops on his land, and even compels him to destroy certain crops which he has already sown. That is something which, I think, the Minister would in other days have fiercely and vehemently denounced. However, one learns as one grows older, and even Ministers learn from experience. As far as the farmers are concerned, I do not think they are unduly worried about the powers which are being taken by the Department under this Bill.

Mr. Burke

How does the Senator suggest the Minister should deal with it otherwise?

Mr. Cogan

I am not suggesting, but I say that the farmers are not unduly worried about the powers that are being taken by the Minister under this Bill. I think they are absolutely necessary, as the Senator himself pointed out, just as compulsory tillage was absolutely necessary during the grave period of the emergency through which we passed. If you want to protect any industry, and particularly an important industry such as this, you must be prepared to give certain powers to the responsible Department. I am satisfied that those powers will not be abused by the inspectors of the Minister's Department, and I do not think, as I have said, that the farmers have very much to fear.

It would be an intolerable and an impossible position if, after considerable expenditure had been involved in the planting of certain new seeds, they were destroyed by cross-pollination or otherwise. I think that, drastic as these powers may appear to be, the House would be satisfied to give them to the Department. It is our invariable experience in dealing with the Department of Agriculture and its inspectors that, whatever faults they may have, one is not aggressiveness or a tendency to trample on those with whom they are dealing so that I think we can be satisfied that the powers given will not be abused but rather will be used to protect this industry.

Mr. L'Estrange

They will not bring in tractors on the farmer's land or knock down his gates.

Mr. Cogan

There is power in Section 16 which would enable inspectors to bring tractors over fences and destroy crops if they so desired. We are giving these powers voluntarily under this Bill and I am quite satisfied that the powers will not be abused by the Department. The powers given to the Department of Agriculture in the past have not, as far as I know, been abused.

It is, I think, desirable that not only should we produce seeds here for our own crops, but that we should seek to produce seeds for export, particularly seed potatoes. I think that is an industry which should be developed as far as possible. I was rather surprised, as a member of a county committee of agriculture, that, when an attempt was being made recently to promote the growing of certified seed for supplying the new varieties of potatoes for the glucose factories, the matter was not brought to the notice of the county committee of agriculture until it was too late for farmers generally to undertake this particular production. I think it was not until the month of April that the matter was brought to the notice of the county committee. In a matter of that kind, I think that ample notice should have been given, because I fear that sufficient quantities cannot be grown under that particular scheme. I was rather surprised that the Department should have allowed so much time to elapse and adopted a scheme at such a late period in the year.

I would also like to draw attention to what happened in regard to kale seed. There was a complete famine during the spring season and now I notice that it has come on the market a little more plentifully, I do not know from what source. At one time there was no source except to invoke the aid of the smuggler. I assume that the cause of the shortage was the adverse weather conditions last year. This bears out what all of us who are engaged in agriculture know—how extremely erratic is our climate, particularly for tillage crops and also for such things as seeds. We have to face grave risks, and if occasionally people have to pay what they may consider a higher price than they would pay for the imported seed, it must be borne in mind that enormous risks are involved to the people engaged in this particular line of production. The entire crop may be, and frequently is, destroyed. All these seed crops are extremely vulnerable in a wet season.

Senator Stanford referred to this matter of loss. It is only those engaged in farming who know how considerable are the losses which can be met in the growing of tillage crops. I am intimately acquainted with a number of farmers who have lost £10 or £20 or £30 per statute acre on the growing of beet, not seed, but nobody ever takes such losses into consideration. People say that the farmers are making heaps of money but they do not seem to understand how grave are the risks involved.

Although it is true that occasionally you may come upon seed of inferior quality I think that in fairness to our seed merchants and our seed producers generally it should be said that the quality of seed is of a high standard. That applies not only to grain but to roots and vegetables. It is fair to say that, whether it is imported or produced here, the greatest possible care is being taken to ensure that seed is of high quality in regard to purity and germination. I do not, however, think it would be possible for any seed merchant or producer to give the guarantees that are being asked for by Senator Stanford. Seed, as we know, is a very delicate matter, particularly in regard to germination. The germination of seed wheat or oats, for example, may be of a very high percentage at the time when the sacks are being sealed, but within two or three weeks it may have deteriorated to a very considerable extent. That may be due to natural causes or to mishandling by the retailer or somebody else before it reaches the farmer. It would, therefore, be impossible for those who seal the sacks to give an absolute and complete guarantee in regard to the quality of the seed by the time the farmer actually put it into the land. The farmer himself may be partly responsible for some loss in germination after he receives the seed for storage. The guarantees given at present are as far-reaching as anyone could reasonably expect.

The Bill as a whole is acceptable and most of its terms have to a great extent already been in operation. It has not received any great criticism except along the lines I have suggested. As regards the criticism of placing certain restrictions on imports in order to help home production, I do not think we can get over that in any way. If we want to produce our own seeds here we have to protect the producer, and that applies equally to fertilizers and other commodities also.

Mr. O'Callaghan

I regret having missed the Minister's opening statement. If I had been here, I would know exactly what his approach to the Bill was and I am therefore at a loss in speaking. I believe the time is ripe for big developments in seed production in this country. I speak from personal experience of growing many different kinds of seed and I have also had experience of seeing seeds of almost every conceivable kind being grown in Holland. I have seen fields of carraway seeds, flower seeds, bulbs and every kind of seed you can think of. If they can do these things in Holland I do not think we should have much difficulty here. We have the land. The climate perhaps is not as good. We have as good farmers, and I think it is very desirable that we should grow as much seed as we could handle for ourselves anyway here. That would help to give employment on the land and stop the export of dollars or sterling to countries which do very little trade with us.

I speak from personal experience when I say that many seeds can be grown in this country which are not being grown to any extent at the present time. The sugar company appears to have made a very great success in the growing of beet seed. I grew beet seed for ten or 12 years myself and did not find any more difficulty than in growing any other crops. I have also had experience of growing swedes and turnips, narrow stem kale and several other seeds here. They are not being grown very extensively in this country and I think it is a great pity they are not.

I do not know exactly what the purpose of the Bill is but I am sure that when he gets the Act the Minister will proceed along the lines of big developments. I would like him to do that and I see no difficulty about it.

Narrow stem kale was mentioned here by the previous speaker. I happened to be growing some during the present season and the price I am getting is something less than 2/- a lb.— 1/9 or 1/10—but it is being sold at 15/- or 16/- a lb. Whether that is on the black market or not I do not know.

I understand that some seedsman is undertaking the growing of 500 acres of H-I rye grass. I do not know whether he has got going with it but at any rate he is thinking about it. I am sure the Minister will be glad of that because H-I rye grass is a top notcher in New Zealand, and many farmers who have grown it here feel just as enthusiastic about it as do the New Zealand people. The growing of H-I rye grass seed will have a psychological effect and will probably tend to develop H-I pastures very largely. I have no doubt that the Minister will agree with me that that would be an excellent thing because in my own experience there is no better grass than H-I rye grass. I think the previous speaker said that the Minister, was not sympathetic, and other people have said that he is not sympathetic, to seed production, but I know the Minister is big enough to change his mind and to do the right thing when he realises that it is the right thing to do. I have no doubt at all that the development of seed production is a most desirable thing.

Mr. Dillon

I am glad to be able to tell Senator O'Gallaghan that H-I rye grass has been grown commercially in this country for about five or six years, mainly in County Wexford, and I imagine that its cultivation will continue to expand as the demand for it increases. I entirely agree with the Senator that it is a very desirable grass and I am glad that enterprising seedsmen have been propagating it for some time.

Senator Cogan says that the Department did not notify committees of agriculture before the month of April of the possibility of growing Dutch varieties of high starch content potatoes. The Department of Agriculture never notifies committees of agriculture about high starch content potatoes because they were not asked to Ceimicí Teoranta, I believe, were in correspondence with county committees, but the Department had nothing to do with it and were not consulted in the matter.

Mr. Cogan

Did the Department not prohibit the growing of these seeds in certain areas?

Mr. Dillon

No. The Department objected strenuously to the growing of these types of seed in seed potato growing areas, on the ground that they might have introduced virus diseases into our seed potato stocks which would have destroyed our export trade in seed potatoes, but the Department had no correspondence with county committees about this matter to which Senator Cogan referred.

I am not aware of any intention anywhere to restrict entrance to the business of growing seeds—an apprehension mentioned by Senator Burke— except in so far as it is necessary to prevent a newcomer growing an unsuitable variety of seed in the immediate proximity of an established grower who is growing another variety of seed. For instance, if Comhlucht Siúicre Eireann is growing sugar beet seed in one particular district and another man comes in and proposes to sow mangel seed in an adjoining district the newcomer would be prohibited from doing so because these two seeds cannot be grown in proximity to each other, as they cross-pollinate and one would destroy the other.

Mr. Burke

It was the assemblers I really meant—the people who dry, process and assemble the seed.

Mr. Dillon

I have no intention of restricting entrance into that trade at all. I am an old-fashioned liberal free trader. I believe that competition is the life of trade and if I could abolish all restrictions, including all tariffs, all quotas and all other restrictions on trade, inside and outside, I believe it would be an eminently desirable thing to do; but I live, I hope, as a realist in a world in which we have to compromise in some measure, but the fewer restrictions I am called upon to put on anybody under any statute, the Senator may rest assured, the better pleased I shall be.

Mr. Burke

You have said that to me both publicly and privately.

Mr. Dillon

But, of course, we have always had powers and must have powers to prevent the lunatic from growing a crop of thistles for the ruination of his neighbour's land. We have always had that power and I imagine that if some lunatic started growing Indian hemp or opium poppies we would have to have power to go in and restrict him from growing these. I do not think that is any abridgment of the general principle that I do not accept it as desirable that the Minister for Agriculture for the time being should wish to mobilise the contents of five fields of inspectors or line the farmers' ditches with Civic Guards to break down their gates or to break down their ditches because they will not do what he tells them. I think there is a wide distinction between the two positions.

Senator Stanford opened by making some reference to chemical fertilisers and I thought I heard an echo of Sir Albert Howard ringing through his observations. I venture to swear that if he approaches his adviser and mentions the name Sir Albert Howard, his adviser's eyes will flash and he will see all the signs of enthusiasm rising in his countenance, because, in the opening sentences of the brief to which Senator Stanford told us he was referring as he spoke, I recognised the words of an enthusiast for Sir Albert Howard.

Professor Stanford

Does that in fact make them untrue?

Mr. Dillon

Oh, no; but you can always tell the disciple of moral rearmament or Sir Albert Howard by the particular form of words he uses. I am not reflecting on the truth of either proposition, but Buchman and Howard are written all over their disciples, no matter what topic they begin to talk about.

The Senators inquired if farmers could be unduly restricted in the crops they grow. I think that, if the powers prescribed in the Bill were improvidently used, the answer is "yes", but I do not think you can have the minimum powers requisite to make it possible to grow agricultural seeds without running the risk of having these regulations improvidently used for the improper and undue restriction of farmers.

Professor Stanford

Would the Minister consider allowing some statutory time for giving notice to farmers?

Mr. Dillon

To do one of the things required in sub-section 3?

Professor Stanford

Something of that kind.

Mr. Dillon

Here is my difficulty, and I am speaking off the cuff on the point raised by the Senator. A situation might arise in which a very valuable crop of sugar beet seed was approaching maturity and the Department's attention might be drawn to the fact that some eccentric person had suddenly elected to grow a crop of mangel seed right in the middle of that large and valuable area of beet seed. Suppose I were under an obligation to give a farmer not less than a month's notice before taking action under Section 16, I might be faced with the position that the pollination stage of these two crops might have come and gone before the month's notice had elapsed.

Professor Stanford

Might I ask what particular length of time the Minister has in mind for giving notice in the ordinary way?

Mr. Dillon

In the ordinary way, the longest notice it is possible to give. I have a constitutional horror of pushing people about in any way. My ordinary inclination would be to get an officer of the Department to go to such a man, and, in the most friendly way possible, to direct his attention to what requires to be done in order to comply with the minimum requirements and to get him to do it voluntarily. I should imagine that the invoking of powers against our neighbours should only be resorted to when no other device will operate, and then, I should imagine, the longest possible notice should be given, but I think that I must reserve the right to deal with an emergency, if and when it arises. I want to be perfectly frank. I do not think, in regard to this seed raising business, if you want proper certification, that you can put on the certifying authority the kind of restrictions that all of us would like to be put upon them, because you may have an emergency to deal with, and we can only depend on the remedy of Parliament and an appeal to Parliament to restrict an improvident user of the wide powers which are undoubtedly conferred by a Bill of this kind.

Senator Stanford asked me what seed production is being done in Ireland. We have, at Ballinacurra, a place where the Department, in collaboration with Messrs. Arthur Guinness, Son and Company, Limited, undertakes the breeding of malting barleys. This has been going on for very many years. We also have the Albert Agricultural College which, as Senators know, is one of the oldest, if not the oldest, in Europe, or in the world. We also have Comhlucht Siúicre Eireann which is specialising in the propagation of sugar beet seed. We also have our own new farm recently purchased at Lucan where the seed propagation division of the Department will carry out its own operations.

Dr. Sheehy Skeffington

I should like to ask the Minister about mangel seed, which is the prime problem, where the plant breeding of mangel seed is at present engaged in.

Mr. Dillon

Yes. I believe that in the Laois-Offaly direction, you will find farmers there growing mangel seed, in particular. I am answering the Senator off the cuff when I say that my distinct recollection is that it has been grown more so in Laois.

The Senator further asked what were our methods for the certification of seeds. This is a highly technical question. I am not giving the Senator a short answer when I say that, if he or his friends are interested in the practical aspect of this matter, the Department would be gratified if they would call on the Department, and discuss their methods of seed certification because, when one deals with this aspect on an occasion such as this, it is very hard to prevent the discussion becoming boring.

It is substantially true to say that the methods employed by us before we will attach the Department's certificate and seal on certified seeds, correspond to the highest standard employed by the Swedish authorities, as described by the Senator. At the same time, all agricultural seeds sold in this country by anybody are required to conform to the lowest standard of certification referred to as operating in Sweden. You cannot sell seeds here at all, if they do not correspond to those standards. Those standards are enforced by a peripatetic survey by the Department. Samples of seeds are taken regularly, and are tested in our seed-testing station, which is located in the science building of the college. If the seeds taken from a retailer's premises do not conform to the standards of purity and germination which are fixed as the minimum by the Department in respect of whatever variety of seed it is—hayseed, clover, timothy, turnip or mangel—the name and address of the merchant is taken, and put in what is called the black list, which is published in all newspapers in the country. This list shows that the seeds have failed to reach the required standard, and there is a statement as to the particular matter on which they failed to reach that standard. Senators, therefore, will realise that seed certification in this country is very high, according to our existing regulations.

Senator Kissane, as I understood him, made reference as to whether people were required to build houses. I think that may have arisen from my reference in the earlier stages of the discussion. "Warehousing" is a technical term, meaning keeping the seed in stock, but it does not envisage building specific premises for that purpose. Ordinary seedsmen would do this on their existing premises, but for a person with no such facilities, the provision of premises for the safe warehousing of seeds is required, in accordance with regulations made by the Department. Only in so far as he could get adequate premises would he be required to do it.

I have a distinct recollection of some other point which Senator Kissane made but, unfortunately, I have not got a note of it.

Mr. Kissane

I mentioned growing as much seeds as we could in the Gaeltacht.

Mr. Dillon

In fact, a great deal of potato seed is grown in North Mayo and also a great deal of seed is produced in County Donegal—actually in parts of the Donegal Gaeltacht.

Mr. Kissane

I am aware of that.

Mr. Dillon

I am informed that seeds are grown in Inishowen and Fanad, and parts of Fanad would be the Gaeltacht. I agree with the Senator that it would be eminently desirable to permit——

Mr. Kissane

Extend.

Mr. Dillon

It would certainly be my desire to see the Potato Marketing Board extending its activities in those areas. As regards seed potatoes, extension is now limited by the market we can get. Competition in the foreign seeds markets is becoming ferociously keen. As fast as we can get the markets we shall extend, or, I hope, the Potato Marketing Board will extend its operations. There has been constant searching for new and better markets. I do not know whether there is any other point on which I can properly dwell.

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage fixed for next sitting day.