I think I should state here what I regard as the general conditions under which a Minister must operate in relation to these consultations. Before I meet the representatives of any of these organisations—I do not mind telling the House; I do not have to tell my officials—on any particular matter, I give whatever consideration, attention and discussion to it that I can possibly afford. I try to know personally every aspect of the questions about which they have come to have these discussions. One of the reasons why I do that—I do not mind making it public—is this. I have heard all down through the years that a Minister was only a cipher; that he was in the hands of his officials and that, if he had a mind, he was not capable of using it.
I always feel that the time I should have a real showdown with my officials about this is when I and they are trying to arrive at a proper conclusion as to how the problems with which we have to contend should be handled. Once the officials and I have discussed these matters adequately and cleared our minds and pulled no punches as to the wisdom of the course I or they might suggest, when we have agreed upon the way in which a matter should be handled, then, when I go to meet the representatives of the N.F.A., the I.C.M.S.A. or any other rural organisation, I feel that, through all the proceedings, I should keep complete control of the discussion. The officials do, in fact, on occasion intervene to remind me of some particular point or another. I feel that it is my duty to let those who are interested in that business know that they are dealing with a Minister who makes it his business—by work, effort and time— to understand what all these matters are and to be able to know himself why it is he has approved of certain actions.
We have had many discussions in relation to projects that affect our people and this particular industry. Surely I am not expected, as a Minister, to act upon the advice of all these organisations? The co-operative movement would want a margin of £5 or £6 for handling and drying wheat. The farmers would love to support the co-operative movement because they would love to think the co-operative movement is against private enterprise but they could not take the responsibility for the increase that would result to the feeder of barley.
The National Farmers' Association might say: "We think you should give 40/- per barrel" and present me with a case based upon the judgment of a committee composed of representatives of the pig feeders as well as the grain growers. I know as much about the outlook, the mind and the approach of pig feeders everywhere in the country as do the National Farmers' Association. I make no bones about that. While I discuss and reason with them or with any other organisation, surely to goodness those who got that wonderful idea that we must end political dictatorship do not suggest I should abdicate and let the N.F.A., the I.C.M.S.A., the Countrywomen's Association and all the other organisations determine questions of this nature from time to time?
I say to them, in the most deliberate fashion, that I want to preserve co-operation and understanding with every one of these organisations. I would prefer if they could pull their weight together—it would make it easier for any Minister—but, whether they do or not, I want co-operation with all of them. Let no man or organisation think, however, that it is going to be based on the understanding that I am going to abdicate and that they are going to make the decisions in these vital matters—which affect thousands and thousands of people for whom they have no right to speak.
Somebody mentioned here the existence of pressure groups. As far as organisations that I meet are concerned, in the main, they aim at contributing their share to the general welfare of the people for whom they are endeavouring to act. Some pressure groups or some few individuals with an axe to grind will get into an organisation. They will plug and drive and they will get the ear of someone who will give their ideas publicity. They will try to get that over. That will be represented as something that is worthwhile from the point of view of the interests of the community. I think we are reaching the stage when we must beware of these groups. We must beware of what they are aiming at. We must be aware that it is a selfish purpose in many cases that they have to serve.
I have read, in connection with another matter which affects my Department, in some paper or other, an article dealing with this matter and I knew it was written by a retired official. If one were innocent and did not know the background and could not detect in the article itself where it originated, one would think that it was genuine criticism of what the Department had done and was doing— when, in fact, it was an opportunity seized by one individual to get even in respect of some imaginary grievance he had against those with whom he was previously in employment.
In reply to the point made by Senator Quinlan, let it be understood that I want co-operation. I sought it at times. I have had discussions on request. Remember that in these nonpolitical organisations there are people of Fianna Fáil leanings, people of Fine Gael leanings and people of other leanings. I do not wish to be brought into the position of denouncing them by saying that this is a Fianna Fáil or a Fine Gael ramp. I only want to remind them that these organisations are composed of human beings. When they come to see me, you can never be sure what motives are prompting them to take a line of action and adopt an aggressive type of attitude in the hope, perhaps, that they would produce a scene to which they could give some splash publicity in order to put the Minister and his Department on the wrong foot.
I am fully conscious of every danger that arises for me in that regard. I would ask those men who are in responsible positions in these organisations to remember it is in the country's interests that there should be co-operation. It is in the country's interests that there should be no misunderstanding as to the basis of that co-operation. It is in the country's interest that whatever suggestions these organisations make should be considered carefully but at no time can I, or any Minister, concede to them the right to determine all these important matters.
If the harmony that has existed is to be preserved in the future, there cannot be this use of the public Press to misrepresent or attack us in the way in which we have been misrepresented and attacked. They will not be free to dub me or my Department as people who have sold themselves to anybody or to any interest—the Grain Board, the grain trade, grain growers, National Farmers or the I.C.M.S.A. I should like them to understand that they are dealing with a Minister who is, I hope, one who can claim he will keep his word and honour his bond and not take an unfair advantage at any time of any discussions that take place prior to the final determination of any question that falls for solution between us.
Let there be then a reassessment of all this. But I can say, on this worked up matter, that in a paper, circulating in my own county, there was a statement released by the National Farmers' Association dealing with this whole question of the arrangement approved by me for the disposal of the barley crop of this year and every single word of any substance in it was untrue and inaccurate.
