Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 1 Jul 1964

Vol. 57 No. 16

Agriculture (Amendment) Bill, 1964—Committee and Final Stages.

Section 1 agreed to.

SECTION 2.

Question proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Fitzgerald

The Minister has not convinced me that he has made a good case for the 50 per cent. The Minister stated in his Second Reading Speech:

While I am suggesting the rural organisation and the co-operative movement as a likely source of suitable members for committees of agriculture, I have not found it practicable to provide in this Bill for giving them direct representation, although I have given a great deal of thought to the matter. In view of the large number of rural organisations in the country, the varying strength of these organisations from one county to another and the varying number of members on individual committees, I do not think that a statutory formula could be worked out which could be applied equitably to all counties.

The next is the kernel of the point:

I hope, however, that county councils will keep the rural organisation and their co-operative movements in mind when choosing members for committees and that this broadening of membership will lead to a more general acceptance of the agricultural advisory services throughout the country.

I am sure the Minister, and anybody who is a member of a local authority or who has past experience of them, will agree that that is only wishful thinking on the part of the Minister. While I agree it is most desirable, I feel when it is not written into this legislation, it will not be applied in any of the local authorities, that I have knowledge of anyway.

First of all, after the wind of the local election has died down and the elected representatives assemble to elect a chairman and a vice-chairman for the ensuing five years what happens? When we come to the county committee of agriculture we divide up the ten places among the 29 county councillors and then we have to take in 10 from outside. Can anybody see any of the Parties, when the ten external seats on that committee are allocated, maybe to the various political Parties that may compose the county council, the NFA, Muintir na Tíre or any other of the rural organisations, getting consideration from the members of that particular county council?

All of us will have the hard luck story and a very good farmer who just got tipped for the last seat and we will have to put him on to the county committee of agriculture. That is how the external members of the county committees of agriculture will be taken in. We are all human and we all do that. We want to help those who helped us. I do not want to appear critical of any of the rural organisations, who are doing excellent work, but members of rural organisations have been very critical of the local authorities and their members. We would not be human if we were to say it is all well meant. We are not likely to say that we will take in five of those external members from the NFA, and another three from Muintir na Tíre. That is not going to happen. I am sure nobody knows that better than the Minister.

I feel the Minister, with all due respect to him—I am not saying this to be critical of the Minister—will not improve the composition of any of our committees of agriculture by this. I would again appeal to him—I have already asked him to give 75 per cent —to compromise somewhere between his 50 per cent and my 75 per cent. If we do not do this we cannot hope to get a better type of member who has the public spirit to stand for election, but one who wishes to sit on the sideline and criticise. He can come into the county committee of agriculture and criticise there. I do not think we will be improving the composition of our county councils and for that reason I oppose section 2. I would ask the Minister to compromise on a 66? per cent, that is a ? figure.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

I have listened to the Second Reading debate on this Bill very carefully and I have come to the conclusion that there is a lot to be said for having a proviso that there should be a minimum of 25 per cent of the county committees of agriculture non-council members and that there should be a maximum of 50 per cent. That would be more flexible and it would meet the wishes of those concerned.

If the Minister's case is accepted it would seem that we are to take in one less likely to be an efficient or good type of farmer among the elected representatives of the councils than one from people who are not prepared to stand for election. I should like to feel that one of the attractions of a county council candidate, a person who offers himself for election to the county council in a rural community, would be his qualifications as a good farmer. I am sure that is a thing even political Parties take into account in selecting candidates. I am sure it is a qualification the electorate take into account when selecting councillors from the candidates offered to them.

Therefore, I feel that 50 per cent is too high. The Minister is not prepared to yield on that and if I understand his case for the section correctly, it is that he desires to give representation to voluntary organisations on committees of agriculture in order to interest them in the advisory services being provided. There is a lot to be said for that, but I submit there is not one sentence in the Bill which will ensure that any rural organisation, whether it be NFA, a creamery society or some cattle breeding society, will get representation on a county committee of agriculture.

The definition in section 2 (1) (c) is wide enough for anything. I confess it is difficult to follow. If the Minister wanted to ensure that voluntary farming organisations would get representation on county committees of agriculture, it would have been very easy for him to write into the Bill that the qualification would be service on such a voluntary farming organisation within the county concerned.

Mr. Smith

Which one?

Mr. Fitzpatrick

On a one. That would be for the council to decide. I could see the Minister's difficulty if he were conferring on the voluntary organisation the right to elect directly to the council but that is not what he is doing. If it were, the Minister's objection would be valid. He could validly ask which voluntary organisation was to have the right to elect a person to the county committee and I would have no answer to that. What I suggest is that the qualification should be that a person is interested enough in agriculture to have served on some voluntary farming organisation—some creamery committee or something of the sort—to show he really was interested in the collective welfare of the farming community.

The Minister's case in favour of 50 per cent is based entirely on his anxiety to give representation to voluntary farming organisations; yet there is nothing in the qualifying section to ensure that will be so. As other Senators have said, knowing the set-up of county councils and the manner in which they are elected, it is simply wishful thinking to say a person will be elected to a committee of agriculture merely because he is a member of a voluntary organisation. There will be an added qualification, a political qualification. It would be a simple thing to define in this qualifying section that a person must have given voluntary service on a rural organisation.

Mr. Smith

Would such a man not have his politics, too? I did not wish to make this point because the main point that concerns me here is a financial one. After all, the Minister for Agriculture has a 50 per cent interest in all counties as far as technical staff is concerned. In some counties, his interest is as high as 75 per cent. Should he therefore not have the right to make a stipulation such as the one I have inserted in this section?

The rural organisation with whom I have discussed this matter admitted that what the Senator is advocating could not be done—that there was no real workable provision you could put in the Bill that would get you that result. The rural organisations would not have conceded that point to the Minister for Agriculture if they had any hopes of putting the other case over. I have not said it is impossible to have a good farmer elected to a county council. I have expressed no opinion on that matter because I was a county councillor myself, and was also on a committee of agriculture; and in both bodies I knew very good farmers.

It is not what I think, it is not what somebody else thinks; it is what these organisations claim they think about the composition of county committees of agriculture. Do they give us reasons why these committees and their employees have not the confidence or the necessary close contact with agriculture that would serve the county best? The net point now is that, as the representative of at least a fifty per cent share, I am asking for the first time, from 1965 on, that the committees of agriculture will be on a fifty-fifty basis and even if the extern members do not come specifically from rural organisations, at least the county councils will be obliged to select 50 per cent of the membership of these committees from outsiders.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

And they can be defeated councillors or anybody else.

Mr. Smith

I take it they will be sensible men who will do their best. If rural organisations have influence and sufficient organisation and go along to the county councils seeking representation on county committees of agriculture, public men will yield to that kind of pressure and give the necessary representation.

Mr. Fitzgerald

If 105 of them went along?

Mr. Smith

The council would have to be selective, then. I do not claim perfection for this measure, but I feel certain its enactment will be an advance.

Mr. McAuliffe

I cannot agree with the Minister. The more he has said, the more he has failed to convince me he has a good argument. All the Senators who have spoken, including those from the Minister's side of the House, with one exception, have been against this provision. The only member to support the Bill was Senator Quinlan. Might I add that when he gets Senator Quinlan on his side he should start examining his conscience, because it is the first time I ever heard him taking the Minister's side.

Mr. Smith

He always claims to be a friend of mine whenever I meet him.

Mr. McAuliffe

The Minister lays it down that there is an opportunity to get progressive farmers to become members of the committee. If I were convinced tonight that progressive farmers would be appointed, I would have no objection whatever to the Bill and would welcome it very much, but I know what will happen these progressive farmers. Their political background will be examined thoroughly and whoever has a majority on the council will see that if they are not active politicians, along with being progressive farmers, they will not get on to the committee.

Mr. Smith

I am not saying that a man's politics will affect the standard of his farming.

Mr. McAuliffe

A man's politics will keep him out of the committee if he is not on the right side.

Mr. Smith

I am not so sure.

Mr. McAuliffe

It has happened before in connection with Dáil Éireann, Seanad Éireann and everywhere else, and it will be the same old story over again. Suppose we do not appoint a progressive farmer, a man who is a good politician but not a bit progressive, perhaps the worst farmer in the county, will the Minister step in and say: "Under section 2 of this Bill, you cannot sit on this committee"? He will not interfere at all. I hold that the Minister could have done rightly without introducing this section into the Bill. It is because we have to provide the money that we should be in a position to put a number of county councillors there so that we can point the finger at them if they have overdone things. We should have control over the amount of money spent on the agriculture committee and we must take it on the 50 per cent basis.

Mr. Smith

They will be spending our money, too. The other 50 per cent is our money and if they put it up, our contribution will also be going up.

Mr. McAuliffe

You would not like your money spent badly any more than the ratepayers.

Mr. McDonald

I should like to ask the Minister one question. Subsection 1(c) of section 2 says:

"Every person, other than a member of the council, appointed to be a member of a committee of agriculture shall be chosen by the council for such appointment either by reason of his attainments in the practice of farming or the development of agriculture and rural living in the particular locality in which he resides, or by reason of his attainments in the promotion of agricultural or rural home education and advisory work."

I should like to ask the Minister if there is anyone in rural Ireland who would not qualify under this section.

Mr. Smith

The word "attainments" is very important. Every member of the Seanad knows very well just how difficult it is to get an exact definition, not only in this country where every person could really claim to have some knowledge of farming. We could couple this with the 1931 Act and the definition in the 1931 Act will still apply as to 50 per cent to every councillor elected. This is the new definition for the incoming 50 per cent to apply to people who are outside the elected body. It is the best we could think of.

Mr. McDonald

Anyone at all could be eligible for appointment.

Mr. Smith

If the Senator reads this carefully, he will see that it is the best we could think of. I do not say he cannot interpret it in the way he describes.

Mr. McDonald

I was only just asking if the vocational membership was going to be more or less kept to qualified bona fide farmers or people with expert first-hand knowledge. Everyone in this country claims to be an excellent farmer because he thinks there is nothing to do but put things in and they come up automatically. Apart from that, I thought we were looking for a more vocational committee.

Professor O'Brien

Might I ask a question on this section? It is laid down here that every person co-opted must fulfil certain qualifications. Suppose this were challenged in a court of law—that some person who was disgruntled were to challenge whether a person co-opted was within this category of a person who had attainments in practical farming and rural living. Could that be questioned in the law courts? It would be an extremely difficult thing for any judge to decide whether or not a person was within that category. It seems to me that there is laid down there a qualification for co-option that could be decided in the law courts, and it would be an extremely difficult problem for any judge to decide whether any individual person had these qualifications or not. I wonder if the Minister has thought at all about that aspect.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

Could I make one further point? If the Minister wishes to attain his objective, which I take to be the granting of representation to voluntary organisations really interested in farming, I suggest he can do so in quite a simple way by compiling a register of such organisations. Within his Department, he must have done so already when he says that there are about 105. He could then say that a certain percentage of the members of the committees of agriculture must come from one or more of these organisations, if there be a branch of that organisation within the county. That would go a long way to get over the difficulty some members had. It would certainly meet the wishes of the voluntary organisations concerned.

There are precedents for it already. There is a register of people who can nominate people to Seanad Éireann and there is a register now of political Parties. It would not be a very difficult thing to have a register of those worthwhile voluntary organisations and to define a qualification for membership as being a member of one or more of these if there were a branch in the county.

Mr. Smith

I am delighted to see this return of interest on the part of Senator Fitzpatrick in these rural organisations. I know that he used to be very concerned about their welfare but I thought he had tended to desert them in recent years. However, it is nice to see this return. Of course, the Senator would devise a scheme without any difficulty. I know that he has tremendous organising ability and a high standard of understanding of these problems that far overshadows mine.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

There is no necessity for humility.

Mr. Smith

I should like to see this idea worked out. Where is the register of members in a particular area? Take even the NFA and the ICMSA. The best chance would be the Irish Countrywomen's Association. I would like to see one of these on the committee of agriculture.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

Why not?

Mr. Smith

Why not? Why should not the sensible people whom we elected to the county council see the need as well as I? We have, as I say, examined this. I do not know whether Senator Fitzpatrick is suspicious of my genuine interest in this or not. If he is, I am not going to try to disabuse him any further. I say that we have tried this. The organisations themselves have discussed this matter with us. They appreciate fully what is involved in it. I know that what is proposed here will not give any firm assurance that a certain thing will happen, but I am prepared to attribute to the elected representatives, in the main, a fair share of judgment and a sense of fair play. I know in certain counties when fairly outstanding leaders of the NFA, or some other rural organisation, were mentioned, they have been co-opted to county committees of agriculture.

The better the organisations are organised in the districts, the more likely they are to make themselves felt with the county councils in securing representation. If they have not the standard of organisation, it is their fault. They have often claimed to me to have, and I am now going to put them to the test and say: "You can get 50 per cent one way or another. It is for you to go after public men and to ensure that you will".

On the other point, mentioned by Senator O'Brien, I do not know what the legal position is. I think a person, or persons, could seek an injunction if some person were chosen who did not appear to have the qualifications set out here. An injunction, or some sort of restraint, could be invoked to examine the credentials of the individual who had been co-opted. I shall not say it would be easy for the court to determine whether a man satisfied the requirements set out here. I cannot make it easier for the court.

Mr. Fitzgerald

If I have heard the Minister aright, he mentioned that it is up to the rural organisations who are anxious to get representation on these committees to go out after the public representatives, or the elected representatives, and ensure that they get elected. The onus is on them to bring pressure on the elected representatives, to get appointed or co-opted, to committees of Agriculture. It is obvious now that a certain amount of pressure is being applied in certain places, and now the pressure will be channelled in another direction, so that the public representatives who are elected, or who are likely to be elected next June, will be subjected to a certain type of pressure from ambitious people who will use their organisations to further their ambitions by saying: "Will you support the appointment of two members of such and such a rural organisation on the committee of agriculture, or three members, or four, of these ten extern members who are to be co-opted, if you are elected." That is the type of pressure I foresee being exerted next May and June when public representatives go out to seek election to the county council. I do not think it is fair that public representatives should be subjected to that type of badgering by ambitious people who have not the courage to run the gauntlet of election and find out what the public or the electors think about them.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

I am entirely dissatisfied with the definition section, that is, section 2 (1) (c). I think it means nothing.

Question put.

The Committee divided: Tá, 19; Níl 11.

Tá

• Ahern, Liam.
• Brosnahan, Seán.
• Browne, Seán.
• Cole, John C.
• Costelloe, John.
• Hogan, Daniel.
• Jessop, W.J.E.
• Killilea, Mark.
• Nash, John Joseph.
• O'Brien, George.
• Ó Ciosáin, Éamon.
• Ó Conalláin, Dónall.
• Ó Maoláin, Tomás.
• Ó Siochfhradha, Pádraig.
• O'Sullivan, Ted.
• Quinlan, Patrick M.
• Ross, J.N.
• Ruane, Thomas.
• Sheldon, William A.W.

Níl

• Butler, John.
• Crowley, Patrick.
• Davidson, Mary F.
• Desmond, Cornelius.
• Fitzgerald, John.
• Fitzpatrick, Thomas J.
• Hayes, Michael.
• McAuliffe, Timothy.
• McDonald, Charles.
• McGuire, Edward A.
• Murphy, Dominick F.

Tellers:— Tá: Senators Browne and Ó Cíosáin; Níl: Senators Desmond and Murphy.

Question declared carried.

Section 3 agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment, and received for final consideration.

Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

Mr. McDonald

In his opening speech the Minister said:

I do not think that a statutory formula could be worked out which could be applied equitably to all counties. I hope, however, that county councils will keep the rural organisations and the co-operative movement in mind when choosing members for committees and that this broadening of membership will lead to a more general acceptance of the agricultural advisory services throughout the country.

In his reply on Second Stage the Minister saw fit to accuse members of the rural organisations of being men who were looking for the glamour of leadership and publicity. I feel that is a slight on the rural organisations. After all, they are composed of men who have the common interest of their livelihood, and the right to come together and discuss their problems. The beekeepers have an organisation, and have they not the right to meet together to discuss the problems of beekeeping? Have not the various societies of cattle breeders the right to organise and meet to discuss their common interest of improving livestock? The same is the case in regard to the ICMSA, and all the other organisations which I am sure the Minister has included in his list of 105.

It is not fair for the Minister to be constantly attacking these rural organisations who have done such wonderful work to help their members, and the farmers of Ireland, to be better citizens, to produce better crops, to pursue better crop husbandry, and to be better Irishmen and farmers. The Minister should be more helpful to these young men who give their time and work voluntarily to improve their own and their neighbours' lot. They are to be congratulated. The tremendous amount of work that has been undertaken, and successfully carried out, by Macra na Feirme and Muintir na Tíre is easily recognisable in all parts of Ireland, and particularly in the counties in which those organisations flourish and thrive. I should like to register a protest at the Minister accusing them of looking for the glamour of leadership and publicity.

Mr. Smith

I admire Senator McDonald. Having made a speech opposing the representation proposed in the Bill for rural organisations, he now denounces me for having said something which, of course, I did not say. It was a tremendously interesting effort for a young man but the young man will be better when he gets older.

Professor Hayes

Some young men are not better when they get older.

Mr. Fitzgerald

I do not think it should be taken that anyone who opposed section 2 was attacking rural organisations. I was defending the right of public representatives to form their own subsidiary committees after they had run the gauntlet of election. If people feel they would make better representatives on the committees of agriculture, they have the same opportunity to get on to committees of agriculture as others have, without depending on a section in this Bill which will enable them to be co-opted on to a committee without having to undergo the hardships and frustrations connected with contesting a local election.

Question put and agreed to.