Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 26 Jan 1927

Vol. 18 No. 2

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE—VOTE 52.

The Dáil went into Committee on Finance to consider Supplementary Estimate (Vote 52 (Department of Agriculture)).

I move:

Go ndeontar Suim Bhreise ná raghaidh thar Dheich bPúint chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1927, chun tuarastail agus costaisí na Roinne Talmhaíochta agus seirbhísí áirithe atá fé riara na Roinne sin maraon le hildeontaisí i gceabhair.

That a Supplementary sum not exceeding Ten Pounds be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for the salaries and expenses of the Department of Agriculture and of certain services administered by that Department including sundry grants-in-aid.

Mr. HOGAN

This is a Vote for funds to advance to farmers to erect new creameries in districts where no creameries at present exist. The amount mentioned is £23,500. That will be available and will be sufficient up to 31st March. Only a small proportion of the total liabilities will be incurred by that date. The supplementary amount which will be necessary to be found in the new Financial Year in order to complete the work to be done under this Vote will be £70,000 or £80,000, making a round total of about £100,000. The method adopted is to take a token vote of £10. Under sub-head Q in last year's Estimates a sum of £52,600 was voted for University College, Cork.

We expect that there will be £23,500 of that available, perhaps more. There will be an amount required in any case, and the amount required will be £23,500 by the end of the financial year. That need not in any way disconcert the people who are interested in the Dairy Faculty in University College, Cork; the money is there for them. They have not got ahead as quickly as we thought they would. Our business was to provide the money; the money is there and there is no hitch whatever on this side. They have some difficulty over the site. There are three possible sites for the new creamery, and they have not been able to come to a decision yet as to which they will fix on. When this estimate was introduced last year they had practically made up their minds on one site, but since then they have changed their minds. There is an alternative site and they have not yet been able to decide between these two on account of difficulties of their own with which we are not concerned. If they had, this money would have been used. As it is, and having regard to the date which we have reached and to the fact that we have only three months to go to the end of the financial year, there is no likelihood that they will have drawn the whole of this, but it is quite certain that this £23,500 will be available. With regard to the new creameries the position is that there has been a considerable demand for the last three months for new creameries and for credits for the establishment of new creameries. That demand has coincided with the considerable difficulty experienced by the suppliers in finding money through the ordinary joint stock banks. I do not want to go into these difficulties. They are there. Money is getting tighter, not only money for the purpose of developing the creamery industry but money for every other purpose, and that particular tendency has come at the same time as a demand for credits for new creameries. In that state of affairs we decided that we would step into the gap, especially in view of the fact that the Agricultural Credit Bill will be passed this Session and that the Agricultural Credit Corporation will be set up as soon as possible after the passing of the Bill. That corporation will be asked to take over these loans. These are loans, not subsidies. I need not argue the advantages of providing that money. It is another step in our backward career of endeavouring to put a premium on mixed farming instead of specialised farming. We are asking the farmer to go in more for tilling and dairying rather than for livestock and pigs. It is frankly a policy to encourage mixed farming as against grain-growing for sale as such.

There is another important consideration that we took into account when we came to this decision, and that was that as a result of the Dairy Produce Act, which is not yet fully in operation, the price of home-made butter has absolutely collapsed. There is no market for it now except the butter factories; farmers' rough lumps cannot be exported, and rightly so. We will not allow it. It very often contains more than 16 per cent. of water, and there are other good reasons for preventing its export. That has limited the market considerably, and the result has been that farmers' butter sold from 6d. to 11d. a lb., or from 2½d. to 4½d. a gallon for the milk, during the last year. That particular factor was more eloquent than any plea to convince the Department, the farmers or anyone in the Dáil, that there was no money in that, and that they should turn to the creameries. There are districts which gave up the idea of home butter-making with a great many pangs and that are still rather sorry for themselves, but the general opinion is that the people in these counties have changed their minds quickly as a result of these prices obtained during the last six months. They are ready, and the time is ripe for meeting their demands for creameries.

I do not want to indicate the number of creameries that may be erected from this fund. There are certain applications. These applications may be granted or amended. I do not want to indicate the counties either. There are various counties all over the South, and there are some applications from Northern counties. They will all be considered. Claims that have been put in for central creameries may be changed to auxiliaries. Other applications for creameries may be refused on the ground that there are auxiliaries close by, so that I am not in a position at the moment to say what proposals put up under this fund will be centralised creameries and what proportion will be auxiliaries. Each proposal will be examined on its merits, and the consent of the Department of Lands and Agriculture will have to be obtained. In other words, the loan will only be given if we are satisfied that the particular proposition is economically sound. To be satisfied about that we must not only be satisfied that the creamery will not be redundant but satisfied that an auxiliary would not suffice instead of a central creamery. There are too many centrals and too few auxiliaries. We will have to be satisfied also that there is an economic milk supply. We will give those loans on certain conditions specified, and I will indicate to the Dáil specifically what these conditions are. The society must, of course, be affiliated to the I.A.O.S. You can take it that a number of these conditions are conditions that will be embodied afterwards in the Bill. There must be in these cases a half-yearly audit by a competent auditor. Before the society is registered prospective suppliers must take shares in proportion to the number of their cows, and these shares must cover the whole purchase money of the creamery. They will be asked to pay up a reasonable proportion, namely, a quarter of these shares, and that payment will be made by a half-crown before registration and a half-crown after registration and just when operations are about to begin. That will leave for every pound a balance of 15/-, and that will be collected by deductions from the price of milk over a period of, say, six or eight years. It will amount to a deduction of 6d. per share per month in the season of five months during which there is a flush milk supply. That will mean a half-crown per share per season.

Per share or per cow?

Mr. HOGAN

Per share. I do not wish to prejudice the position at the moment by saying how many shares should be taken for each cow. That is a rather important question that will have to be decided on discussion. They will be financed in that way, and repayment of the loan will be in that way for six or eight years. That, I think, will give the farmers concerned a reasonable way of financing these creameries.

Will the Minister state what he is charging for these loans?

Mr. HOGAN

I will come to that. First of all, no creamery can be established on a sound basis, no creamery has security for any credit, unless the suppliers take shares. I am not speaking at the moment of paying up shares. What used to happen was that an enthusiastic minority decided to erect a creamery, found the money, so far as the money was found by the suppliers themselves, borrowed the rest, on the joint and several security of a few big men in the district, from the local banks, and started working it. That is utterly uneconomic. Only a minority in that case are affected by the fate of the creamery. There is no realisation generally that everybody is interested in it, and the majority are free. Moreover, it is unsound from the point of view of the banks. If everybody who was interested in it is encouraged to do his best by taking shares then the particular organisation for which the money is required, over and above the money that is subscribed, has a sound security for the working capital and for the difference between what is subscribed and what is required to build the creamery. We will insist that the full purchase money be covered by shares, with a reasonable proportion paid up, and we will find the balance by way of loans. The money can be borrowed roughly at 5½ per cent. We will make a further condition, which I think is right to mention, and that is, that new creameries, when established, work in with the federation that is at present being arranged for the sale of Irish creamery butter. At present the I.A.O.S. and the creameries are meeting and preparing a scheme for the sale of butter. I need not now go into the question of the sale of Irish butter and indicate the weakness which was inherent in past methods by which every creamery sold its own small lot to its own customers in England. Again, it was rather hard to change that, but factors which have operated for the last three or four years have convinced the creameries that that must go, and arrangements between the creameries and the I.A.O.S., outside the Government altogether, are being made for the federated sales to English salesmen on the other side. Before any new creamery gets the benefit of these credits it must agree to come into that federation and join up with the rest of the creameries in selling its butter in that way.

I think in view of the state of credits in the country and in view of the fact that the particular agencies through which trade should get credit, the joint stock banks, have refused to come to the aid of the farmers, it is very wise on the part of the Government to provide the funds in this way, and while it is not my duty to extol the merits of the Government, in this particular case I agree that the step is timely and well placed and that it deserves the support of the farmers. The setting up of this Agricultural Credit Corporation, will, I hope, remove the necessity for the State to become a loan bank, so to speak. This is the first attempt in that direction, and I hope it will be the last. I do not believe in State credit. I believe that if industry is to live it must be on its own merits and that it should finance itself, and while I appreciate this action at this particular stage, when things are so difficult in farming, I believe the proper course would be the use of this corporation when it is established, and not to be going to the State for doles or for help when we can obtain it by our own endeavours.

I, too, am pleased to have the exposition from the Minister of the underlying principles behind this proposal. I think it is timely that the State should enter actively into the promotion of organised agriculture, that the organisation of agriculture should be pressed forward by positive State action, and that every encouragement, even insistence, as is to be proposed in the Bill, should be forthcoming. I think it is valuable, too, to have it made clear to societies that are entitled to this that they are in the main to capitalise themselves, that they are not to be pretending to be co-operative while not having the slightest notion of what is behind the idea of co-operation.

For a few people to get together and go to the bank to borrow money and be bound for years to pay a big interest out of the sales of milk, is damaging to the idea of co-operative agriculture. It is well that this new condition should be imposed upon the projected societies. There may be good reason why the Minister should not give us any indication of where the new societies are likely to spring up— we can guess—but I think it would have been very interesting, and I cannot see any disadvantage in being told what parts of the country are more likely to be served by this proposed loan.

Mr. HOGAN

There are applications from Waterford, Cork, Leix, Tipperary, Clare, Louth, Kildare, Wexford, Kerry, Leitrim, and, I think, Monaghan.

I was curious to know, because I thought it would be probably in areas which had not been hitherto served greatly by the creamery system.

Mr. HOGAN

These are areas not yet served—Leix, Clare, Kerry, and part of Cork—a great part of Cork is not served yet. There are some counties where there are practically no creameries, and in other counties mentioned they are only in the North or in the South. The applications are from areas where there are no creameries.

What about Connacht?

Mr. HOGAN

Leitrim is mentioned here.

It is also quite satisfactory to have a condition imposed upon societies that are to participate in these loans that they must work in with the projected federation. Again, we find that ideas which have been preached for quite a considerable time by people who sit on the Labour Benches, and which have been denounced, are being accepted by farmers and Ministers, whether farmers or not, with joy and all kinds of commendation. It is most satisfactory to find that these ideas of collective action, stimulated and assisted positively by the State, are finding acceptance generally.

Mental Gymnastics.

I hope Deputy Hewat will contribute to this discussion, and let us have some idea as to why this should not be done—why the gymnastic exercises should not be indulged in. I was also interested to hear from the Minister that it is intended to give a premium to the system of mixed farming. The State is coming forward to give a premium to those farmers who indulge in mixed farming—again a most desirable development, and, I may say, a warning against the policy which is sometimes preached by the same Minister that they must buy in the cheapest market. Even if these feeders of cattle find it possible to buy imported grain at a lower price, they are not to follow the market and do what the merchants and manufacturers are advised to do—they are to use their own labour on their own land, and produce food for their own stock; even though it may cost a little more than the imported stuff.

Mr. HOGAN

No, that will not do.

I am glad to hear the Minister making a reservation there. I should like to understand clearly what is his intention—what his meaning is? Is mixed farming only to be engaged in when farm produce cannot be bought cheaper than it can be produced on the home farm? Is that the position?

Mr. HOGAN

Does the Deputy want me to interrupt?

I should be very glad. This is not merely a matter of debating. It is important, because it affects national policy both in agriculture and in industry generally. I have here a recommendation by the same Minister to some farmers in the West, when he told them that he wanted to see ten million pounds' worth of butter produced, and that he did not care where they sold it. The important point was to produce more and sell it in the best market, and then, if they liked to buy Siberian butter, why not? He applied the same argument to bacon. The stimulus is going to be cheapness.

Mr. HOGAN

Dearness.

If the stimulus is going to be cheapness or mere liking, without regard to the producer in this country, then this policy of mixed farming is going to fail. I have sufficient acquaintance with farmers to know hundreds who have told me after long experience that they can buy fodder and grain cheaper than they can grow it. If a man comes forward with that argument, is the Minister going to say to him: "Go and purchase where you can buy cheapest?"

Certainly.

If not, then follow up mixed farming. If the Minister is going to qualify his statement and tell them only to follow mixed farming when they are satisfied that the produce from their own farm is going to be cheaper for their stock than if they purchased it, then let us have that qualification. On the other hand, if he says it is going to be an advantage, even though it may cost a few more pounds in the year, then I hope he will take note of that when giving advice to farmers in future. I anticipate that when the Minister really considers this matter at close quarters, if he has not yet done so, he will blurt out the truth —that what he has in mind is the man who is working his own farm with his own labour as against the man who is working his farm with wage labour. He will tell the farmer who employs wage labour that it is no use trying to grow food for his own stock, because it will cost him more to grow than he could purchase it for. To the farmer who is working his own land he will say: "You can grow cheaper than you can buy." I believe that the outline of policy that we have had from the Minister regarding these co-operative creameries is right and sound and should be extended. I believe it is in conflict with his argument and advocacy in other directions, and it would be well if he would learn something of the virtue of a reasonable amount of consistency.

I should like to ask the Minister where the three provisional sites are situated.

Mr. HOGAN

That is in connection with Cork University. I was explaining that the whole of the Vote was not used by the University, as they have not yet decided which of the three possible sites they will build on. That has nothing to do with the premiums.

I should also like to ask the Minister whether he received an application from the Westmeath Agriculture Committee for the establishment of a co-operative creamery in Mullingar. In November last a resolution was adopted by that body, when there were 16 members present, suggesting the setting up of such a creamery. There are no creameries in that county, and the farmers there would take shares and do everything in their power to see that the creamery would be a success. At present the farmers have to depend on the local market for butter. I regretted to hear the Minister say that there is no market for home-made butter, and I should like to know what he meant when he used the words "rightly so." In that county we find that the butter made by the farmers' wives and daughters is better than any other butter that can be purchased. I should also like to know whether it is intended when making these loans to impose any condition that the workers employed in the creameries will receive an adequate wage for the support of themselves and their families. It is necessary for us to see that what took place in connection with the Shannon Scheme, where they only paid a wage of 32/-, should not again occur. If the Government are going to subsidise an industry, it is the duty of labour representatives to see that an adequate wage will be paid to those employed in it, and not have the workers brought back to the slavery of pre-war days. If these creameries are to be set up, and are to get a loan at 5½ per cent., to whom will the profits go? All the profits will go to the shareholders, and the man who produces the butter will have to work for a wage that will not be sufficient to keep himself and his family. The producer should be the first to be provided for. I do not want to elaborate this point, as there are a number of Labour Deputies here, but I do maintain that when a subsidy is given by the State, or a long term loan at low interest, the least we should expect is that the people engaged in the industry established should get a decent share of the profits.

I would like to know, too, whether it is the intention of those who control the creameries to make some class of condensed milk that can be sold in this country. As a result of my own experience in several very large shops I have found that Irish condensed milk has been returned as it is not at all up to the standard of the foreign condensed milk. If you serve these creameries in a manner whereby they will be enabled to manufacture condensed milk that will be acceptable to the people of Ireland, you will certainly be doing a great deal to relieve unemployment. I appreciate the Minister's attitude and I sincerely hope that he will introduce some provision whereby the worker will receive an adequate wage.

I am not awfully keen on the State aiding the farmers or anybody else, but I believe the State ought to aid the farmers to help themselves. That is what the Minister is doing on this occasion. The necessities of the situation make it necessary that the State should step in at the present juncture. With regard to methods of administering this loan, I quite understand it is rather difficult for the Minister to make a very comprehensive statement at this stage. Possibly he has not got very definite plans yet outlined in his Department. I am sure, however, the Minister and his Department are not stepping blindly into this work of organising creameries, and I daresay they have had some definite scheme under consideration. I understand from the Minister they are going to help the establishment of creameries in counties in which they are not already organised.

Mr. HOGAN

Districts.

I should have said areas or districts. The Minister is, no doubt, well aware of the tendency in the organisation of creameries. I am sure he knows that the creamery industry is developing very much in the direction of a central creamery with branch auxiliaries surrounding it. I would like to know from him if he has this idea definitely in mind with regard to the creameries that are to be assisted by this scheme.

The small isolated creamery is not a success; the creamery with the small supply or the creamery that is not connected with other creameries has not been a success. The creameries are amalgamating and that tendency is on the increase. Modern systems of transport allow for the changed system of work in regard to creameries. It is essential, if the Minister is going to stimulate the establishment of new creameries, that he should bear that in mind and base his definite plan of action accordingly.

Perhaps the Minister will give consideration to the experiment made by his Department in regard to the one-man auxiliary type of creamery. I know the experiment was tried in my county and I believe it proved a success. It seems to me that in dealing with counties, like Clare, Offaly and Kildare, in which there are few, if any, creameries, the development of the butter and milk trade will have to be along somewhat new lines, such as those adumbrated in connection with the one-man auxiliary creamery. These counties are not capable of carrying a sufficient number of dairy cattle in a restricted area necessary to supply a large creamery that carries out the ordinary manufacturing processes of a creamery.

I quite approve of the safeguards the Minister intends to introduce in cases where it is decided to make advances under this scheme. Every one of those safeguards is absolutely necessary. There was one point that the Minister did not deal with. You may have all those stipulations which the Minister has mentioned, but at the same time, you must have a security of supply. It is time some law was brought into force which would make it obligatory on the supplier, or the member of the co-operative creamery, to continue supplies to the creamery of which he is associated. As the law stands at present that is not the case. A man may enter into a contract or may be a member of an auxiliary creamery, but he can break away, if he gets a higher price in a neighbouring creamery. That is constantly happening.

The real difficulty in regard to many creameries is the securing of competent managers. The success of a creamery depends almost altogether on the competence of the manager. Unless we can be sure of a scheme which will provide for dispensing with the services of incompetent managers, we are bound to have trouble. In almost all the cases I have known the lack of success in a creamery has been due to the incompetence, negligence or culpability of the manager. Of course, the half-yearly audit would be a check, and the examination to be carried out under the Dairy Produce Act will be a check, but I think there is a necessity for a still further check by a superior authority which will ensure that an incompetent manager cannot continue to be in charge of a creamery.

Will the Deputy say whether he suggests that this interference should be by a Government authority?

I have not gone so far as to outline any definite plan. I merely say it is a matter for consideration. It is not for me to commit myself to any definite plan at this stage.

I want to know if the Deputy has in mind that the management of the society, or some authority superior to the management of the society, would have the right to say whether the manager is incompetent or culpable.

I have in mind the existing conditions, and I know that there are, and have been, incompetent managers responsible for the failure of creameries. I am not quite convinced, even if we have auditors, that we will have competent managers. I am only suggesting that it is up to the Minister to consider whether any further check can be applied. I am sure Deputy Johnson does not want me to nail myself definitely to something in the nature of State control of creameries.

I only wanted to know whether the Deputy had anything at all in his mind on the matter.

Deputy Johnson seems to be anxious to know what everybody has in mind to-day. I must confess that I did not know very well what Deputy Johnson had in mind when he was making his statement. I got some idea of a nebulous State socialism in the country—the State controlling the farmers and creameries. I do not think Deputy Johnson outlined very clearly his idea of what the policy of the farmers should be. The only remark I will make in regard to Deputy Johnson's statement is that if he expects the farmer, by any State control, to lose anything because any particular article grown on the farm is dearer than a similar product, imported from other countries, which he can buy, he is asking the farmer to go contrary to the ordinary economic law which controls everybody else in this country. The farmer will not go contrary to the ordinary economic law, and Deputy Johnson knows that.

Is this the ordinary economic law? Ask Deputy Hewat.

On the whole I appreciate the attitude that has been adopted. The Minister has asked Deputies to deal with this matter at the right time. He has filled the gap between this period and the time when a credit corporation will be established. He is giving an opportunity to have these creameries established this year and put in working order, perhaps during the coming summer. If he did not take this action now I do not suppose they would be established before next year. I think, on the whole, that this Vote should have approval.

The passing of this Vote will certainly give a stimulus to the dairying industry and, incidentally, it will be an inducement to farmers in those areas where creameries do not exist already to get to work immediately. I assume that provision will be made in the Estimates for 1927-28 for a similar loan; at least I hope so. At the present moment in three different areas of the constituency which I represent the farmers are already arranging to start the erection of creameries. I assume that as a natural consequence of this Vote some generous provision will be made for similar loans in the Estimates for 1927-28.

I was very glad to hear the Minister stating his intention to spread the responsibility for the repayment of the loans over all the shareholders in the different societies. Hitherto, loans were advanced by the banks or the Government, only to certain members of societies, invariably the best and most progressive farmers in the area. In some instances of which I am personally aware, these farmers were heavily mulcted in consequence of the failure of the concern. It always seemed to me contrary to the spirit of true co-operation that a few men should be asked to assume responsibility for the inevitable risks entailed in the repayment of loans, which should be borne by all the members of the society—at least by the shareholders of the society.

I would be glad if the Minister would make the different shareholders responsible for the payment of these loans. I would also like to know whether any provision has been made for existing societies. The Minister is aware that under the operations of the Dairy Produce Act certain creameries have incurred expenditure for the purpose of installing machinery to fulfil the requirements of that Act. Many of these societies are in a shaky financial position at the moment, and their activities are restricted and hampered owing to the want of adequate capital. I hope it will be feasible for the Minister to make provision whereby it would be possible for him to assist societies of that kind. I wish to compliment the Minister on the production of this Vote, and I am sure it will be appreciated by the farmers, particularly of the Western area.

I would like to ask the Minister for Agriculture if the professors of the Cork University when putting on the three sites included Moore Park?

Mr. HOGAN

No. I was speaking of the site for the laboratories and creameries. There was no question of putting creameries in Moore Park.

The reason I mention it is that Professor O'Rahilly and a few others interested in University College, Cork, visited Moore Park a year ago with the intention of setting up a creamery, or a national farm, or a school for the teaching of agriculture. That would be of benefit not only to the locality but to the nation. These people proclaim that in their judgment Moore Park was the best land they had met in their travels. Even if it is not suitable for the present purposes it should be borne in mind that such a place is there, and that it is the property of the Government, so that there is no need for purchasing or bargaining with regard to it. I was going to say, "This is my own, my native land," but I will say this is our land and we can build on it for whatever purpose we like.

Who are the trustees of the land?

The trustee at present is the Minister for Defence. When you are subsidising, or giving a loan, to the co-operative creameries I think you should go to the root of the thing and give a loan to the poorer class of farmers for the building of home dairies. At present these poor people cannot build them, and they cannot comply with the laws that are being imposed upon them. It is a gross hardship to some of these poor people to bring them before the courts and fine then when it is impossible for them to comply with the laws. These poor people are told they must change their way of living and their way of bringing butter to the markets. I think they should be assisted and not have impossible conditions imposed upon them. A number of these people as a consequence of being compelled to comply with the laws will have to sell their cows.

Mr. HOGAN

There is no law in connection with the home dairies.

But if they take butter into the market and it is unclean, or if an Inspector goes out and finds that the cow-house is unclean, will not a fine be imposed? The people cannot afford at present to keep the cow-houses properly clean. They require to be assisted by means of a loan. They should be given a house to live in, for a number of them are worse off than the labourers. I suppose they did not organise in time, but now that we are imposing a duty upon them to change their methods, I think it is up to the Minister for Agriculture that he should provide a loan for these poor people so as to put them into a position to comply with the laws he is inflicting on them.

I believe that the Minister in making this loan available for the erection of creameries is taking a step in the right direction. Owing to the fact that the feeding of dry stock has been very unprofitable for some years back, farmers are casting about for some method by which a profit can be made. The prospects are not altogether so rosy as some people imagine, as butter is selling at a low price, due possibly to foreign competition. In my districts meetings have been held recently with the object of seeing whether it is possible to start a creamery and work it at a profit. This action was taken before anybody got wind of the loan for buildings. With regard to what is called farmers' butter, or home-made butter, I have it from shopkeepers who are constrained more or less to take this butter in exchange for goods, that they often sell it in Dublin at a loss of 4d. or 5d. per lb. It is practically unsaleable except as car grease. It is a very unprofitable system to be producing an article of this sort for which there is no market.

Does the Deputy maintain that all the butter produced by Irish boys and girls is only fit for car grease?

I do not because I have had experience of some very good butter at home, but I say that a great percentage of it is unfit for consumption, especially having regard to the fact that people's tastes have changed. In the large cities especially, people do not care to buy anything but creamery butter. I am not a very enthusiastic advocate of co-operation. I have had the unpleasant experience of having to foot a very big bill along with fellow-guarantors for an overdraft in a co-operative society. It was what is called a trading society. I think it would be well when the creameries are established that they should not go in for shop-keeping.

Like many of the previous speakers I am quite pleased with the Minister's scheme. Coming as I do from a county where there are practically no creameries, I must say that we have not degenerated to the level mentioned by Deputy Conlan. Our butter is not so despicable as to be compared with car grease. I maintain that we produce a fairly good article still for which there is a fairly good demand all round. The old ways, however, I suppose will have to go, and, as the Minister has stated, many of the things that were in operation in the past are of no use to-day. I hope the Minister will give all the help possible to the organisation of societies in counties such as ours where nothing whatever is known of creameries, their management, organisation and development. If it is going to be of any benefit I am sure the county of Wexford will grasp at it immediately. Our other industries, such as barley-growing, have been a failure for the past three years and we must devise ways and means of trying to make up for that. I presume from the Minister's statement that this new system will help us, and, as I have said before, I am sure that the people of Wexford will be eager to adopt any method that will improve their position in any way.

At an early stage I think I was invited to take some part in the discussion. I am sorry that in doing so I have perhaps to utter a discordant note in a very unanimous House regarding the very popular chance of participating in a Government loan. The Minister brings forward a supplementary estimate whereby he makes use of a sum which was granted on the last occasion on which we came to consider the Budget for a certain purpose. That sum not being utilised the Minister now proposes to use the money in connection with the granting of loans to creameries to be established in many parts of the country. I imagine that that is a large question which would involve a question of policy, and, generally speaking, the recognition of a state of affairs as a consequence of which the Government was going to pass legislation on certain lines. But that is not so. The Minister for Agriculture says: "I am going to take this sum and throw it out as a feeler to the country," and no doubt we will see the reflection in connection with the coming elections.

Mr. HOGAN

I hope so.

At all events, a feeler is thrown out, and it has been wonderfully successful in catching the fish of the Dáil. I have no objection whatsoever to the statement of the Minister as to how this money is going to be used. But why is it necessary to use it even to a limited extent? The operations of the Government in this matter are operations which have been in practice, and there is no reason why they should not be, in connection with the organising of creameries throughout the country. The Government now come along and say they will advance the money to a certain creamery under certain conditions.

If those conditions were complied with, irrespective of the Government's interference in the matter at all, I venture to say that the money would be available, and ought to be available from private sources. Be that as it may, let us take, say, a creamery in a certain district in Clare, which is established upon the lines that the Government lays down in connection with this particular loan. How far is that going to go? The Minister mentioned the sum of £23,000. Is it to be taken as the definite policy of the Government that they will make available an unlimited amount of money for whatever is required in connection with the starting of creameries in any part of the country? If that is so, well and good. But once you start that principle in connection with a small creamcry in any part of the country, how can you resist a similar demand from any other part of the country. In other words, are you going to have piece-meal legislation.

The principle that is involved in this should be the principle involved in the legislation of this House. It should be on definite lines, and we should not have preferential treatment. What I contend is, that whatever area of creameries is going to be covered by this supplementary vote, that will make an irresistible claim for all the creameries that are in the Saorstát or that are going to be in it, and not only that, but it involves the Government in the settled policy of subsidising co-operation to the extent, at all events, of financing it out of the country's resources. I am not here to say that that is not a right policy, but I do say that it is a perfectly wrong system to bring in a policy of that sort on a supplementary vote for £10. I say that the thing is absurd. The money that was voted originally was voted for a specific purpose. Is it the policy of this House or of the Minister for Agriture or anybody else to take money voted for a certain purpose, and because it suits their convenience to come again before the House with a supplementary vote for £10, and put that money to a use for which it was never voted, and never contemplated when voted. That is the broad issue that I put before the House.

In connection with the discussion that has taken place it has of course naturally led up to the farmers' idea of mixed farming, and to a hundred and one other aspects of the case that I have no concern with. I take it that the farmer is going to farm his land to the best advantage for himself, and is not going to consider anyone but himself in the matter, and I think rightly so. But how far, I ask, is it really an attractive proposition for the farmers. The Government steps in and makes it easy for a certain body of men to get a certain sum of money on loan. I take it that the Government is prepared to provide for adequate security for the money they have advanced, but I would like to say to the farmers that it would be very much wiser for them to get together and do that class of business on their own. There is nothing involved in the Government's proposal, if carried out, that is going to be of any particular advantage to the farmer. The amount of interest that they are going to pay for the money is not going to be so very attractive as to compensate them for all the supervision and control that the Government will be entitled to put into operation in connection with the advance of the money. I say to the farmers that it would be a simpler proposition for them to do all that themselves and to have thereby a greater freedom in the matter. The main argument that I am putting before the House is that this is not a supplementary vote; that the foundation of this whole supplementary vote involves a question of principle and policy which has never been adumbrated by the Government and never decided by the Dáil.

Would the Deputy prefer to see the workers in the country districts drawing the dole from the labour exchanges instead of being employed?

That raises a question that has not been discussed and one that I did not refer to.

I have not listened to all the discussion on this supplementary vote, but the portion of the discussion to which I have listened seems to be altogether wide of the reason why it has been introduced. The reason for its introduction is to fill a gap that has been closed by the action of the banks in recent years.

A good many gaps have been closed in that way.

Up to four or five years ago the banks were reasonable and did not ask for unreasonable securities or an unreasonable amount of interest, but within the last few years they have been asking for unreasonable security. There was one time when they did not ask for much security. In fact it is not so many years since they were asking people to take money to buy land. They went to one extreme in madness at one time, but now they appear to have gone mad in the other direction, with the result that the agricultural community and others identified with agriculture cannot at the present time do business with the banks of the country. The reasonable facilities afforded heretofore by the banks to the farmers have now been withdrawn by them. They are not prepared to accept reasonable security from farmers at the present time, and in that condition of affairs who are the farmers to look to except to the State, and all that the State is doing in this case is offering money at a reasonable rate of interest and on a certain gilt-edged security?

Private enterprise fails and the State comes in.

Private enterprise has not failed, but the banking institutions of this country have adopted a policy that is making progress in agriculture impossible.

Banking institutions are private enterprises.

Call them what you like, but that is the whole issue. I hope that this vote will fill the gap until such time as the banks come to their senses, and I do not think it is meant for anything more.

Deputy Hewat made a serious contribution to this debate. He says that this is raising a big question of policy. The mistake he makes is in thinking that it has been raised for the first time. When you criticise the principles that underlie this Vote you are criticising your project of an agricultural credit corporation, and you are equally finding fault with the basis of the Banking Commission's Report.

I had not had time to study that Report yet.

Mr. HOGAN

That may be, but I want to assure the Deputy that we have not come to the Dáil on a question like this without having given it very serious consideration. This is no casual estimate introduced without any realisation of its significance. It is a rather significant estimate undoubtedly, but it is not to-day or yesterday that we began to examine this question. We have been discussing it in the Dáil one way or another during the last two or three years. More than a year ago, since the Banking Commission was set up, and almost six or seven months ago since they reported—during all that time the Department of Agriculture and the Government generally have had to consider their attitude on this whole question. On every issue that the Deputy has raised, the decisions they have come to were, I can assure him, arrived at after great deliberation.

Is there any difference between the principle involved here and the principle involved in other grants given for agricultural purposes?

Mr. HOGAN

No. We have debated this question for the last three or four years, and have come to our conclusions after serious deliberation and after considerable examination by ourselves and by the Commission set up for that purpose. I agree with regard to the point that this is a token vote for £10. There is no point whatever in the suggestion made by the Deputy that we are really converting money to another use than that for which it was voted. It is merely a question of procedure. I could have come here with a vote for £100,000, but I know that a sum like that is not got in by the end of March. I know that I can probably find about £23,000. That is the sum that is wanted by March, but I think it right to indicate that spending £23,000 means incurring liabilities for about £100,000. I could also have come with a supplementary vote for £23,000, but obviously the right thing to do is to take it out of savings. There is no question of converting the money to a wrong use. As long as the Dáil knows what is happening and approves there is nothing wrong about it. As I have said, we have not come to conclusions on the matter casually. This whole question has been considered at great length for the last two years. I agree with the Deputy that it is just not entirely satisfactory that one portion of our agricultural policy has to be revealed and discussed without any advertence to the whole policy in regard to creameries.

As I stated in the beginning, we are proposing to set up an Agricultural Credit Corporation. That Corporation will exist to finance the needs of farmers, in particular to finance the needs of farmers' organisations, and, more particularly, to finance the creamery industry which is the foundation of our farming. That is being done deliberately, and will be done through a Bill to be introduced. This is simply following the example of a number of other countries, particularly countries competing with us in the British market. There is nothing new or revolutionary in this solution. It is, in fact, the policy outlined and adopted in Australia, New Zealand, Denmark and other countries competing with us in the British market.

I think that the comments concerning the joint stock banks' attitude are beside the point. The fact is that such banks were never intended for business of this sort, but for an entirely different purpose. Their organisation is not suitable for business of this kind. I make all allowance for the fact that these banks must have money at call, and that it does not suit them to make long term loans. There is no question at all that the loans which the farmers' organisations want are loans for fairly long terms. The joint stock banks are not suitable, either here or anywhere else, to deal with agricultural needs, and it was the realisation of that fact that led us to set up the Banking Commission and to agree to adopt their report. I think that that is the real reason that these banks are unable to deal adequately with this particular service, especially in times of shortage of money. When we discuss this question it should be stated that the attitude of certain farmers in the country is doing as much as anything else to make it difficult to give farmers credit. The attitude of farmers in various counties in small meetings—I am glad to say they are small meetings—is that they are not going to pay their debts, and to be put out of their houses and homes. That is all very fine, but it means that it is going to raise the rate of interest, no matter where the money comes from, and I think farmers should realise that.

What organisations said that?

Mr. HOGAN

There is an organisation in Tipperary known as the Farmers' Defence League, to which the Deputy wrote a letter, and which I read the other day. That organisation says that in most explicit terms.

I do not think that the Minister is correct in saying that that organisation, or any member of it, stated that they are not going to pay their debts.

I am not a member of that organisation. I have read a great many of the statements of the prominent members of that organisation, but I never read a statement that they were not going to pay their debts.

Mr. HOGAN

I have said that in discussing this question of agricultural credit we have to take into account as one factor the attitude of certain farmers. I read these statements which I say mean nothing else than that they are not going to pay all their debts. They talk about the sheriff and the bailiff and what they are going to do if anyone comes to liquidate a mortgage on their land. We know what that means. They are trying to injure the credit of the country. I do not believe that they will have that effect, but so far as I am concerned and, I think, so far as the Minister for Justice is concerned, we will do what we can to see that they will not injure the credit of the country. If those statements have any effect at all—I do not believe they will because there are too many sensible people in the country—it will be only to injure the credit of agriculture.

There is no use in going over the past. The man, be he shopkeeper or farmer, who borrowed in 1920, was unfortunate, and if these people come now and say "times have changed and we are not going to pay our debts" we know that there will be the grossest abuses and that, apart from genuine hard cases, everyone who is afraid of work will crowd into these organisations. That is one factor of the situation. This bank has been set up and luckily we are able to borrow money as well as the English or any other Government in the world. It will be set up under the best auspices. Meantime there is need for temporary credit. There is need to fill the gap. This is an attempt to fill the gap. Deputy Hewat is wrong when he says that this is legislation in favour of particular districts. It is not. We come here and state the amount. It will be our business to examine applications, not from the point of view of the district, and not to give advantage to one district over another, but to see where there is the greatest need in any part of the country for a creamery to replace home butter making.

Is the Minister denying that this is piecemeal legislation?

Mr. HOGAN

It is not legislation.

It amounts to legislation.

Mr. HOGAN

You can have it that way if you like. That is a comment I do not understand. I am standing over the estimate as it is in its setting. When this money is lent on these terms it must be taken over by the Agricultural Credit Corporation and we are finished with it. That puts a definite end to this sort of transaction. I realise that it would be a serious thing if we were doing this casually with no policy and with no idea where it is going to stop. We have a policy in our mind. The Agricultural Credit Corporation is there and we will ask the Dáil to sanction its setting up. We propose that these loans will be taken over by it and that in future the transactions will be between the Agricultural Credit Corporation and the creameries.

Will you not continue the guaranteeing of the credit. You guarantee the credit of both capital and interest of the Credit Corporation?

Mr. HOGAN

We need not discuss that now. First of all, the issue of the Credit Corporation is to be made to the public and, if they do not respond, we give the guarantee for the loan. In future the transactions will be between the Credit Corporation and the creamery. When we have cleared the ground it will be a matter between the Corporation and the creamery. No one should come to the conclusion that we are going to give out this money casually. It would be wrong for districts in which there is no real need for it, from the home butter making point of view, to think that we are going to give credit. We will examine each application with the microscope and we will try to give money to each district where it is most urgently needed. When the Credit Corporation is set up other needs can be considered, but meantime this money will go to districts where there is most urgent need for setting up creameries. Moreover, the money should only be expended on creameries that will be in operation during most part of the next butter season. Once that season passes over there is no great point in setting up creameries in November or December, as the country ought to be nearer the Agricultural Credit Corporation then, and that Corporation will be dealing with the matter.

It is not our aim to control internally the administration of co-operative societies. That is unsound. That is a matter for farmers themselves. We will not take responsibility for the actual day-to-day administration of the working of creameries but we will require a general standard. We will make general regulations in regard to affiliation, in regard to share capital, in regard to audit, and in regard to suppliers being shareholders, and the Credit Corporation will give no advantage in the way of credit to creameries which do not comply with these regulations. After that it is their responsibility, and what you want here more than anything else is to throw responsibility on people. At the same time, the co-operative movement has to be guided in every country. We hear criticisms about the co-operative system and we hear more about the societies that fail than we do about those which succeed. As I have stated, there is a very disordered state of affairs throughout the country with regard to organised co-operative creameries but that is inevitable. This is the only country in the world where co-operative creameries were allowed to develop without State direction. It was not in the past a question of finding the money but of State direction. You have actually redundant auxiliaries here and the business is carrying twice the overhead expenses which it should. Do not blame the farmers, for if you do you blame the farmers in every country in the world, because it has been found by experience that, having so many people and so many interests involved, it is essential that while the State should not do the farmers' work it should direct it in certain ways.

In future it will be impossible to set up redundant creameries, to set them up without having them affiliated, without having a half-yearly audit, and without having them properly covered by share capital. I am not saying that there is a fortune in the creamery industry. I do not believe that there is I do not say that there is a fortune in any business, even in normal times, and certainly not in agriculture, but there is a living in fair times for hard-working farmers. People need not be wise after the event if there is not a good butter season next year. I make the case that the creamery industry is vital to farming and is the foundation really of stock-rearing. It is the soundest method in normal times, and especially in times that are not quite good. With regard to Deputy Johnson's point I think it is not quite relevant, but I suppose I asked for it in my opening statement. He changed his ground a little bit, as the last time he criticised me he was advocating mixed farming instead of tillage.

Mr. HOGAN

I thought that mixed farming was tillage farming. I take it that what the Deputy wants is to increase production and, in addition, to see that as many people as possible share in the benefits of increased production. His programme, so far as I see it, is that the farmers should till and give employment in that way, but he seems to object strongly to them feeding their own stock from their own tillage. If I can read his statement at all, that is what he means.

The Deputy cannot read it if he thinks that.

Mr. HOGAN

At present the cheapest way of getting food is to produce it on the farm. Deputy Johnson should be delighted, as that means more tillage. If the Deputy requires me to tell him what advice I am going to give farmers when it becomes impracticable, from the point of view of cost, to produce food on farms, I ask him what is he going to do about it. He has never given it to us yet. But why argue about it?

Is the farmer wrong when he says that he can buy more cheaply than he can produce?

Mr. HOGAN

There is a difficulty about arguing this question. Every farmer knows that he ought to produce some of his grain and some of his meal, and that he must buy others. Denmark, which has 99 per cent. tillage, imports two and a half times its production in the way of tillage. There are some foods that you might grow here in a glass-house, palmnut meal and cotton cake, highly protein foods. It would be impossible to produce here all the foods that we need, even if 100 per cent. of the land were tilled. There are some foods we must import. But the real point is that by mixed farming, properly carried out, the industrious farmer will do far more tillage, produce far more of the food he can produce, and consequently produce more wealth and give more employment than either the farmer who goes in for cattle alone or for raising barley for sale as a cash crop. All that is irrelevant, and I will leave it.

I wish to make a slight explanation of a statement made by the Minister. It is with regard to the question of the association of farmers whom the Minister says will not pay their debts. That is a point that ought not to be allowed to go. It is a very important point. I am quite in agreement with the Minister in his view that people ought not to repudiate their debts, and I think it would be wrong and be bad for agricultural credit to allow it to go out from this House that farmers are repudiating their debts. As I know the facts, they are not actually repudiating their debts, but you will get at meetings, including meetings often attended by Ministers, men who make extreme statements, but these statements are not the feelings of men——

Deputy Heffernan will shorten this discussion if he tells me what the objects of the Farmers' Defence League are. I am not speaking of irresponsible farmers or anything else. What are the avowed objects of the Farmers' Defence League?

I will have to come to that in rather a round-about way. We have had a good deal of talk about the banks. The banks, taking the report of the Banking Commission into account, are not to blame for the state of affairs now existing. I could protest strongly against the attitude of the banks towards agricultural credit in the past three or four years. The banks have not justified their existence towards agriculture. I know something about the theory of banking. But in regard to these men that the Minister has referred to, the banks have been dealing with them on a policy of "heads I win and tails you lose." The banks could not lose under any circumstances, but these men had to take any chance there was of losing. I know case after case where money was lent to men where the principal man was not a responsible party, was not a mark for the money, and where decent, respectable farmers, who have always paid their debts and who have always intended to pay the debts they incurred, are being practically threatened with bankruptcy if the banks enforce their claims. Naturally, these farmers are trying to safeguard themselves in some way. The report of the Banking Commission offers an outlet, as the Minister knows.

Mr. HOGAN

No.

It offers some kind of an outlet in regard to them, and while I do not stand in any way for the repudiation of loans, I say that the fault in this case is not altogether with the farmers.

Mr. HOGAN

Who said it was?

The banks are largely responsible for the existing state of affairs, and I say that they should be made to accept some responsibility for it.

Mr. HOGAN

Now you are talking. What does that last statement mean?

Vote put and agreed to.
The Dáil went out of Committee.
Resolution reported.
Question—"That the Dáil agree with the Committee in its report"— put and agreed to.
Ordered "That the Supplementary Estimate, Vote 52 (Department of Agriculture) be taken on Tuesday, 1st February."
Barr
Roinn