Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 28 Feb 1929

Vol. 28 No. 5

Local Elections (Dublin) Bill, 1929. - Destructive Insects and Pests Bill, 1928—Second Stage.

Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Hogan)

The particular pest aimed at is the Colorado Beetle. It is an insect that attacks potatoes. It originated, I think, in America, and has now spread to France, and has become practically endemic in France. There is very little hope that the operations of this insect will be controlled in France. France is very close to this country, and we think it essential to arm ourselves with the necessary powers to deal with any situation that might arise if, in seed potatoes, packing or in any other way, this particular pest arrived from France and made its appearance in our potato crops.

In Section 3 the Bill provides that an authorised officer of the Department of Agriculture may enter the land of any grower, inspect his potatoes, and if it is found that the potatoes are infected with this particular disease, he may destroy the crop. Section 4 provides that compensation may be paid by the Department of Agriculture. The amount is not specified, but compensation may be paid to the full amount. Section 5 provides that a prosecution for any failure to obey an order or any other regulation made may be instituted at any time within twelve months from the day on which the alleged offence was committed. The point about that is that this Bill is really an amending Bill. Indeed, that applies to every other measure. This is not the first Bill dealing with potatoes and the protection of potatoes and crops generally. Under a previous Act the prosecution had to be instituted within six months. In fact, in a great many cases the offence could be committed in planting a particular crop, such as non-immune varieties, potatoes affected with this disease. It is often quite impossible to verify that the potatoes have the disease until they grow. As the law stands, the prosecution must be instituted within six months. It may be found after nine months that non-immune varieties or varieties infected by this particular insect or any other potato disease had been planted, but under the law it would be too late to prosecute. The period is now extended to twelve months.

Section 6 provides for the spraying of potatoes, in the event of a spraying notice being served on any owner to spray his potatoes for the protection of the crops. If in a district the potatoes of a farmer were found to be infected with this disease, and it was considered necessary as a precautionary measure to compel that man's neighbours to spray potatoes so as to protect them from the disease, a notice could be served. The farmers might fail to obey that notice, and the officers of the Department could then order the spraying of the crop and charge the cost to the farmers in question.

This disease spreads very rapidly. It has got such a hold in France that it is almost impossible at this stage to stop it. We feel that prevention is better than cure, and if the disease appears we think it is much better to wipe it out, either by destroying the crops or spraying in the case of crops likely to become affected because of their location—their nearness to infected crops.

Section 7 provides that expenses up to £1,000 may be paid by the Department without the sanction of the Minister for Finance. A certain emergency may arise, and it may be necessary to destroy the crop or ask the farmer to destroy it and promise him compensation on the spot. The Department will have a fund up to £1,000 to play with without sanction.

This is a short, but it may be a very important, Bill. If we never passed it, the Colorado beetle might never arrive in this country. I think it is in England at the moment. The situation, however, has become quite serious. The pest is in France, and we feel we should be prepared to meet any emergency. We are developing a rather important potato trade. We now import no potatoes. We have considerable exports. We do not even import seed potatoes, and we are developing the seed potato trade. The prospects for the development of the potato trade are rather promising, and we are in a specially favourable position as compared with Northern Ireland and England. We have practically no black scab in the Free State, with the exception of parts of County Louth and Donegal, whereas black scab is all over the Northern area, having regard to the area under potatoes. It is also prevalent in England. We should try to maintain our position, the particularly favourable position we have got. There is practically no disease either by way of black scab or any other diseases that attack potatoes. In this Bill we are endeavouring to take precautions against the introduction of a disease quite close to our shores now. It is highly infectious and spreads very rapidly. If it once gets a hold it is almost impossible to control it or to eradicate it.

Mr. Cassidy

The Minister in the course of his remarks referred to powers in the Bill whereby, in the case of any crop being diseased, the Department can order the farmer or owner of that crop to destroy it, and in such cases the farmer would be paid compensation. The Minister also made reference to the fact that under the Bill the Department of Agriculture can order the farmers or owners of crops to spray their potato crops.

Mr. Hogan

That does not apply to a diseased crop, but to a crop that is likely to get diseased by reason of its location—by reason of the fact that it is near another crop that is diseased.

Mr. Cassidy

The point I was about to put to the Minister is this: In such a case, where his Department finds it necessary to do that, his Department has power to levy upon the farmers concerned the charge for the spraying of the crop. Would the Minister at a later stage of the Bill consider an amendment whereby the Department would, in a congested district, bear the cost of the spraying of the potatoes? I am referring now to cases where the farmers are in a very poor condition; cases where there is extreme poverty among the small farmers.

Mr. M. O'Reilly

We welcome this Bill. It is certainly a step in advance. It was a very necessary Bill to introduce. Crops, just in the same way as livestock, are exposed to infection and diseases of every description. It is certainly a very important thing that a country like this, which is immune from this disease at present largely because the country is an island, should be kept immune. I believe that it is always a wise thing to take very definite steps with regard to the prevention of diseases both in animals and in crops. The one is the same as the other in the matter of these diseases. The point made by Deputy Cassidy might certainly need a bit of consideration. There are, undoubtedly, cases where, perhaps, under the Bill serious hardships might arise. I refer to cases where small farmers would unfortunately find their crops diseased, and perhaps owing to their financial position they would be unable to spray the crops themselves or to pay for the spraying of them. At the same time I do not believe that the expense can be very heavy.

It might be, perhaps, advisable for the Minister to consider some form of amendment in that matter so that people of that description would not be so heavily handicapped, perhaps, with the cost of the extra spraying. At the same time I believe that the system of spraying is a good one. Where farmers refuse to apply the remedies or preventives of the kind suggested, I think it is rather a good idea that the State should be in a position to step in and take definite steps to check the disease and prevent it from spreading. The case of sheep scab was somewhat similar to this. I think this matter of the spraying of potatoes is one in which the Department might have a little more power of a similar nature to that in sheep-dipping. The Department have a system of dipping sheep, penning them, and it would in fact be a good thing if that system were made a little bit stronger. I know that the custom amongst many farmers is to do the dipping in such a way that the sheep are only half dipped. The same thing applies in the matter of their crops. For this reason, I believe that the Bill is a good and a suitable one.

Mr. Hogan

With regard to Deputy Cassidy's point, you must, I think, give the same treatment to all farmers. Spraying with a mixture of arsenate of lead would, I imagine, cost very little. I should say that the material for the spraying would not cost more than 15/- for a half-acre plot. I am not quite sure of the exact amount, but I am quite sure that the cost would be very little. But look at it this way —if the State is to intervene to prevent the spread of a disease which, should it spread, would render the crop useless, does not that save the farmers a very considerable amount of money? The least that could be expected is that the farmers would co-operate in some way, and that they would spray their crop. If we go any further and tell the farmers that not only will we spray the crops for them and pay for the cost of the materials, of course, the obvious procedure, for a number of farmers, at any rate, will be just to sit tight and let the Department of Agriculture, and not the farmer himself, go in and spray the crops, paying for the spraying materials and for the spraying at the expense of the taxpayer.

In other words, the farmer is to have the advantage of the services of numerous highly-paid officials of the Department of Agriculture, who are to inspect his crops to see if they are diseased and, in addition to that, where they find it necessary as a preventive measure against these insect pests, they are to spray the crops and the taxpayer is to be called in to bear the cost. I can imagine a case where, in a poor district, the farmer is so miserably poor that he could not pay the 5/- or 10/- required for the spraying materials that are necessary to spray his rood of potatoes. That would be a very special case, and I should imagine that there would be a way of dealing with such a case. I suggest that in such a case other measures might be taken. As a general rule the farmers are asked to spray their crops in order to prevent their potatoes from becoming infected by a particular virus or pest which would render the crop valueless. The least they may do is to pay for the cost of the spraying. However, that is a Committee point, which can be gone into more closely in Committee. I move the Second Reading.

Question—"That the Destructive Insects and Pests Bill, 1928 be read a Second Time"—put and agreed to.

Committee Stage fixed for Wednesday, 6th March, 1929.