The Minister for Agriculture desires to make an announcement.
Public Business. - Proposal to Mix Irish Grain With Imported Maize.
I desire to announce to the Dáil the terms of reference of the Inquiry set up in connection with the proposal to mix Irish grain with imported maize. The terms of reference are as follows:—
(1) To ascertain and report whether, having due regard to the interests of
(a) Producers of cereals in Saorstát Éireann; and
(b) Consumers of maize meal in Saorstát Eireann,
it would be in the national interest to enact that all maize meal before being offered for sale in Saorstát Eireann shall be mixed with some one or more of the following home-grown cereals, namely, wheat, barley, oats or rye, so that the resultant mixture shall contain a definite percentage of such cereals; and, if so, what that percentage should be.
(2) To consider and report upon the effect, if any, which such enactment would be likely to have upon tillage and the production of cereals in Saorstát Eireann.
(3) To consider and report upon the administrative machinery necessary to make such enactment operative.
These are the terms of reference. It is proposed to ask Professor Whelehan, Mr. McElligott and Dr. Hinchcliff, the present members of the Tariff Commission, to act as the members of that Inquiry.
What will be the procedure at that Inquiry? Will the grain-growers have power to cross-examine witnesses who wish to give evidence against the proposal? Also, will those who are against the proposal have power to cross-examine the grain-growers?
Mr. Hogan
An inquiry set up in that way would not have any such powers; it would be purely voluntary.
The presence of witnesses would be voluntary.
Mr. Hogan
Yes. I have no doubt the Tariff Commission will make arrangements under which any witnesses that they think necessary for the purposes of the Inquiry will come forward. For instance, I think arrangements could be made to deal with their travelling expenses, and so on. There is a certain sub-head in my Vote which would enable that to be done. This inquiry is just an ordinary inquiry, and no powers exist in connection with such a body to compel the attendance of witnesses. If a tribunal were to be set up with such powers, it could only be set up under the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act, 1921, the first section of which roads: "(1) Where it has been resolved (whether before or after the commencement of this Act) by both Houses of Parliament, that it is expedient that a tribunal be established for inquiring into a definite matter described in the Resolution as of urgent public importance, and in pursuance of the Resolution a tribunal is appointed for the purpose either by His Majesty or a Secretary of State, the instrument by which the tribunal is appointed or any instrument supplemental thereto may provide that this Act shall apply, and in such case the tribunal shall have all such powers, rights and privileges as are vested in the High Court, or in Scotland the Court of Session, or a judge of either such Court, on the occasion of an action in respect of the following matters:—(a) the enforcing the attendance of witnesses and examining them on oath, affirmation, or otherwise..." I presume that would include cross-examination.
If it were desired to have a tribunal of that sort it would be necessary to bring forward a resolution in the Dáil. I have no decided views one way or the other. I believe that the sort of inquiry it is proposed to set up can get all the information that is really required. I take it the various interests concerned will be willing—it will cost them nothing— to come forward and give their views and answer any questions put to them by the tribunal. As a lawyer with some experience of courts, I do not believe that in an inquiry of this sort the cross-examination of witnesses will lead to very much additional information. Most of the information will be elicited by the court itself from the witnesses. If the House feels very strongly that a tribunal of the sort contemplated by the Act I have referred to should be set up, it would be necessary to bring forward a resolution, put that resolution upon the Order Paper and pass it.
I am not clear as to whether this matter could be properly described as one of urgent public importance. Possibly it could. I do not think, however, that there is any advantage in that. I believe the inquiry I have suggested will get all the information that is wanted. I believe the parties interested on both sides will come forward. As regards anybody who does not come forward—well, he would have nothing to say that would be worth hearing.
Would it not be much better when a witness comes forward that he should be cross-examined? It is only by cross-examination the different points for or against, will be brought out. Any witness can come in and read a statement and if he is not cross-examined neither the tribunal nor the public at large will be satisfied. I think it would be much better if the witness were to be subject to cross-examination. After all, that is the way evidence is taken in the law courts.
Mr. Hogan
The word cross-examine may lead to misunderstanding. After all, cross-examination mainly consists in asking questions although they are asked by the other side. I presume the witnesses who will come forward voluntarily in this way will answer any question asked. I think in practice that is almost absolutely certain.
Could it be agreed that witnesses coming forward to give evidence will be cross-examined?
Mr. Hogan
In other words, could it be agreed that every witness will answer every question? That is what it comes to. Of course, a crank might find himself in difficulties and refuse to answer a question—no one could get over that.
His refusal to answer a question would be illuminating.
Mr. Hogan
It would. I am certain that if witnesses come forward and are asked questions, either by the Commission or anybody else, they will answer them. If they do not, even-one can draw his own conclusion.
Can any interested parties bring a lawyer or an economist to represent them in order to cross-examine witnesses?
Mr. Hogan
I am sure the Commissioners will have no objection. Personally, I do not know that a lawyer can help an awful lot, but an economist or anyone else like that might.
Have the Government, in deciding on the existing members of the Tariff Commission to conduct the inquiry, had any thought for the number of applications awaiting consideration by the Tariff Commission which will have to be adjourned?
Mr. Hogan
We have, but this is an important matter, and the Tariff Commission seems to be a body, as constituted, eminently suited for such an inquiry. It is undoubtedly a body without any vested interests. It is undoubtedly a competent body, when we consider the men who are on it, to make such an inquiry. I think this is a very important inquiry, and I should like to see every aspect of the proposal brought into full relief. I want to see all the issues, direct and indirect, that arise stated fully, and I am more concerned with getting what I call a full, competent report in the matter than with any other consideration. I think that this body can give us that. They have experience of sifting evidence; they are impartial; they have no vested interests, and, from their past experience they are bound to be competent to deal with the case. These considerations have overborne the fact which Deputy Lemass states that they have a fair amount of work on hands.
Can the Tariff Commission issue a report by the middle of December?
Mr. Hogan
My proposal is to ask them. I have not had an opportunity of consulting them, and I could not really give such an undertaking on their behalf at this stage, but I shall do what I can to expedite the matter.
If this is to have any influence on next year's crop, the farmers will have to know by the middle of December.
Mr. Hogan
By the middle of January.
By the middle of December in our county.
I wish to emphasise that this is a matter of urgent public importance. I speak for the people in the midlands, and this is a very vital question for them. No question that has come before the Dáil recently for decision, or before the Commission for consideration, is of more vital importance to a large number of our people than this is. I welcome this inquiry and I hope that the Minister, in view of its urgency, will see that the Commission will take the matter up and report as soon as possible. It is of importance that the report be available by the middle of December.
Mr. Hogan
I have mentioned this to one member of the Commission. Probably he has mentioned it to the others. We have not formally asked the Commission to consider the matter, but we shall do so at once. I shall do what I can to expedite the matter.
Will the Government consider releasing these members from the Tariff Commission and getting others to consider the applications which have been waiting for three years?
After the report is issued, how long will the Government take to make up their minds?
Mr. Hogan
I can guarantee to make up my mind fairly quickly.
Can the Minister say who will be the Government at that time?
Mr. Hogan
The present Government.