The Parliamentary Secretary has not given any indication of what he proposes to do for those small farmers who, he says, are represented by himself and his Party. The Parliamentary Secretary merely tries to make sport of the Opposition. He tries to make sport of the Centre Party, tries to make sport of the Dáil and to make sport of the sufferings of the small farmers down the country. He tries to make sport out of everything. He tries to establish that because his Party have been elected as the Government of the country they have no responsibility, nothing to do with the sufferings of the farmers, and that they have got a mandate for taking up that position. He says that the country must be self-supporting and that the country does not want to produce cattle, but the country cannot do without cattle. Milk is necessary for both town and country and if the farmers are to have cows they must have calves. If they have calves they will have store cattle which are very difficult to sell nowadays and if they are going to have beef to sell they must have something to feed these cattle. If they sell them as stores, sell them for export, they have to meet a great loss in tariffs.
Notwithstanding what the Parliamentary Secretary says in belittling the British market, although we are losing 40 per cent. of the price through tariffs, ten per cent. in preferences to which we would be entitled, and an additional ten per cent. in goodwill, that is, although we lose a total of 60 per cent. of the price which in normal circumstances we would be getting, that market is much better than any market in the world. It is still 20 per cent better than the Belgian market. The Parliamentary Secretary says that Irish beef has to compete with frozen meat at 5d. per lb. Irish beef is able successfully to compete with that frozen meat at 5d. per lb., but he did not tell the Dáil that Irish beef is being sold at 5d. per lb. Irish beef, if it got fair play, could command a decent price on the British market. Apparently the policy of the Parliamentary Secretary and his Party is to compel the farmers to make all the sacrifices. They claim that they got a mandate for that, but I question that mandate. At the election which we had about a year ago they promised the farmers everything, but they gave them nothing. On the contrary, they took what they had from them. They promised a reduction in expenditure of a couple of millions, but instead they have increased expenditure by three or four millions. They promised derating of land, but they have gone back entirely on that now. They made other promises, but they went back on them this year, and they claim to have got a mandate to go on with that policy. The Government had two policies at the last general election. One I will describe as their public policy, and the other was the policy put before the people by the whisperers. The whisperers went round and stated that they had got a mandate and they compelled the tenants to make sacrifices. We asked why did not the Government keep the promises they made last year, and the whisperers answered: "We could not keep our promises last year because Deputy Norton had the screw upon us and was tightening the screw.""You must now," the whisperers said to the farmers, "give us a majority over Norton and we will carry out our promises." But we now see what the Government are going to do from the answer of the Parliamentary Secretary to those who suggested that seeds and manure should be provided for the small farmers whom the Government claim to represent.
How are the farmers to grow crops if they have not the proper seed and manure? The Government well know that the small farmers are not in a position themselves to procure these things. They are merely trying to earn a few shillings to keep their wives and children from starving. There is no use in hoping for better times and better harvests under such circumstances. There is no use in people lecturing the farmers and shouting to them to "stick to the trenches" and comforting them with the assurance, "We are making a great fight." Who else may we ask are making sacrifices? These people say to the farmers, "You can go back and live as your grandfathers lived 200 years ago and you can afford to suffer the privations that they did; they were great men and made such sacrifices as you are making now." But at that time gentlemen of quality were passing rich on £40 a year. We have servants of the State now who try to pass for poor at £400 a year and more. Are they and other servants of the State coming down to £40 a year and getting into the trenches with the farmers? If the Parliamentary Secretary and his colleagues are not prepared to do that then I say they are not playing the game. The means by which they got elected through the action of the whisperers will be exposed. Notwithstanding the sarcastic speeches of the Parliamentary Secretary I expect he has a soft heart and that he will do what is asked in the motion for the farmers of the country. The Parliamentary Secretary says that the Centre Party are not supposed to represent the farmers. If the farmers had taken our advice they would not have to regret their action as they have now. They would not have put the Government in the position of having a majority over all Parties, and so enabled them to ridicule the farmer's difficulties. They would have increased the members of the Centre Party and compelled the Government to do their duty to the farmers of the country.
I am not now finding fault with the economic war or dealing with the cause of it. I am not going into that matter at all. I am dealing with the position in which the farmers find themselves no matter to what cause it is due. Everybody knows that the farmers are losing. They are paying more for what they have to purchase and, of course, they are losing the goodwill of the British market. More than that, they pay tariffs in order to protect industries, and instead of getting any protection they find themselves penalised by tariffs on all sides. They are not like any other class of men in the front line trenches because they find their generals are firing at them from behind. We are told that there are only 8 per cent. of the representatives of the farmers in our Party, but even that does not say that we have not a right to speak for the farmers. The farmers whom we represent, if only 8 per cent., should not be insulted by the Parliamentary Secretary, nor should he insult the 80 per cent. which he says he represents. On the contrary he ought to do his best to help them out. It reminds me of the story of the fox and the goat. A fox and a goat happened to be out for a walk and they both got into a ditch. The fox then advised the goat to allow him to get up on his back so that he might get out of the ditch and in return he promised to pull the goat out by the horns afterwards. But when the fox got out on the bank he sat on his tail and started to lecture the goat. The goat then began to get a little wit as the small farmers are now beginning to learn a little wit from the lecture of the Parliamentary Secretary. They are learning a little wit now, but I ask the Parliamentary Secretary not to make them pay too dearly for their education.