I would be inclined to treat with contempt what the Minister said in reply on the Second Reading Stage, but for the fact that he is a responsible Minister of State and I assume that he expressed the views of the Government in the matter. If that represents the real view of the present Government, I must say the situation is utterly hopeless from the agricultural point of view. If the Minister says, and persists in saying, that agriculture generally here and the people living by agriculture are fairly well off, and that they are fairly prosperous, the Minister fails and the Government fail completely to realise the position of agriculture in this country. If the whole agricultural position is approached by the Government in that frame of mind I think the situation is utterly hopeless.
There is no getting away from the fact that the vast majority of people appreciate that agriculture is in a very difficult position. Our attitude on this Bill is that the help afforded under it is altogether inadequate to meet the present conditions when one considers that rates—as has been pointed out by Deputy Brennan—have gone up by over a million pounds since 1932. In 1931-32, the rates were, approximately, something under two and a half million pounds and last year's rate was something over three and a half millions, so that it has gone up by over a million pounds; and this year's rate is higher again. As well as that, the agricultural grant has gone down during that time. When Fianna Fáil came into office they increased the grant by a quarter of a million pounds the first year. Afterwards, they reduced it by half a million, so that the agricultural grant to-day is actually less than it was in 1932, by a quarter of a million pounds.
The general burdens on the agricultural community have gone up in the same proportion, and, side by side with that situation, our agricultural output has sunk and is sinking to an alarming extent. The output then was £62,000,000 and that has fallen to £47,000,000. In face of that situation, in face of a reduction in income—and a serious reduction in income, to my mind, is reflected in the cost of production being relatively greater than it was in 1932—the agricultural community are faced with this charge.
The present relief afforded by this Bill, we are told by the Minister, is a generous allowance and taking, he tells us, the halving of the annuities into account, more has been done for the agricultural community than for any other section of the people.
There is one thing I would like to point out to the Minister and to the Government. It is the absolute necessity of preserving the agricultural community intact and preserving them as producers. If anything happens our main industry, the whole fabric of the State is going to crack up and collapse, and I think we are far nearer to that than the Minister appreciates. The Minister commented on the fact that every time that he hears certain Deputies—like Deputy Broderick and myself—we are getting more and more gloomy about the agricultural position. Evidently we have not penetrated the Minister's mind in the matter. Evidently he is living quite happily in a fool's paradise. It is his serious responsibility to realise that the one important industry in this country is definitely in a very dangerous position at the present time.
I am not attempting—and it is of no benefit to me—to paint a gloomy picture. I am sorry we are in such a position, but I treat it as my responsibility in coming into this House to put the position of that industry before the responsible people. The Deputies named by the Minister have completely failed to impress him. The Minister went on to tell us of his experience, but is he aware that that is not the position? I would be very much inclined to treat the Minister with contempt and scorn but for the fact that he is a responsible Minister living in the City of Dublin, in the environment of the city and without any contact with the country. I do not know where he got his information: I was told that he got it from friends—he has a number of friends down the country; but it is an extraordinary situation if the Minister is getting reports from his friends showing that agriculture is in a good position at the present time, and does not require help. I am afraid he is being misinformed: I know that he is being misinformed if that is the case.
Our attitude definitely is that this relief to agriculture is not nearly sufficient in present conditions, and it is doubtful whether this Bill should be made a permanent measure, in view of the fact that a commission has been set up to examine the whole agricultural position. This question of rates on agricultural land is a point raised by a big bulk of the agricultural community, as to the justice of such a charge at all, and when outside competitor countries in the market in which we sell our surplus produce are free of such rates, we must realise that if we are going to continue to hold that market, in competition with the keenest producers in the world, we must be put on the same basis. If we are handicapped in any way, we are going to fall back, and that is what is happening at present. It is not that our people are lazy, indifferent as regards their work, or do not know their job. We fail at present because the cost of production and overhead charges are relatively greater than those of the people against whom we have to compete. I appeal to the Minister not to make this Bill a permanent measure, and, in view of the fact that there is an enormous increase in local taxation and in the burden thrown back on our agricultural people, with, at the same time, a reduction in the grant of £250,000, I say that this relief is altogether inadequate.