Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 28 May 1940

Vol. 80 No. 9

Committee on Finance. - Vote No. 30—Agriculture (resumed).

Mr. O'Reilly

Deputy Cogan made a remark which I think, is extremely important, especially at a time like this when we know that it is only through increased and efficient production that we will be able to increase our markets and improve our prices. He made the remark that few farmers had confidence in the officials of the Department of Agriculture. It is my opinion, and I am quite sure the opinion of almost all Deputies, that the officials and instructors of the Department are possessed of a vast amount of knowledge and that knowledge is not available to the farming community generally, mainly because of the fact that we have not all done our best to induce the farmers to have more confidence in the instruction given to them by the officers and instructors of the Department. I know that to a large extent that may be due to historical or semipolitical reasons, but I think the time has arrived when all Deputies fully realise the necessity for better and more efficient production by our farmers.

Deputy Childers some time ago quoted very interesting figures. He indicated the low production per man on the land in this country. Those figures, of course, were known to most of us. The real reason for the low production is want of efficiency, and that lack of efficiency is due entirely to want of instruction. The unfortunate part of the business is that while that instruction is always available, it is not taken advantage of. The county committees of agriculture have available instructors in many branches of farming, poultry keeping, butter making and many other things. It is my candid opinion that for some reason or another the bulk of the farmers pay no attention whatever to the instructions and lectures given by these people; nor do they bother to any extent about the many valuable leaflets produced by the Department. To my mind, the whole Dáil and all our public representatives should make every effort to see that the confidence that Deputy Cogan spoke about is at once restored and that we should make an effort to get the farming community into a position in which they can produce more efficiently, in which they can get a better knowledge of the markets in which we have to sell our produce, and of the type of produce that is wanted in those markets.

For instance, some time ago the Government introduced a measure which controlled the production and handling of eggs. The previous Government were also compelled to introduce a measure which may not have gone as far as the last measure did. Every one of us knows the attitude of producers and farmers to that measure. Many of them believe that that measure is a penal one devised purposely to punish them and to create difficulties when, in reality, the measure that this Government introduced, like the measure that the previous Government introduced, is intended to get better prices by putting on the market a better and more suitable commodity.

I believe that this question of agricultural teaching is at the root of the depression that now exists in agriculture, apart altogether from the very severe depression that took place all over the world since the last war. Be that as it may, when there is depression the only way the agricultural community—or the industrial community, for that matter—can fight it is by increased production and by better production. One of the things that many Deputies have noticed is that, possibly up to 1883, agriculture was taught as a subject in the national schools, and every teacher passing through the Marlborough Street College went through a course at Glasnevin or elsewhere. That ceased mainly because the British Government did not believe in it, or perhaps because the British people were a little jealous that they had not the same system. One thing that has to be realised is that some instruction in what is a most intricate and highly technical calling like agriculture is essential. In my opinion, the Department of Agriculture should make a special effort to see what can be done with the youth of the country, and especially with those attending clementary schools, in order that when they come to a more mature age they will be in a position to avail of the different lectures that are given. I also believe that that would give the children at that particular period more reverence and more respect for the land.

One of the things that has happened here since 1983 is that those living on the land began to be "looked down upon," and there was not the same respect for that extremely important profession as there was for the other professions we have in this and other countries. As a result the others took precedence over the important and fundamental profession of agriculture. Many people smile at that, but agriculture is really the profession that needs most learning and most study. The other professions are sectional, while agriculture embraces everything. The farmer must know law, he must know a good deal about veterinary science, and he must know something about engineering and other things. Really the farmer and the labourer are the most important members of the community. Up to the present, many have not begun to look at farming in the right light. It was no wonder Deputy Cogan made the statement that the farmer had no confidence in magnificent lectures that were delivered, and no confidence in seeking out the enormous amount of information necessary for his calling.

While every effort was made to get them to study agriculture, for some reason there seemed to be a barrier between officials of the Department of Agriculture and farmers. Farmers were made to believe that the officials of the Department were cold-hearted officials who caused peculiar Acts of Parliament to be passed, compelling them to pack eggs in a certain way, and imposing other impositions on their industry. That outlook must be cleared away. We must try to induce farmers and agricultural workers to cooperate with the Department and its officials, and with the committees of agriculture and their officials, and, instead of looking upon them as enemies, to see in them friends who are there to do all they possibly can on their behalf.

Mr. Hickey

Begin in the schools.

Mr. O'Reilly

We will have to begin in the elementary schools. I believe the time is now ripe for some agreement between the Department of Education and the Department of Agriculture for the carrying on of instruction and lectures. Agricultural products have for a long time past been turned out like manufactured products. They are highly standardised. Consumers may want bacon containing half an inch or an eight of an inch of fat. It is not yet packed in waterproof and dustproof packages, as in other countries, and it is not sold in 1-lb. or ½-lb. packages, but possibly we will reach that stage here in the near future. Eggs have to be sold by weight, and their colour is extremely important. They have also to be sold in an attractive form and packed like chocolate in a box. Therefore, while the profession of agriculture has become highly intricate and highly involved, I fear we are not doing as much as we should to provide all the knowledge that is needed by the farmer and the worker. It is true that we have vocational schools. We have two or three of them in County Meath, to which a farm is attached, but there is the greatest possible difficulty in carrying on these schools because of overlapping between the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Education and the vocational education system. The time has arrived when the whole question should be considered anew.

It does not matter what the position is going to be after this war. I take it that it will be extremely depressed, and that is why it is all the more necessary that at this particular period we should make an effort to get our most important producers to change and to have the labouring community better trained. That would be the way to inculcate more reverence and more respect for the soil. Since the collapse of agricultural tillage some 40 or 50 years ago, many labourers have not had much opportunity for training on the land. They had to find a livelihood by working on roads and on public works. If we are going to face this depression it is incumbent upon us to take all possible steps to see that our workers are highly trained, and that every effort is made, by a more efficient system, to eliminate the slavery that exists in agriculture to-day. I do not think that any Deputy will disagree with me when I say that there is too much slavery in that profession at present, and that it should not be beyond the efforts of the Department of Agriculture to devise some means of making life on the land happier and more prosperous. If it is more happy, it is bound to be more prosperous. The people who live and work on the land, including the farm labourers, are entitled, to a large extent, to the life that exists in the city, to the same leisure that is enjoyed by residents of the city and to many of the amenities which they enjoy. In the years that I speak of, it gradually came to pass that the cost of living in the city had become, perhaps equal to or less than the cost of living in the country. The country labourer and the farmer had oftentimes many miles to travel to church. Their children had many miles to travel to school. The consequent charges on the rural resident, due to wear and tear, were extremely onerous. If the matter were examined, it might be found that the cost of living in the country has gradually come up to the cost of living in the city. If we cannot do something to improve the conditions of agriculture, we shall find that depopulation will continue and that, ultimately, it will be impossible for us to keep the ordinary school going because of lack of numbers. One of the remedies I suggest is more education in the elementary schools and more confidence between the farmers and the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. S. Brodrick

I do not agree with everything Deputy O'Reilly has said as regards instruction for farmers. These instructors are very good. It is all right for them to go around and give instruction regarding production of eggs, bacon and milk, but these instructions are not of much avail if you have not the wherewithal to carry out the directions. If the Department want these instructions and regulations carried out, they should do something to provide better fowl-houses, better byres and better styes. They are limiting themselves too much in that regard, with the result that the farmers have not the means of carrying out the instructions given them. A small farmer with 15 or 20 acres, and a valuation of £8 or £10, is not in a position to erect these fowl-houses or byres or styes. The farmer, and particularly the small farmer, is prepared to carry out the instructions given him so far as possible, but he is no fool. He knows what is going to pay him. If an instructor advises him to do a thing which he has tried and failed to do with a profit, he will not try it again.

There is no use in the Department harassing the farming community of the people who are directly dealing with the farming community. Take the case of egg production. The man who buys eggs from the farmer has to pay for a licence and he has also to be registered. Not alone that, but he must have a place where nothing but eggs are dealt with. I have no objection to that part of it. But you have inspectors—men and women—flying around the country every day, harassing the people to an extent which makes the production of eggs uneconomic. That is one reason why you are not getting increased production of eggs. This is a time when the Department of Agriculture should be on their feet and when they should be encouraging greater production. Yet, last year owners of two mills in my county—even co-operative mills—were fined £40 and £73 for over-milling wheat—that is to say, milling beyond a certain quota the farmers' own wheat. The farmers were the people who owned the mills.

If the Minister is going to carry on in the future as he did in the past, you will not have increased production. If the Department is satisfied that a mill can produce good flour, it should be allowed to mill the necessary wheat instead of giving the lot over to a few millers who have got rich quickly owing to the Government's policy. The small millers should get a chance. When the Government Party first assumed office, they were in favour of spreading out industries and giving more employment. Last year—I hope it will not occur this year—they centralised the milling industry and gave the benefit to a few millers instead of giving a chance to the mills throughout the country who were producing good flour and giving good employment. They were giving to the farmer a much cheaper flour than he can get from the few millers who are in a privileged position.

As regards the bacon industry, we find some of the factories paying a dividend of 25 per cent. That happened in the West of Ireland and appeared in the Press. Yet, the farmer cannot get a market for his pigs. The small consumer—the ordinary labourer and the industrial worker who works from 48 to 50 hours a week—pays 190/- a cwt. for his bacon.

Dr. Ryan

That is the worst yet.

Mr. Brodrick

What is the same bacon sold at in England?

Dr. Ryan

A pig does not consist entirely of back rashers?

Mr. Brodrick

Are we not paying 180/- for inferior cuts?

Dr. Ryan

What do you pay for the shoulder?

Mr. Brodrick

I am giving the price which, I am told, is being paid here. If I am wrong the Minister can correct me. I am not in the industry but I am told that the same Irish bacon can be bought in England for 133/-. The Minister will admit that there is a big difference between the prices in the two countries.

Dr. Ryan

It is cheaper here.

Mr. Brodrick

The people down the country will not tell you that.

Dr. Ryan

And you will not encourage them to say so, either.

Mr. Brodrick

The Minister has cheek enough to say anything.

Dr. Ryan

I would not have the cheek to say that bacon is costing 190/-.

Mr. Brodrick

You have the cheek to say that the cost of bacon here is cheaper than in England. If you want greater production, you will have to do more in order to get it. The Ministry, so far as I can see, have been asleep for a number of years. There are large areas of land that could usefully be reclaimed, and the reclaimed land would make fine tillage land. If you go beyond a certain valuation in land you cannot get the £5 an acre for reclaiming it. There should be no restrictions in that connection; there should be more freedom for the people.

The Government should endeavour to compensate the people in a better fashion for producing crops. If the Minister is not prepared to do something in the way of better compensation for production, he cannot have production. There are many hundreds of acres of land and all that is allowed is an acre here and there every other year for which the farmer will get £5. No purpose is served by the Minister pointing to all he is doing to develop agriculture unless he starts in a proper fashion. If he wants better eggs, butter and bacon, he will have to give the farmers a start and put them in a position so that they can produce better eggs, butter and bacon. At the moment they are not in a position to make any progress. I know farmers who are anxious to produce these things, but they are not able to use their land because they have not the necessary money. The Minister should help those people.

Mr. Hickey

They have not any capital.

Mr. Brodrick

They have not, and they are not in a position to develop their holdings. There is one little industry in the country concerned with the export of seed potatoes. That industry was started nine or ten years ago, and a beginning was made with a few hundred tons. The export for the year 1939-40 reached a total of 6,000 tons. That is a matter that should receive serious consideration. The trouble now confronting those in that industry is connected with the grading of the potatoes. The potatoes have to be graded and inspected. Most of that work has to be done on the land, because the people engaged in the industry have not stores large enough to contain 12 or 15 tons, so that the potatoes could be graded indoors and packed. The Minister should give some small loan to help those people to erect suitable sheds in which they could grade the potatoes in the winter; in the summer time the sheds could be used for some other purpose.

I find throughout the country that small farmers are anxious to comply with the regulations, but they do not want to be harassed, and the exporters do not want to be harassed, every day by inspectors. If you want farming to be put on a proper basis you must, first of all, give financial assistance to the farmers; you cannot have your regulations properly carried out unless you provide the farmers with the money necessary to enable them to put their industry on a proper foundation.

Mr. J. Flynn

Last year I had occasion to ask the Minister to take some action in regard to the importation of onions and apples. At that time the Kerry County Committee of Agriculture were faced with a rather serious situation. Producers there had large quantities of onions and apples for sale and, simply because the ban was not imposed at a sufficiently early period, considerable quantities of foreign onions and apples were dumped in this country. The Kerry producers, in the circumstances, found it practically impossible to dispose of their produce at anything like remunerative prices. We asked the Minister's Department on that occasion to have the ban enforced at an earlier period this year.

I must say that the Department did their utmost to assist us then, but, whatever took place previous to the period of our application, large quantities of onions and apples reached the merchants in Dublin from foreign sources and, right up to a late period in the year, the Kerry farmers were prevented from getting anything like the cost of production for their products. I appeal to the Minister to see that there will not be a recurrence of what happened last year. It might be argued that it is premature to bring this matter forward, but I consider that, if the Minister gives a favourable reply, it will be an incentive to our people who are interested in onion and apple production because they will know that there will be a safeguard and that they can look forward to a remunerative return for their labour.

I should like to draw the Minister's attention to the question of non-creamery butter. In one of our Gaeltacht districts, Glencar, we have 1,100 suppliers who would benefit greatly by the introduction of the creamery system. I understand a good case has been made out to the Department for the introduction of such a system in that area. The 1,100 suppliers are small farmers, hardworking, industrious mountain farmers. I think there should be no hesitation on the part of the Department in granting whatever expenditure is required.

In addition to the 1,100 in Glencar, there are 400 suppliers in another area. All we ask the Department to do is to establish a travelling creamery which would cost approximately £600 or £700. The departmental officials say that the Department of Finance would not sanction such expenditure. Fancy such a reply from these people when the scheme, apart from the facilities which would be provided for these hardworking farmers, would easily pay for itself. It is unquestionably an economic scheme and, despite the attitude the Department is taking up, I urge the Minister to insist on the scheme going through. There is no use in talking about our Gaeltacht policy or about assisting the people living in these districts if we have not some sincerity.

I think that a case certainly has been made out and that, therefore, there should be no hesitation. The amount involved is high and we are going through trying times when it is not easy to find money for every scheme, but these schemes are outstanding and have been going on for years. We hope that this one, if it is taken on and sanctioned, will be as much a success as the others have been in other parts of the country. These schemes have saved the farmers in the Gaeltacht districts and, were it not for the introduction of the travelling creamery system in West Cork and South Kerry, those farmers would be in a grave predicament at the moment, especially in the question of non-creamery butter. The only salvation for those areas is the further development of the travelling creamery system. I believe that the Minister would be justified in entering on that kind of development.

The question of reclaimed land has been raised. That is a matter which affects the people in my area very much, and I wish to mark my appreciation of the Minister's efforts in that direction. Very great benefits have been conferred on the people down there, though there are certain difficulties. The Department is going ahead with a certain type of development in regard to land reclamation and they say that a small farmer is only entitled to a certain grant per year, no matter how anxious and industrious he may be. The inspectors have come to me and admitted that they are tied up by the system. Where they see a man anxious to go ahead they may arrange to give him £5 per acre. In a case like that, if a man reclaimed 20 acres the price should still be £5 per acre, and I would be in favour of that. It turns out, however, that the inspector has to inform that man that he will get £5 per acre up to a maximum of one and a half or two acres. That is a very small area. As the scheme carried out is such a success and as such great work is being performed, I would ask the Minister to get the Department to adjust that regulation, so that intending applicants—and those availing of the scheme at present—would be able to reclaim 10 or 20 acres and would get the rate arranged, no matter what the acreage might be.

I should like to hear the Minister's reply to the suggestion put forward in regard to farmers anxious to develop their holdings. I have been asked to make representation to him with regard to men who, in the ordinary course of events, are entitled to unemployment assistance, that the farmers in those areas could employ those men if the State would pay the farmers the amount of the assistance that these men would be entitled to. The farmer, in turn, would increase that amount to the standard agricultural rate. Of course, I admit that it is difficult to work it out in practice, but it is something which should be considered by the Minister. A scheme like that would make for better co-operation between the farmers and the agricultural workers and would help towards increased production.

In conclusion, on behalf of the people in the Gaeltacht districts, I wish to mark our appreciation of the Minister's efforts for those areas, and our appreciation of his efforts to try to find a way out for the small farmers to enable them to develop their little holdings.

Mr. McMenamin

There are three matters I should like to mention. I should like to ask the Minister a question regarding home-produced butter— that is, non-dairy butter. It is a serious matter in counties like Donegal, where there are very few creameries. Would the Minister say whether he holds out any hope, for this year, that there will be any market for it? If not for the butter produced in the homes, would there be any hope, assuming that the merchants took it and cleaned it up and turned it out well?

The second matter is this: Would the Minister tell the House what the potentialities are for seed potatoes for next year, assuming that the European hostilities continue? Thirdly: I wish to draw the Minister's attention to the fact that the Minister for Lands has some 4,970 farms on which there are apparently no chattels of any kind. I am curious to know whether the Minister is applying the Compulsory Tillage Order to these lands, or if he has taken any steps to put them into production. There was general impeachment by Deputy O'Reilly and others about the treatment the inspectors get from the farmers; that the farmers do not appreciate the inspectors' advice and adopt their suggestions. I wonder does it ever occur to those Deputies that the explanation is attributable to the fact that Government policy so reacts on the farmers that they hate to see anybody associated with the Government at all.

Considerable attention has been paid to certain statistics submitted to the House by Deputy Childers. Statistics are quite inane unless they are related to the facts and explained. We were told by Deputy Childers that the farmers have done nothing at all to increase production in the last 20 years, but he did not give us any explanation. Is it not to be found in the fact that, in that period, a revolution, a civil war and an economic war took place? Just as the country was emerging out of a revolution and a civil war, the farmers were getting into production and were getting an income after paying for all the imported agricultural produce. This country had an income of over £14,000,000 annually for the five years, 1927-32; but for the five years 1932-38 that fell to £6,000,000 annually, after they had paid for all the imports.

I should like to advise any Deputies in this House who are inclined to lecture the farmers that it would be far better to leave the agricultural industry alone and the farmers would be then much better off. Give the farmer a chance to go on with his business about which he knows best himself. Let Deputies who feel inclined to lecture the farmers just think that after this country was called upon to pay for the damage done during the civil war, and when it was slowly emerging from the throes of revolution, it was suddenly launched into the economic war. How could agriculture prosper under these conditions? We got certain figures from Deputy Childers, but I presume it did not suit Deputy Childers' brief to explain why production had gone down. Is it any wonder that the agricultural community lost heart? Is it any wonder that they do not want to see anybody connected with the Government, or if they are saying to themselves at their own humble firesides that the country would be better off if there was no Government at all, considering the treatment they have received at the hands of the Government? It is rather amusing to hear certain Deputies suggest that the Government should give a lead to the agricultural industry. Having seen the many "leads" it has given to the agricultural industry since I entered this House, I would say: "God save the farmer from any more of them." It would be quite silly, of course, to say anything dogmatically with regard to the future. One could make many suggestions, but then the events of to-morrow may nullify and cut across the whole field of these suggestions. It is quite useless to speculate. One can only hope that, as far as the export side of the industry is concerned, the Minister will avail of every opportunity that comes his way to promote the interests of the farmers. Further than that it would be foolish for one to say anything. I should like the Minister, when replying, to deal with the three matters to which I referred at the beginning of my remarks.

Dr. Ryan

Many questions, big and small, have been raised during this debate, and I suppose that Deputies realise that if it took seven hours to put these questions to me, it is not likely that I shall be able to answer all of them in twenty-five minutes. Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney talked about soil analysis. There has been a good deal of soil analysis carried on in this country, scientifically and especially practically, but it has not been of any practical advantage to the farmer. It does indicate the chemical composition of the soil, but that is not of much use to the farmer. What the farmer wants is information in regard to the plant food that is available in ordinary conditions in the soil, and even those people who have been advocating soil analysis in the past have now gone back to the old method which we have been pursuing here for years. We have put at the disposal of the farmers the staffs of the various county agricultural committees. An instructor is sent out to a particular farm to ascertain by experiment the best way to manure the land. That is the method that has been followed in this country for forty years. I saw it in operation myself when I was a boy. The instructor will mark out stripes in a field and on the various plots try out different classes of manure. That is the only way by which you can ascertain which is the best class of manure for a particular soil.

Mr. Hickey

It is the most practical way.

Dr. Ryan

It is. After all this talk about soil analysis and all this writing in various magazines by different people, we now find that we are considered to be the most up-to-date country in the world because we did not bother with what they were doing in other countries. I was surprised to hear Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney advocate the growing of maize in this country. I can imagine what Deputies on the opposite benches would say if I suggested that we should grow maize in this country. It is surprising to hear the ideas that are expressed sometimes on the opposite side of the House. Why should we try to grow maize in this country when we remember that if you take the ordinary forage crops, such as vetches and oats, there is no country in the world can beat this country in the production of them? In Canada and America they may be able to grow maize, but there is no country in the world can grow the same quantity as we can of vetches and rye on an acre of land. Why should we depart from the growing of these crops to experiment in the production of a crop that has never been grown in this country? I am surprised that a man of sense such as Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney should make a suggestion of that kind.

I agree with Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney that we should do everything possible to impress on farmers the desirability of laying down a proper grass seed mixture. We try to do so by distributing leaflets. Deputy O'Reilly said that there was a vast amount of knowledge in the Department which is not getting out to the farmers. I agree with the Deputy. I have been saying that for a number of years. It is a great pity that we cannot get this vast amount of knowledge disseminated amongst the farmers, but it is difficult to know how we can do it. The Department has been urging very keenly on committees of agriculture to provide more classes and many of the county committees, as a result of the urge from headquarters, have appointed extra instructors during the winter months to give classes in various areas. There has been a good response on the part of farmers to these efforts. We have not the slightest difficulty in getting young farmers and farmers' sons to attend the classes. We intend to push these classes as far as we can. Suggestions have been made that we should send out leaflets to farmers all over the country. Other suggestions were also made, some of them, I am afraid, not of a very practical nature. The plan we have followed is the old one of sending out leaflets to anybody who asks for them.

Mr. McMenamin

Why not try distributing them through the schools?

Dr. Ryan

That was advocated too, and we tried that method on a small scale on one occasion, but Deputies should remember that if these leaflets are sent to farmers without their asking for them, the leaflets are not appreciated.

Mr. Hickey

Have you not sufficient demonstration plots throughout the country?

Dr. Ryan

I do not know if we have sufficient, but we have quite a number of them. I remember when I was young, often sitting down by the fireside amongst farmers' sons and farm labourers, and I can recall the sort of conversation they carried on about agricultural matters. At the present day, I often meet the sons of these people, and from any discussions I have had with them, it is clear that the present generation of young farmers are very much more learned and skilled in farming than the last generation. They know why you should have a balanced ration to feed a pig, and they know the proper seed mixture to use in setting down grass land. They also know how you should mix manures, and when you should have potash and nitrogenous manures for various crops. Knowledge of that kind was not so universal amongst the farming community 30 years ago.

There has been a good deal of talk about providing capital. Well, of course, there is the usual opinion expressed by many Deputies that farmers are short of capital, and there is no doubt that certain farmers are short of capital while others have capital enough, but the whole difficulty in that connection is to find out what farmers to whom we should give extra capital and how to secure it. I am sure that nobody will advocate that money should be given out without any distinction whatever to farmers, and I am sure that anybody who had the handling of the matter of handing out capital to farmers would lay down regulations in regard to it. I think it was Deputy Linehan who suggested that the Agricultural Credit Corporation should lay down what is meant by "solvency". I think that the Agricultural Credit Corporation interpret the word "solvent" as meaning a man whose total assets, if realised, would exceed his liabilities, and they are prepared to lend money to such farmers. Such a farmer might not have money at the time, but if he were solvent in that regard, and if, by lending him a few hundred pounds, he would be enabled to stock his land, the Credit Corporation would advance the money to him. Although he has no money, still he is not insolvent, and that is the type of man to whom they would give a loan. Interpreting the word "solvent" in that way, I think that the Agricultural Credit Corporation is entitled to use that word. On the other hand, if a man's total assets, including his farm implements and so on, do not, in value, total up to the amount of his liabilities, I do not think the Agricultural Credit Corporation would be prepared to lend that man any money, and I do not think they should do so.

Mr. Linehan

It is merely a question of the interpretation of the word.

Dr. Ryan

Yes. Well, in fact, they do interpret the word "solvent" as meaning a man whose total assets exceed his liabilities.

Mr. Linehan

I am glad to hear that.

Dr. Ryan

A complaint was raised by Deputy Hughes in regard to cattle arriving late at the ports and there not being the necessary officials available for inspection. I do not think there has ever been any trouble about getting the officers of my Department to work late. I do not think there is any question of their refusing to work late. It is not a question of their refusing to work late, but it must be remembered that the cattle have to be rested for two hours, and then there is the question of catching the boat, which must keep to a time table. As a matter of fact, whenever there has been an occasion where cattle had to be sent out late, the veterinary surgeons have never raised any question at all about the matter. Another question was raised with regard to the end of the milk strike. I do not want to go into that matter fully now, but I do not think Deputy Hughes was right in what he said. At the termination of that strike, I said that the negotiations should go through the ordinary machinery. That meant that the negotiations should proceed through the board and be put up for my consideration. I turned it down on the first occasion, but there was no breach of any undertaking so far as I can see.

Deputy Cogan, I think, said that I had neglected to provide seed wheat. We went to a lot of trouble to get in seed wheat. As a matter of fact, we had got an agreement with Sweden to send us 2,000 of Diamante, and then just when we thought we were getting that, the Swedish Government cancelled the licence at the time. We then got it from Denmark, and the result was that we had too much seed wheat in the country. As a matter of fact, Deputy Cogan asked us what we were going to do with the amount we had on hands, and suggested that those people who had too much on their hands might not be so very enthusiastic about it. Well, I do not think these people will suffer any appreciable loss, and I do not think it will be necessary for myself or any other Minister to intervene.

Some figures were given by various Deputies who spoke, and I am always quite willing to discuss any question here if it is on a proper figure basis, but sometimes Deputies are not quite accurate in the figures they give. For instance, Deputy Brodrick spoke about the price of bacon. Now, I do not deny the fact that the bacon factories were making money, but I do not think they are making much now. There is no use, however, in saying that the price of bacon here is 190/- a cwt., and implying that that is the price for all classes of bacon. It must be remembered that that calculation is based on the price of prime back rashers.

If we could produce pigs that had nothing else but that class of bacon, it would be a different matter, but the fact is that our pigs have shoulders and bellies and other things that do not fetch anything near 190/- a cwt. If it were a fact that our factories were getting too much, I think it should be borne in mind that, as against that figure of 190/- that has been mentioned, the British have been buying the whole pig for 133/- per cwt. at an Irish port, and I think that the fact that that is a favourable price is proved by the fact that a Cork factory which had its export quota reduced, and was told to cater more for the home market, protested very vigorously against the new rule. They made the very good case—and I am sure the Deputies have seen it and probably expected to see the proprietors of these Cork factories in the bankruptcy court —that they could do much better on the foreign market at that price. The price paid by the British at the ports here is 133/- per cwt., but I am very doubtful if the consumer in England gets his bacon cheaper than we get it here. It is subsidised to an extent, it is true, but even so I do not think that the price of bacon to the consumer in England is as cheap as here.

Another figure was given by Deputy Brasier, who said that agricultural machinery had gone up in price by 150 per cent. Now, under an Order, the increase in agricultural machinery is 12½ per cent. and cannot be more than last year, and on inquiry I find that imported machinery has gone up by 20 per cent.

Mr. Brasier

Is that since the war commenced?

Dr. Ryan

I think so. Deputy Corry asked about the provision of harvesting machinery. We are watching that position very closely, and I think we need have no worries about it. Deputy Belton said that his Party were entirely in agreement with the wheat-growing policy as advocated from this side of the House. It is a pity that that was not known some years ago. It would have saved a lot of discussion.

Mr. Brasier

Not all.

Dr. Ryan

I said that feeding stuffs would be cheaper, and I said that at the same time it would be harder to get them. Deputy Belton says that that is inconsistent, that if a thing is scarce it is sure to be dearer, not cheaper. I do not think so in this case. This year I expect we are going to grow a good deal more feeding stuffs than last year. The amount coming in will be less, and still they should be cheaper, because, of course, the price is regulated to some extent in any case. The ordinary economic law of supply and demand does not hold.

Mr. Brasier

Does that mean that the cross-Channel freights will be lower?

Dr. Ryan

No; it is the ocean rates.

Mr. Brasier

That will mean that the price in England will be lower, but the price in this country will be raised by the difference in the cross-Channel freights.

Dr. Ryan

The British consumer will not get as big an advantage as we will get. They have been getting these cheaper rates for a long time.

Mr. Brasier

Still, the cross-Channel freights will be higher.

Dr. Ryan

Coming from there to here, yes, they will be slightly up, but it will not be a big thing, not nearly as big an item as the ocean freights. I was asked if we impressed on the British Ministers that if we sell at pre-war prices we must buy at pre-war prices. We impressed every single argument we could think of. When Deputies say that we must get bigger prices for butter and for bacon, and that we must, in fact, do away with the quota on bacon, they must always remember that we are merely sellers and they are buyers, and that if the buyer has one view and we have another, and if we cannot agree, we cannot insist. The only thing we can say is that we will not supply the goods.

Of course, there is a big difference between New Zealand conditions and ours. With regard to the price of butter, I was asked why could we not sell butter as cheaply as the New Zealand farmer. We cannot. New Zealand is composed practically altogether of very big farms. They have mechanised farms in the way of milking and that sort of thing. They do their own separating and they send their cream to the creamery so that you may regard practically every farm there almost the same as if an auxiliary creamery here owned all the land around it. That is the basis it is worked on. They work on a very large scale. They pay very big wages, three times what we pay here, but they are able to do that because they are working on a huge scale, are mechanised units and, in that way, can get the big output. In addition to that, there are two other items: they have practically no winter. I believe that you might regard only two or three weeks as winter. We have a very long winter here, practically six months. They have also the advantage of the exchange. The primary producer in New Zealand has the advantage of about 25 per cent added on to his price on account of the exchange.

Mr. Hickey

They have their own control.

Dr. Ryan

Yes, that is right. We do not produce our own seeds of certain kinds here, as Deputy Belton says. We do not produce vegetable seeds. We were commencing to produce beet seeds, and I had in mind producing our own vegetable seeds, but I was looking forward to the uproar there would be if I were to say to the people of Ireland, for instance, in regard to ordinary cabbage, that there is only one variety of cabbage seed to be got. In the catalogues of all the seedsmen in Dublin alone, without mentioning Cork, a number of varieties of cabbage are mentioned. The same would apply to parsnips, carrots, savoy and cauliflowers. We could not possibly produce all those varieties, because the quantity would be small, and people would be complaining that they used to get a variety which they cannot get now. There would be a great deal of trouble over it. At the same time, I think Deputy Belton is right. We should have done it, and perhaps we may do it yet.

I am quite familiar with the case raised by Deputy Cosgrave. He raised it here before. Deputy Murphy mentioned another case. With regard to the case raised by Deputy Cosgrave, the facts are as stated by him, and it does appear unfair as Deputy Cosgrave put it, but if the Dairy Disposals Board and the co-operative creameries, combined or separately—because, after all, they were working hand in hand—had tried over a number of years to buy this man out and had failed to get him at what they thought was a reasonable price, then they said: "If we cannot succeed that way, the only thing is to fight for the supply." They fought for the supply and then it appeared that that particular proprietor was not able to fight financially, and, therefore, collapsed immediately and, from that point of view, should be considered ex gratia.

Mr. McMenamin

Is it not a very long time hanging on, a small matter like that?

Dr. Ryan

The Deputy must remember, of course, that the creamery built in opposition is only operating this year for the first time. I admit that the whole thing has been going on for years. In regard to the position raised by Deputy Murphy in Ballinascarthy, I cannot see anything wrong about that. The farmers of the district say: "We do not want to send our milk to a proprietary creamery; we want our own creamery." They come to me and say to me: "Are you able to buy this man out?" I say: "No, it is impossible to agree to a price." They say: "If you cannot buy him out, you must give us a licence to fight him. We want our own co-operative creamery." I cannot refuse a licence when the thing is put to me like that. As a matter of fact, I informed the proprietor before I did it. I said: "If the Dairy Disposals Board does not come to an agreement with you to buy you out, I will have to yield to the co-operative societies' demand to give a licence to fight you."

Mr. Murphy

That was not the view expressed by the farmers in the petition they sent to the Minister when they said they were quite satisfied with the existing state of affairs.

Dr. Ryan

There was a long list of farmers. They sent up a petition to me to give a licence to set up a co-operative creamery. Somebody else sent a petition that they did not want that to be done at all. At any rate, the farmers have put up the money and are going on. That is their own business.

Mr. McMenamin

Is it not a foolish policy?

Dr. Ryan

It is very foolish, but if the farmers want their own creamery I am not going to stop them.

Mr. Linehan

The Minister ought to stop them from wasting money.

Dr. Ryan

There was a certain policy agreed upon here, I think by all Parties, in 1927, that the proprietor should be bought out and handed over to co-operatives. There was no question of compulsion. That, probably, would have come some time. Many of them were bought out at that time and handed over to co-operatives. There were only a few remaining, and it was a question for me either to bring in a Bill here to appoint arbitrators, if you like, and have them taken over on a compulsory basis and handed over to the co-operatives, and finish the work begun in 1927, or to do the other thing —let the farmers go into the fight and build creameries for themselves.

Mr. Linehan

Is it not a most dangerous proceeding to permit any operation like that that entails the raising of money by a group of farmers at the present time to start building new creameries in such areas? They will be coming to the Minister and asking the Dairy Disposals Board to pull another bunch of lame ducks out of the banks again.

Mr. McMenamin

That is what will happen.

Dr. Ryan

The Deputy probably knows the conditions in these creameries better than I do. I am told that in these particular creameries which are fighting the Cork and Kerry group in Cork, the committees there are very sensible men who know what they are doing.

Mr. Murphy

Time will tell that.

Mr. Linehan

I am not questioning the individuals at all.

Dr. Ryan

I think the farmers were quite entitled to say to me that if I was not able to induce the proprietor to sell out, or if I was not prepared to bring in legislation to compel him to sell out, I must at least give them an opportunity of fighting for themselves.

Mr. Linehan

Even at the risk of wasting money?

Dr. Ryan

What could I do?

Mr. McMenamin

It seems a terrible policy.

Dr. Ryan

The other point raised by Deputy Murphy is also a question that comes up again and again, that is, how far these co-operative societies should be permitted to go into business. They have certain advantages with regard to income tax and other things over the ordinary trader, but I do not think it can be claimed that they have any particular advantage with regard to Government subsidies. The price of their butter is subsidised, that is true, but that is a general thing. Butter is subsidised whether it is produced by a co-operative society, a proprietor or by a farmer in his own dairy, and so on. Therefore, I do not think that the traders can claim that. The only thing they can claim is that they do not pay the levy.

Many traders say that they are not paying it because they are not making any profits, but that is the point. Another point they sometimes make is that the creamery supplier is compelled to deal with the creamery stores because he is at the mercy of the manager. He delivers his milk there and is looking for a cheque, and sometimes perhaps for an advance, and, therefore, he must keep in the good graces of the manager. As a result, he must deal with the stores and leave the ordinary shopkeeper. There may be something in that also, but when you come to deal with it, you find that it is a very big problem.

Mr. Hickey

There is nothing wrong in trading with the stores.

Dr. Ryan

No.

Mr. Murphy

Deputy Hickey knows nothing at all about it. He lives safely in Cork City.

Dr. Ryan

I want to put this to Deputy Murphy: I wonder if he were in my place, and particularly being a member of a Labour Government, would he attempt to bring in a Bill to prevent people from co-operating either in buying or selling?

Mr. Murphy

I would not have the slightest hesitation in putting down this co-operation, because it is not co-operation at all.

Dr. Ryan

The Deputy would not be regarded as a good Labour man.

Mr. Murphy

I would risk that.

Dr. Ryan

I personally think they should not do it. We have been preparing a Co-operative Bill for a long time, and I hope that we may bring it in here in the near future. If so, this matter will be discussed very much more fully. Deputy Linehan asked me about cow testing. In that regard, the suggestion has been put to me that if we could give a shade better price to the produce of cows which are tested at the creamery than to others, it might induce farmers to go into cow testing. That is so, but I think it would be a pity to depart from the voluntary method of cow testing. If any inducement of that nature were given, you will have the type of farmer coming into it who always comes in when there is something to be made out of it. That is the big difficulty. You must leave it on the voluntary basis.

Mr. Linehan

Is the position not that those farmers are injuring the others at the moment?

Dr. Ryan

It is an extraordinary thing right enough that it is not spreading, but we are doing a little more propaganda now than last year, and are meeting with some success. Possibly we may get it going better now. Deputy Linehan also raised a question about the Newmarket Dairy Company. Last year the Deputy raised that question and I actually got a list of the amounts paid by the various creameries over a couple of months and there was not the slightest shade of difference. What the Dairy Disposals Board does is to try to pay the same as surrounding creameries. They do not pay the same price in all places but they pay the same as the creameries in the area because it would be unfair to the co-operatives to pay more. It would be unfair to the supplier to pay less. Therefore, they try to pay the same.

Deputy Linehan also said that there was not very much use in all these instructions unless the Department helped small farmers to provide piggeries and henhouses. As I explained when introducing the Estimate, we had a scheme of loans for poultry houses in operation and it was hardly availed of at all, so that there is a difficulty in that matter.

Deputy McMenamin asked me a few questions, one being about non-creamery butter. We are in a real difficulty there. I explained to-day that the British Government did offer a certain price for creamery butter, and that they had not agreed so far to take non-creamery butter at all. We of course, are still pressing our point of view that they should pay more for our creamery butter and should take non-creamery butter. I am not sure whether we will succeed or not, but, as I said to-day, I should not like to be too pessimistic because I do not want the farmers to go out of production. Possibly we may succeed.

Mr. McMenamin

The heavy production will be coming on now.

Dr. Ryan

I am quite well aware of that. We have been pressing them very hard and we did try to impress on the British Ministry that the month of May was going to be difficult and, of course, June will be very much more difficult. I do not know what we are going to do, if we do not get rid of it there, because what we can get rid of in other markets will be very small, and with difficulties of shipping now, the quantity may be even smaller than in previous years.

Mr. Hughes

What are the other markets?

Dr. Ryan

Africa was one. A certain amount of tinned butter was sent there. Then there were ships' stores and Mediterranean markets which, I suppose, would be North Africa. They were small. I think that a few years ago it was a matter of half and half to Britain and to other markets, but I think the amount sent to Great Britain was greater than half in the last few years. The other point raised by Deputy McMenamin was as to what prospect there was of markets for seed potatoes if the European war went on. I do not think the European war affects our seed potato market very much.

Mr. McMenamin

What about the amount that went to the Mediterranean countries?

Dr. Ryan

None of the countries involved—Germany, France, Belgium, Holland—took them from us. They went to the Mediterranean, it is true, and to Africa, and another lot went to Great Britain, so that these markets would not be interfered with. Shipping may be difficult, to a certain extent, but otherwise they will not be interfered with. With regard to the amount of land held by the Land Commission, I should point out that the land is not held by the Land Commission. I think the Deputy was wrong in that statement.

Mr. McMenamin

I did not mean that. I referred to land on which the annuities were not paid.

Dr. Ryan

Whoever is the owner is responsible, and I could not answer straight off as to what is being done about them, but the only land actually owned by the Land Commission, forestry land, has been tilled to the proper amount.

Mr. McMenamin

I was not referring to land held by the Land Commission.

Mr. Hughes

Would the Minister answer the question I raised about veterinary inspection at the port?

Dr. Ryan

I answered that before the Deputy came in. I said that it was not a question of veterinary surgeons at the port refusing to work, and I said that any time they were asked to work overtime there was no trouble at all about it. There must, however, be a two-hours detention of cattle before they are shipped and the boats must sail at the scheduled time because, otherwise, they do not catch the connection across the Channel and the cattle miss the markets. It is really a matter of carrying out a schedule of transport rather than any difficulty of inspection that makes this rule as to closing down about 6 or 6.30 necessary.

Mr. Hughes

Suppose a cattle special arrives at 4.45 p.m. The two hours' detention period will be up at 6.45, but the veterinary surgeons will have gone at 6.30. In such a case would it not be reasonable that the veterinary surgeons should remain over?

Dr. Ryan

The veterinary surgeons wait to deal even with trains coming in as late as 6 o'clock. It is not a question of trouble from the veterinary staff, but the trouble of keeping the scheduled times for boats and trains.

Vote put and agreed to.

Progress reported.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.40 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 29th May.