I move:—
Go ndeontar suim bhreise ná raghaidh thar £303,741 chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1941, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisí Oifig an Aire Talmhaidheachta, agus Seirbhísí áirithe atá fé riaradh na hOifige sin, maraon ie hIldeontaisí-i-gCabhair.
That a supplementary sum not exceeding £303,741 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1941, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Agriculture, and of certain Services administered by that Office, including sundry Grants-in-Aid.
The Estimate is for £303,741, but of this sum £238,000 is offset by a saving of the same amount on sub-head A of the Export Subsidies Vote (No. 68). The main items of the Estimate are: sub-head M (7), £238,000, and sub-head N (1), £64,500. I want to give some details in connection with these two sub-heads. The big item is in connection with the provision of butter for winter requirements, £238,000. It is estimated that the creamery butter production for the year ending 31st March, 1941, will be 655,000 cwts., as against 714,000 cwts. last year. The production of butter during the last 12 months, including the month of March on which we have now entered, was lower than during the previous 12 months by about 60,000 cwts. Practically all this reduction occurred in the four months, August, September, October and November. In the months of April, May, June and July last, the production was about the same as during the corresponding months in 1939. It was only towards the end of August that the returns coming in from creameries showed that there was a decline in production. That decline continued during the four months, August, September, October and November. In fact, the production was lower by 55,000 cwts. than it was for the corresponding four months of 1939.
When these returns were received by the Department the position was reviewed, and exports were stopped. There was no export of butter from this country after the 31st August, except about 1,000 cwts. which were allowed out to complete certain contracts which had been entered into. In fact, the amount of butter exported during those 12 months was lower than during the previous 12 months by a considerable quantity. The amount exported during the year 1939-40 was 240,000 cwts., and the amount exported this year was 227,000 cwts., so that we did in fact export 13,000 cwts. less than in the previous year.
These figures do not in fact give a true picture of the situation, because our usual carry-over of butter on 31st March always ranged about 8,000 or 9,000 cwts. The carry-over on the 31st March, 1940, that is the beginning of the present year, was over 20,000 cwts. So that if there had been the usual export the year the war commenced, and if we had carried over the usual 8,000 or 9,000 cwts., the difference in export in the two years would be much more marked than the figures I have given show.
Another point is, that taking our other exports of dairy products—condensed milk, dried milk, cheese, and non-creamery butter—we exported in the year 1939 54,000 cwts. of butter fat in the form of condensed milk, cheese, etc., and in the present year we only exported 38,000 cwts. I mention these facts because it was alleged by people interested in this matter that we had exported much more butter this year than we did previously. That is not true. As a matter of fact, in making up our programme for the year in April last, the amount that we intended to export was reduced by about 10 per cent. on that of the previous year, as we had forecast a certain reduction in production. The dry season that came later in the year effected a very much bigger reduction than we anticipated, and it was owing to that fact that we were left short of butter during the winter.
Now I come to the price. The production from 1st April to 30th November, 1940, was 609,000 cwts. The delivered statutory home price for this period was 154/- per cwt., less levy 9/- and freight 2/-, making a net 143/- per cwt. To this has been added a production allowance of 6/ per cwt., owing to the lower production, and that makes a net total to the creameries for butter during that period of 149/- per cwt.
The production from 1st December, 1940, to 31st March, 1941, is estimated at 46,000 cwts. The delivered statutory home price for this period is 154/- per cwt., less freight 2/-. There was no levy. That gives 152/- per cwt. It is proposed to pay an allowance of 18/- per cwt. on this production, making a total of 170/-per cwt. for that period. Therefore, the average value for the whole year will be 150/4 per cwt.
As to sub-head N (1) — Diseases of Animals Acts, etc., £64,500, the main items under this are £22,500 for the employment of temporary lay assistants, and £40,000 compensation for animals slaughtered in connection with the outbreaks of foot and mouth disease. Owing to the extent of the area covered by the standstill Order made under the Diseases of Animals Acts, the Department found it necessary to employ men to assist the Gárda Síochána in patrolling the districts affected. About 2,000 men will be employed at 7/6 per day. The number of outbreaks that have been notified so far is 53. The number of cattle affected by these outbreaks was 2,112, sheep 1,440, goats 44, and swine 130. The estimated value of these animals is £38,499, and the amount provided in the Estimate for compensation is £40,000. It is probable, however, that this amount may be exceeded, but the excess will not be required before 31st March. I shall come back to foot-and-mouth disease again, but I want to go through the other sub-heads.
The first of these is B—Travelling Expenses, £3,000. The additional provision is required for the payment of travelling and subsistence expenses of veterinary inspectors on foot-and-mouth disease duty. The next is G (3) —Fertilisers Scheme, £9,000. In the year 1938-39 the amount paid in subsidies and fertilisers was £84,959. In the year 1939-40, the amount was £76,394. For this year, to the end of January, the amount paid was £37,189. The expenditure in the current financial year has been £37,271 in respect of the 1939-40 season, and £37,189 in respect of the 1940-41 season. It is estimated that a further £14,540 will be required up to the 31st March, 1941, making a total of £89,000 for the year.
The next sub-head is M (1) —Miscellaneous Work, £2,500. This money was spent on a scheme for advertising Irish eggs in Great Britain. It was estimated that the cost would be about £5,000, but the scheme was terminated on 30th June, 1940, consequent on the measures taken by the British Ministry of Food to control the importation of eggs, which rendered an advertisement campaign on our part unnecessary.
Sub-head M.5 — £10,000 — improvement of the creamery industry. The additional sum is required for the purchase of two creameries. Sub-head M.11—farm improvement scheme —£9,900. This is the amount required for the payment in the current financial year of the wages, travelling expenses, etc., of the farm improvement supervisors and temporary agricultural overseers employed in connection with the new farm improvement scheme. I should say that the amount which is now sanctioned for payment on that scheme is £180,000. I do not know if all that will be paid within this financial year.
I come back now to the foot-and-mouth disease, and may commence by saying that it is undoubtedly the most serious outbreak that we have had in this country for a century. I am convinced that the policy of eradication which is being followed—it has always been followed here as long as this foot-and-mouth disease has had to be dealt with—is the proper policy. Some people seem to have a doubt about the advisability of dealing with the foot-and-mouth disease in that way, people who are actuated, I think, by motives, whether misplaced or not, of humanity and so on. They think that it is a very cruel thing—they even think it is a great economic loss—to slaughter so many animals in order to get rid of this disease. The argument has been put up by many people that the disease is curable. As a matter of fact, dozens of people have called to see me and to see the officers of my Department to tell us that this disease can be cured. No doubt it can. As a matter of fact, a lot of those animals would probably get well if they were left alone, but if they were left either to get well themselves or to be treated in any way, we would have an appalling spread of the disease. I think there is very little doubt that it would spread over the whole country and affect every single beast, whether cattle, sheep or pigs. What is worse, it is adisease that does not confer immunity for very long. If we could be assured that, if we allowed the disease to run through our flocks, we might then be immune from it for some years, there might be some reason to consider the argument, "let it spread", but it is not so. The immunity is of very short duration, and wave after wave of the disease would spread throughout the country if it were not tackled with the least possible delay.
I do not think there is anybody in this House who has suggested that we should deal with the disease in that way, but there are people outside the House who think that we have tackled this disease blindly, doing what our predecessors did before us, and doing what our neighbours do in Great Britain, without giving any thought whatever to the problem. I can assure everybody that the matter has been very carefully considered, both by our veterinary advisers and by those who look at it even from the economic point of view. They have taken the view that eradication is the only way of dealing with it. We also get letters from time to time from people who say that they can immunise cattle against this disease. I do not know if that is true. I do know that immunisation has been tried on the continent of Europe and has not proved very successful. But, in any case, the same objections would hold: that while we were immunising our cattle and so on, the spread of the disease would be taking place and there would be enormous economic losses. It is very hard to calculate what that loss might be. It is held that it puts cattle back at least a month or two in condition. Even if they are only put back a month in condition, we can all imagine what the loss would be if the disease were to spread through, a considerable proportion of our flocks before we could get after it.
I have also been criticised for not having done some research in this disease. Well, we have not done research either with regard to the cure or immunisation because, as I have said, we were convinced that the proper way to deal with it was to eradicate it; but a considerable amount of research has been done in countries where it is endemic—on the Continent—and no great progress would appear to have been made. The next point that I want to make clear is this, although I think it should be clear to every farmer in the country, that if the farmer reports, where he has any suspicion that his cattle are affected, and if it is afterwards confirmed that it is really foot-and-mouth disease, he will be fully compensated for all the cattle, sheep and swine that may be slaughtered. I have not heard a complaint from any owner that he was badly treated in this respect. I think every Deputy will agree with me that, if any farmer thought that he had not got proper compensation, I would have heard about it before now.
I think there need be no anxiety amongst farmers that they will not be fully compensated if the disease is reported in a proper way. What is more, I am quite prepared to make allowance for a farmer being unaware of the existence of the disease for some time, even though he did not report it as promptly as the farmer who had his wits about him would. On the other hand, where cases are concealed, and unfortunately there have been attempts at concealment, in my opinion, in this particular outbreak, I want to point out that it is an offence to make any attempt at concealment. A farmer can be prosecuted for doing so. Apart, however, from the question of a prosecution, I have full discretion in awarding compensation in such cases.
As I have said, the policy that we have pursued here in this outbreak is the policy of eradication. In attempting to eradicate the disease we must take drastic measures. I have, in all cases, in consultation with the veterinary advisers of the Department, sanctioned any drastic measures that they have thought necessary. On the other hand, I would like to say that the veterinary officers, wherever they thought they could possibly permit it, have avoided imposing any unnecessary hardships on anybody in dealing with the outbreak. There is criticism, naturally, of the way in which this outbreak has been dealt with. I say "naturally" because I can understand farmers who are upset in their business being impatient and anxious, blaming officers and so on, if they think that they are not carrying out their business as they should. The criticism would seem to come from two directions; some say that the regulations are far too strict, and some say that the regulations are far too lenient. I do not want to avoid any responsibility as regards anything that may be done. I would, however, like to say this, that when dealing with an outbreak of this character I must be guided entirely by the veterinary staff in the Department. When the chief veterinary inspector comes to me—he consults, I presume, with his own veterinary staff—and says it is necessary to take some very drastic step, I have invariably done what the chief veterinary inspector asked me to do. I think I would be very foolish to do otherwise, because if I did otherwise the chief veterinary inspector would feel that he was not getting the full co-operation which he would require in dealing with this very serious position. On the other hand, if the chief veterinary inspector is inclined to allow a certain function to take place, whatever it may be, and if he sees no danger in such a function taking place, I am not going, of my own volition, to stop such a function for the sake of meeting public opinion. I am guided entirely in those matters by the chief veterinary officer.
Let me deal with hardship first. Undoubtedly there is hardship, and hardship of a kind that cannot be compensated for. First of all, let us take the farmer who has an outbreak on his farm. I have said that he is very well compensated on the present value of his animals, but I am sure that even that is not welcomed by any farmer at the moment. A farmer does not look on an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease amongst his own flock as a stroke of good fortune, even though he does get the market value, or even a bit more than the market value for his cattle, his sheep, and his pigs, because he is put out of the business of farming for some time to come, and he is not compensated for that consequential loss. Apart from the farmers who are affected, you have the farmers in the restricted area, and they are suffering in many ways. For instance, there is the farmer who may have a good milch cow to sell; he cannot sell that milch cow because he cannot move her, and by the time the restrictions are lifted she will be no longer a new milch cow, and will not be worth the money she is worth at the moment. There are farmers also who had fat cattle ready for sale, and who had to hold them over. Those cattle, after being held over for seven or ten or fourteen days, will probably not be worth any more than they were worth when he had them fit for sale, although he will have had the expense of giving them additional feeding. There are farmers who perhaps have had to use up now the very necessary feeding stuffs that they had intended to hold over for other stock by getting rid of their fat cattle, and they will be put to the expense of buying more feeding stuffs when they get the opportunity. All those things are annoying, and indeed very hard on the farmers concerned, but still I think that the farmers as a whole will suffer those inconveniences and even suffer those losses in the hope that we may be able to deal with the outbreak as effectively and as rapidly as possible.
Then there are other classes; there are, for instance, the men who made their living as dealers. Now, they arc completely demobilised, and they are the people, unfortunately if you like for their sake, in regard to whom we are most careful that they must remain out of the business for the time being. A lot of the regulations that we have made are made for the set purpose of preventing the dealers from going around from one farm to another to buy cattle, but in the dealers own interests it is better that we should deal with this thing as drastically as possible, so that they may get back to their means of livelihood as quickly as possible.
Then there is in this city, and I suppose in the towns to some extent, quite a number of butchers, quite a number of drovers, and quite a number of people who were employed in the making of sausages and the canning of meat, and who are now unemployed. All I can say is that the more drastic we are in keeping those regulations there—regulations which are very much to their disadvantage at the moment— the better for them in the long run. We must at this time be drastic; we must not have either misplaced or foolish sympathy for certain classes; we must not make the mistake of being too lenient, and thereby perhaps spread the disease again.
On the other hand, there is no reason at all why we should be panicky. There is no reason why we should do things that are unnecessary, or that put unnecessary hardship on any class or on any individual. I will take the instance of dog races and horse races. In some cases they are prohibited, and in some cases they are not. Open coursing in the restricted area is forbidden; open coursing outside the restricted area is not forbidden. Point-to-point races are discontinued. There was no order made in that case, because there was only a limited number of them; the committees were got in touch with in each case, and agreed to postpone their point-to-point races for some time. All dog races and horse races on a confined course are allowed, except in cases where those courses are close to an infected farm. In this particular instance, I personally had some doubt as to whether or not we should permit the races to go on, but I was informed by my veterinary advisers that they could give no veterinary reasons for stopping those horse races; that they could give no more reason for stopping those races than, say, for stoppings football match, because the congregation of people is undoubtedly somewhat dangerous, but we might just as logically stop a football match or even stop people from going to religious services as stop people from going to a race meeting or a dog track. The dogs and the horses themselves are not more likely to carry the disease than the men and the women who go to those races; in fact they are less likely, because dogs and horses are not permitted off infected farms, while it is very difficult to stop humans from infected farms from going to any gathering whatever, whether it is a football match or anything else. In those matters I should like to say that the veterinary officers decide on scientific and rational grounds. They are not affected in any way by public opinion, and are not actuated by any other motive. In a case like this, I think it would be a pity that veterinary officers, or in fact any men who have to decide on a scientific basis, should by any sort of agitation be compelled to how to public opinion. It is much better that they should go entirely on their own judgment in those cases.
There have been other complaints made which are more specific. For instance, a complaint was made to me from at least two or three sources that we were very slow in the slaughtering of animals on the affected farms. However efficient we may be, or however anxious we may he to deal with this outbreak in an expeditious manner, it takes some little time to get all the preliminaries carried out and to do everything that is necessary before we slaughter the animals. I have looked up a number of time-tables and I have found that from the time the case is notified to the Department until a veterinary officer from the Department calls it is, as a rule, only a matter of a few hours. He may have to go back the next day before he is prepared to verify a case. Every case reported to us is not a case of foot-and-mouth disease. There have been dozens of cases notified to the Department as suspicious which have not turned out to be foot-and-mouth disease and it is not surprising, therefore, if a veterinary officer from the Department examines a beast under suspicion, that he may not be able to pronounce there and then that it is a case of foot-and-mouth disease. He may say it is suspicious and in that case he serves an order on the owner to keep the flock isolated. He goes back the next day and then he is usually able to give a definite opinion. If it turns out definitely to be foot-and-mouth disease, the necessary preliminaries are gone through as quickly as possible.
The slowest job is the digging of the hole necessary to hold these animals. I do not know if people realise how careful we have to be in burying animals. The hole has to be nine feet deep, seven to eight feet wide, and roughly a yard is allowed for every animal, so that with a fair-sized farm you have to dig a hole nine feet deep, seven or eight feet wide and perhaps 100 yards long, and that takes time. We had to depart entirely from the practice of getting the labourers on a farm to dig the hole, because that took far too long. The holes are made by the military and in that way we get the job done very much faster. Comparing the time we take here with the time that was taken on former occasions in this country, and with the time taken in neighbouring countries, we are far quicker.
It was suggested to me by one individual—and I may say that all these people want to be helpful—that we might slaughter these animals and then wait for the hole to be dug. There, again, we have a most difficult problem, because Deputies from the country know that when the animals die they become swollen in the body and very stiff in the limbs, and if we were to adopt that suggestion the hole necessary would have to be probably 50 feet longer. The only possible chance we have of packing all the animals in is to have them slaughtered and put into the hole while they are hot and soft. Another complaint made to me was that we were not sufficiently drastic about disinfection and isolation. I was trained in the medical profession and I have some knowledge of disinfection. I am perfectly satisfied from what I have seen that there is no ground for that complaint. Every officer of the Department has been most particular about this matter of isolation and disinfection. As a matter of fact, no case has been spread by any officer of the Department or through any laxity in taking the measures necessary with regard to isolation and disinfection.
Necessarily, we had to allow a certain amount of meat into Dublin, if that could be done with safety. We consulted the veterinary staff and they said they were satisfied that it could be done under certain conditions. The one thing they wanted to avoid was having dealers going from farm to farm looking for cattle, sheep or pigs. We had to adopt some system under which we would get the producers to send the cattle direct to Dublin without any dealers calling on them, except under control. It was an urgent matter and we had to set up some machinery within a number of hours. It was suggested to me that we should select as a committee the Chairman of the Cattle Traders' Association, the Chairman of the Dublin Butchers, and three members who were somewhat more prominent in the dressed meat trade than any of the others engaged in that trade. I agreed to that committee being set up. That committee has to buy all the cattle and sheep. It is done in this way. A producer will apply to the Department for a permit to sell his cattle or sheep to this committee. The committee will then send a buyer, who is accompanied by an officer from my Department, an officer who is not a veterinary surgeon. Both of them are thoroughly disinfected before entering and before leaving the farm. The buyer purchases cattle and sheep at a price which the producers know they must accept and these animals are then sold according to grade to the butchers in Dublin.
The principal object of that arrangement was to supply Dublin with meat, but the scheme was also drawn up in order to avoid as far as possible dealers going from farm to farm when they were not under proper control. This is only a temporary provision, and as soon as the veterinary staff will permit it, as soon as they think it is safe, we hope to depart from that system and go back to the regular way of trade. It would be more acceptable to the butchers and to everybody concerned if we could get back to the live-stock market. We mean to do that as soon as we can.
I want to give a little history of how these outbreaks took place, so that Deputies may have some idea of how it spread from one place to another. We can only give an opinion of how it spread in certain cases; in other cases I think it can be stated fairly definitely how it spread. On the 16th January the Department was informed by the Northern Ministry that foot-and-mouth disease had been confirmed on premises about eight miles north-east of Derry and, as a result, the Department immediately made an order prohibiting the removal of animals from Northern Ireland into this State. On 17th January, the next day, the disease was confirmed on a farm in Derry within two miles of the Donegal border. Immediately, an area in County Donegal, lying roughly north of a line running from Strabane to Letterkenny and bounded by Lough Swilly and Lough Foyle, was made a restricted area. Next day, 18th January, the Department received a report of a suspected disease on a farm premises in County Donegal. Inspectors from the Department were already on their way to Donegal, owing to the outbreak in Derry, but they had difficulty in getting through, owing to a very severe snowstorm. The disease, however, was dealt with pending their arrival. On the next day, 19th January, the Northern Ministry informed my Department that visits had been paid to a number of premises in County Donegal by a person who had been in contact with the disease in County Derry, and that, of course, is what spread the disease to County Donegal. On 20th January, disease was confirmed on premises in County Donegal lying within the scheduled area, and, since that date, eight further outbreaks have been confirmed in Donegal. The source of infection in the Donegal area was obviously traceable to the infected centres in County Derry, but it is hoped that the disease in County Donegal is now well under control.
The first outbreak was in County Donegal on 18th January. On 24th January, disease was confirmed on a farm premises in the vicinity of Abbeyleix and, since that date, six further outbreaks have occurred in that area. It appeared to be under control until, on 9th February——