asked the Minister for Agriculture if, in view of the representations that have been made to him by various county committees of agriculture and farmers' organisations with reference to the necessity of adding a number of practical farmers to the personnel of the committee set up by him for the purpose of considering and planning post-war agricultural policy, he will now say what he intends to do in the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Farmers and Post-War Agricultural Policy.
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he can state the reason why no person depending mainly or solely on the occupation and management of land for a livelihood was appointed on the Committee of Inquiry Into Post-War Agricultural Problems.
I am answering these two questions together and I am glad to have this opportunity of explaining to the Dáil the constitution of the committee.
The body that has been set up is not intended to be a commission of inquiry into the agricultural industry but an expert committee whose function is firstly to study the effects which the emergency has already had on the industry, and then to endeavour to gauge the future effects which may be expected from the continuance of the emergency and to appraise the conditions in which farming may have to be carried on when the emergency ends and to make recommendations based on their conclusions. This involves a close study and investigation of a large number of economic factors, some of which are of world-wide import, and for this purpose it is necessary to have a small committee consisting of persons who not only have a knowledge of farming but are also authoritative agricultural economists. I consider the committee which I have set up to be eminently suitable for the purpose in view and I have the fullest confidence in their competence for the work entrusted to them.
I should explain that the labours of the committee will be arduous, involving attendances at frequent meetings, and that it would be unreasonable to expect men dependent on farming for their livelihood to spare the time necessary for the study of the intricate problems involved as well as for attendance at the meetings of the committee, particularly in view of the existing transport difficulties. It would, moreover, be difficult to select a small number of farmers who would be accepted as representatives of the the various branches of farming. Any attempt to give representation on the committee to certain branches of farming would give rise to claims from representatives of the livestock trade and of other bodies connected with farming. I am satisfied that if I were to accede to the requests that have been made for adding to its membership, the committee would become too unwieldy and ineffective for the purpose in view.
It should be understood that the committee in the course of their work will be prepared to hear the views of representatives of the various branches of the farming industry in regard to the problems under consideration.
Finally, I should say that before effect is given to any recommendations which may be made by this committee, the farming community in general will be given ample opportunity for expressing their views on such recommendations.
The Minister says that the committee has been set up for the purpose of examining and studying the effects which the emergency has had on the industry. Does he suggest that these men, for whom I have a great deal of respect, are in a better position to judge the repercussions and reactions of the emergency on the industry as a whole than practical farmers, men taken from the industry, men who are in close touch and know the reactions and repercussions of the present emergency on the industry? Does he suggest that there are no practical farmers in the country capable of making such an examination or capable of making a contribution towards whatever policy may be adopted in respect of post-war conditions? Does he suggest that there are no practical farmers in the country capable of visualising post-war agricultural conditions? Does he suggest to the plain practical people of the country that it is the theorists and the arm-chair farmers who will determine agricultural policy for the country, and that hardworking practical farmers who are up against it all the time, men of ability and capacity to study and judge the problem, are not to be consulted, are not fit to be consulted and are incapable of making a decision in the matter? If that is so, the Minister is not being very complimentary to the agricultural industry.
In answer to the Deputy's speech, I may say that I do not think I could usefully add to what I have already said. If the Deputy wants to make capital out of it, he is welcome to it.
I do not want to make capital out of it. It is a very serious matter for this country. We are setting up a committee——
The Deputy's supplementary question has been replied to already.
I have asked the Minister a supplementary question.
What is it?
I am asking the Minister if he thinks there are no practical farmers in the country capable of sitting on such a committee whose contribution to the committee would serve any useful purpose? Is that the decision of the Minister?
No, it is not the decision of the Minister, as the Deputy will see if he reads the reply.
Why has the Minister not put practical farmers on the committee?
Read the reply.
Why has the Minister not put them on the committee?
Read the reply, and keep that kind of speech for the cross-roads.
The Minister said he was glad of the opportunity to speak on this matter. Would he not think this a suitable opportunity to state the names and qualifications of the persons appointed, and would he say whether there is any one of them who is competent in respect of farm costings?
That is a separate question.
The names and qualifications were published. I think every Deputy knows who the members are. If necessary, I shall have them circulated with the Official Report.
In the case of an important committee like this, it would be well if the names and qualifications of the persons appointed were on the records of the House.
Would the Minister not reconsider his decision with a view to putting a couple of farmers on the committee?
I have answered the question as honestly as I can. I believe the committee will do better work, if it is kept rather small. I do not think it is going to satisfy anybody to put on the committee a man representative of practical farmers, because I would immediately be told by Deputy Hughes or somebody else that I have no confidence in some other class of farmers.
What other class of farmers is there but practical farmers?
We will hear all about it, you may be sure.
Has the Minister definitely made up his mind not to reconsider it? The question is not one which is best dealt with by question and answer, but if one examines the answer it is obvious, as it must be obvious to the Minister, that the explanation of transport difficulties operating against a farmer being put on the committee is a Civil Service explanation.
I think the Minister ought to reconsider the position and add one or two farmers to the committee. It scarcely matters whether they would be able to attend all the meetings or not, but it is obvious that those engaged in the farming industry would feel dissatisfied that they are not themselves members of the committee. There is scarcely a parallel or precedent for a commission of inquiry of this sort without somebody on it who is representative of the interests concerned.
I do not want to be too persistent in my refusal. I want to see this committee a success, naturally, but I should like to put it to the Deputy that the committee is really a tribunal. They are really there to sift evidence and inquire into the position as experts, if you like. They will present a report and I think it is at that stage that the practical farmer comes in. Their reports are not going to be automatically adopted. It is more than likely that my Department or I, the Government or this House, will offer amendments to whatever they may suggest, and I think Deputies should look on it as an examination by a tribunal rather than by a committee or commission. I should like to say, also, that there is some force in the answer that it would be hard to expect a practical farmer who is dependent on agriculture to give the time necessary. These men have agreed to meet for two full days every fortnight until they complete their task. In the meantime, there is quite a lot of preparation of material, because, as every Deputy will realise, a study of the economic position and of world conditions, which they must study in this case, is quite an onerous job.
I quite appreciate that, but surely anybody who knows the farming community will realise that there is a natural objection to what are called arm-chair economists. The farmer has to work out his own scheme himself and he is in touch with every problem from day to day. If the Minister would re-examine it with a view to seeing how a farmer might help this committee and perhaps consult the committee itself, I think he would find it would be to their own interest to have somebody there who would be directly concerned. It might be that he would not be able to attend all the meetings.
I can assure the Deputy that the committee have no objection to my adding to their number, if I think it advisable.
Perhaps the Minister would reconsider it and consult the committee on the subject before definitely closing the door?
Yes. I think we could discuss this better outside the House.
[Following are the names of the persons appointed as members of the committee of inquiry:—
Professor Timothy A. Smiddy, M.A., Belvedere House, Dalkey, County Dublin (Chairman); Robert C. Barton, Esq., Glendalough House, Annamoe, County Wicklow; Professor C. Boyle, M.A., B.Sc., D.Ph., University College, Cork; Professor James P. Drew, M. Sc., University College, Dublin; Professor Joseph Johnston, M.A., F.T.C.D., Trinity College, Dublin; Henry Kennedy, Esq., M.A., D.Sc., Secretary, Irish Agricultural Organisation Society, Ltd., Dublin; Timothy O'Connell, Esq., M.Sc., F.R.C.Sc.I., Chief Inspector, Department of Agriculture, Dublin; Professor E.J. Sheehy, D.Sc., F.R.C.Sc.I., University College, Dublin.]