asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will state whether the departmental committee which inquired into the position of the pig, pork and bacon industry and outlined the objectives which, in the committee's opinion, should be pursued in the industry, made recommendations for the achievement of these objectives; and if he will state what these recommendations were.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Pig, Pork and Bacon Industry.
The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the second part, such recommendations as were made in the report of the departmental committee referred to were in the nature of advice tendered to me in the course of their day to day duties by officers of my Department and accordingly, as indicated in my reply to a question by Deputy Risteárd Ua Maolchatha on 5th June, 1946, I do not propose to publish the terms of the committee's report.
Is the position then that this House is to legislate on this matter and is not to be informed as to the methods to achieve the objectives set out by the committee and to implement their recommendations?
Yes, that is the position.
We are to hear only one side?
It is nothing unusual. I hope we will hear the other side from the Deputy.
Might I ask if the persons appointed were appointed because they were experts?
No.
If so, will the Minister say why he set up a committee to give him advice which was not composed of experts when experts were at his disposal?
Surely Minister have, from time immemorial, asked their officials to give them advice?
Does the Minister not claim that this committee was set up on the recommendation of the Committee on Post-Emergency Agricultural Policy and does he hold that this sort of committee was envisaged in the recommendation of that committee—a departmental committee submitting a secret report to the Minister?
The committee was set up arising out of a recommendation of that Committee on Post-Emergency Agricultural Policy, but they are officers of the Department.
In view of the importance of this matter, in the light of the legislation dealing with an important branch of agriculture, which is pending, I propose, Sir, to raise this matter on the adjournment.
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will state the names, addresses and qualifications of the witnesses who gave evidence before the Committee of Inquiry on Post-Emergency Agricultural Policy on matters connected with pigs, pork and bacon; and if he will cause a copy of the evidence tendered by these witnesses to be placed in the Library for the information of members of the Oireachtas.
I am informed that the procedure in regard to the taking of evidence followed by the Committee of Inquiry on Post-Emergency Agricultural Policy was rather informal and that witnesses were left under the impression that the information they supplied was given in confidence to the committee. In these circumstances, I would not be justified in adopting the suggestions made by the Deputy.
Is the position then that responsible witnesses gave evidence before this post-war planning committee and that the House is not to be properly informed before dealing with important legislation?
The witnesses were not informed that their evidence would be published.
Will the Minister say what he means by his statement that the evidence given was informal?
Only in some cases were proper notes taken. It was an informal conversation between the witnesses and the members of the committee.
Are we to understand that, when the Minister set up a special committee to review the whole of our agricultural industry and to make recommendations with regard to its objectives and its operation in the post-emergency condition of the world, the approach to the taking of evidence was informal and that no formal recorded evidence is available either for the Department or the Oireachtas?
That was entirely a matter for the committee to decide.
It is a great way of planning for the new world.