I move the following motion which appears on the Order Paper in the names of Deputies MacEoin, Bennett, Fagan, Cosgrave, and myself:
That Dáil Eireann is of opinion, in view of the strain placed upon the land and on the farming community by six years of compulsory tillage under emergency conditions, that a modification of the Tillage Order, 1946, would result in a greater and more securely saved grain crop in the year 1947, and calls upon the Minister for Agriculture to amend the Tillage Order, 1946.
I want to say, at the outset, that this motion was not designed or put on the Order Paper merely for the purpose of providing an opportunity for attacking the compulsory tillage Order. It is not intended in that way. The intention is to provide an opportunity for the House to discuss the terms and the application of the Order for the coming sowing season, and to bring before the Minister and his Department the handicaps, the difficulties and the hardships, and in many cases the heavy financial losses that have accrued to many farmers during the emergency. We have a sense of our national responsibility in this matter. We appreciate the Minister's responsibility and the Government's responsibility in so far as they must ensure, as far as it is possible to do so, adequate supplies of essential feeding and bread grain. The Minister has this advantage over us that he has better information so far as supplies of imported wheat are concerned. A lack of information in that regard is a considerable handicap to us in discussing this matter.
It is all-important to appreciate what the position is regarding supplies. There appears to be some confusion on that matter so far as one can learn from the information which is appearing in the newspapers. I have some Press cuttings here which indicate that the United States is very much perturbed that there may be a crisis due to the accumulation of grain there. It is indicated that reports from Washington give confirmation of the nervousness of American officials on the imminence of a collapse of the world grain hold-up. American officials are reported to be anxious to get wheat moving overseas since they are perturbed about the possibility of being left with a surplus by the next harvest. Sir John Orr has referred to this matter. The Canadian position, so far as the harvest is concerned, is that it has issued a warning that if the surplus wheat that is on their hands in the New World is not moved to the consuming countries it may precipitate a serious crisis. It is reported that the Canadian wheat crop is much bigger than last year—419,000,000 bushels, against 306,000,000 bushels last year. In the case of the maize crop there is also a very substantial increase. It is pointed out that there were difficulties in getting the wheat down to the ports and to the silos and elevators at the ports—the Atlantic and Pacific ports. From recent reports it is stated there appears to be a flow of grain down to the ports for export purposes. The U.S. Government reported on the 18th November that the wheat crop is in "good to excellent" condition with the best moisture supply for several years. Autumn moisture, it is pointed out, is the main determinant of that vital crop. The report goes on to state:—
"With nearly two-thirds of the season still to go, the U.S. Government has already bought more than half the wheat required for its full season's export programme, which ends on June 30th, 1947."
So that for the season that ends on 30th June, 1947, the season for export purposes, the United States has already accumulated at the ports more than half of its supplies. We were informed recently by the Minister for Supplies that the supply position for this season is more precarious than it was in any season during the emergency.
Mr. Strachey, Minister of Food, replying to a question in the British House of Commons, made it clear that while the supply position was not so much the problem, the transport position was acute. The strikes in America seriously affected and retarded supplies. This, he stated, was partly the result of the decontrol of transport and partly the result of the series of maritime strikes in the United States. In the last few days, he said, the stoppage of the soft coal industry had added a further and most serious complication. He went on to say: "It is this transport position which will govern the flow of cereal supplies to this country over this winter rather than any question of the amount of the cereals potentially available in North America."
The ability of North America to supply the world's requirements has been very substantially improved because of the bumper harvests this year. It is pretty obvious the difficulty of getting the grain conveyed to the consuming countries is one of transport. I do not know whether we can complain very much in that regard. We evidently have ships that we can afford to send, even to Cuba and Chile and other countries, for the raw material for the alcohol factories, but I do not want to stress that.
So far as the operation of this Order is concerned, the Minister will agree there is scarcely any change from the terms of last year's Order. I was struck by this peculiar characteristic of this Order, that it is designed to make it simple of administration. It is a Civil Service Order pure and simple and it is administered by the Civil Service and the inspectors. We give absolute power under it to these people to enforce its terms and conditions. In that regard we differ very much from Great Britain, because in Great Britain, notwithstanding the very critical position there and the responsibility of carrying on in a life and death struggle and organising the tremendous forces that had to be organised to repel the threatened invasion, they were capable of providing machinery to allow farmers to appeal against the decisions of inspectors. In each county there was a committee set up, known as the County War Agricultural Committee, and any farmer who felt aggrieved by an inspector's decision had a right to bring his case before a committee of his own county men. These committees were composed of the right type, with a patriotic outlook, and fully aware of the responsibility placed on them to ensure an adequate supply of food. They judged each case and came to a decision, and that decision was final and binding.
That was not so here. We had bureaucratic control, young inspectors approaching farmers double their age and dictating to them what should be done and the fields which should be broken. That gave rise to great difficulties and to a certain amount of hardship, where men had to break fields that they felt were unsuited for tillage and more advantageous, because of their position in relation to the farmyard, for other purposes.
We recognised the need of the compulsory Order during the emergency, but when the emergency ended we believed that compulsion should not continue. We are vigorously opposed to the Minister's intention of continuing any compulsion here. We are opposed to giving power to the Minister to send an inspector into a farmer's yard to tell him how to operate his farm. We believe that by demonstration and by an efficient advisory service, the farmer should be encouraged to carry on mixed farming. We are vigorously opposed to the system that provides for compulsion and bureaucratic control. We feel that, in certain circumstances, in certain districts and under certain conditions a reduction in the amount that must be tilled under the Order would not necessarily mean a reduction in the amount of grain and other food produce. We believe that asking a man to do tillage he is incapable of doing even reasonably well is not good policy.
On the other hand, we believe that there are large numbers of farmers not properly equipped to carry out the tillage programme envisaged in this Order. The result is that the job will not be properly done. Ploughing is done in a haphazard fashion, cultivation is not properly carried out, the seed bed is not properly prepared and the crop from the word "go" cannot be successful. In tillage particularly a good system of husbandry is necessary. If that is absent, not merely does the individual suffer but the nation as a whole suffers. That is the basis of our case.
If there is an opportunity for a reduction, there ought to be one, even if the supply position from overseas is not so encouraging. On many farms in those districts where you have not a tillage tradition you might get as good results from some reduction in the application of the Order. In the tillage districts you have a tradition and that is handed down from father to son. You have the necessary equipment there and, generally speaking, there is no difficulty.
As regards the type of land where you have a tillage tradition, God so designed that land that it is free from weeds and it is easier to carry out tillage. In our circumstances and with our wet climate, in the districts known as the non-tillage districts the handicaps are not usually appreciated and there are great difficulties that have to be surmounted so far as this Order is concerned.
In those non-tillage districts there was, during the emergency, a shortage of equipment, lack of technical knowledge, and the unsuitability of land for tillage purposes. The Minister may say that that is all humbug, but I think the emergency has proved that what I say is true. The late Minister for Agriculture on more than one occasion stressed this aspect of our agricultural economy, that there was a good reason why we had tillage in certain districts, like the district I come from, in County Wexford, South Kildare and portions of Cork. There was good reason why there was dairying in Limerick, Tipperary and other districts where dairying has been handed down by tradition. There was good reason why people adopted a live-stock grazing system in Meath and Westmeath, first, through the creation of things and, afterwards, through the natural evolution of things. Men who went through the hard school of experience, down through generations, eliminated those methods of husbandry that were unprofitable and adopted those systems that suited the particular circumstances, the soil conditions, and the economy in operation in our relations with Great Britain so far as our surpluses were concerned.
I suggest that the compulsory tillage Order during the war has proved the wisdom of those words. Fancy men on land in high altitudes, above the 500 or 600 contour line, with a thin poor soil, bleached completely of calcium, highly acid, being compulsorily obliged to grow wheat there. It is absurd. It is not only absurd, but unjust and unfair, because anyone who knows anything about tillage knows that it is utterly impossible to get results there. Even before he puts his hand to the plough, such a man knows from experience that he cannot hope for success. Because the compulsory tillage Order is there and the powerful bureaucratic machine, if an inspector goes down and tells him that he must toe the line and conform with the conditions and terms of that Order, he has no redress. There is no court of appeal.
As I pointed out, people in another country, even in the stress and strain of war, were able to provide the right for an individual to state his difficulties and how utterly impossible it would be to carry out his responsibilities under the tillage Order. We also know that there is any amount of land in this country liable to flooding. This particular year proves the amount of damage that can be done to crops on these lands. Yet the individuals on these lands have no redress, no court of appeal. We had the powerful bureaucratic machine steam-rolling them again. Then we had a shortage of fertilisers and a lack of any system of proper husbandry, which made for deterioration of the soil and of the fertility of the soil. Then, again, in districts where they had not the tradition of tillage, they continued to sow a cereal crop year after year on the same land with disastrous results. As I said, many people were asked to produce beyond their capacity and the work was done in a very poor haphazard way. A decent seed bed was not produced, and this resulted in financial loss.
I have here a letter that Deputy Fagan handed to me from a man in County Westmeath, which states:
"I see that a motion is to be brought in the Dáil against compulsory tillage. Here are some figures which may be of interest to you and you are at liberty to use them in the motion. In 1945 I sowed 14 barrels of wheat at £4 4s. 0d. per barrel. From this I got a return of 45 barrels, for which I got 55/- per barrel. In 1946, I sowed 14 barrels of wheat at the same price and got a return of 46 barrels, for which I was paid 52/- per barrel. In 1944 the yield was even lower still."
I have a number of letters in somewhat similar terms. I was in Tipperary recently and met a man who is a very keen farmer. He complained that he had something like 32 acres of land under tillage and that, through no fault of his own, he did not get the price of the seed out of that land.
We know that any amount of land was badly treated. As I said, cereal crop after cereal crop was sown for three, four and five years and the land was then put down in a very haphazard way to grass. That is bad, foul work which will have its reactions on the future capacity of this country to produce food. The Minister must have received some letters about the difficulties that some people experienced in trying to manure land. The compulsory tillage Order does not provide for the possibility of folding sheep on the crop. The Order says that the crop must be separated from the land. There again the Minister might consider allowing people to sow crops like rape, or at least of allowing sheep to eat the crop on the land.
So far as my constituency is concerned, we had a strike in North Kildare this year. I put it to the Minister that, if he is going to apply the compulsory powers which he has announced for this year, the farmers are entitled to some guarantee so far as the provision of labour to save the crops is concerned. The Minister cannot, by a compulsory Order, compel people to do a certain job and then feel himself relieved of further responsibility. The Minister must appreciate the difficulties that a number of farmers had to face in North Kildare. By a piece of luck, the strike eventually collapsed owing to the abnormal weather conditions. Surely it is not unreasonable to suggest to the Minister that at this stage, a couple of years after the war, if the supply position is bad and if we must have compulsion to the extent provided for in the Order, the farmers are entitled to have some undertaking from him so far as the provision of labour is concerned. The labour problem has been acute, not merely in Kildare, but in other counties as well. So far from giving any stimulus to production, the Minister has stopped the manure vouchers this year. The farmer's position has been worsened financially.
Recently I asked the Minister a question as to what extent the increase in the agricultural grant has met the statutory increase in wages made by the Agricultural Wages Board early last summer. The Minister told me that the increase in the agricultural grant was approximately £600,000 and that the difference between the two was the difference between £600,000 and £1,000,000; so that on the Minister's own showing the agricultural community is placed at a disadvantage amounting to £400,000. Even at that, I am rather critical of the Minister's figures. I think the gap is much wider than that.
Under the compulsory tillage Order, the Minister is looking for the same amount of tillage as last year or the year before, namely, three-eighths of the arable land. We feel that there ought to be some effort made to reduce that for the coming year to 25 per cent., or one-quarter. We also believe that there are certain areas which ought to be exempt from wheat. I put it to the Minister that our aim ought to be to produce the maximum amount of food from the land; that we are interested in live stock and live-stock products, and that we are short of essential food for that purpose. The Minister is particularly anxious to increase our production of eggs for export purposes by 100,000 cases this year. The Minister knows that if we bridge that gap it means an increase of 4½d. per dozen.
We have any amount of land, particularly on high altitudes, which is absolutely unsuitable for wheat-grow- ing, but where, under the Order, a man is bound to put in a certain quantity of wheat. It is not possible to get an economic return for that wheat. It would be possible to get a decent crop of oats or potatoes. It is possible to grow crops on acid land, crops that are tolerant to acid conditions. The Minister knows that it is not possible to grow crops like wheat, barley and beet, which are not tolerant to acidity, on acid soils. The Minister has made much capital out of guaranteed prices and secured markets. It is true that we have a guaranteed price for wheat and a secured market but that is of very little use to the man whose land is unsuitable for the production of wheat or whose land is acid. The Minister a few years ago had little appreciation of the degree of acid in the soil of this country and even some of his experts had no appreciation of the extent of the acid soil problem but since the establishment of the new section in his Department the Minister must have a fuller realisation of the extent of that problem. It is enormous. A great deal of the land which we hoped would yield good results in wheat-growing and where, it was suggested by the Minister, there was built-up fertility that could be drawn upon during the emergency, was found to be unproductive because of the soil condition. In certain areas, land that had been in grass for years, when put under tillage, produced straw but not wheat, owing to the condition of the soil.
All these difficulties have imposed grave hardships and burdens on the agricultural community. I live in a tillage district and I want to emphasise that, relatively speaking, we had very little difficulty and were able, without any trouble, to comply with the terms of the Order but I appreciate the enormous difficulties that faced these people who had not the tradition of tillage. They had not the equipment. They had not soil suitable for tillage or suitable for the production of the particular crops that were designated in the Order.
We are asking for a full examination of the whole circumstances. The operation of the Order in the coming year ought not to be merely automatic as far as the Department is concerned. It is too late now to adopt the British system of county committees to which an individual farmer might appeal and have his case examined. So far as individuals are concerned who are ill-equipped to carry out this Order, it is possible that, if the Minister is prepared to meet us on this matter, more discretion would have to be given to inspectors. Much as I dislike that, I suggest it is better to give that discretion than to ask people to continue to endure the hardships they have had to bear in recent years. Taking all the circumstances into account, on the information that is available from reputable sources, from men like Sir John Boyd Orr, from the United States and Canada, we feel that the supplies are there and that the difficulty is shipping. It is not for this season we are planning, but for next year's crop. There is then scarcely justification for continuing the full implementation of the Order that has been in operation and that was necessary during the emergency. Surely there must be an opportunity next year for a relaxation of the Order and, if that is so, we are pressing for an undertaking from the Minister that the matter will be very fully and carefully examined. I am not pleading for the old tillage districts. These districts are quite competent to carry on and to produce what they have been producing in recent years but I do certainly plead very strongly for those people who are not able to produce. It is beyond the capacity of their land to produce and, for that reason, they are doing the job damn badly. That means that they are not merely suffering themselves but the nation is also at a loss because the land so employed could be better utilised in producing other classes of food or live stock.
A question was asked here to-day about the reduction in dairy produce and the substantial fall in the amount of butter that is in cold store at the present time. The Minister must know that the problem of compulsory tillage is reacting on our dairy industry and that inevitably it must have the effects suggested by Deputy Halliden to-day.
That is our case, and we are putting it to the Minister as strongly as we can. We wish to stress the point that we are in the difficulty that we do not know what the supply position is but we feel, through the information that is available to us through the public Press—that is the only source available—that an opportunity exists for the Minister, in certain districts where hardship is obvious, to modify the terms of the Order.