In former years, on the Vote for Agriculture, considerable time was devoted to a discussion of the uneconomic price for milk paid to farmers by creameries. Owing, however, to the praiseworthy efforts of the Minister for Agriculture, that longstanding grievance has now been removed. I wish to congratulate the Minister on so readily attacking the question of the low price of milk supplied to creameries and on giving what is to my mind a satisfactory price at the moment for that milk. We are particularly glad to notice that the period has been changed and that the winter price will be paid for the month of April in future. As time goes on, and when costings are in from the Costings Tribunal which we hope will be established very soon, the Minister may find that the price of milk must be revised and that it may be desirable for him at a future date to fix a further increased price for milk so that the dairying industry will be restored to its old position in the country.
In fixing that price for milk, the Minister made an appeal to the farmers of the country to do all they possibly could to increase milk production during the coming year. Owing, however, to the poor condition to which cows had been reduced during the winter and spring months as a result of the abnormally bad weather and the great shortage of feeding generally, I am afraid that the increase in milk and butter production for the coming year will not be very much despite the best efforts of the dairy farmers. He has appealed to the dairy farmers to do their best in the matter. I desire also to urge the farmers to do their best and I am sure they will. There are many circumstances, however, seriously militating against the dairy farmer. Perhaps the worst at the moment is shortage of labour. That shortage of labour has resulted in smaller herds and in many cases the dispersal of many large and useful herds throughout the country.
In that connection, I would appeal to the Minister to consider the desirability of strongly urging farmers and facilitating them to use milking machines. For some reason, which is fairly obvious, milkers seem to have a hatred of milking cows on Sundays. Of course, cows must be milked on Sundays. How can that best be done? How is the dairy farmer to be safeguarded against the loss which might arise from the bad milking of cattle on Sundays or the neglect, perhaps, in some cases, to milk them at all? I suggest that he should introduce a scheme to encourage farmers to install milking machines. In New Zealand, to which our eyes are very often turned in connection with dairying problems, we find that fully 85 per cent. of the cows there are milked by machinery. In the United States we know also that a very large percentage of herds, practically all herds above 12 cows, are milked by machines. Many farmers throughout this country do not like milking cattle in that way. I think there are many reasons why they do not. One reason I think is that the machines that were available up to a certain period were not very efficient and I am afraid, too, that the manipulation of these machines was not efficient and that, therefore, through lack of efficiency in the handling of the machines, a difficulty has arisen. I have known many farmers who have used these machines for years with great success. Others got them and very quickly dismantled and scrapped them.
Consequently, I think that in any scheme of education that may be introduced and in any courses through which young men have to go in the agricultural colleges in the country, there should be on the curriculum some scheme of practical instruction on the proper handling of milking machines. I would also suggest to the Minister that he should consider the advisibility of issuing attractive loans, either free of interest or at a low rate of interest, to farmers who would like to install milking machines. I know very well that with the introduction of rural electrification these machines will become popular. I think it would be well that our young men should be trained in the proper method of manipulating these machines and using them with the great success that has been achieved in other outstanding dairying countries of the world. There has been a great deal of current comment lately on the Live Stock Breeding Act and the value of our dairy cattle. My contention is that we have in the country a breed of cattle—the dairy Shorthorn— which produces the best all-round general purpose cow available. We can breed into her sufficient milk not only to supply our needs but very often to give a surplus to enable us to regain the export market so that we will be able to import the goods we need most.
I believe the dairy Shorthorn, if properly bred, can be a very efficient milker and we all know that the dairy Shorthorn cow is the foundation of the store cattle trade. That trade has been a very great source of wealth in this country and the dairy Shorthorn cow, mated with the Aberdeen Angus or Hereford, can always be relied upon to produce milk in the most economic fashion. I think we would be wise to concentrate on the dairy Shorthorn rather than entertain breeds which may be exceptional in other directions. There is an old tradition among our people, and they will hold on to that tradition, and if we want to improve our cattle trade, we must face the fact than any sort of change would be unpopular.
Agriculture is the basis of our national economy, and on it depends our standard of living. Consequently, I think the policy of our agriculture should be one that would ensure a prosperous peasantry. In particular, that would help to increase the rural population. I am afraid it must be said that the agricultural policy followed for a number of years has probably stripped the country of the best of its population. We have had control of our destinies for the past 25 years, and even so, the production of the land, our greatest potential asset, has not been increased in a changing world with the result that we have people leaving the land, flying to the City of Dublin and even leaving the towns, to go to the cities. Unfortunately, a larger percentage of the people leaving the land is crossing over to England. Emigration in my opinion is the greatest evil of the present day. I think it should be the policy of the Minister to do everything he can to keep our people on the land. I know that he has a colossal task ahead of him in trying to do so but seeing that he is a man with a mind of his own and with, I believe, a determination to help the country and the farmers, he is expected to produce an agricultural policy which will ensure that we can preserve and maintain in this country that rural population which is "a bold peasantry, the country's pride". Unfortunately, people are going from our shores year after year in great numbers and that is why we advocate every measure which the Minister can put forward to procure greater production from the land. There is plenty of room for reclamation, drainage and development throughout the country.
The country is calling out for more money for agriculture, and will look to the Minister to see that that money should be made available for expenditure in the right direction. If we consider the City of Dublin alone, we have practically one-fourth of the population of Ireland in it. We believe that Dublin is getting top-heavy—that there is considerable expense in bringing in food to feed that teeming population. The time is ripe for the Government to consider, as an urgent matter, the desirability of decentralisation.
It seems rather strange in an agricultural country like ours that in all matters relating to agriculture—our Department of Agriculture, the Albert College and the other colleges and institutions—there is too great a tendency to centralisation in Dublin. Our young farmers and young scientists are being educated in the heart of this big population and in the middle of highly artificial standards. I believe that all those services and institutions should be sent down to the heart of the country instead. Many of the industries that have been established in Dublin and other cities should have found their way to the rural centres, because they would be nearer the centre of production from the land.
The country is crying out for decentralisation, and I would very seriously ask the Minister for Agriculture, who should have a very big say in the matter, because this is an agricultural country, to do all he can to stop the suicidal policy of stripping the country bare of its young people.
Somebody has said in this debate that co-operative societies have cut a rod to beat themselves. Of course, we cannot agree with that. Co-operation in every walk of life is essential and where farmers are concerned it is absolutely indispensable. We find the Papal Encyclicals advocating co-operation, and in recent statements by the Pope the tendency towards co-operation has been supported. If co-operative societies have purchased farms throughout the country they have done a very useful work. There is no desire to enter into competition with other farmers who want to purchase land.
The idea of the co-operative movement in the country was that because the Government refused to set up demonstration farms, farmers should do it themselves. So far as they have done it, a great deal of valuable information has been given to the people by these demonstration farms, and we hope the day will come when the Minister for Agriculture will see that such farms are established under the auspices of his Department. The time is ripe for such farms and for an extension of inquiries and researches into diseases of plants and animals. I think the Department are moving far too slowly in connection with research in animal diseases. I referred to it on previous occasions, and we have read in the report of the Committee on Post-War Planning that the losses to farmers from diseases in live stock each year run into millions of pounds. I would, therefore, urge on the Minister that he should take the earliest opportunity of ensuring that the research station which it is proposed to set up should be put into benefit at once, and that he will push forward its work as quickly as possible so that the diseases that we complain of may be eliminated at the earliest moment.
The Minister in his opening statement told us that £200,000 is to be set aside this year by way of additional subsidies for fertilisers. The position at the moment with regard to artificial manures is very unsatisfactory, and if it continues it will militate very much against production. I believe that we can make no progress in the way of increasing production until our farmers can get artificial manures at world prices. This additional subsidy may be substantial enough, but it has to be remembered that our land is badly in need of more fertilisers. The price of fertilisers here compares very unfavourably with the prices obtaining in England and in Northern Ireland. An Englishman to whom I was speaking recently told me that his grass land was in fairly good condition because, as he said, he had dressed it some time ago with basic slag which he purchased at £5 15s. Od. a ton while the cost of it to the Irish farmer is £12 10s. Od. a ton. There is the same unfavourable comparison to be made in the case of other artificial manures. In this country the 50 per cent. grade of muriate of potash costs about £22 a ton, while in Northern Ireland the cost is £13 a ton. In Northern Ireland the farmer there pays 10/5 per unit for nitrogenous manures, while here we pay as much as 25/9 per unit. The most valuable of all fertilisers are the raw phosphates for which we have to pay £10 a ton, while the price in Great Britain and Northern Ireland is £5 3s. Od. a ton. I am quoting those figures from the Farmer's Weekly of the 23rd October, 1946. I presume they are correct. If not, the Minister will correct me. If the figures are correct, they indicate that our farmers are suffering from a very severe handicap and cannot be expected to compete with farmers outside this State who are able to get their fertilisers at a much lower figure.
I understand that £300,000 is set aside to pay out to farmers on the credit dockets for fertilisers. I hope that money will not be paid out as a subsidy to the Fertiliser Manufacturers Association. I make that suggestion because I know that on a former occasion when a very substantial subsidy was given for fertilisers —we were getting 10/- a ton at the time—the farmers in Northern Ireland were getting their phosphates at 35/- a ton cheaper than we were, so that I am afraid the subsidy in that case went to the manufacturers rather than to the farmers. It would be very unfortunate if such a thing were to happen again. The Minister should see that no tariff is placed on the raw phosphates which come into this country, and which, as we all know, are the real fertilisers. I refer to raw phosphates and basic slag which, if made available, will help to fertilise the soil and restore the fertility stolen from it during the war period. Superphosphates and other fertilisers are mere stimulants. For some reason or other the manufacturers do not like handling the raw phosphates, presumably, because there is not enough profit in them. Unless the Minister ensures that the raw phosphates are brought in free of tariffs, the credit dockets to farmers for fertilisers will, I am afraid, be of very little value. The fertility of the soil as we know has been depreciated. We see that from the wheat returns. They have been gradually decreasing because of the low fertility of the soil. I know, of course, that it is very difficult to get fertilisers, but when they become available I trust the Minister will have an attractive policy in connection with them, and will see that the greatest quantity of them are obtained. They should be imported free of duty, and no monopoly or preferential consideration should be given to any particular firm. I am sure the Minister understands what I mean in that connection.
I would urge on the Minister to do all he possibly can to carry out the recommendations made in the report of the Committee on Post-War Agricultural Policy, particularly with regard to cow testing and dairy development. We have in the country a very efficient body—I might say they are a neglected body—of workers on behalf of the dairying industry. I refer to the inspectors in our cow-testing associations. They have got very small increases, and indeed the method of paying them is most unsatisfactory. I think it would be a good thing if the Minister were to take over the scheme and work it on proper lines because at present the position is most unsatisfactory. If he were to do that, I believe it would result in adding materially to the milk yields from our cattle. It would also help to assist our farmers in finding out something which they do not know at present— that is whether they have an economic cow or an uneconomic cow. Everybody knows that the uneconomic cow is a desperate drag on a farmer. It is only through these cow-testing schemes that a farmer can find out the merits or the demerits of his cows. Therefore, I appeal to the Minister to put into operation the recommendations of the committee I have referred to, recommendations which were published practically four years ago. It is about time now that they were implemented.
This is the time when we should go all out to increase production from the land. We require more and more food. Due to our scenery and to the generosity and courteousness of our people immense numbers of people are being attracted as visitors to the country. That is all to the good. If we can attract people to the country and, if they consume our surplus agricultural produce, that is the best way we can dispose of it. For that reason everything possible must be done to encourage the production of more butter, bacon, eggs and other commodities that we require for tourists.
The poultry industry has suffered greatly during the past year because of a shortage of suitable feeding stuffs. Many poultry keepers are doing their best but they have been hampered by lack of petroleum for incubators. It has been possible to get over that difficulty. There is one question that is upsetting poultry keepers a great deal, that is the levy imposed by the previous Minister on turkeys exported at Christmas. I hope the present Minister will not follow that example.