I move:—
That Dáil Éireann is of opinion that, in order to restore the pig industry, the price paid to the producer should be increased sufficiently to cover the cost of production on home-produced foods, and a reasonable profit.
I am at a great disadvantage in having to take this motion to-night. As the House knows there are five other motions before this which were not taken and that fact has left me entirely unprepared. However, rather than let the motion go by default, I must get on with it in the best way I can. The pig industry has presented many problems and gone through many phases during the past few years. It has had its ups and downs and the question is disputed as to what was the cause of these ups and downs in production. Three years ago, or even later, we had, I think, the lowest pig population recorded in the country probably in living memory. As to the causes which brought about that decrease, I think it must be generally admitted that two factors were responsible. One was the scarcity of home-produced foods and the virtual, if not absolute, disappearance of imported foodstuffs and the other what we claim was an uneconomic price. Pigs became so scarce during 1947 that it was a rare luxury to get a piece of bacon at all, while the price at which the producer could sell his pigs was controlled so as to keep down the price that he might get for his pigs. That continued until the increased production reached a point when there was more than sufficient to supply the home market. Then the fixed price was lifted at a time when it was evident that the price was going to drop, although control was kept on the price the farmer might get when he was in a position to produce very few pigs. Now, largely owing to the importation of maize meal in the last year, pig production has gone up, with the result that pig prices have gone down until, in many instances, pigs of the heavier type have been selling around £7 per cwt. Although we were assured by the Minister last year that the price of certain pigs would be around £9 10s. per cwt., in many instances, particularly in my own county, the highest price was around £9 3s. and £9 4s. per cwt.
The question will arise, as mentioned in the motion, should the farmer get the cost of production on home-produced food? I claim he is entitled to that, because industrial producers are protected to such an extent that they get whatever their costs are on home production. The prices at which they sell the manufactured articles are arrived at after the wages of the workers are estimated, after the costs of running the factory are taken into account and, last though not by any means least, the dividends for the investors. To assure that, they are protected by tariffs and by quotas on imports so that no appreciable quantity of manufactured goods will come in from outside which might lower the conditions of employment of the workers and the dividends of the investors.
In passing, let me say that I am not by any means opposed to a policy of protection for native industries. I think I can claim to have put that into practical effect, because I can make the statement that nobody can find about my place any article of foreign manufacture in the way of agricultural requirements, except one article which I had to buy when I could not get an Irish manufactured one. That is the only article of foreign manufacture in the place. Therefore, I claim to be at least as good a supporter of Irish industry as any Deputy or anyone else in the country. But the point I want to make is that the prices of the farmer's requirements, both for agricultural and household purposes, are at an artificially high level as a result of protection. Yet, when the farmer looks for what it would cost to produce his pigs, poultry, eggs, milk or anything else, he has no protection. He reaches the point when he has to go on to the export market and, when he goes there, there is no protection; he has to sell at whatever he can get. Therefore, he is suffering both ways. He has to pay a higher price for his requirements as a result of protection which increases his cost of production and, when he goes to sell his products, he is faced with international competition and, in many cases in the past, has been faced with penal tariffs. Therefore, I claim that pig producers are not being fairly treated in this respect.
Over a year ago I put down questions here as to the inadequacy of pig prices and I also raised the matter on the Adjournment on one occasion. I made the point that unlimited importation of maize meal was likely to lead to increased production to such a point that even the then prevailing price of £9 10s. 0d. per cwt. could not be maintained. Anyone who had any doubts then about that must have satisfied himself since that that has been the result.
I claim that some protection should have been given to the pig producer so that such a slump would not come about, particularly when he was not allowed to take advantage of the scarcity so as to get a higher price. He should at least be protected now to the extent that he will be guaranteed his cost of production and a little profit. I would not advocate extravagant profits for any farmer, but he should be given at least a working profit.
On the adjournment debate last year I gave details with regard to the cost of production of home produced foods. The estimate I gave at that time was denied, but it was not disproved. I have not seen any figures since put up by anyone to disprove my figures at that time. On the basis of £9 10s. a cwt. I then estimated that potatoes grown on the farm were worth 8d. per stone, 5/4 per cwt. or £5 6s. 8d. per ton—it was on the basis of 8d. a stone anyway. I do not think anyone will suggest that £5 6s. 8d. or £5 13s. 4d. would be a sufficient price for a farmer to get for the production of potatoes, particularly with agricultural wages as they are and with increased charges both for national health insurance and employers' liability insurance. National health insurance stamps in the past year or year and a half have gone up from 1/- per week to 1/7 and employers' liability insurance has gone up by 27½ per cent.
At the moment, to insure an agricultural worker against accident, to give him full cover, will cost something around £4 10s. 0d. per annum. I think those two charges put on to the agricultural labourer's wages at present mean slightly over £3 per week. I wonder would it be possible, on an average farm, to employ labourers at £3 a week or slightly over it and take a risk as to what kind of yield you might have of any crop. In 1948, we had a good yield, but in 1947 it was a bad one, and we are told that there will be a scarcity of oats and potatoes in the present year. When we take into consideration the uncertainty of crop production, I wonder would anyone assert that it would be profitable, taking the good year with the bad, to produce potatoes at £5 6s. 8d. per ton.
I am well aware that one could produce pigs to sell at £9 10s. 0d. a cwt. by using imported maize. There, again, the question of protection for native industries arises. We do not allow foreign manufacturers to come in to lower the conditions of employment in industrial production. Therefore, why should we do it in connection with the agricultural industry? Apart altogether from that point, is it a wise policy to pursue? We saw how the production of pigs dwindled, particularly during the emergency years when maize could not be got. That was a terrible upset. Who knows but that same condition might arise again and, as a result, that pig production might once more dwindle?
We have had an enormous increase in production during the past 12 or 18 months. I think we have almost three pigs now for the one we had two years ago, or a little over two years ago. But the pigs could dwindle again. We have only to look at the example of the 1948 crop season. Through the goodness of God we had a splendid crop of potatoes and oats that year, with the result that prices slumped and only very reluctantly the Government came to the aid of the grain growers by taking the oats from them at 28/- a barrel—I am not quite sure of that figure. What was the result? It was officially stated that there is a scarcity of oats and potatoes in the country this year. Therefore, if we do not protect the pig producer now, when pigs are plentiful, what encouragement is there for him to continue to produce pigs?
Possibly production may decrease considerably even one year from now and then the scarcity of bacon, even for the home consumer, would be as bad as in some years past. To my mind it is essential, apart altogether from the producers' interest—it is essential in the national interest—to give some stability to the producer. We see at the moment when pigs have to be exported that the price is not even £9 10s. I think in order to maintain that price that some of the levy collected off the pigs in past years has to be drawn on to subsidise exporters of bacon in the hope that the Minister at a later date will be in a position to make a bargain with the British Government so as to enable £9 10s. a cwt. to be paid for bacon pigs.
We should have some assurance from the Minister, something in the nature of a long-term guarantee that the pig producer will get sufficient to encourage him to stay in production. It has been the experience at all times that the more he produces the less he gets for it. That is not good encouragement for any producer and particularly for the agricultural producer. The farmer has enough to contend with, what with the uncertainty in the weather and everything else, without having to be uncertain as to what he is likely to get for the article he produces. He has first of all to grow the crops and then to feed the animals before he can turn them into cash. If he gets a disappointing price what encouragement is there for him to continue?
I have been taken at a disadvantage in this debate and I cannot develop my point at any great length. I hope other Deputies will fill in the gaps that I have left and that there will be an intelligent discussion on this motion from all sides of the House. I hope something will emerge that will help to stabilise the pig industry. I commend the motion to the House. I trust it will be warmly supported and ultimately adopted.
