I move:—
That a sum not exceeding £10,065,040 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1951, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Agriculture, including certain Services administered by that Office, and for payment of certain Subsidies and sundry Grants-in-Aid.
In reviewing the work of this Department for the last year, I think the golden rule applies that the best test of a policy is its results, and that the best arguments are facts. I have, therefore, for the convenience of Deputies, prepared a short White Paper which is available to all Deputies on the Lobby and which, I thought, might be of assistance to those who are interested in the Vote in mastering the rather wide range of topics which may properly arise in the course of this discussion.
In regard, however, to certain factual statistics, I am in a position to bring the House up to date a little more precisely since that White Paper was prepared. The deliveries of milk to creameries up to June 3rd from the 1st January, 1947, were 34,587,000 gallons; for the corresponding periods of 1948, 1949 and 1950 deliveries were 41,020,000 gallons, 54,246,000 gallons and 62,830,000 gallons respectively. The most recent figure for the production of butter is that for the fortnight ending on the 31st May. In 1947, from 1st January to 31st May, it was 85,065 cwts.; for the same periods in 1948, 1949 and 1950 it was 105,471 cwts., 149,048 cwts. and 180,887 cwts. respectively. I now come to the export of eggs to date for the same period. The latest figures I have relate to the 8th June, and I give them in statistics relating to 300 cases, each case containing three long hundreds of eggs. In 1947, the figure was 344,581; in 1948, 554,374; in 1949, 862,404, and in 1950, 811,256.
I think the White Paper contains the most recent figures that I am in a position to offer in regard to the exports of dead poultry. Then we come to an interesting figure in regard to the delivery of wheat to the mills. The House will remember that there was a substantial decline in the total acreage of wheat this year. But, despite that fact, the delivery of wheat to the mills up to the 29th April last amounted to 2,350,648 barrels, as compared with 2,514,088 barrels last year, off an acreage nearly 150,000 acres less this year than was laid down under wheat last year.
I think Deputies will find in the White Paper the last figure which I am in a position to give them authoritatively for the total exports of cattle is that relating to the month of April. Deputies are already informed of the total delivery of pigs to the factory.
That brings me now to the matter of employment on the land. I noticed, with emotion, that the Leader of the Opposition repaired recently to Louth and there spoke more in sorrow than in anger. He was grieved to observe that 50,000 male employees had left the land. I need hardly say that his kept newspaper was thrown into a state of deep distress by this. But neither the Leader of the Opposition nor the kept newspaper deemed it expedient to say that this remarkable exodus from the land had taken place during the last five years of his administration. It did not appear to trouble his conscience so gravely until he became Leader of the Opposition; and then it became a matter for anxious comment, wide publicity and implied rebuke to those now responsible. Lest there be any misunderstanding on this, it may be well to recapitulate the figures which were recently published in the Statistical Abstract for this year: males employed on the land in 1941, 555,601; in 1942, 541,181; in 1943, 536,383; in 1944, 526,147; in 1945, 521,980; in 1946, 519,634; in 1947, 507,568; in 1948, 499,542.
As the House knows, I have sought to crystallise the agricultural policy of this Government in the aphorism: "One more cow, one more sow, one more acre under the plough." That phrase was first used by my distinguished predecessor, the late Mr. Patrick Hogan. I think it makes pretty clear the view that we desire to see on the land of Ireland mixed farming so that those who own the land and live upon it will be, in so far as-is possible, protected from any transient economic wind that blows and that they shall be equipped, if one market should fail, in such manner as to enable them to avail of an alternative without undue dislocation of their livelihood. I have constantly maintained that that system of agriculture has the additional advantage that it employs more of our people on the land; that that system of agriculture tends to multiply on our land farmer proprietors; that that is what this Government wants to see — not quasi-landlords or 11-month tenants, but people owning and working their own land.
The kept newspaper has been concerned for the last couple of days to prove that, despite the steadily increasing production of milk, despite the increasing number of cows, despite the increasing number of heifers in calf, the dairy industry is tottering to ruin. But they prove too much because, in seeking to prove one thing, they inadvertently prove another. Just imagine the kept newspaper proving that tillage, to the exclusion of everything else, employs less men per 100 acres than any other system of farming known in Ireland. Picture the havoc that will be wrought at Burgh Quay tonight. Rows of dangling corpses will swing from the rafters when the full significance of the table printed on page 6 of that newspaper is appreciated. These tables show the employment per 100 acres in 1947—the last year of the blessed 15. Limerick: tillage acres, 12 per 100 acres of arable land; males employed, 3.8 per 100 acres. Meath, Westmeath, Kildare: 20 tillage acres per 100 acres; males employed, 3.3.
That does not finish the story. I thought it such an interesting one that we might follow it further afield. Let us leave the rolling lands of Meath and Westmeath, the bullock and the dog, which have this mysterious power of employment, and turn to Wexford and Laois. Here are counties where tillage is conducted with greater intensity than in any other counties in Ireland. Take Laois, where it is conducted almost to the exclusion of live stock. In Laois the total area under corn, root and green crops, flax and fruit is 82,972 acres. The total number of males employed is 12,015. The number of males employed per 1,000 acres cropped is 145. Turn now to despised Roscommon, Meath and Limerick, to the Golden Vale where the plough is said never to be seen. In these counties the number of male employed per 1,000 acres cropped is 294 in Roscommon, 160 in Meath and 328 in Limerick. In Wexford, where the total area under corn, root and green crops, flax and fruit is 157,076, the number of males employed per 1,000 acres cropped is 113. I wonder has the kept newspaper, by its revelations, taught Fianna Fáil what reason and argument could not teach them in the last 20 years, and that is that "one more cow, one more sow and one more acre under the plough" employs our people on the land in dignity, peace and prosperity and in numbers, and that wheat, peat and beet reduce the number of people employed upon our land as farmer proprietors, multiplies the number of wage-earners on the bog and leaves the arable land of Laois with 145 males to the 1,000 acres, while the despised live stock of Limerick and Roscommon manages to give a good livelihood to 328 males per 1,000 acres in Limerick and 294 per 1,000 acres in Roscommon. That sow, that cow, that other acre under the plough should be written on the heart of the Leader of the Opposition as Calais was written on the heart of Mary Tudor.
I promised the House that inasmuch as Deputy Lahiffe was good enough to give me the names of the farmers in Galway whose barns were burdened with great mountains of unsold barley, whose credit was strained and whose families were distressed by their inability to sell their humble stores, I would have inquiries made. I, in accordance with the Deputy's instructions, sent officers of my Department to each of these farmers with a respectful inquiry if I might be of service and whether I could assist them to dispose of this unmanageable burden of unsaleable agricultural produce. I went first to Mr. J.H. His barns were said to be bursting. He told us he had not any barley at all, but that he had sold 73 barrels some time ago for 42/-. I thanked him and went my way. Deeming Deputy Lahiffe's information to be an invitation to enter on the premises of Mr. T.K., I knocked at his door. He said he had three barrels, but that he would not take a penny less than 50/- for it because he wanted to feed it to his stock. I said "one more sow, one more cow, one more acre under the plough," and bid him the time of day. I went to Mr. S. S. He said he had not a barrel of barley in the barn for some time, that he had sold the last of it for 44/- some weeks ago. I wished him luck of it. I repaired to Mr. P. H. He said he had not a grain in the place, and had not had for some considerable time. I went to Mr. M. C. His larder was also bare. At this stage the officer of my Department fell ill, and I had to bring him home. I sent down another officer, but the poor man was again disappointed. As fast as I could get that other officer of my Department to the scene, he called on Mr. M. M. and Mr. O'B., both of whom received him with genial but ribald laughter, and said they had no barley at all, but that Mr. O'B. had had three barrels which he had sold six weeks ago for 42/-.
It was a pleasure to discharge this duty. I am grateful to Deputy Lahiffe for communicating his anxieties to me. I trust he feels that I have discharged my duty in making sure that the distresses, under which he believed his constituents to labour and in reference to which he thought it necessary to move the Adjournment of this House, were not as grave or as pressing as they were represented to him to be.
I assume the permission of the House not to dwell on the general topics that have been referred to in the White Paper I have submitted, though I need hardly reassure Deputies that if any particular facts therein set out appear inadequate I am at their disposal to elaborate them in any way I can on question. I have to announce to the House that, as a result of negotiations which have recently been proceeding in London with the British Ministry of Food, I am now in a position to indicate the price of eggs to the producer up to 31st January, 1952. The price of eggs to the producer will remain at 2/6 per dozen until 31st January, 1951. From the 1st February to the 31st August, the price of eggs to the producer will be 2/- per dozen and from the 1st September to the 31st January, 1952, the price will be 3/6 per dozen. It is fortunate that we are in a position to give this notice in due time so that those poultry people who desire to avail of the 3/6 for eggs between the 1st September, 1951, and the 31st January, 1952, may take measures in due time, as experienced poultry-keepers will know they can be taken, by judicious feeding to bring their fowl into laying in the month of September.
Deputies unfamiliar with the technique of this business may not fully realise that if you take certain well-known precautions in the matter of feeding, you can bring young fowl into laying in the autumn: they will then moult in December or January. If, on the other hand, these ordinary precautions in relation to feeding are not taken, fowl will not begin to lay until February, and will then continue to lay through their ordinary laying season. I hope that the majority of fowl-keepers in the country will spend the interval between now and this time 12 months consulting the poultry instructress and seeking her advice and guidance and help to inform themselves of the appropriate method to secure for themselves the maximum yield from their fowl between the 1st September and the 31st January — and the more eggs that are laid in that period of high prices the better it will be for the fowl-keeper and the better it will be for the country. I do not think the House will expect me, and, in any case, I would not be able, to interview every woman who keeps hens in the country and instruct and advise her how to bring about that desired result, but I think there are available now throughout the country as fine a body of women as we have ever had concerned to help and advise poultry-keepers in every county in the country wherever they are. If there are people who lack the technical information to get for themselves from their fowl the maximum return in the months of high prices, it will not be the fault of the poultry instructresses — it will be the fault of the women who have failed to call on their services. There is no hurry or rush, but no time should be lost by any farmer's wife who derives any substantial income from fowl in making contact with the poultry instructress and planning her programme next year so as to ensure that the bulk of her eggs will be available for sale when she can get 3/6 per dozen for them, instead of allowing the fowl on her farm to produce them at the period of surplus when they will sell for 2/- a dozen, 2d. an egg. It is not a bad price for eggs if you grow your own stuff on your own farm and there ought not be any fowl in this country eating anything except what is grown on the land of this country. Twopence an egg: I can remember when it was the top price for eggs, and it is not so long ago. Twopence an egg is the minimum now and 3½d. an egg for the five winter months. They can produce an income a man or a woman could rub along on if they make the best of it.
I would direct the attention of Deputies to one very encouraging feature of our agricultural set-up at the present time and that is the tendency for the numbers of our live stock to increase. One of my great anxieties when I first became responsible for this Department was the very low figure to which our live stock had fallen. In January, 1947, our total cattle were 3,703,000. In January, 1948, they had fallen to 3,531,000. There were a great many sages who told me that to increase the number of your cattle with any degree of rapidity was hopeless. It was a long, slow business and to hope for anything else was chasing rainbows. Sometimes there is a profit to be got from chasing rainbows because you sometimes catch them. I think we have caught this rainbow. From 3,531,000 in 1948, we have gone, in January, 1950, to 3,821,000, and I will take a flyer on this: wait for the June figure. I will be judged by it. I have not got it yet. I have a shrewd suspicion what it is going to be. It will knock a grunt out of Fianna Fáil. One of the most menacing characteristics of the cattle picture was that in January, 1947, our cattle under one year numbered 744,000. By January, 1948, that had fallen to 659,000. In January, 1950, the number of cattle under one year is 804,000. For the previous five years, any increase in cattle that we had was an increase in the veterans — the three-year-olds, the four-year-olds and the five-year-olds. These were increasing. The one year-olds and the two-year-olds were going down. I am glad to report to the House that the veterans have emigrated, lock, stock and barrel. The juveniles are multiplying.
Sheep show a gratifying increase, as do pigs and poultry. I have reminded the House that, although the acreage of wheat has fallen by 150,000 acres, the yield has declined by less than 40,000 tons.
Oats: In this I am beholden to Deputy Blaney and my distinguished colleague Deputy Davern. Their exertions and melodious, mellifluous accents carried such conviction to the public that, to use the classic phrase of Deputy Davern — or was it Deputy Blaney—oats were rotting in the hedges of Donegal. The acreage of oats was reduced, from 880,000 in 1948, to 686,000 in 1949. The yield fell from 792,000 in 1948 to 559,000 in 1949. That, I think, provided the text of my distinguished colleague from County Monaghan, who delivered a moving speech on the distressing cost of oatmeal. I hope Deputy Blaney and Deputy Davern listened closely to my distinguished colleague from Monaghan when she spoke so convincingly on the subject of the price of oatmeal. They wrought well but to the great cost of our people. I trust that when they next go to the palisades they will deal with something which is not so costly to the people of our country as the oat crop.
Barley: The acreage rose from 119,000 to 157,000 and the yield from 100,000 to 159,382 tons and, as there was no legislation to prohibit the brewers from paying more than 35/- a barrel, I am happy to report to the House that farmers who produced barley last year found it a very remunerative crop.
I direct the attention of Deputies to the item of agricultural exports in the White Paper which, I think, will stimulate and cheer them.
I may be able to give an account of the daily average consumption of milk in the cities of Dublin and Cork. These figures are at present being prepared and, if they are available, I hope to lay them before the House.
The fowl market in England will be released from control shortly. I cannot forecast, nor can anyone else, precisely what the result of that will be but this is certain, that we are entering a phase when competition in that and every other market will be much more intense. I want to assure the House that we have no reason whatever to be apprehensive on that score. We shall produce and offer for sale on its merits fowl of better quality and better finish than are offered anywhere else, and we will seek for it on the open market in Great Britain or elsewhere nothing less than the top price ruling on the day of sale.
Certain amendments have already been made in the regulations controlling the packing and grading of fowl in order to produce uniformity. We will gradually advance along the lines of ensuring that where prime fowl are exported from this country they shall be exported only when they are finished and in a proper condition, due precaution being taken to ensure that the benefit deriving from that improved procedure will accrue, not to the middleman, but to the producer who takes the care to learn how to do it and, having learned, the trouble faithfully to perform the necessary operations to put our fowl on the market in the best condition.
Turkeys, I think, will be a good trade. There again Deputies are as good a judge as I but I should imagine that, next Christmas, turkeys will be at least as remunerative as they have been heretofore, but we are on an open market and I am merely making my prognostication of what that market is likely to be. I have not the slightest doubt that we are putting on that market better turkeys than any other country in the world and I will not have the slightest hesitation in looking for, or the slightest difficulty, I believe, in getting, the top price obtaining on the London market for any Irish turkeys exported.
I want to say a word about cheese. Deputies will recall that Deputy Allen and other Deputies have spoken to me on more than one occasion about the difficulties relating to those who produce farmer's butter. I think Deputy Cogan interested himself in that matter on more than one occasion. I have explained repeatedly that I cannot sell farmers' butter, not because it is inferior, but because the public taste has changed. Heretofore, the British Ministry of Food were prepared to buy it, at a price, for confectionery manufacturers. This year they notified us that they would not buy it any more because they could not get confectionery manufacturers to take it because the confectionery manufacturers could buy vegetable oils cheaper. They said:—
"If you can get a buyer in Great Britain, we will gladly license it, but we will not buy it."
I cannot sell it.
In so far as that problem existed in South Galway, North Clare and Kerry, my first concern was to try to meet it by bringing these areas into the butter manufacturing business. In Clare, in South Galway, in Kerry and in West Cork, I am glad to inform the House that, as a result of the superb exertions of the Dairy Disposal Board and its staff, an organisation has been set up which I think faithfully provides for every farmer in these areas who wants to sell milk to have it collected within three miles of his door and converted into butter at a creamery operated by the Dairy Disposal Board. I then went to Wexford. The Shelbourne Co-operative Society having abdicated and gone over to the retail distribution business and closed their creameries, I proceeded to survey the county to see if I could fill the gap they had deserted. My difficulty is this, that the people have got out of the habit of providing milk in quantity and with the regularity which makes the maintenance of creameries easy over wide areas.
Now I am going to make a proposal to them. They closed down three creameries in Wexford. If they will put these abandoned premises at our disposal, I will try this experiment out. I cannot establish creameries because the people are not minded to produce milk in quantity to make that economic; I cannot sell farmers' butter because the purchaser will not buy. Deputy Allen tells me that the farmers in Wexford are constrained to sell their butter for 1/6 and 1/9 a lb. I will give them the equivalent of 2/6 a lb. If they will bring their milk into any one of these abandoned buildings, I will reopen it as a cheese factory. We will try converting that milk into cheese and we will pay them 1/- per gallon for the milk. We will annex to the cheese industry the feeding of pigs, using the whey which farmers have not yet familiarised with as a substitute for skimmed milk, barley locally produced and other feeding stuffs.
If, at the end of 12 months' operation, there is a surplus of profit on our year's transactions, whatever that surplus is will be distributed by way of bonus in respect of each gallon of milk delivered to the cheese and pig centre by the farmer. There will be no shareholders and there will be no stockholders. The only measure will be: how many gallons of milk did the farmer deliver to the cheese factory? If he delivered 100 gallons and there is to be a distribution of a surplus permitting of ½d. a gallon for all the milk received at that manufacturing centre in 12 months, he will get ½d. for every gallon, that is, 4/2 per 100 gallons, and if he delivered 1,000 gallons, he will get 4/2 multiplied by ten. Whatever surplus there is will be distributed among the milk suppliers.
That is the best I can do. I do not know whether it will succeed or not, but it is worth trying, and, in any case, it is some effort to ensure that those who do not want to produce milk on the basis on which it is produced in Limerick, Cork and Tipperary, but who still, in their ordinary course of mixed husbandry, have a surplus of milk for which Deputy Allen tells me that, consequent on their abandonment by the Shelbourne Co-operative Society, they are now constrained to take 1/6 and 1/9 a lb. as butter, will get more for it. I will give them 2/6, and more if the product of their milk realises it, and for any quantity. Maybe it will be a greater success than I dare to hope. I do not want to raise false hopes. I am talking in terms of minima and the equivalent of 2/6 per lb. is better than 1/6 and it has this virtue, that it is better than hot air. Lip sympathy is cheap. A concrete effort to help may be neither popular nor successful, but it at least has the virtue of an effort to do one's best. If there is any Deputy who can make me a proposal that would improve on that, I want to hear it, and, if it can be grafted on to that proposal or substituted for that proposal, I will be glad to give effect to it.
