Deputy Corry gave notice that he would raise the subject matter of Question No. 50 on to-day's Order Paper on the Adjournment.
Private Deputies' Business. - Adjournment Debate—Price of Eggs.
When I raised this matter to-day I did not hear what the Minister said in reply to a supplementary question of mine when he stated that my observations were no help to him in trying to sell eggs in markets other than Great Britain. If, in the Minister's opinion, any discussion of this matter would not help but would do harm in any negotiations, I certainly would not proceed now. I should like if the Minister would let us know at this stage if, in his opinion, it would do any harm.
The Deputy is entitled to raise the matter on the Adjournment and I do not wish to deter him for a moment.
That means that there will be no harm done by raising the matter. My anxiety is that the unfortunate smallholders and people who were induced by the Minister's statement to put their money into the rearing of poultry and egg production should not now find themselves thrown on a lee-shore in the same way as the Minister threw the flax growers in 1948. I do not want to see that condition of affairs prevailing. When the Minister comes along at this stage and says: "No money, no eggs," that represents the Minister's attitude. I have also a very definite objection to the manner in which the Minister is meeting this matter. Speaking in this House on 14th February last, as reported in column 184 of the Official Reports, the Minister stated:—
"No. I did not negotiate the eggs agreement. It was my predecessor, and my predecessor left me in the position of going to England with £5,000,000 worth of eggs on my hands to negotiate an agreement... I will never make an agreement about eggs with such a provision as was in the agreement of 1947 that we would spend £1,350,000 maintaining egg production with no proviso as to what the British would pay for those eggs when produced, and I will not send my successor to London with a vast surplus hanging around his neck to try and make a price agreement for that surplus, as in my case..."
I have here also the Minister's statement on the 5th August, 1948, as reported in Volume 112, column 2246, of the Official Report, as follows:—
"I think the agreement made by Deputy Smith was a good agreement. It bound me by contract, when I went to London, but it caused me no uneasiness. I think it was well negotiated for our people. It provided me when I came into office with a useful instrument for the development of an extremely valuable branch of our agricultural industry."
That was the Minister's opinion on 5th August, 1948, of the agreement, which he now attacks Deputy Smith for making, after being seven or eight months in office and having time to examine the agreement to see what it was worth. After he had been over in London and examined matters there he came back to this House and praised the previous Minister. Then he comes along with this kind of stuff afterwards when he had made as big a mess of the eggs question as he made of the flax question. As I said, I am only concerned with the position of our unfortunate people. This is a message which the Minister sent out to the people of this country in May, 1948, with his photograph on it:—
"MESSAGE FROM THE MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE.
It used to be the rule that when egg supplies increased the price went down. That is no longer true. We have made an agreement with the British Ministry of Food that the more eggs we send to the British market the more they will pay for our eggs.
It is as a result of this agreement that shippers can afford to pay 3/- per dozen for eggs to the producers.
Indian meal is selling for 28/- a cwt., and it used always to be said that if you could get as much for a hundred (10 dozen) of eggs as a cwt. of Indian meal cost, eggs paid a profit to the producer. You can get 2/- per cwt. more than the price of Indian meal now, so you can be sure of a good profit on every hundred you sell.
For the next five years, I believe, you can earn a good profit on every hundred of eggs you sell, and at the same time every quarter of eggs you sell to the eggler is a real and valuable help to the country.
This is a free country, so you can sell your eggs, eat your eggs, or get rid of your hens altogether if you want to; but if you want to help your own Government to secure steadily improving terms in the British market:—
(1) Keep only pure-bred hens.
(2) Kill off the common hens (they eat a lot but they lay very little).
(3) Sell as many eggs to the eggler as you can.
Remember that a quarter of clean fresh eggs is better than a hundred dirty stale eggs—James M. Dillon."
What is that extract from?
That extract is from, I take it, a Government journal called "P.E.P."—Pep.
Is there a date?
May, 1948. Then here we have all the chicks that will lay hereafter and a photograph of "James" on the other side. That is a message from the Minister for Agriculture with full knowledge of this egg agreement to the people, and with a very definite innuendo that he had fixed up everything and there would be a definite guaranteed price for eggs for five years.
So there was.
I shall not inflict on this House a résumé of all the things that happened after that. On August 5th, 1948, we have at column 2245 of the Official Report the following:—
"I take it that the advantages of the poultry agreement are manifest. In regard to the egg agreement, give credit where credit is due. The egg agreement was negotiated by my predecessor, Deputy Smith. For its merits, thank him.... The agreement provides for the farmer of this country a sure and certain market at remunerative prices for any conceivable product that the land of Ireland can produce."
There was then a wild campaign waged on eggs. The unfortunate farmers were induced by their "better halves" to buy incubators and every kind of machinery that was going. The county committees of agriculture were inundated with demands for more poultry houses, all of which had to be paid for out of the ratepayers' pockets while the taxpayer paid roughly £250,000 to meet the expenses of this poultry drive, as it was called. The poultry drive finishes in the position of the Minister standing up here and saying that England would have to pay a better price or we will give her no more eggs. I agree with him entirely in that. But why come along first and tell the farmers that the more eggs they produce the better the price will be when, instead of the price going up consequential on the price of maize and pollard, which is now 30/- or 33/- a cwt.——
30/-.
Will the man who wants to buy one cwt. of pollard get it for 30/-?
Yes.
That is fair enough. With that condition of affairs and eggs at 2/- per dozen there is an entirely different position from what had been forecast. I wonder was there any security at all in this agreement. If there was, where is it?
With relation to eggs?
Yes.
None—that is the tragedy.
Then why did the Minister advise the people that the more eggs they produced the better the price would be?
I will tell the Deputy that in a moment.
That is what I would like to know. The Minister is now trying to find alternative markets, the alternative markets that he ridiculed Fianna Fáil for looking for in their time. Mother England is no longer a market. The Minister will have to go to the Continent.
You never got that far.
The Continent of Europe, where we sold our butter this year at 98/- per cwt. less than the Danes got for their butter.
The Deputy must keep to eggs.
We are now going out into that market with our eggs. I would suggest to the Minister in all seriousness that, in view of the price the Danish Minister seems able to get for the produce that was condemned here to-day with bell, book and candle by many Deputies——
When did we sell butter before?
Take the pebbles out of your mouth and speak up.
This year, at 98/- a cwt. less than the Danes got for theirs. Surely it would be better to pay commission than sell our butter 98/- a cwt. less than the Danish butter?
The Deputy must keep to eggs. Eggs are the subject-matter of the debate.
Eggs are the subject-matter that I am so worried about as one of the taxpayers who had to put his hand in his pocket to find money for the Minister's daft schemes.
Do you remember the 5d. per dozen?
The Deputy should give up his corner-boy tactics. The Deputy should stick to tomatoes. My object in raising this matter to-night——
Is for publicity.
——is twofold. First of all, I want to correct the Minister's vilification of his predecessor here last week. Secondly, I want to know from the Minister is there any redress for those farmers who raised loans from his Department in order to build poultry-houses and buy incubators? Will he wipe out the balance of the loans outstanding since he did not keep his word? Will he give them any compensation for the money they have spent because of their accepting the Minister's word in this matter? What hope does the Minister hold out for the future? What hope is there of a market? What hope is there of a price in that market to help these people to recoup themselves for the losses they have made?
I think the sensible thing would be to give the House as far as I can an objective report of what led up to the present situation. The story begins in 1947. During trade talks in London in the Autumn of 1947 the export of eggs to Britain was discussed between the representatives of the Department of Agriculture and the British Ministry of Food. I ask leave to refer to a copious note on this matter as I want to get this factual material over to the House as simply as I can. Under the arrangement which was in operation from February, 1944, the scale of prices for eggs payable by the Ministry was related to the quantity exported, the price per great 100 increasing by steps from 24/6 to 29/- according as the volume of exports rose. The British Ministry of Food officials expressed disappointment that this arrangement had not resulted in a larger flow of exports and that exports of eggs from 1947 were far below what had been anticipated. The Department of Agriculture officials emphasised that the prices which the Ministry had agreed to pay were not sufficient to induce Irish poultry keepers to increase production. A further meeting between officials was held on 28th October, 1947, at which the Ministry offered to modify the existing contract by (a) extending its duration by a further year to 31st January, 1951; (b) continuing the existing sliding scale of prices but reducing the minimum quantities necessary to qualify for the top price of 29s. per great 100, and (c) paying an extra bonus price provided the Department were willing to embark on a scheme calculated to expand the production of poultry and eggs and to increase exports.
At a meeting between British and Irish Ministers on 4th November, 1947, the then Minister for Agriculture, Deputy Smith, indicated that producers were not attracted by the price offered. He agreed in principle to the spending by the Irish Government of a large sum towards a poultry development scheme.
At a meeting between officials of the Department and the Ministry in Dublin on 6th and 7th January, 1948, it was agreed that a satisfactory scheme of development could not be carried through in less than three years. The cost of the scheme for the three-year period was estimated at £1,350,000. The Ministry of Food, on their part, agreed to pay a special bonus price of 5/- per great hundred of eggs exported, which, over the three years, 1948-49, 1949-50 and 1950-51, would be equivalent to the sum expended by the Irish Government on the scheme of development. The quantities of eggs which the Ministry expected to receive during these three years to qualify for the prices agreed to were as follows:—1948-49, 1,650,000 great hundreds; 1949-50, 1,825,000 great hundreds, and 1950-51, 2,100,000 great hundreds. The bonus on the price fixed by the Minister was sufficient, with support from the poultry reserve fund to the extent of 1/9 per great hundred, to pay Irish producers 3/- per dozen for eggs during 1948-49. At that time the 3/- per dozen was payable out of what the British Ministry of Food was paying us, plus a levy on the export of fowl, plus a large levy on the export of turkeys. When I became Minister for Agriculture I stopped the levy on the export of turkeys.
The effect of the new arrangement was that the target which my predecessor had fixed for his third year of operation was exceeded by me in the first year. The exports in 1948/49 were 2,231,734 great hundreds; in 1949/50, 3,397,618 great hundreds; and in 1950/51, 3,350,000 great hundreds. This had this embarrassing result that the British undertaking to pay 5/- per long hundred on eggs was subject to an overriding limitation. I and my colleagues had hit the target after 18 months at the end of which time the British obligation to pay the bonus of 5/- per great hundred had ceased and henceforth the prices of our Irish eggs would have fallen. I had to go back to London in that situation and say to the British: "Look here, I do not accept this business of the British Ministry paying the Irish Government to develop their own poultry industry. What I want is a fair price for the eggs we produce." We do not want the British or anybody else to subsidise our poultry industry. I told them to take back the subsidy. I would not let the British Government subsidise the Irish Department of Agriculture. I said that I appreciated their offer; that I did not consider it was consistent with the position in this country that we should accept subsidies from a foreign Government. I said : "Let us talk in terms of a fair price for eggs," but appreciative as we are, I release the British from all obligations to pay any further subsidies to the Irish Government. We would not pay them subsidies and I did not think we had any right——
On a point of information, I can understand that was the Minister's attitude towards this bonus.
I have only five minutes.
It is an important point. I am sorry.
I will be moving a Supplementary Estimate next week when you will have an opportunity of speaking.
There is no need to be unmannerly.
I, therefore, pressed on the British Government that if we were to maintain egg production in this country the only basis on which we could do it would be on the basis of a long-term price. I said there was no use giving us prices for two or three years. What I wanted was an agreement with the British Ministry of Food that they would establish a rigid link between the price payable for British eggs and the price paid for Irish eggs. I said to them: "When you fix a fair price with me I want that to be linked to whatever prices you are then paying in Great Britain and if your prices go up my prices went up and if your prices go down my prices went down." The vital flaw was that we were left with £5,000,000 worth of eggs when we were trying to get a price out of the British Ministry of Food for eggs. That is the truth.
I said to the British Ministry of Food in London nearly 12 months ago, when I went to meet Mr. Webb—there is no reason why I should conceal it—that the only result of bringing down the price of eggs would be that they would get no eggs; that I would not ask our people to produce eggs and sell them to the British for less than the cost of production and that I would not ask the British to pay me a fantastic price simply because they were under pressure for food which was essential. I said to Mr. Webb that there was no use trying to buy eggs for a price less than that which would give the producers a modest margin of profit. There was a long and vigorous negotiation with the Minister of Food. Eventually we arrived at an agreement whereby I got a proposition to enable me to pay 2/6 a dozen for eggs all the year round. I think the price is itself sufficient to pay 2/- during summer and 2/6 during winter. When I paid 2/6; for eggs, not one penny was taken off turkeys, and but for the fact that we had a levy on turkeys they would have got no more than half.
That is nonsense, and you know it.
What is nonsense? What you are saying now?
A Deputy
Sit down.
I will if I like.
If I had taken the money out of the turkey fund I could have insulated myself against the criticism.
A Deputy
You could not.
I will face the consequences of informing the public in this country of the truth and I am not one bit apprehensive of the result. I told the British Ministry of Food that I wanted to see food produced that we could ship to the British people. I want to send them what the land of this country is capable of producing and I would be happy to let them have it at a fair price. I will not ask the British Government for a very big price for anything. I told the Minister in private and I now say it in public: "I will not ask our people to produce one single egg or 1 lb. of meat to sell in Great Britain at less than the cost of production." I want to get a fair price and then we will expand production and be proud to do it. I would like Deputies, instead of asking me what I propose to do, with our exportable surplus of eggs to tell me what they suggest that they would do with them.
Did you not guarantee us a profitable market for eggs?
The Dáil adjourned at 11 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Thursday, 22nd February, 1951.