When the House adjourned last night, I was speaking on the 1948 Trade Agreement, on the land project and on the system of allocation of bulls to the different county committees. This matter of the allocation of bulls is a serious matter in my county, where there is a shortage of bulls. It constitutes a serious drawback for the cattle industry, from the point of view of foundation stock and quality of the breed. I mentioned last night that, in one electoral division, we had two old premium bulls which we could not replace. That is a serious situation. I do not know whether the owners bought a bull on their own or not, but if they did not do so, the position must be very serious. There is the special term bull system, and both of these men made application for a special term bull, when they could not get the premium bull, and so far as I know they were both refused. I refer now to the Ballina electoral division.
In our county, when we set about allocating bulls from the quota available, on the basis of two-fifths dairy and Shorthorn and three-fifths Aberdeen Angus, we divide them up amongst the electoral divisions, and the difficulty in that respect is that one electoral area may want a greater number than another from the point of view of the number of premium bulls which may terminate at a certain time in a certain year. If these men I speak of bought bulls on their own and paid the full price of a premium bull at the Dublin Show, they would need to be fairly wealthy farmers. In another electoral division, there was a man who had been a premium holder for years and we could not supply him either, due to this two-fifths and three-fifths regulation.
I suggest to the Department that, in relation to the allocation of bulls, the country should be divided into three areas. An area comprising Mayo, Donegal, Galway, Leitrim, and, possibly, Kerry should not be put in the same category as Meath, Kildare, Westmeath and Longford or the three counties of Cork, Limerick andTipperary, which are dairying areas and for which special regulations should be made. In Longford, Westmeath, Meath and Kildare, the Shorthorn is a suitable type of bull, but in my area the Aberdeen Angus is the only suitable type. Three-quarters of the county is mountainous and barren and the people of the area would prefer an animal on the lines of the Aberdeen Angus rather than risk the beef Shorthorn, because they could not rear the calves. They can get on fairly well with the ordinary black small type of cow or the coloured cow, with the Aberdeen Angus, but you will never get them to turn over to the beef Shorthorn or dairy Shorthorn.
I should like to see a reasonable proportion of the dairy breed of bull in my county; but on the basis of two-fifths and three-fifths, when a quota is allotted, you will get as many Aberdeen Angus as you wish provided you are able to get the required proportion but that proportion is far in excess of what you would wish to get in order to replace premiums. I feel that a proportion of 70 per cent. Aberdeen Angus and 30 per cent. Shorthorn or dairy would go a reasonable distance towards meeting the difficulty in my county. We would prefer more, but that, in itself, would be a great help. I think the Department are too firm in this matter. I know that in one area in my county we were only a small percentage short but the Department refused to move an inch. Even though the percentage was almost available to qualify for an Aberdeen Angus, the Department were not prepared to move even an inch in regard to providing the area with such a bull.
As to the land project, this is a scheme which gave a huge amount of employment in my county. We talk here about increased employment on the land and the initiation of that scheme was the beginning of the putting into work on the land of every available man. The Government ask the farmer to increase tillage and the only way in which we can get that increased tillage is through this land rehabilitation scheme. It is a scheme which, as I say, put hundreds of people working on the land. We had thismachinery and these gangs of men working on the land, and we had another section working on local drainage under the Local Authorities (Works) Act. All these schemes ran hand in hand but the land reclamation scheme can go only 50 per cent. of the way towards complete success, unless the Local Authorities (Works) Act drainage scheme is in operation at the same time. If a farmer wanted to have two, five or ten acres of waterlogged land reclaimed and made application, he would not be able to get that land reclaimed unless provision cation, he would not be able to get that land reclaimed unless provision had been made to take the water off the land, with the result that his application would be refused.
In my county to-day there is tillage on land that was waterlogged and that would not feed a snipe five years ago. To-day anyone can see the improvement as a result of reclamation. That land is a valuable addition to the holding. No county would benefit more from land reclamation than the county I represent, with its big population, low valuations and poor land. The land project scheme would be a godsend to the people of County Mayo. Farmers with valuations running from £2 to £7 10s. have been tilling the same land for years past. Land reclamation would add two, three, four or perhaps five acres to their present holdings.
The drainage carried out under the Local Authorities (Works) Act, run in conjunction with land reclamation was very valuable. It provided employment for the people in the rural areas. It provided that employment in close proximity to their own homes. The money spent was spent on constructive work and expenditure in one year meant that the farmer could reap the benefit of that the next year. That money showed a return. The scheme was different in its conception from other public schemes under which the registered unemployed in an area were required to travel long distances to report for work on roads, for instance, or else lose their unemployment assistance. Very often they rose in the dark hours of the early morning, had their breakfasts in the dark and cycled long distances to work; they had no lunch and waited until they cycled homeagain in the evening to have dinner and tea combined. Work under the Local Authorities (Works) Act and the land project was done in close proximity to the homes of these people. The workers had an excellent return from a purely monetary point of view. It is a pity those schemes have suffered some interference because they were very successful.
It is regrettable that the machinery has been disposed of to private contractors. Hitherto if a farmer wanted to do the work himself he could avail of the services of a private contractor. If a farmer did not want to do the work himself he could apply to the Department and the Department would do it for him. Now the work is entirely in the hands of private contractors. I am wondering if the scheme will continue. Is there any danger that it may collapse? About three weeks ago in my own county I heard of a farmer who had made application to have four or five acres of land reclaimed. He had engaged a private contractor and that contractor was to start work on a certain date. Instructions were given that the work was not to go on, with the result that the work was held up. Eventually the work did start. Great numbers of applications for land reclamation work have been sent in from County Mayo. Are private contractors free to tender for this work? If the owner has to do the work himself I can see this scheme coming to a rapid conclusion in the very near future. Mention has been made of £30 per acre. I understand it will cost anything from £20 to £25 to supply clay pipes. Concrete pipes will cost anything from £15 to £18. There will not be much of the £30 left by the time the pipes are paid for. I am afraid the farmers will prefer to go out and work on the roads for the county council at £4 or £5 per week and I believe they would be better off doing that than in reclaiming their own land. The only satisfactory way in which to do land reclamation is by means of a Government scheme, the Government operating the machinery over large tracts of land.
In the smaller areas where there isa small acreage to be done let the private contractor do it. In the areas where a man can afford to spare a certain proportion of his time during the year let him do it. Under the old scheme a man had every chance of doing that. He could spend £12 or he could save it and have the work done. If he were unable to afford the £12 he could pay it by means of an addition to his rent. The contribution per year was 9/- an acre. In this way a man added many valuable acres to his holding. To-day the value of that land is very much greater when you take into consideration the value of land let in conacre, meadow or for grazing.
I would appeal to the Department to give very serious consideration to the question of the allocation of bulls. I know it will be a problem for the Department in the dairying areas because the dairyman will take the best advantage of his dairying cows. The dairyman may get from £15 to £20 for a two to four weeks old white head calf and it will be very difficult to get that man to put a dairy bull in with his herd and sell the bull calf or the heifer calf for £6 or £8.
I was told about a man in Tipperary who sold 15 white headed calves out of his dairy herd and got £19 6s. 8d. each of them or approximately £290 in all. The calves were two to 12 weeks old. I know there is a problem there for the Department but it is a problem that has to be solved some day if the dairying industry is to be protected so far as the foundation stock is concerned. Nevertheless, there should be ways and means of doing it. Having a method for the whole country will only create an injustice in places such as I have mentioned in my own county.
Members on the opposite side said last year that during the term of office of the inter-Party Government the Minister for Agriculture went to America. That was a very profitable visit as it was responsible for bringing trade to this country so far as beef and the dead meat export trade were concerned. That in itself was one ofthe greatest sources of income that was ever provided for the farmers.
It was of great benefit to farmers living in the country and especially to those farmers who live in areas where you have a big surplus of fat cattle. Every farmer knows that during the months of September, October and November there is a surplus of beef in this country. You had no place to dispose of that surplus except on the British market but the British people themselves had a surplus of their own at that period. The result was that these heavy beef cattle were a drug on the market. It was not easy for the big farmer to dispose of those cattle in September, October or November. They could dispose of store cattle at a good price from April to July. After that those cattle became fat cattle and were on the farmers' hands. The dead meat export trade to America was of great advantage to those farmers.
Were it not for that trade you would not have all those factories springing up to give employment during that period and to buy all the surplus cattle available. That was of great benefit so far as the winter sale for beef cattle available. That was of great benefit so far as the winter sale for beef cattle was concerned. The visit by the Minister for Agriculture to America during the time of the inter-Party Government paid dividends. It provided a means by which the surplus of cattle at that particular period of the year could be disposed of.
During this debate we were told about the cattle, poultry and pig population in 1947 and in 1951 and 1952. We were told that the number of cattle increased in 1951 and 1952 and that the number of pigs went up in 1951 and 1952. The number of cattle cannot be increased in one or two years. The foundation was laid in 1948 and the increase began to show itself in 1951 and 1952. It would take two years at least before an increase in the number of poultry would show itself. Here again the inter-Party Government laid the foundations of a thriving industry. Hatcheries were set up in 1948 and 1949 and this led to a vast increase in the number of poultry. There was a subsidy for chicks and the Department of Agriculture advised the people in the rural areas to go in for the day-oldchicks and produce more eggs. I did my part. I know that the egg is of great benefit to the community. It is a money builder. It provides money for the rent and is of particular value to those living in the poorer areas. The same remarks apply to pigs. The number of pigs cannot be increased in one year or two years. It would take a minimum of two years to increase the pig population because you would, first of all, have to make up your mind in regard to the type of breeding sow. In the circumstances, you would not have young bonhams for at least two years. If the pig population increased in 1951 and 1952 the ground work was done during the time of the inter-Party Government. No farmer in this country is able to make a living on one class of farming. He has to have mixed farming to make a success of farming. By going in for mixed farming the farmer will be able to sell something at the different periods of the year. I believe that in the dairying areas other methods will have to be adopted having regard to labour and other costs.
In the dairying counties you have huge quanties of milk going back to the farmers from the creameries. It is used for the feeding of fowl and pigs. In my area we have small farmers with two and three cows. Apart from the value of the calves and the high prices prevailing for cattle to-day, the cows they keep are able to provide them with milk for their own use, while the buttermilk and the skim milk is utilised for the rearing of pigs. In some areas they are able to fatten pigs within from 3½ to 4 months. They buy young pigs and are able to turn them out within that time, pigs weighing from 16 to 18 stone. They may pay £8 for a young pig and in a minimum period of four months can put that pig on the market. It may weigh 16 stone. They are able to do that, mainly in cases where they have surplus milk which they use with potatoes and maizemeal for the feeding of pigs.
I realise that, from the point of view of its cost, butter is becoming the problem as far as ordinary consumers in the towns and cities are concerned. They are finding it difficult to buy creamery butter at its present price. I am ofopinion that, within two years, there certainly will not be the same sale for creamery butter as there is to-day. The position in many rural areas at present is—I am speaking now of areas which are outside the dairying counties —that the people are going back to the old system of churning butter for themselves. These are areas where you have big populations. People can buy a churn at from £2 10s. to £5. That is why I say that within two years a great number of people will not be buying any creamery butter. They will be able to supply their own home butter requirements as they did 15 and 20 years ago, with the added advantage of having the buttermilk for the feeding of fowl and pigs. I think the people are wise to do that. I remember that in my county 25 or 30 years ago, the people bought very little creamery butter. They made the butter at home and, as I say, they are going back to that system again. That, of course, may not happen in the dairying counties.
In conclusion I want to say that in my opinion the land project scheme, the drainage scheme and those other schemes which were introduced by the previous Minister strongly influenced the decision arrived at by the people in the recent by-elections in Wicklow and Cork. In view of that I think the Government would be well advised not to proceed with the sale of the machinery that was purchased for the land project scheme. I think they should take the advice that was expressed by the people when they cast their votes at these by-elections. I take that advice to mean that the machinery should not be sold. It should be put back working on the land in the manner that obtained before the change of Government took place. At that time you had a number of men getting employment on the schemes sponsored by the then Government. Many men were employed, too, by the private contractors who took work under the scheme. The position at that time was that small farmers were enabled to take advantage of those schemes. The sooner the Government comes to a decision in regard to these schemes on the linesthat I have indicated the better it will be for the country and for the people.
