Not in hand stacks. In approaching this Estimate it is wise to consider the amount of money that is being voted—nearly £5,000,000. If we consider the number of males employed on the land we find that, if we dispensed with the Minister and the whole Department, and had a skeleton staff to distribute this money through the offices of the Department of Social Welfare, who would know these people who are employed on the land, all we could afford by direct subsidy would be about £10 per head. We have heard many suggestions from the opposite benches with regard to direct subsidy. All that the direct subsidy can give the farming population of this country is £10 per head per year. That is all it can provide.
If we are to stimulate and encourage agricultural production, one means by which we can do it is by the stimulation of reproduction, by the introduction of ground limestone to the land which, for an expenditure of £1, will give the farmer £3, by the introduction of all the other schemes which the present Minister for Agriculture initiated and which the Opposition now decry or, if they do not decry it, they try to jump on the bandwagon and take credit for it. There is one other way, that is by the education of men's minds. There we have the parish plan.
Before I discuss either the parish plan or ground limestone I would like to discuss corn, because in County Louth we have an economy in which the production of corn is uppermost. We have this year a decline in the wheat acreage of approximately 70,000 acres and we have an increase in the barley and oats acreage, which leaves us with a greater tillage acreage than we have had before.
I want to praise the Minister for Agriculture and to point out that there are six, or seven or eight counties in Ireland which, in my view, definitely subscribe to his view that the only policy for agriculture in this country is one more cow, one more sow and one more acre under the plough, but that these counties subscribe to it in a different way from that which is generally understood. The counties to which I refer are those which invariably produce more corn and more grain than they could use—Louth, Wexford, Carlow, parts of Tipperary, parts of Cork and you know the rest.
We now have a decrease in the acreage under wheat. I am pleased to observe from the figures supplied by the Department of Agriculture for deliveries to and mill intake in respect of the 1953 harvest—which I presume is the only one we should take, last year's season being so wet—that 7.34 barrels per statute acre were delivered to the mills. If we have to-day 400,000 acres of wheat—the Estimate of the Department of Agriculture is that we have from 370,000 to 400,000— we will have 354,000 tons of wheat to mill next harvest from Irish farms. If the figure is 370,000 we will still have more wheat next harvest than Fianna Fáil wanted when they issued their instructions through their various Ministries on January 17th of last year. Their figure was 300,000 tons and we have still got more. In addition, we have more oats and more barley and it is inevitable that a great quantity of barley and oats must be marketed.
The Minister has introduced the contract system. The contract system, if it can be implemented in full in the years to come, is the ideal answer for the internal usage of our grain. Over the last ten years we have imported maize and milo-maize to the value of approximately £5,000,000 per year. There is not the slightest reason why that £5,000,000 cannot be put into the pockets of the Irish farmers who increase tillage and subscribe to the policy of one more cow, one more sow, one more acre under the plough.
The greatest contribution towards the advancement of this idea of internal usage was made by the present Minister for Agriculture, Deputy Dillon, when he introduced, in 1951, his Grain Storage Loans Bill. As a result, we have to-day, for an expenditure, including the amount in this year's Estimate, of £1,100,000, grain storage for 100,000 tons more than we had at the end of the war. Many thousands of tons of that grain storage can be put to the very excellent use of storing barley which can supplant our imports of maize.
Our barley trade can be improved but there is only one way in which the Minister can do it. He has subscribed towards it very fully by the introduction of the contract system. At the moment the system does not embrace all our barley, but we hope that will be possible in the years to come. A contract system in malt and barley is possible because one firm buys three-quarters of our entire output. Many firms buy maize. What is wrong with a firm in Monaghan about which I can speak using up to 20 tons of maize per day, which is approximately 6,000 tons per year, making an arrangement, if overdrafts could be guaranteed, with a firm in Ardee which can store 60,000 barrels of grain, to supply 6,000 tons of feeding barley during the year? The difficulties in the way of such an arrangement are that the overdraft must inevitably be guaranteed.
Otherwise we hand over to men who are at the top of their business and these men will be left with the monopoly and with the right to say what we want. If the Minister can guarantee the overdraft and suggest a means as to how such an arrangement can be implemented, there is no reason why that maize should come from Dublin port but from Louth, having been produced in Monaghan which at the moment uses much more than it produces. I know that there are difficulties, but no man can tell what the price of maize will be in the months to come. This 60,000 tons of maize is but one little economy; there could be hundreds of these economies, certainly tens of them. There would be a certain gamble because of the uncertainty as to whether maize in the world market would drop or rise in the following month. That is a problem which must be met either by arrangement with the trade or by the trade taking up a contract system. If the Minister induces the trade to take up a contract system he will have made a contribution to agriculture which will live long after him.
The Minister is to introduce a Bill in the very near future called the Seed Production Bill. I think it is long overdue and, while speaking on the Estimate for Agriculture, I think it is not out of order to suggest that when introducing the Bill he should refer to the delay and say that he will get for the farmer the extra profit which is his due. All over the world a system has been introduced in places where the geographical position of areas means that they are suitable for the production of seed—where, in a peninsula, pollination cannot take place. The same applies to where mountain ranges occur. I can think of one such area which would suit the production of corn seeds—the Coolea Peninsula— where we have 470 farmers with average holdings of ten statute acres. These farmers do not use the combine harvesters because their fields are too small. They have not got economic holdings. They are excellent men who farm in the traditional manner and produce grain of high quality which they market for seed. From this area could come all the seed that this country needs. From it could come pedigree seed of a very high quality.
Speaking very seriously, I believe that this Seed Production Bill may mean one of the biggest things in agriculture we have had so far. The present Minister is the first Minister for Agriculture who did make the farmers realise by his publicity campaign the value of the use of fertilisers and of ground limestone. Before he became Minister there was no ground limestone and a week ago the Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy Flanagan, was able to make a statement that 810,000 tons of ground limestone were used last year. That is a very happy position. It is a still happier position to realise that we have 49 plants this year capable of producing 1,500,000 tons of ground limestone and that our output per acre should improve proportionately. We are not a rich nation. We have to spend here at the moment £10 per male employed on the land per year. Can you get any male employee who is satisfied with a potential increase in his income of £10? The only way we can better that is by the use of ground limestone, by the eradication of bovine tuberculosis and by participation in all the other such schemes introduced by the Minister. A nitrogen factory is to be built. This factory should not be centralised in Dublin but should be established in some central position within easy reach of the grain growing counties.
We have an awful lot to do yet. I notice in the Irish Farmers' Journal of January 14th, 1955, an article stating that the Dutch Government has built a pilot plant to make potash from seawater. That may seem far-flung to attempt but it gives us an idea of the potential that is there and suggests that we must follow up these potentials in all parts of the world. But the first and last law the Minister for Agriculture must follow is that we have not got the money to give a direct subsidy for every person engaged in agriculture. And when we do subsidise such products as ground limestone and fertilisers we must ensure that when we spend a pound we may get £3 back. Our wealth is in the land and in the land alone.
With regard to pigs and pig progeny testing, on Wednesday, 20th April, 1955, I addressed a question to the Minister for Agriculture asking him to state the comparative consumption of meals per lb. of live weight gain of the Large White and Landrace breed of pigs. I could not get a list of the type of pigs generally used in this country but I am concerned that the type used should compare favourably with any pig in any part of the world, and I want the Minister to say that we are on our way to getting it as quickly as possible. I have been very interested in this matter and in the Irish Farmers' Journal of Saturday, 19th February, 1955, there is a report of a letter addressed by Professor Helmar Clausen, director of pig progeny testing in Denmark, to a British farming paper. Dr. Clausen stated that there are only two pedigree Large White herds left in Denmark and said that the Large White pig in Britain could be brought up to the level of the Danish Landrace by seven years' progeny testing. We are now to have a progeny testing station and we hope that the results from it and the stock which will eventually emerge from it will improve two things—our rate of conversion and the consumption per lb. of meal.
Doctor Clausen is recognised as the expert on the continent on pig progeny testing and we shall see what he had to say, as reported in the paper mentioned. Under the heading of Landrace conversion Doctor Clausen states:
"There are only two pedigree Large White herds left in Denmark. Although the Large White has had the same progeny testing facilities as the Landrace for the past 50 years, the carcase quality from the pedigree Large White herds has been lower than the carcase quality of all commercial pigs in Denmark for the past ten years."
Doctor Clausen emphasises that there is very little relationship between show ring judging and commercial qualities in pigs. Examination of live pigs has, however, some part to play in such matters as determining the number of teats on an animal, determining the soundness of the visual parts of the reproductory organs and in getting an idea of the constitution of the pig. He goes on to say that in Copenhagen Zoo they found a wild pig and in seven years they succeeded in bringing that pig up to standard by crossing him with a Landrace to the point where the pig had the same conversion rate as the Landrace which had been bred over 50 years before.
His opinion is that the Large White will not give the same quick results. In an issue of the Irish Farmers' Journal of Saturday November 21st, 1953, there is a table of consumption of food per lb. of live-weight gain in pigs in Denmark through the years. In 1909-1910 a lb. of pig meat was produced for every 3.77 lb. of meals consumed; in 1919-1921 that figure was down to 3.59; in 1929-1930 it was down to 3.39; in 1939-40 it was down to 3.22; and in 1951-1952 it was down to 3.05. Approximately four years ago—I cannot say the exact year, but it was either 1950 or 1951—I heard Professor Senior read a paper to the Statistical Society in which he stated that in the Albert College the rate of conversion was 1 lb. of pig meat to every 3.8 lb. of meal fed. Now the comparison there with 1951-1952 is 3.05. That may seem small, but it really means that to get the same amount of pig meat the Irish farmer has to feed one ton of meal for every 16¼ cwt. that the Danish farmer has to feed.
I understand that pig production has reached a stage where, if one goes in for pig production, one does not think of 20 or 40 pigs but one thinks in terms of 100, 200 or 1,000 pigs and one computes one's profit at the rate of £1 or 10/- per pig. If the Danish and the Dutch farmer are in the happy position that they have only got to feed 16 cwt. of meal for every ton we feed, is it not true they can cut our price on the British market?
It is true that the very serious veterinary objections which the Minister mentioned in his reply to my question are there. The British Ministry excluded the Landrace. As I said, I hold no brief for the Landrace. The British excluded the Landrace for a period because one pig in a particular shipment was found to be suffering from rhinitis. After a period they allowed them in and there has been no trouble since. I think with very, very careful supervision foundation stocks from any part of the world could be brought in here.
A very natural sequence of events followed on the prohibition of the Landrace from England. There was no prohibition in the Channel Islands and astute farmers in the Channel Islands built up herds of Landrace waiting for the time when the restriction on their import to Britain would cease and they could cash in. If it is the case that veterinary objections preclude us from taking in any pig from any part of the world, be it Large White, Landrace or anything else, which could be tested here and might possibly prove to be of better value than the pig we have, could we not bring a foundation stock to some island off the coast in order to carry out testing; that stock could be kept there in quarantine for any period of time, years if necessary? I make that suggestion to the Minister. I think possibly the Department of Agriculture, particularly the veterinary section of it, is a little bit stultified. Possibly the veterinary officers of the Department like to play safe; but if the farmers are going to be forced out of pig production, they cannot afford to play safe. I think extreme measures are possibly necessary and the Minister should turn the problem over in his mind and examine it very, very carefully.
Yesterday the Minister referred to a letter of Deputy de Valera's on the parish plan in which Deputy de Valera said that he had nothing against the parish plan. Why, then, did he not implement that plan from 1951 to 1954? Why was it jettisoned? The cheapest commodity in the world to-day is knowledge and education. The cheapest commodity that can be bought is knowledge. If we have to acquire knowledge in the hard field of experience we dissipate our lives and finances in doing so. If we can get it by contact with those who are experts, then we are fortunate indeed.
The unit in this country will always be the parish. If for every three parishes there is one expert available to the farming community, surely we will have made a step forward. I could not care less whether these experts are attached to the Department of Agriculture or to the county committees. Whatever they are attached to, their knowledge will be passed on without bias. Anybody who tries to come between the parish plan and the Irish farmer will be crushed inevitably. I believe the plan will be successful. I appeal to everyone not to detract in any way from what is at the present moment only a blueprint. Mistakes will be made. It will be the duty of the Deputies here to tell the Minister of those mistakes in order to have them rectified. We cannot tell the Minister in advance what mistakes will be made since he has more knowledge at his disposal than we have.
I said at the outset that the only way in which we can stimulate agriculture is by subsidy and encouragement in connection with those things which reproduce themselves. I note in the Estimates a figure of £2,900,000 for land reclamation. There never would have been land reclamation, notwithstanding Marshall Aid, had Deputy James Dillon not been Minister for Agriculture in the years 1948-1951 because there is not the slightest shadow of a doubt that, had the Fianna Fáil Government been in office, Deputy Lemass would have collared all that for industry and commerce. Fortunately Marshall Aid was injected into agriculture and, as a result, we are more prosperous to-day than we would otherwise have been.
Any sane, thinking man knows that what I say is true. The lime subsidy this year will cost £600,000. According to the Parliamentary Secretary's figure, it will probably cost more. I hope it will cost twice as much. No one is responsible for that lime subsidy but Deputy James Dillon, Minister for Agriculture. As far back as the 1930's the Fianna Fáil Party had the advantage of experiments in the use of ground limestone. For 17 years they sat, stagnant, in their benches and refused to give the Irish farmers anything except the price of a calf skin.
The present Minister has been maligned in the last hour by the Opposition. He has been described as the Minister for Grass. An attempt was made by his predecessor to show that we are more interested in the production of cattle through grass rather than from corn. Why then did the present Opposition when they were in Government not put through this House the Grain Storage (Loans) Act, which was passed by the inter-Party Government in 1951, and which gave the Irish farmer an opportunity of marketing his grain. You did not do it because you had no interest in anything but votes and subsidies. Since that Grain Storage Loans Act was introduced, a figure of £1,100,000 has been injected into it and that means that there is 100,000 tons more storage for Irish grain than there was at the end of the war and at the end of 17 years of your administration. If that is the Minister for Grass I would like to hear the reason why he is Minister for Grass. If he wants 100,000 tons more of Irish grain, then surely he is Minister for Corn and Minister for the Irish farmer.
I should like to congratulate the Minister on his very opportune and— shall we say?—certainly delayed beginning of the eradication of bovine tuberculosis scheme. We are behind in this matter. The countries of Canada, America, Holland and of England are far ahead. This is a country which is producing quality beef. We must, therefore, work for the English market and if we do not we must go to the wall. The bovine tuberculosis scheme will certainly prove again that the Minister for Agriculture is the only man who can put Ireland on its feet.
With regard to cattle, I heard the previous Minister for Agriculture state that Britain needed from 200,000 to 250,000 tons of beef per year. The figure Mr. W.A. Smith, a famous agriculturist, gives is 275,000 tons of beef as the requirement of the British market. Irish-bred beef is getting a premium for quality and Irish beef must, therefore, rely on quality. We are getting a quality price for a quality product, and if we are, we must put it up. Therefore, the prudent choice of the Minister for Agriculture, as mentioned in his statement yesterday, that we must all place our confidence in the Shorthorn cow is indeed most certainly a wise one. I, like the Minister, have a couple of Friesians and I, like the Minister, would like Deputy Moher to come along and buy the bull calves.
If we are to export quality beef— and here again I may get derisive howls from the Fianna Fáil Benches— I would like to ask the Minister for Agriculture to impress on the Minister for Lands that the fattening lands of County Meath are one of the most valuable assets that we have. Every factory in this country has a finishing shop. It would be as silly for a boot factory to close its finishing shop and sell all its production as seconds as it would be for us to divide or dissipate or in any other way touch the fattening lands of Meath and Kildare. They must be there to fatten cattle that cannot be fattened on the land. I can tell of a farmer in County Louth who has one field of 11 acres and it is worth more to that farmer than half his farm —and he has a very extensive farm— because every beast that passes through his hands goes through that field at some time. In that field the grass grows for a month longer in the autumn and comes a month earlier in the spring. That is an asset, and there are many of those assets. I would appeal to the Minister to make representations in any way he likes to the Minister for Lands to make sure that these are not touched.
With the end of the bulk-buying period, the British housewife, as I said, has her choice. I believe, in the trade, that if it were possible for the prices to be available to be announced in November for the following year instead of March it would give the farmer—who is really buying ahead when he buys his stores—a very great guarantee of profit. Our production of beef is something I cannot compare with the production in England and Scotland, but I would imagine we are quite a sizable producer for the British market and perhaps it would be possible for the Minister to make representations also to the British Minister of Food that the prices should be announced months earlier if that is possible.
I am proud to stand behind the Minister for Agriculture, and that is because I know why he places his faith in the land of Ireland—because his family has suffered for the land of Ireland. I know that not two miles from where I live the present Minister for Agriculture's father was arrested and apprehended for telling the farmers that they were paying too high a rent and that they could not leave their land in the autumn better than they found it in the spring if they continued to do so. The best way out was not to pay their rents and see what would happen.
The late John Dillon received six months in Dundalk jail for that speech and I am proud to say in my parish there were 20 men to walk 20 miles behind the jail cart to the town of Dundalk and 20 men to meet him outside the jail when he came out after six months. I know then why the Minister for Agriculture places all his faith in the land, because it is only from the land of this country we get reproduction and multiplication of our assets and finances. I would like to ask him to redouble his efforts for the land of Ireland and if he does, then, surely he will redouble his efforts for all the people of this country.
