asked the Minister for Agriculture whether in the present precarious position of live stock exports, accentuated somewhat by the conflict between the exporters and the executive of the cooperative marts, he will use his initiative to invite the parties in dispute to meet him with a view to endeavouring to get them to reconcile their differences in the national interest.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Live Stock Exporters and Co-operative Marts.
10.
I would certainly like to be of the utmost assistance in effecting a sensible understanding between the interests involved in this question. I had hoped that the parties on each side were agreed that the producers are entitled to complete freedom to dispose of their stock in whatever way they think serves their interests best. Any attempt to deprive them of this freedom of choice through the use of the boycott or other weapon will be resisted to the maximum extent having regard to the powers vested in me.
Does the Minister not agree that this dispute has gone on for too long to the detriment of the cattle trade and will he not use his position as Minister for Agriculture to try to get these parties together, under a chairman acceptable to both sides in the dispute, in the national interests, just as the Taoiseach a week ago got the parties concerned in the oil dispute to come together to the satisfaction of all concerned?
I have no hesitancy, doubts or prejudices in regard to taking any steps which I think would have any effect in this whole matter. I want to assure the Deputy and the House that on every occasion where I detected the appearance of unreasonableness I made my mind known to those who, I thought, were responsible. I had really hoped that things would not have gone as far as they appear to have gone and I have deliberately re-framed the answer which I have given today from that which I would have given yesterday. If I thought there was anything I could do, or if there was any indication from either of the parties, or both, that my intervention would be of use in achieving the objects the Deputy has in mind, I would not hesitate in the least. The position, after all, is not comparable to the case he has cited.
Would the Minister not consider the value, as Minister for Agriculture, of calling these parties into his room in the Department of Agriculture and seeing if, by the exercise of reason, he could not get both parties to act reasonably? If he fails, no one will blame him. If he succeeds he will have done a useful service. There does not appear to be anyone else except the Minister for Agriculture who can bring them together to talk this thing over in a reasonable way. The present situation is absurd and very unjust. The Minister would have the support of all sides if he asked the parties to come together and discuss the matter with him. Would he not consider the value of that?
I consider everything in regard to this matter. I have no objection to calling anybody or everybody into my office to discuss the matter. I have kept close contact with all these interests and, as I said, when I detected the slightest evidence of unreasonableness on one side or another and when the report reached me of the activities that apparently took place yesterday, I felt that, apart altogether from whatever prospects there might be for the type of discussion to which the Deputies have referred, the onus was on me to come down flatfooted, as I have, in the reply to this question and state to those who are attempting to deprive the owners of stock in this country of their choice in disposing of them, that whatever my own feelings are, I can be found only on the one side and that is the side giving freedom to the people who produce stock to sell them where and when they like.
Would the Minister, without committing himself irrevocably to any side, not try to bring the parties together and hear them argue the matter out between themselves? May I ask the Minister if he has ever known a case in which he brought conflicting interests together to discuss the solution to a problem where he has not been able to arrive at some reasonable modus vivendi?
I have, but there are tremendous differences in cases. A Minister at least has to have some shadow or glimmer of hope. It is not, of course, a question of my being refused, or if the people concerned said they did not want to meet me, but you would like to get some indication from the parties that there was something there, a question on which the Minister could help to adjudicate. It is not necessary to press me. It is not necessary for this House, any Deputy in it, or anybody outside to press me. If I see the slightest possibility of introducing an element of commonsense into this whole business you may take it I shall need no pressure at all.