Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 3 Mar 1960

Vol. 179 No. 8

Committee on Finance. - Vote 49—Agriculture (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £2,133,500 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1960, 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.—(Minister for Agriculture.)

Mr. T. Lynch

I covered most of the points I had to make on this Vote last night, but after leaving the House I had a discussion with several people who attended the Dublin market this week. They informed me of what I would call a rumour that was current there and I would ask the Minister to deal with this rumour because our line so far as this Estimate is concerned is one of co-operation. We are not endeavouring to sabotage the T.T. scheme. We do not consider it is a laughing matter; it is a most serious matter. Only a short time ago I am sure that the Minister's colleagues would have liked to have sabotaged the whole scheme and would have liked something like this to have arisen. I shall not go into that now except that I want to say that it was rumoured yesterday in Dublin that the Minister had given instruction to his buyers to offer considerably lower prices for reactors. Without asking anybody, I regarded that as a rumour and I believe there is no foundation for it. I should like the Minister when replying to tell the country that is the case and to assure the farmers that there is no foundation for such a rumour.

I hope that the Minister will be able to bring this T.B. eradication campaign to a successful conclusion in the shortest possible time.

Mr. McQuillan

There are two points on which I wish to comment. The first is in connection with the land project. I merely wish to point out to the Minister that in my constituency a great deal of very necessary work on the project is held up indefinitely due to the fact that outgoing drains are not attended to. This arises as a result of Government action in suspending the Local Authorities (Works) Act. I would urge the Minister even at this late stage to use his influence to have grants made available under the Act so that the work can continue.

Mr. O'Sullivan

There is not much hope given in the Book of Estimates this morning that that will happen.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That will be a matter for another Estimate.

Mr. McQuillan

This Minister carries great weight in the councils and it is on that basis that I am urging him to do this.

There is one other point I want to comment on very briefly. I hope it will not be suggested that I am committing heresy when I suggest to the Government that the time has arrived to examine very seriously the question of the dead meat trade in all its aspects. While we all welcome the urgent measures being taken in connection with the T.B. eradication scheme we should at the same time realise that one beast slaughtered here and processed here is of far greater benefit to the community than three beasts exported on the hoof. I should like to emphasise this point that for the small farmers of under £12 valuation—we have many of them in the west of Ireland—the store cattle trade, as we have had it for the past 40 years, in my humble opinion, is not good sound economics.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It would seem that is a matter for the main Estimate rather than for this Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. McQuillan

The question of the dead meat trade has been mentioned and we are giving extra money in connection with the cattle business and surely I am entitled to comment briefly on the desirability of putting more emphasis on that aspect of the cattle industry.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If the Deputy relates his remarks to the bovine tuberculosis scheme he would be in order but otherwise it would not arise on this Estimate.

Mr. McQuillan

Would I be in order in suggesting that quite a considerable amount of money might be devoted to the setting up of proper State-controlled concerns to deal with the processing of meat in this country?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

A debate on a Supplementary Estimate is confined to the various subheads and there is nothing in the subheads to which to relate the Deputy's remarks on the point he is making. It would be a matter for the main Estimate.

Mr. McQuillan

If you take it that it is not within the rules of procedure to comment on a very important aspect of our agricultural programme, namely our cattle trade, I bow to your ruling in that matter.

Mr. Donnellan

There can be no question about passing this Supplementary Estimate, but my worry is on account of the slow progress in eradicating this disease. I wonder if we have missed the boat completely. Take the West of Ireland at the moment. I am told by some of the officials of the Minister's Department that in County Galway we are as clear of the disease to-day as they are in any part of England. The trouble as far as I see it is that while we can claim to be in that happy position reactors come in from outside. The Minister himself referred to that matter here last week.

I think there should be some tightening up. This matter has cost the State a large amount of money and it will cost more. When you have an area in a condition such as Galway is in at present, something should be done so that outside reactors cannot be brought in because the result of bringing in reactors would be to start the whole thing all over again. I would appeal to the Minister to look into the matter to see if there is any hope of tightening things up so that this would not occur. I am afraid it is happening in County Galway. If the whole country had been taken as a unit early in the scheme, that would not have happened and could not have happened. I feel that was the great mistake.

There is one other appeal I must make to the Minister. As far as the West of Ireland is concerned, we are practically a clear area and we would be completely clear if it were not for the matter I have just mentioned. For the export of our tested cattle in the West I think it is very important that they should be exported from the West rather than brought to Dublin or some other place. In connection with that I would appeal to the Minister to whisper to his colleague, the Minister for Transport and Department that in the near future his Department would do whatever work is necessary so that the port of Galway would be brought into condition to take these cattle. Then we would not have to go through any other part of Ireland with our livestock.

These are the two points I have to make. Some people who have no consciences are bringing reactors into an area that has been cleared. I would appeal to the Minister to have a further tightening up in that regard. I would also ask him to see that the port of Galway be put into condition so that, when the area is clear, our livestock can be exported through that port.

Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Smith)

I think I can very truthfully say in relation to the discussion which has taken place on this Supplementary Estimate and in particular in relation to that part of it relating to cost, which is the great bulk of the requirement that is being asked for here, that my Department has given everything that we have to give to get some life into the scheme, to bring home to everybody an appreciation of the importance of it, to bring home to all concerned how much they themselves can do to help us in this and to bring home to our people the ineffectiveness of any effort that we may make without their understanding and co-operation.

The thought has often arisen in my own mind, and I have from time to time discussed it with my officials, as to the best means of putting over to the people mostly concerned in this its importance, and the importance of securing from them the fullest that they can give in the way of co-operation. Some people will say to you: "Your publicity should take a definite from, you should have more meetings, you should make more speeches, you should print more literature." Dozens of suggestions can be made in every matter of this nature that can arise. I always find it hard to decide what sort of steps, what sort of action, is likely to secure the best results.

Mr. Dillon

An adequate advisory service.

Mr. Smith

We will come to that too. As I have said, different people have different ideas and I suppose members of this House, and people everywhere, have the belief that they know and that they understand the mentality of those with whom they are dealing better than the other fellow. I do not want to claim I know it better than anybody else but I would like to think that I know it as well. I often thought that too much official exhortation, too much "speechifying", if I might put it that way, too much printed paper such as leaflets and so on, do not automatically ring the bell you want to ring. I often suspected that instead of securing that end it had the very opposite result.

Since I came into this Department there has been no suggestion from any source, either inside or outside the country, that has not been carefully examined. In everything we have done, in every scheme we have devised and in every change we have made in our endeavours to improve matters and give the work the impetus we wish to give it, the ideas of many people are reflected. Maybe we could have had more publicity and more direct contact by the distribution of leaflets and so on, but whatever changes we may make in the years ahead, up to now all the advice we could secure as to the best means of reaching the public mind and securing public co-operation has been carefully considered by us.

I do not want to blame our people for possessing, maybe, characteristics that are peculiar to us. I do not know enough about the people of the outside world to be sure whether we are any worse in that regard than they are. But I certainly would be prepared to take the risk, even with my limited knowledge, of saying that we are no better. There was mention of the markets. I was in the market on Tuesday and what took place there for everyone present to see was something a thousand times more effective than all any Minister for Agriculture could say since we started on this major campaign to eradicate bovine tuberculosis. It was the price that spoke. It was the 15/- to 20/- per cwt. extra that spoke there. What took place there, perhaps belatedly, can be of considerable assistance and encouragement for the people in the Department who have been concentrating on the clearance area and, as I have said, may be more effective than all we have said in the past. If we could really get the whole-hearted support and co-operation of the people living in the western clearance area, the question put to me by a number of Deputies yesterday could be answered fairly accurately. By that I mean it could be answered to within a couple of months.

What absolutely puzzles me is this. You go out amongst the people, to a show maybe, and you meet somebody you know. Before 60 seconds have passed, if he comes from the clearance area, he is probably telling you of all the things that are wrong there. He tells you about the rascality of some people trucking in green tag cattle, about the scoundrels breaking the barrier over the Shannon, in so far as it is possible to have a barrier of this kind. He tells you of the people bringing in untested stock without a permit. After he has built up this wonderful tale of woe he seems surprised when you remind him that these scoundrels would make no progress at all and could not benefit in any way if the farmers in the clearance area to whom they hope to sell would ask the simple question "Have these stock been tested?".

When you ask the individual who comes along with all these tales of woe: "Do you expect the Department of Agriculture to erect a Maginot Line around the clearance area?" would it not be more natural to expect the people in it, who have the substantial advantage of having been selected as the first area in which an attempt is made to clear it of all reactor stock— which are being purchased on the basis of a very generous valuation—and who will have the further advantage of higher prices that will obtain when the stage of accreditation or attestation is reached, that they would form themselves into a Maginot Line of their own? Would it not be natural to expect them, when they go to a fair or mart, to enquire whether the animals offered to them have been tested in the area itself or, if they have been brought in from outside, whether they have come in covered by a permit having successfully passed the 14-day test.

Mr. Dillon

May I interrupt the Minister? I think he knows as well as I do the mind of the ordinary small farmer in rural Ireland. Can he imagine any 12-acre farmer saying: "Have these cattle been tested within the area, or have they come into the area under the appropriate licence showing they have been tested elsewhere?"

Mr. Smith

I can.

Mr. Dillon

To me it sounds fantastic.

Mr. Smith

I may not know them but it would be somewhat strange if I did not. It would be very strange, and I am quite convinced in my own mind that they know the questions they should ask and they know how to put them, just as well as anyone here in this House would. I am trying to demonstrate how they can at this belated stage——

Mr. Donnellan

Would the Minister allow me to interrupt him?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is not usual to interrupt the Minister.

Mr. Smith

I am trying to demonstrate how at this belated stage they can take the type of action that will mean more to us, that will mean to themselves personally, and will mean more to the country as a whole than anything I can say, or anything we can publish, or any resolutions we can pass through our public bodies or otherwise. Officially the Department must give the lead. The Department must be alert. The Department must listen to the complaints that reach it and then try to smooth things out as best it can but again I come back to the point I made at the outset, that we cannot effectively bring this to a speedy and successful conclusion unless we secure a full blooded appreciation on the part of individual farmers of the facts. I do not mind whether they have nine, ten, 12, 15 or 50 acres. As I said in reply to Deputy Dillon, neither do I believe that they are not sufficiently intelligent to know how to put the questions which I say they can put. Not only that, when they go into fairs or marts, if they find stock being exhibited there for sale about which they are suspicious there is an obvious course for them to take also.

I have often thought what we could do in the way of taking other measures against those who, because they can sell or dispose of reactor stock and maybe reactor calves of 14 days, then carelessly purchase new stock which is not tested. I imagine it might be difficult but it should not be impossible to devise means by which if the stock on a man's farm has been tested and on a further test is found to contain other animals that were not tested on the previous occasion and which, because of their appearance would be likely to be of an age that they should have been tested, that man could be penalised for taking such animals into his herd without making the necessary inquiries, or refusing to make these inquiries, perhaps because he felt that even if they did not pass the required test he would be compensated for them anyway. As I say, there are so many simple means of evasion. I am not saying that is the type of evasion that might not be regarded by many people as quite a simple matter but I am making this statement because yesterday I was invited to say when I thought we were likely to declare the Western area an attested area.

There is nobody who would like to be able to fix a firm date for that better than I would but, however, I cannot do it. I would like to be fairly sure of my ground before I would even moot a date. I admit there has been a departure in the declaration of County Sligo as a clearance area as against a larger area. I admit that it is natural that we must, when making a decision on such matters as these, take into consultation those who have to be satisfied as well as ourselves because these are the people who will probably buy the stock from us, stock which they will release into their own attested herds. Therefore they must have a say and must be free to express an opinion. Apart altogether from any opinions that they may have or may express on the subject, looking at the proposition now and looking at the question of controls and the difficulty of controls—I am referring to controls of movement—and seeing that some of the other counties there are very well advanced too, I would really be inclined to think that the best idea is to wait a little while so as to be able to declare for the larger area.

Mr. Dillon

That is the west of the Shannon area?

Mr. Smith

Yes. That is the best that I can do in the way of giving information. The disease incidence over practically the entire area is obviously very, very, very low indeed but our problem will be this matter of effective control of movement. I am dealing with that at length so as to bring home, if I can, the importance of public co-operation in that regard. We are considering at the moment also what steps we could take to publicise the fact more clearly on the spot. We were thinking in terms of holding a series of consultations along the frontier, if I may put it that way, to which we would bring all types of public officials from the Garda down, have these consultations at certain points and, if possible, I should like to attend them. In fact, we are just thirsting for some effective means of putting over on the people of the clearance area the onus that is upon them, now especially, to stand in with us and co-operate with us fully. If they do that, I do not think it should be very long at all until we would be able to make a very important pronouncement for the country and a very useful one for those people who would enjoy the benefits in the way of price advantage.

Mr. Dillon

Before the Minister departs from that, what is the difficulty about stopping the ingress of untested cattle? Is it not a fact that the boundary is the Shannon River?

Mr. Smith

Yes.

Mr. Dillon

If all went to all, would it not be possible to keep a constant patrol on the bridges across the Shannon?

Mr. Smith

Well, there are more boundaries than that.

Mr. Dillon

I thought the Shannon was the operative boundary.

Mr. Smith

For part of it but it does not cover the whole lot.

Mr. Dillon

It covers it, practically, with the exception of Donegal?

Mr. Smith

Yes; then you have to take Cavan and Monaghan.

Mr. Dillon

I understood that the Minister was referring to the area west of the Shannon.

Mr. Smith

There is a way in.

Mr. Dillon

How?

Mr. Smith

You can pass through Cavan and Leitrim.

Mr. Dillon

It would be a very resourceful man who would drive cattle all around the country to get in.

Mr. Smith

They can do it anyhow.

Mr. Dillon

If the bridges were effectively controlled?

Mr. Smith

Where you have bridges it is all right but still it happens and that is the important thing.

Mr. Dillon

It would be a very great contribution if the bridges were effectively controlled.

Mr. Smith

We have a form of control there but one can never be sure that it is sufficient to guarantee 100 per cent. effectiveness. We are, of course, thinking of the transport arrangements which must be made for the disposal of attested stock there when the area becomes attested. These matters are at present being discussed with C.I.E. and, of course, the shipping companies also. That matter is being attended to.

Mr. Dillon

But we may take it transport facilities for attested stock from the attested area will be provided?

Mr. Smith

It will have to be. Deputy Donnellan wanted to ask me a question.

Mr. Donnellan

The Minister stated that he was not getting co-operation from the farmers in the west of Ireland. As a farmer in the west of Ireland I fail to see how he can make that statement. In County Galway all the farmers have submitted to the scheme. Their stock has been tested again and again. The Minister says that some of these farmers put out cattle that are reactors. They would be fools if they did because they can get a better price by selling them to the Minister's Department without bringing them to the fairs. The Minister is wrong in making that statement about reactors because it is illegal in the attested or nearly attested area to expose reactors for sale at all.

Mr. Smith

I am making no charge at all. I am making no charge that would tend to engender heat in this business.

Mr. Donnellan

I do not understand the English language if the Minister did not say it.

Mr. Smith

I am not talking about the sale of reactor stock that arrives on a man's farm. Of course, I know that it would not be wise for him—as an Ulster man or a Connaught man would know—to attempt to sell a reactor beast in a clearance area knowing that he would get substantially more for the beast from the Department. It was a disappointment to me, as it would be to any Minister— this is a human thing and we cannot complain too much—that on the price of store cattle falling, say from May onwards, it was really then that the pressure came on in the clearance area to take up small store cattle. There are many ways of killing a cat without choking him with butter. There are many ways in which co-operation can be given or withheld. I move about a little when I get half a chance and I see things. I know that what I have been complaining of has happened to some extent, in some places more than in others, and I am merely showing the way in which farmers can co-operate, if they want to be co-operative. I am showing the steps they can take in co-operation with us. If they take those steps and throw themselves into this effort for a matter of a few months, if the farmers and the veterinary surgeons who are private practitioners in the area combine, we should perhaps be able to make a pleasant announcement in regard to that fairly large area before too long.

The same applies to County Monaghan and County Cavan. Although these two counties are not as far advanced as they could be, the incidence there is very low. We had a formidable problem up to the 1st January last in that these counties border the Six-County area and that free testing was going on on the Six-County side. Their scheme is different from ours. The British scheme was different from ours inasmuch as they did not buy reactors of any kind until a particular area was declared an eradication area. It was so up to the 1st January last in four of the Six Counties nearest to the border. The result was that the farmers were testing there. There was no purchase scheme there either for cows or other stock and because of our agreement with the British they were being moved across into Cavan and Monaghan and being sold there every day of the week.

I was in Belfast some time ago. I was not looking for press men but they do make their appearance when you are not looking for them. Not that I have any objection to them; I would be in dread of saying anything in that way in relation to them. However, I was cornered by 10 or 12 press men and most of the questions they had to ask me were questions dealing with bovine T.B. I thought I got over all the hurdles, knowing my subject fairly well, as I think I do, but there was one gentleman who thought there was one tough hurdle to be met. He asked: "Perhaps you are making fairly good progress now but are you people not sorry that you did not take more serious notice of what was happening in Great Britain over the last 30 years?" I was satisfied that question was directed towards me to put us in a spot. Perhaps we were entitled to be put in that spot but I did not want to be driven into it without taking my neighbours with me. Although in the course of all my public announcements I had never once mentioned the difficulties that the Six-County problem had been creating for us in the clearance area in Cavan, Monaghan and I suppose, Donegal, I felt that when I was being put in a spot by a press man in this way I was entitled to bring him in along with me. I said: "That may be so" and went on to explain that if it was so in our case it was also so in theirs and that much of our problem up to the 1st January as far as these clearance counties were concerned was created by our inability to control the movement of reactor stock coming across from the Six Counties, being sold at our fairs or markets, being tested on our land, found to be reactors and paid for at generous rates such as those being provided under our scheme.

Mr. Wycherley

I believe they were sold on the Dublin market.

Mr. Smith

Some Deputies mentioned last night that the fact we were not taking up reactors in all parts of the country was a great hindrance. I think it was Deputy Corry who laid most emphasis on this. As I have briefly explained, even in Great Britain and the Six Counties all testing done up to 50 or 60 per cent. in any county or shire was done on the basis of the farmer disposing of his reactor cow, reactor store heifer or store bullock any way he liked.

We should like to be able to take up all animals in every area. Deputy Corry complained that we did not extend our clearance area scheme to the whole of the twenty-six counties and went on to declare there was no purpose in taking out cows if young stock were not also taken out. He did not comment on the fact that in many cases notwithstanding the advantageous prices being offered for cows, no attempt is being made to remove these. Many of the farmers have been doing very well in that regard but some of them have had their tests, know the results but have not taken any action.

Apart altogether from the practicability of undertaking such a task in relation to the whole country, where is the point in complaining about the ill effects on some young stock from the point of view of the distribution of the disease if a plan is not made by the owner to rid himself of reactor cows, which are the major factor, as quickly as he can. I realise it is a problem for some people. Where the incidence is high it would be a great problem but if these people make plans which will ensure success over a fairly extended period, the hardship is minimised. The veterinary surgeon who is the man chosen by themselves to test their stock will give them advice as to what these plans should be and as to how and when they should be executed.

The major reason for inability to take the steps which are suggested should be applied not only to the clearance area but to the whole country is a practical difficulty, but a tremendous amount can be done outside the clearance area—the pasteurisation of milk and the planned removal of cow reactors. I admit that in the major portion of the six counties in which the scheme came into operation on the 1st October of last year they are doing very well and making a very good effort. Anything I have to say about them is to give them further encouragement in regard to the pasteurisation of milk. If that work is properly supervised the effect it must surely have on the cows being reared there is the speedy and planned removal of all cow reactors. It is bound to have a softening up effect upon the tremendous problem that the milk area of the south presents when it comes to the point that it too can be declared a clearance area.

I have no doubt in my mind that the plan that is being followed is the right one because if it were possible for us to have in this year an accredited or attested area of seven counties with two more to be added in a very short space of time, the very fact that you had reached that stage in such a wide area would give tremendous encouragement to the other counties which would be taken on by degrees and from which you could build up against that other substantial area which was already free. It is to encourage other areas to come along and bring their counties to the most finished stage possible that we are really enthusiastic about giving the finishing touches to the area that I have mentioned.

I know it is not a matter on which there could possibly be any difference of opinion. I knew that from the beginning, and the idea of any public man or any Deputy saying that at any time we had been foolish enough to try to sabotage this scheme because somebody did something before us, or somebody would do something after us, is the greatest nonsense. I know that this fact is appreciated by everybody but while lip service is paid to that fact and words spoken to reiterate its truth something is dragged in to the effect that "It is only a short time ago that you people over there were trying to sabotage it." That is not true.

There is no credit being sought by anybody. We feel that having made the decision that this is the proper course of action for us to take, if we have decided as to the importance of the store cattle trade and decided that we must save it, then these are the steps which we all agree then the greatest If that is agreed then the greatest degree of co-operation and understanding that we have and the more people we can get to understand these facts, the greater the work that will be done.

Mr. T. Lynch

When I spoke this morning I mentioned something that was current yesterday, something that might not have come to the Minister's notice, in regard to prices. With all respect it was in a spirit of co-operation that I mentioned it because I considered that a rumour like that would not be an encouragement to farmers down the country.

Mr. Smith

But it has no meaning for me. I often heard the rumour——

Mr. T. Lynch

When I was told it I said that I did not believe that the Minister or his officials gave such instructions to the buyers as to cause the prices——

Mr. Smith

Does the Deputy mean in the market?

Mr. T. Lynch

Down in the country.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is concluding and it is not usual to interrupt him.

Mr. T. Lynch

I said to the Minister that I considered that he should deny this himself. I know that he can deny it and that he never made such an order.

Mr. Smith

I am not objecting——

Mr. T. Lynch

The Minister is not encouraging us to co-operate.

Mr. Smith

I did not understand what the Deputy was saying to me. It had no meaning the way it was put. I have never given instructions to buyers to reduce prices. I will say this, although I suppose it has not arisen half a dozen times, I do not believe that an instruction, or that any encouragement should be given to our valuers in the clearance area to be forced into outrageous prices by a few individuals simply because these individuals feel that they can just get what they like, what they ask and what they insist upon so as to be taken out of the way of preventing the clean sheet story to materialise. I do not believe in that at all. I believe in justice. I believe in giving generous treatment in the way of prices to such people but I have told the officials of my Department—although it has not arisen recently—that where it was suspected that an attempt was being made to intimidate us along these lines that I have legal powers in such cases, powers that I would not want to use but powers that I would use.

Mr. T. Lynch

Hear, hear.

A Deputy

And rightly so.

Mr. Smith

That is the only question as to price that arises but let me say that we have to keep an eye on these matters. It is not right to say that a Minister can be entirely indifferent. I like to see, if it can be produced, a degree of uniformity in valuation. I know that is hard to get. There are some very excellent young men who have not had much training but who have adapted themselves to their job in a most excellent way and I confess that the checks I have made, and I have made them, have gone to establish that the degree of uniformity as between the counties is surprising. There are some cases which I have come across where that sort of degree of uniformity does not appear to exist and if I find that the average loss for a cow is £15 in Kerry, Cavan or Donegal and £25 somewhere else I am going to ask myself how that has arisen.

I have not attempted to do more than to follow up a policy of being generous and fair in every case and trying to produce the greatest degree of uniformity which every Deputy and every fair-minded person will admit is the course that should be followed. There were a lot of points raised on this Estimate which I thought would be given to me in about half an hour or so.

Somebody mentioned the fact that we made the owner of the animal responsible for its safety until it is collected. I do not know if we could possibly do any better than that. We all know what can happen. We know there are some instances where an animal is lost through no fault of the owner. In that case it is a bit of a hardship, but if there is anything of a border-line nature, of course, we would not stand on ceremony, but we have to insist that the owner should be responsible for the animal until it is taken away. We fully appreciate the hardship that could bring to many persons in a number of cases.

Mr. Donnellan

Who else could be responsible?

Mr. T. Lynch

It is normal risk.

Mr. Smith

I was told by Deputy Dillon that the way in which I could improve on this question of public relations between the Department and the farmers was to appoint more agricultural graduates on the basis of the parish plan. If I am to be invited to cover that field on every question which arises while I am in the Department of Agriculture, whether on a supplementary estimate or the principal Estimate, I am quite prepared to repeat myself one thousand and one times, or two thousand and one times. I do not like repetition. Deputy Dillon has a thorough-going flare for it. That is his own business and his own technique and perhaps he is right, but I have no flare for it at all. However, in this case as in other cases, I shall not refuse to meet that challenge, even though I was not fully prepared to deal with it. I shall cover roughly the reasoning behind my approach to this matter. In dealing with questions like this I suppose the decision rests with me, in consultation with my colleagues, but we have not the final word. There is the far wider field of public opinion outside and we, as public men, whether as Ministers or as Deputies of the Opposition Party, must keep in mind, if we are wise, the workings of the public mind to whatever extent we understand it.

Here is how I approach the parish plan. Let me say again—and I shall say it in regard to another matter to which I shall refer later — that there are people who will try, and I suppose it could be regarded as good political tactics, to accuse their opponents of making a change for change's sake. Perhaps in a limited field of public opinion that is a good approach because one can steam up the enthusiasm of one's supporters and lead them to believe that the other fellow is making a change purely to get, if I may use the expression, a political wallop at his opponent.

I am not here to give myself a character because, even if I did give myself the best character in the world, it would be from myself and would be of no use, unless I did something to justify it. I claim for myself that in any major question of public policy, as a Minister, the one thing I have always had regard to before making a change, is the fact that it may cause dislocation and sometimes hardship of grave disappointment to some people. The final commitments of a Government should not be repudiated by their successors and I would say not to the same extent, but to some extent, the serious acts of your predecessors should be kept very, very carefully, and very genuinely in mind, and the implications of the effects of making a change should be looked into. I do not want anybody to believe me when I say that, but it is my mental approach to this matter I want to discuss now: the introduction of more agricultural graduates.

This idea of a parish plan came along somewhere in Deputy Dillon's time. I do not want to be in any way scathing about this, but I was told that it arose in a most frivolous way. Somebody made the suggestion and it was quickly put into operation. I do not know if that is correct. Maybe that was not so. Maybe it was thought about for years. I do not know, I am only saying what I heard. The plan was put into effect and it meant that we would have two advisory services and that either the Department of Agriculture would take over the whole structure of the county committees of agriculture, or that the county committees, of agriculture would operate an advisory service and the Department would run another advisory service alongside.

I can say to Deputy Dillon and every other Deputy in the House, and I shall say it outside—I shall meet any group of farmers, or go before any body of people picked at random. and take their decision as to whether or not my reasoning is right—that I will not accept, in a small, poor country a scheme with two advisory services operating on the basis of the County Committee of Agriculture operating a service in Cavan, and another service being operated in the very same area by fully-fledged civil servants responsible only to the Department of Agriculture in Merrion Street, Dublin. I will not accept that scheme because it does not make sense to me. When I say it does not make sense I am not talking about the importance of agricultural research.

Not only do I say that that has been, and is, and I am sure will continue to be, my mind on that matter, but if any Deputy wants to get proof of the impracticability and foolishness of having two schemes running alongside each other, even for a limited period, they can come over to my office for an hour and I shall show them a couple of files. That does not mean that I am hostile to the idea of generating enthusiasm for more agricultural scientists. I am not, but as I say, in relation to that matter, since one is not faulted for repetition in this House I shall say again I believe in increasing advisory services under the county committees of agriculture to the fullest possible extent that there is or is likely to be a demand for their training and knowledge amongst the people with whom they work. I would warn those who have an unbalanced enthusiasm in this regard, just as in the case of over-propagandisation, as I said in the beginning of my speech when I referred to my hesitancy about warning farmers in relation to bovine tuberculosis, whether we should have more literature, whether we should have this, that or the other, that I would be afraid of the effect of applying too many technicians if there was not enough work for them. Instead of being an asset, they would be regarded as a demoralising influence moving about and maybe not as active as they should be.

I want Deputies to realise that I know something about the practical side of this question. Let me repeat, and it can be reasoned out more closely at a later stage if there is any desire to discuss this matter here, that I had made up my mind and even before I came in here. The decision was made by the Government, by my predecessor in our Government, in this matter. That decision had my full approval. The questions that arose with me were: Are we to maintain the system of advisory services controlled by the county committees of agriculture? Are we to abolish the county committees of agriculture and take over all the employees of those bodies and have the advisory services controlled from Merrion Street because it would be foolish to allow the two systems to grow up, one alongside the other? As regards decision on that matter to take over the county committees of agriculture, I certainly would not be one to approve of it but there would be some sense at least in bringing the whole of the advisory services under one control, whatever that control was to be.

My predecessor decided, and I agree with the decision, that the control that was there was to remain. That was the control of the advisory services of the county committees of agriculture. Inside that framework, we will encourage the county committees to employ all the agricultural scientists and all the agricultural people they feel there is a demand for and whose services can beneficially be used in the respective areas.

Another matter that was mentioned was the land project. I thought I dealt fully with that matter, too. Again, in this regard, let me say that—I am not protesting in any sense that I feel sensitive about the accusations—it is not true that I was anxious to sabotage Section B. of the Land Project. I may tell this House that I never believed in it and not only can I make that statement but the records of this House prove that I did not believe in it.

In this matter, it is not a question of being wise after the event. My speech on the 1949 Act is in this volume here. While I say that, just as I pointed out in 1949, nobody could be a more enthusiastic believer in land reclamation than I am. You dare not or you should not, anyhow, pretend to be interested in land whether as an individual farmer or as a Deputy or as a Minister for Agriculture unless you come from the county from which I come. Land reclamation on a much more moderate and inexpensive form has been carried on here from 1934— I think Deputy Dr. Ryan's time. It may be said that times were different. Money was scarce then. We need not discuss these aspects now. They can be discussed, if necessary.

Mr. T. Lynch

The Minister will pass over them.

Mr. Smith

I am proud of them. Do not think I am passing over them because of any reluctance on my part. Times were different but land reclamation was then in operation and a tremendous lot of good work was done in a very simple way. The Farm Improvements man came to you. You showed him what you intended to do. His deputy came and examined it. He gave you a simple specification. In a short time, you got that sheet of paper from him. He gave you an estimated cost of the work and he told you what you would get by way of grant.

Mr. T. Lynch

1934?

Mr. Smith

1934-35. When the 1949 Act came before this House, my whole attitude was as follows: If you have money to spend, why not reconstruct the framework that is there? Pour more money into it. Make the grants more attractive. You have a staff of officials there. They had not the big elaborate headquarters that they now have in every county but they were in every district and they had the inspectors and they did their work direct with headquarters.

I am not going over this ground in order to convince anybody here because apparently you do not succeed in convincing people in this House. However, for the sake of the record, I should like to establish, because the records contain the truth, that what is charged against me in this record is not true. I am definitely hostile to Section B. of the Land Reclamation Act but I was hostile to it the day it first came into this House. If you follow me, it was not an unreasonable line of action that I took. Not a word was spoken that I would not repeat and that I would not love to see blazoned over the countryside. I have always taken the line not only in relation to land improvement but to other matters that the man who owns the land is the man who should love it, is that man who should try to improve it, is that man whom the State should help, if it can afford to help him, to improve it.

After that, devise the machinery by which the State can help and decide the extent to which it will help. Let the man put up his proposals; let these be examined. Give him the signal to go ahead, and tell him the amount of money you are going to give him when he does his work. That is my idea of land reclamation. It was my idea in 1949 and it is my idea since then. That is why I, with the full approval of my colleagues, abandoned section B of this scheme. I can go further and say that the records of the estimates of the provision for this service for the last four or five years show that the people themselves were abandoning it. While there was an increasing provision for a number of years, from 1949 to 1954 or 1955, for section B and a decreasing provision for Section A, since 1955 or 1956 the provision for section B started to decline while the provision for section A has been going up, proving, of course, that by a process of trial and error, even the people came to the conclusion that my reasoning on this matter was 100 per cent. right.

In the course of the discussion in 1949 when Deputy Dillon was Minister he questioned me when I asked if he had this £40,000,000 to spend why spend it all on land reclamation; why not give a subsidy on phosphates? He asked me: why not give it to them free? A subsidy on phosphates, if these millions were available, did not seem to be such a nonsensical proposal. Not only do I venture to say now, but I am quite sure in saying, that if some of the money that was not too wisely spent under section B was spent instead on subsidising the application of superphosphate to the land we would have got, as a community, better results.

Mr. Dillon

Was not phosphate put on every acre of land that was reclaimed?

Mr. Smith

I am talking about land that did not need reclamation at all. I am talking about increased use of superphosphate.

Mr. Dillon

I made the Dutch subsidise our phosphates.

Mr. Smith

Nonsense. The question has been raised that this decision of ours was made without due regard to the fact that the previous Government had done certain things. Policy can be changed. That is the point. Surely a Minister and a Government have the right when they have a conviction about a matter to make a change. I claim that right very energetically, but I would not abuse it. I have never abused it and I did not do so in this case because I gave those to whom we had contractual obligations assurances that any work that we were committed to would be completed. In fact, some of that work has not yet been completed. During the discussion in 1949, I pleaded with the then Minister to insert a ceiling in the Bill beyond which the expenditure would not go. I had in mind £40 or £45 at the very most. I think it was about £40 I had in mind but Deputy Dillon in his wisdom or otherwise resisted that. In resisting that, we arrived at the point where, as the Deputy himself admitted, certain cases had passed through which nobody could justify. They were not "certain cases"; there were dozens of them, cases in which money was absolutely burned or drowned, because where the money was being spent it would not really burn.

Not only that, but a crop of legal actions had arisen from the scheme in cases where when the work was completed and the owner of the land refused to sign the documents consolidating the £12 per acre with the outstanding portion of the advance for the purchase of his holding, or where he refused to sign on the grounds that the work was not properly executed. The engineers were employed and the lawyers came on the job and my Department officials were running up and down to Laois and Kerry, appearing in courts all over the country. You know the attitude of judges and justices in these cases—unless the Department of State has a water-tight case— in fact, sometimes when they appear to have a water-tight case — the decision is given against them. Does anybody seriously contend that my conception of land improvement which is done on the basis that I have described with the farmer himself applying and of our having, as quickly as we can——

Mr. T. Lynch

As quickly as you can.

Mr. Smith

Yes, as quickly as we can. Our officials cannot be on a man's doorstep immediately or within a matter of a couple of hours. It might take three or four months. A huge amount of arrears of work was piled up since 1949, applications that were never examined. I have a scheme in mind, and in fact in action, that will bring that state of affairs to an end. The fact that I am looking for an additional £200,000 on the original Estimate, for the additional work done under Section A in the year that has passed is proof that I mean business on a practical basis and on lines that will be understood by the people of the country, who are not so simple.

I was asked I suppose to continue a scheme in which you could get a result like that, where the estimated cost of the reclamation of the land in County Wexford——

Mr. Dillon

This is the late Deputy Tom Walsh's mistake, the mistake he made with the Wexford farmer.

Mr. Smith

Of course, Deputy Tom Walsh, poor man, is dead.

Mr. Dillon

The Lord have mercy on him. That mistake could have been made by anybody.

Mr. Smith

The estimated cost of the work was £33 per acre and the actual expenditure was £263.

Mr. Dillon

That was one farm, a case in which he blundered.

Mr. Smith

I have another here where the estimated cost was £79 and the expenditure £376.

Mr. Dillon

I do not know about that one.

Mr. Smith

I have another where the estimated cost was £36 and the expenditure £95; another, where the estimated cost was £62 and the actual expenditure £92; I have another where the estimated cost was £47 and the expenditure £92; another where the estimated cost was £99 and the expenditure £141.

Mr. Donnellan

All that will never get us an attested area.

Mr. Dillon

If that is all the Minister can extract from over 1,000,000 acres of land reclaimed——

Mr. Smith

I have another case where the estimated cost was £43 and the actual expenditure £105; the next is estimated at £49 and it cost £121; the next is estimated at £79 and actually cost £191. The next is an estimate at £88 which appears to have worked out exactly on that basis. The next shows, in fact, a reduction from an estimated £88 to £86.

Does any man in his senses wish to suggest to the simple but intelligent people of the country that we could afford or could profit by a scheme capable of producing results like that? If so, I would rather be aware of that in advance because I would feel like abandoning all hope of operating such a plan.

In 1949 this grandiose scheme came along and we had the whole place full of county officers and this tremendous build up of staff. Many of those civil servants are very excellent people, some of them men of fine intelligence and some of them tremendous workers, men for whom I have the greatest respect but I would not like to hand over to them and I am afraid that when the 1949 Act was passed and the decision made to establish the county officers there was a lot handed over to these gentlemen. They built up their wonderful schemes, with all their planning and their mapping and they proceeded on the basis of encouraging those under the section B scheme to a completely unjustifiable extent, so much so that every time you drove past such a place where this work was being carried out you found about 25 State officers with their cars parked along the road, all inspecting the work.

Mr. Dillon

Rubbish.

Mr. Smith

You do not like to hear this but it is the truth.

Mr. O'Sullivan

It is wild exaggeration.

Mr. Sweetman

It is nonsense.

Mr. Smith

In 1949, 1950 and 1951 when you went past one of these places you found the cars parked along the roadside. The scheme was prepared in the county office and the contract was let out by officials. The farmer did not come into it until he had to sign the consolidating documents and he went about his business. The boys were standing about watching the bulldozers, the machines and the pipes being thrown down in the cold earth.

I know a bit about this country. I travelled it as much as anybody else and I could take you to a farm of land on which such an enormous expenditure was made and the people in whose name the work was carried out are now in all parts of the world, having sold out their property because it was property on which such sums of money should never have been spent.

Mr. Dillon

Somebody bought them.

Mr. Smith

We do not know whether they did or not. Let me say again that for any decision which is made by me as Minister for Agriculture or by the Government of which I am a member, will have to be justified by us. If I was to exercise myself to the extent of reading the records of this House ten or eleven years ago when this Bill was going through you would find that my thoughts and my mind are in those records and I can and I will go before public opinion on them at any time. That is the only way in which these matters can be resolved.

Deputy Dillon will not accept the wisdom of my judgment on these matters but when he says that Governments should not make decisions which would bring hardship on people who invest money as a result of these decisions I hereby agree with him. Governments should not embark on schemes that are wildcat or grandiose but they should start in accordance with their means, in a simple way. If the scheme is to be a success, and if there is more money then available increase the provision as you find yourself equal to the task of meeting the increase. Just as it is a hard and chastening experience for a man who enjoys carrying substantial sums of money in his purse and finds that his money has disappeared so it is in the expenditure of public money.

It is all right to shout about A and B schemes with all the hullabaloo about the expenditure of £40,000,000 but my approach to the matter would be to start in a small way, pay your way, see what the results are and if the results appear to be good then, as money becomes available, press more and more of it into the scheme. If you do that you will not find people investing money and then finding that policy has changed. I have not been listening to the discussion on the amendments to the licensing laws but I found myself, as a member of the Commission for some time, in great sympathy with those who complained that this house amended the law some years ago and encouraged people to expend money on improving their property in different parts of the country and that these people now find themselves adversely affected because the law is being changed again without warning.

Mr. Sweetman

I hope you will support our six day amendment.

Mr. Smith

I am talking about this only as an indication of the unwisdom of taking action that will induce people to put money into a certain project development when there is some uncertainty or uneasiness about it which may result in a succeeding Government having to make a change. I have never failed to be conscious of that side of the problem. Again, in these matters it is impossible to safeguard our people from hardship in the event of such change. If we have to go over this argument every time an agricultural estimate is introduced I do not mind in the least. I have more material to establish the wisdom of my point of view and I would be willing to cover this ground, or more, at any other time. But I do not think it would be a very rewarding occupation in the long run. We all have to present ourselves to a higher court and abide by their conclusions as to our capacity and judgment.

Another matter was mentioned when I was asking for a sum of money to meet the losses incurred on the purchase of artificial fertilisers. I can truthfully say that I did not know which year nor did I consider the price in 1951 as against 1952. All I knew was that there had been a substantial loss. I had not the slightest intention, even if the whole amount were attributable to the year in which Deputy Dillon was Minister for Agriculture, of making any comment upon it. Indeed if I could have got the money without coming to the House, although that would not be reasonable, I would have been glad to do so.

In the circumstances that existed at the time the judgment of a man could have been at fault. Many people can be tremendously wise after the event, but if you sit down with them to plan anything you find they have very little to contribute. It has been said that this will be a lesson to us in the future, but I do not think it will. It is possible to conceive a set of circumstances in which there may be only a limited time to get at a very high price something that is badly needed. In that case I would be on the side of those who would take the risk of getting it. When mention, was made yesterday of the way in which this item was presented, I must say that aspect never occurred to me. I do not expect members of the Opposition to give one credit for having a more specious mind than is sometimes suggested by them. Maybe they feel it is desirable to put over something on the public, because the public cannot possibly have the contacts that would be helpful in the political sense. Whatever the objective, I do not fully understand it. The decisions taken by two Ministers of two different Parties, whatever the losses were in one year as against another, were based on the same reasoning. I had no intention in the world of presenting this in a way that would either do credit to one decision or discredit another. I would be prepared in the most deliberate way to defend both decisions whatever the outcome may have been.

Vote put and agreed to.