I had not an opportunity of hearing the Minister's speech last week, but in glancing through it—or at least what I saw of it in the papers—it seems that he gave the House a statistical abstract of agriculture. I do not suppose anyone can be very surprised at that, because probably the farmers of Ireland at present find themselves more financially embarrassed than they have been for a considerable period.
I want to draw the Minister's attention to some aspects of his policy which have produced the present situation. First, I want to address myself to the grain situation which is of considerable interest in my country and in adjacent counties, in other words, in the tillage counties. The Fianna Fáil Government have been repeatedly warned that if they did not put an economic floor to feeding stuffs—and by feeding stuffs I mean feeding barley —they would not achieve the results necessary to maintain an economic balance nor would they achieve a satisfactory ratio between the three principal crops sown here, wheat, oats and barley. However it may be glossed over by the Minister or by members of his Party, very few of whom appear to have spoken here, the indisputable fact remains that we have come back to the position in which we were some years ago—we have not sufficient feeding barley to meet our own requirements. That is entirely due to the fact that the Government would not fix an economic floor.
When we were in office those of us who were supporting the Government in the Fine Gael back benches fought our battle within the Party and achieved a floor of 40/- a barrel for feeding barley. We were told by members of Fianna Fáil that was insufficient and I, personally, was not particularly satisfied with that price but it was the best we could get. At least it was fixed and the barley was produced, or the greater portion of what was necessary for home feeding was produced. The present Government, in spite of the advice they got from this side of the House and in spite of the pressure from Deputies of their own Party, two of whom are in the House at present, refused to take advice from people in a position to know, people speaking on behalf of counties producing that type of feeding stuff. The Government allowed themselves to be put in a position of fixing an uneconomic price which has resulted in the present situation.
We move to wheat. This is a subject on which any Deputy could talk for hours. He could produce a history over recent years of innumerable statements by Government Party members in regard to this crop. I do not think there is any need to stress that further; it has often been discussed here and I think the answer was adequately given to the Government in the recent by-election. As a result of the Government's foolishness over the price of barley they find themselves with too much wheat. Farmers have grown more wheat this year, I think, than in recent years and the question now is how much the levy that the Government will impose on the farmers for growing wheat will be.
I wonder how much money has been spent by the Government in advertising and on publications concerning wheat. In every country newspaper, in every paper, journal and magazine the farmers were told to "grow more wheat". Thousands of pounds were spent in that campaign and the farmers responded as they always respond to a call in this country. The result is that they will be penalised again. Further, the Minister has said the present arrangement is a temporary one and that next year he is going to impose a quota on the farmers.
What about all the money being spent on advertisements asking farmers to grow more wheat? Is it not sad that a Government who advocated a wheat growing policy are this year imposing a levy on farmers who grow wheat? The Minister has not yet stated the amount of the levy. Next year he will impose a quota in order to prevent them growing wheat which over the years they were advised by the Fianna Fáil Government to grow.
What is the situation in regard to grain? Have the Minister and his advisers considered, from a world point of view, what the prospects are for grain growers in this country? Employment on the land has fallen by 4,000 or 5,000 over the past few years. Each year there are fewer people employed on the land. Tillage was calculated to keep people employed on the land. Extra production of livestock would keep people employed on the land. Where are all the promises in regard to mixed farming, grain farming, made by the Fianna Fáil Party? The results are sad.
The Leader of the Opposition, Deputy Dillon, has indicated that the agricultural income has fallen by £17 million. Are the majority of the Irish people, those employed on the land, which is fundamental to our economy, to be content because a few industries are set up from outside? Economists may write articles in the paper indicating that the situation is a bit better here, that the balance of payments position is better. Fundamentally, the country depends on the people who come from the land, who have stood by Ireland all the time and who are the basis of our economy. They are to be driven out by a Party with a huge majority in Dáil Éireann, a Party free to adumbrate any policy but who have no policy.
Will the Minister tell us when he is replying what his grain policy is for the future? The Minister comes from a county which is not very actively concerned with grain. That also applies in the case of Deputy Dillon but Deputy Dillon always had in mind the needs of the tillage farmers. If the farmers of Ireland could get Deputy Dillon back as Minister for Agriculture, they would be satisfied because they know that, in that case, there would be some sort of policy in operation.
What will the future bring? What will be the situation in Europe as a whole? Have the Minister's advisers considered that matter? What is the position in regard to the wealthiest purchasing community outside the United Kingdom, the Common Market, the Six? They have all the grain they want. There is no market there. There is no market anywhere else. The Minister may say: "Let us turn grain into livestock." Let us consider the position in regard to livestock. What are the prospects for livestock? In spite of all the glossing over in this House by those who would defend a futile livestock policy, this is the story: Over the past two years, there has been a gradual decline in exports of livestock from this country; there has been a gradual decline in prices. From time to time, there was a fillip and everybody felt that things would be all right, only to sink back into despondency when the bottom went out of the market again.
Have the Government any policy for the future? If the bovine tuberculosis eradication scheme is fully implemented and if there is no residual tuberculosis in the country, is there any guarantee the Government can give to the people that there is a market for store cattle? I doubt it. Anyone who goes to a mart or fair knows the attitude of the people there. There is nothing but despondency. People wonder if they can cut their losses or even get what they gave for cattle some years ago.
The Minister and his Department may issue statistics and may say that the price of cattle in such a month is better than it was a month before and better than it was a few months ago, that the fall is due to climatic conditions, that it is due to drought in England, failure of crops in England, a decline in the grain crop, a bad return of hay so that the British farmers are unable to feed the stock. The fact is that conditions are changing with regard to the sale of livestock and this Government have done nothing to meet the situation. They have no policy and no stable outlook in regard to the sale of livestock.
Our capacity to sell to the United Kingdom, where the major portion of our exports goes, is entirely dependent on whether the British buy beef from the Argentine or not. The price of cattle recently went up by a small amount. Everybody was hopeful that there would be an improvement. A few days later, it was announced in the newspapers that there had been an enormous shipment of beef from the Argentine into the United Kingdom. Prices went down again. There was another shipment of beef from the Argentine a week or so ago and the price went down again. There is no stability in the market today, no attempt on the part of this Government to get an agreement. At the time when they should have looked for an agreement, they were whittling away their time in an effort to change the system of election. Every country in the world is looking for agricultural agreements.
I have said that the Government did nothing but they did one thing. They did it in desperation. Recently they voted the money for a subsidy for fat stock. That is something. It is an indication that the Government and the Department of Agriculture have accepted the fact that they have lost the store cattle trade, on which this country depended and which gave vast employment and kept people on the land. Above all, it kept the small farmer in existence. The loss of the store cattle trade is the greatest tragedy in Ireland today. The majority of the votes that go to the Government Party come from the small farmers. Yet, the small farmers are the very people whom they have driven off the land and out of the country. The small farmers are unable to exist without the store cattle trade.
Anybody who has cattle, who has a strong farm, who has some sort of financial backing, who is able to stand the racket, can hold on to his cattle, fatten them and sell them. That is the only reliable market left today. What will happen to the small farmer? The bigger farmer by exporting his stores, can create space on his farm for restocking. The live calf market can be kept going. The dairy farmer has a source of income from that and is able to produce milk.
No doubt, when the Minister is replying, he will produce statistics by the dozen. Departments are always ready with statistics. One can prove anything on paper but I want to face the hard facts. I live on the land and work on the land. The hard fact is that at the moment the farmer is unable to sell his produce or, if he can sell it, is selling at a reduced price. The old cry that has been going on all the time is: "Produce more efficiently and sell more cheaply".
It is not for this side of the House to advise the Government. The Government have a huge majority. They have official advisers at their elbow. They were supposed to have a policy when they came into office. The majority of their supporters were small farmers who are being destroyed. It seems to me that in the changing circumstances on the land at the moment, this Government or any succeeding Government must look for an alternative policy and for alternative markets. Agricultural production is increasing all over Europe, in North America and in some areas of South America. There are hundreds of people in the world who have not enough to eat, who are living on the verge of starvation.
F.A.O., the world-wide organisation for the distribution of food and for the increased production and marketing of food, is conducting a freedom-fromwant campaign and is building up propaganda throughout the world. The idea behind that campaign is that every country able to produce and already producing food should produce more food and should endeavour to market that food where possible in other parts of the world.
There is an almost illimitable demand for food in Africa. Though Africa happens to be one of the underdeveloped parts of the world, it still has the purchasing power. Certainly some of these emergent countries have the purchasing power to absorb a great deal of the world's agricultural produce. This country is fortunately placed in that there is no stigma of colonialism such as attaches to other European countries. The position in Africa is that they are not anti-white but anti-colonial.
I can assure the Minister and his advisers that anything Ireland has to offer those countries will be gladly accepted. The marketing of produce in several of the emergent African countries is a simple problem because the majority of their exports and imports are conducted through one firm, a world-wide firm. When these African countries were colonies they imported and exported through this agency and they are doing it still as there is no other medium through which they can export and import. They are anxious, as many of their leaders have stated, to make separate agreements with other States.
Is there any State in the world more fortunately placed than Ireland to deal with these countries? What has the Government done? Has the Government done anything about solving the surplus milk problem which has become an embarrassment not only to this country but to other strong agricultural producing countries? I suggest to the Government that they have the means of making such trade agreements. They can appoint someone, a Commissioner for Food or whatever they like to call him, to try to secure markets for us.
Our chief difficulty is that if we produce more we are not able to sell it. We regard the United Kingdom as our chief market. The O.E.E.C. is closing down on the 22nd of this month to become a wider organisation embracing North America and Europe as a whole. In its reports which have been issued year after year it has stated that the fault with the Irish economy is that we have put all our eggs in one basket. The Government have relied on policies that existed prior to their entry into power. There is not the same demand for our produce in the United Kingdom as there was before and they are in a position to pick and choose. The answer to that is the E.F.T.O. We are looking in the window while six or seven other nations are inside making agreements which will have an effect on our produce here.
It is time that the Minister for Agriculture who is responsible for the welfare of Irish farmers should make some definite move to establish a marketing system whereby people can dispose of their produce. It might well be answered that if we do get the markets we have not the produce to sell to those who wish to buy from us. There is a certain measure of truth in that. There has been much instability in Irish marketing throughout the years since this Government came into power. The cattle trade started to go, as unfortunately it always seemed to go, when they became the Government. If we were to get a comparatively big order from any country it is unlikely that we could fill it.
Because of the instability that exists it has been impossible for us to go into full production. Anyone who suggests that we are anywhere near full production is just talking nonsense. People complain; people leave the country and turn their backs on the administration and on political life here. They are disillusioned in every way because, after 40 years of Irish Government, we are not in full production for the reasons I have been giving the House. Any time we get production going something happens and our market is gone again.
With regard to the eradication of bovine T.B., one would imagine from the Minister's statement, if I read it correctly in the time I had available, that bovine T.B. was almost eradicated, that the scheme was a success, that the millions of pounds spent already have been well spent and that we are secure in the thought that the country will be free from bovine T.B. in a very short period. I wonder if the Minister knows that in my county, which is not very far advanced in the bovine T.B. eradication scheme, those who have disposed of reactors and tried to replace them have found the situation anything but satisfactory.
In the last few days I have been told by several people in my county who have sold their entire herds, upset their husbandry and their existing method of living, that having bought tested replacements from the clearance areas to which the Minister has been referring, many of these cattle have gone down. One man had 28 heifers of which 24 went down. Like a loyal citizen following the policy of the Government he disposed of the 24 and bought 24 more attested cattle, what he believed to be first-class milking cattle. Every one of them went down. Even though the Government bought them from him again, he was at a loss of about £15 a head. Someone may say that is only one case but it has happened not only once but repeatedly and it is happening to people who are taking cattle out of the so-called clearance area west of the Shannon. I am not alone in that experience. I know many other Deputies can give similar cases. Everyone wishes well to the bovine T.B. eradication scheme. We must make it a success if we are to maintain what little is left of our store trade.
I have said before to the Minister and I say again that to run a scheme for bovine T.B. eradication you must have technical experts in charge. They must be free from the worry of continual file-keeping. The Minister has had difficulty in getting technical experts, but I understand that position has been rectified. I suggest to the Minister that these experts should be scattered throughout the country, not necessarily to carry out the tests themselves but to superintend the scheme. A small secretariat with central control would be sufficient to run the scheme on a proper basis.
My information is that it is somewhat like the complicated machinery of the Land Commission. With machinery like that of the Land Commission, you will never get anywhere. One group will be supervised by another group which, in turn, will be supervised and so on. The system makes for the gathering of files but not for efficiency in a practical scheme such as this. The Minister should allow it to be an entirely professionally-controlled organisation with, naturally, the secretariat of the Department of Agriculture and the Minister in supervision. It is not necessary for 20 or 30 officials to write letters to overworked veterinary surgeons to spur them on to greater energy and to send them regulations regarding what they should or should not do when they already know their business full well.
Nothing will satisfy me that there is not some directive to go slow on the land project. We are told that more work is being done on the land. That may or may not be. I should think it is more likely that it may not be. However, we shall accept the Minister's statement. There are more applications as people become alive to the benefits of reclamation, manuring and improving of land. These applications should be dealt with expeditiously. No matter how influential Deputies may be, no matter how interested they may be in the people on whose behalf they make representations, the stock reply seems to be that the application has been noted and will be dealt with as soon as possible.
Would it be possible to have a few more inspectors? We have other inspectors without whom we could do. Quite a number of officials in other Departments might possibly be done without also. Land reclamation means increasing production and the arresting of emigration. Surely the Minister could ask the responsible authority to sanction the employment of a few more inspectors so that land will be inspected and the very necessary work carried out? I cannot accept that the land project is running freely and efficiently and that cases are being dealt with in any sort of rapid sequence.