asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he is aware of the great dissatisfaction amongst farmers in regard to the floor price for feeding barley and the basic price for millable wheat of the 1967 crops; and if the matter can be reviewed at this late stage so as to grant a substantial increase in the price of these crops to all tillage farmers.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Wheat and Barley Prices.
4.
I am not so aware. I am satisfied that the prices for feeding barley and millable wheat recently announced by me for the 1967 crops are fair and reasonable and I do not propose to amend them.
The Minister is aware that cattle prices were not so good last year and in view of that, a number of farmers are now going in for tillage this year. Does he not consider it unreasonable to expect them to have a fairly good margin of profit from the same prices for barley and wheat as were operating last year? Does he not consider there is a very good case, in order to help the farmers' incomes, for a substantial increase in the prices of barley and wheat this year?
The Deputy, I presume, is fully aware that farmers do choose from one year to another to change their pattern of farming and that they are usually induced to do so by the prospect of one price or prospect of a price rather than another. The farmers may be going in more for tillage this year—and the indications are that they are—but this does not indicate the need for increasing the price of crops of which they are proposing to grow more.
Does the Minister not agree there is a good case to be made for increasing the price of barley, in view of the fact that there has been a substantial drop in the price of barley since 1951 and costs have increased considerably during that period? Furthermore, in view of the enormous drop in tillage acreage, a drop of 133,000 acres last year, surely that makes a case for an increase?
The Deputy says that with his tongue in his cheek. He knows it does not necessarily follow that because there is a drop in tillage, it was less profitable. It well may mean that certain other lines of production have become more profitable.
Can the Minister indicate them? Was it cattle?
Surely the Minister will agree that there is something anachronistic in the fact that the price fixed for barley in 1967 is actually lower than the price fixed in 1951? Would the Minister not agree that that suggests that the price for feeding barley stands in need of review in the light of existing circumstances?
What Deputies are trying to get me to say is that I agree with their views on this matter. The fact is that I do not. Surely the merits of the price of barley or any other crop would rest on the profitability of the crop at the present time and the matter ought to be treated in that way rather than on the basis of what was done ten or 15 years ago? It is on this basis that we should talk about the price of barley.
Is the Minister aware that in 1948 when Deputy Dillon, as Minister for Agriculture, fixed the price of barley, Fianna Fáil claimed that it was an uneconomic price?
I am still posing the sensible approach in this matter to the Opposition, to have a look at it. I am asking them if the matter should be approached on the basis of what one can get by way of profit by growing an acre of barley or by quoting what Deputy Dillon did in 1948.
Costs have increased; money values have decreased.
Certain other things have increased and decreased in other circumstances.