Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 13 Nov 1968

Vol. 237 No. 2

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Income of Farmers.

30.

asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries what definite plans he has in mind to increase the incomes of all farmers having special regard to the circumstances of small farmers whose incomes have lessened while other sections of the community have had their incomes increased.

The trend of farm income in the last two years has been very satisfactory. In 1967 total farm income increased by 10 per cent. While it is too early to say precisely what the final out-turn will be for 1968, the indications are that there will be a further substantial rise in farm income which will keep it in line with income increases in other sections of the community.

The policies and programmes operated by my Department have been a major factor in achieving this pronounced improvement which is now everywhere apparent. The wide range of measures operated by the Department include measures to support prices, improve land and buildings and the quality of livestock and crops as well as measures to reduce farmers' costs, to develop agricultural education, advisory services, training and research. Special attention is being given to the position of smaller farmers. The pilot area scheme operating in all western counties, as well as benefiting the farmers in the areas concerned, is making a valuable contribution to the solution of small farm problems. The new farrowed sow subsidy in the West, the increased piggery grants, the mountain lamb subsidy scheme and the higher rates of grant under the Land Project in western areas are all helping the small farmer.

The small farm (incentive bonus) scheme is a recent additional measure designed to bring income on potentially viable farms to an acceptable level. Unemployment assistance to smallholders is now paid throughout the year and in the West is paid irrespective of the actual level of income from farming, thus constituting in effect a guaranteed minimum income. All these measures are kept under regular review and are adapted from time to time to meet changing circumstances. As the Deputy is aware, the Government recently decided to increase the price of creamery milk as from the 1st September, 1968 by 1d per gallon on the first 7,000 gallons per annum delivered to a creamery by each creamery milk supplier and they also announced the introduction of a new beef cattle incentive scheme applying to herds not in commercial milk production. In deciding on these measures, the Government had the position of smaller farmers especially in mind.

Does the Minister agree that production costs, costs of labour, seeds, fertilisers, etc. have also increased? In view of these increases, and the increase likely to follow as a result of last week's Budget, does the Minister consider the amount of profit that small farmers have, or their income, is sufficient?

The amount of profit a small farmer has, or ever had, has never been sufficient.

The Minister does agree that in regard to the one penny per gallon increase for the first 7,000 gallons of milk it means only approximately £30 per annum?

If you already have only a half-dollar and somebody gives you another half-dollar you have double what you had before.

How does the Minister reconcile the principle of the Government's proposed scheme for a calf subsidy on herds not sending milk to creameries with the universal advice being tendered by agricultural advisers in the congested areas to small farmers to switch over to creamery milk production?

There may be some apparent conflict there but the fact is that there is certainly none in my mind or the mind of the Government in regard to this situation. It is to try to preserve the situation wherein the amount of milk produced will not be a continuing increasing embarrassment as a result of the larger producers going into it in a larger way that I am trying by these inducements to get the man who is not yet in milk and who is a big man to stay in beef or, if he is partially in milk and partially in beef, it is intended to induce him to come out of milk and go more into beef for which he is properly geared to make a worthwhile living. At the same time, it is not intended to knock the small farmer out of milk or take him out of milk because, as I have stated on many occasions, milk in the case of the small man can constitute the entire livelihood which it is possible to derive from a smallholding, whereas what he would get out of beef altogether on the same smallholding would not keep him in cigarettes, let alone keep his family. I am thankful to the Deputy for bringing out this point. It is not intended to discourage all people from continuing in milk or, indeed, to discourage the small man from going into milk but it is rather intended to encourage the big man who can do well in beef to stay in beef or to switch over to beef. That is the lesson and the lead and the aim of the policy that we are following as regards the extra penny on the first 7,000 gallons and the beef incentive.

I am not trying to set any trap for the Minister——

I appreciate that.

——but am I correct in thinking that the beef scheme is primarily directed at the larger farmers and that the view of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries and the Minister is that the small farmer should continue to supply milk to creameries and further to enter into creamery milk production?

This I am not against. I want to keep that distinction quite clear.

When the Minister refers to farm incomes, does he mean the gross farm earnings from which must be deducted increased costs of production? When he uses the term "farm income" is he referring to gross farm earnings, in other words every shilling that comes in?

It depends which one I am talking about.

In the Minister's reply he used that phrase.

I was answering the question as asked—the increase in incomes of all farmers.

But when you use the phrase "farm incomes" is the Minister referring to gross farm earnings?

What I am talking about here is the level of family farm income in recent years and the indications are that, even for this year for which I have not yet got a complete figure, it will have risen to £161 million, approximately, as against £145 million last year.

When the Minister refers to this £161 million does that refer to everything the farmer gets before he subtracts from it the costs of production?

The Minister is referring to net farm income?

No, not net.

Then he is referring to gross income?

No. If I say I am not referring to something it does not follow that the Deputy can say what I am referring to.

(Interruptions.)

Is the Minister referring to gross income or——

What I am trying to get across to Deputies in Fine Gael is that farmers and farm incomes have never been better.

(Interruptions.)

That is not true.

You know it is true.

The Minister cannot get away with that.

The Minister is referring to gross income.

Question No. 31.

Would the Minister clear up the matter by saying whether it is to gross or net income he is referring.

(Interruptions.)

Go away and make another call to Belfast.

Barr
Roinn