asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries (a) the quantity of surplus milk disposed of by the Dublin District Milk Board during May and June, 1970, separately; (b) the price obtained by them for the different purchases; and (c) the average price per gallon for the total quantity.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Dublin Milk Surplus.
64.
(a) 656,506 gallons in May and 445,714 gallons in June; (b) it would not be appropriate to disclose particulars of individual commercial transactions by the board; (c) 22.46 pence per gallon.
Would the Minister not agree that there is a danger that money collected from the smaller producers will find its way into the pockets of the larger producers when it suits them to supply milk?
I do not think there are any grounds for that assumption. The producers themselves have seven members of the 14 members on the board. They have the regulation of their own business in their own hands, to a large extent.
The Minister is aware that seven out of 14 does not constitute a majority. The chairman always has a vote.
Would the Minister indicate that all the moneys collected, apart from administration expenses will be returned to the farmers?
I do not think the Deputy has any need to worry that there will be any untoward occurrences to the farmers. The equalisation fund is exactly what the title suggests—an equalisation over the whole period and a drawing-off of the surplus milk produced. The board may find themselves in a position of some difficulty at times in disposing of surpluses.
That is why I am anxious to know what is the position.
Is the Minister aware that the lower price for surplus milk has been paid since last May because of the fact that the Minister decided Exchequer support should be limited to 4½ million gallons this year, whereas in previous years it had been unlimited.
It may be due to the fact that the board may have had difficulty in disposing of the surplus milk.
The Minister has limited support this year where previously it was unlimited.
A new system of price equalisation has been evolved, as the Deputy is aware, since last February.
It involves less Exchequer support and, therefore, smaller prices for the farmers at certain times of the year.
Not necessarily, because there is now a consumer levy.
Does the Minister agree that the profits on surpluses accumulated will be returned?
That is a separate question.
Would the Minister not consider ascertaining the position in this regard? Will he not reconsider his decision not to give the information because this is information the Minister can obtain without any difficulty while Deputies would have considerable difficulty in securing this information?
I think it would be inappropriate for me to give that information to the House.
I do not think it would.