asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the date on which the Common Agricultural Policy of the EEC commenced to operate in relation to Ireland; and the date on which the consequent benefit to the Exchequer commenced.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Common Agricultural Policy.
27.
While Ireland became a member of the European Communities on 1st January, 1973, Article 151 of the Act of Accession provided that the application of the measures implementing the Common Agricultural Policy should not take effect until 1st February, 1973. The resulting benefit to the Exchequer also commenced on the latter date.
I suppose the Minister appreciates that this question was put down to his colleague, the Minister for Finance, and was transferred to him. In regard to the latter part of his reply, in which, as I understood, he stated that the consequent benefit began to accrue on 1st February this year, is the Minister quite certain that is so, or does he mean that it began to accrue as from that date but that no actual benefit was received by the Exchequer until a later date?
My reply simply states that the resulting benefit to the Exchequer also commenced on the latter date, which is 1st February.
Probably the position is as I have indicated in my last supplementary question, but on the assumption that what is stated in the Minister's reply is precisely the position, would this not mean that there was a period of one month and 15 days which elapsed between the date of commencement of operation of the Common Agricultural Policy and the date of the change of Government? Would he agree that, to say the least, it would be an unlikely situation that in that period there would have accrued to the Exchequer a sum of £29 million which would have been spent in that period at the same time? If he would agree to that, would he also agree that, as a consequence, what has been stated repeatedly by his colleague, the Minister for Finance, that the benefit from EEC was spent by the Fianna Fáil Government is not in accordance with the facts?
I do not wish to get into an argument between the ex-Minister for Finance and the present Minister for Finance but I think it was quite clearly stated by my colleague, the present Minister for Finance, that what happened was that Deputy Colley, who was then Minister for Finance, anticipated this money and had committed it for ordinary services in the present year, with no improvements, and that it had been taken into account in calculating the deficit, the incoming deficit, and that the incoming deficit would be that much worse if that £29 million had not been taken into account in this way.
Presumably the Minister is aware that the outturn of the financial year last year was a deficit of something between £3 million and £5 million and that that clearly indicates that there was no anticipation of money which did not come in last year. I think the Minister is trying to do his best. Would he at least agree that the version given by his colleague might, if given by him——
I do not think we should bring another Minister into the matter.
I think my colleague was perfectly correct.
Another cover-up.
The facts are coming out.
28.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the steps he is taking to ensure that farm incomes keep pace with increased costs if the impending reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy materialise.
29.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries whether measures to restrain the production of dairy products are being contemplated by the EEC Commission; whether he has made any representations to them about this; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 28 and 29 together.
I am aware that the EEC Commission has been considering the question of proposing some adjustments to the Common Agricultural Policy and my Department has been engaged on a continuing study of the implications of various suggested adjustments which have been reported in the Press and elsewhere. So far, however, no proposals for amendment of the Common Agricultural Policy in the milk or other sectors have been put forward by the Commission and, accordingly, I do not think that it would be appropriate for me to make specific comments at this juncture. I would also point out that it is a matter for the Council of Ministers to decide what action, if any, should be taken on any proposals that may be made by the Commission.
I can assure the Deputies that I shall adopt a firm line on any proposals for adjustments of the Common Agricultural Policy that might adversely affect this country, but I should say at the same time that there are some aspects of the policy which I myself would wish to see improved. I might add that in private discussions with some members of the Commission I have already made clear my attitude on the question of a review of the Common Agricultural Policy.
Has the Minister read a statement made by the Agricultural Commissioner to a group of Dutch farmers which was reported fairly fully in The Financial Times of October 2nd? Has the Minister any comment on that statement.
Various statements have been made by the Commissioner in relation to his ideas on the changing of the Common Agricultural Policy but he has made no statement in the Council of Ministers. It would be foolish of me to make public comment on a number of public statements by him.
The Minister might think it foolish to make statements at this stage but is the Minister aware that the Agricultural Commissioner's statement to the Dutch farmers included a stern warning about EEC dairy quotas. Would the Minister make some statement on that. I can assure the House that the Agricultural Commissioner was not afraid to make his mind known.
I think we are going beyond the scope of the question.
I think it is not right to say he made a statement on quotas. He made a statement on levies when supplies reached a certain level. I am not aware that he made any statement on quotas or any effort to restrict by quota.
I can understand that the Minister would probably have difficulty in keeping up with all the many statements made almost daily. Would he be kind enough to familiarise himself with the statement I am talking about because it is far too important to have been missed by him?
The important time for me to familiarise myself with some matter is when it comes before the Council of Ministers. That is when I can be effective. I cannot be effective by making statements off the cuff on hearsay.
Arising out of——
Question No. 30. I have given the Deputy quite a lot of latitude on this matter and we cannot debate it here today.
This is my last supplementary and it is very important. Two questions were taken together. The Minister says the place to do his job is at the meeting of the——
We must not get into an argument. The Deputy should ask a supplementary question.
I am going to do that if the Chair will have the patience to wait. I suggest that the Minister might be far more successful in his negotiations if he did a little home work before going into these meetings.
That is hardly a question. The Deputy misled the Chair.
It is quite obvious that the Deputy knows very little about what is happening on these matters.
Question No. 30.
30.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the proposals he has submitted to Brussels to ensure that maximum benefit is obtained from the impending review of the Common Agricultural Policy to assist farmers in hill areas and other disadvantaged regions.
The terms of the directive to provide for a special system of aids to farmers in mountainous and other less-favoured areas have not yet been settled by the Council of Ministers.
The question of submitting proposals to Brussels in this connection does not, therefore, arise at this stage.