asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the action he proposes to take to ensure that farm output is not greatly reduced due to the substantial drop in the use of fertilisers.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Use of Fertilisers.
1.
I myself and my Department, and, indeed, other agricultural husbandry experts, have already been emphasising to farmers that it is false economy to curtail the use of the necessary level of fertiliser application to grass and crops. Even at present prices, it still pays to apply the optimum levels of fertiliser and I have been continuing to point this out at various meetings.
I also recently brought together a committee representing all the interests concerned with a view to undertaking promotion work for increased fertiliser use.
It will be especially important during the remainder of the present growing season to take full advantage of suitable fertilising of grassland in the interests of ensuring adequate supplies of fodder for the winter.
As the interested parties did not take the advice of the Minister or his Department, what steps does he now propose to take to ensure that this decline will be halted, a decline we are told is in the region of 40 per cent? This is a decline more in the use of phosphate and potash than of nitrogen and it could have a very harmful effect not only on the economy but on the very land of the country for future years.
I have nothing to add. I have established the fertiliser promotion committee consisting of CAOs, Department officers and representatives of the fertiliser industry to undertake publicity and advisory measures aimed at increased fertiliser consumption. I do not know what the Deputy is expecting beyond that. In various public pronouncements at every suitable opportunity I have urged farmers to continue the steady application of fertilisers, even at present prices, stressing that a serious cut-back in purchases is false economy.
Does the Minister not agree that the decline in the use of fertilisers is due to the spiral in prices which commenced when the Minister for Industry and Commerce removed the controls? This was the cause of it. Did the Minister ever try to have the controls reimposed or has he considered subsidisation now that there is some money available for agriculture?
I must remind the Deputy that he said the same thing about the lifting of controls on feeding stuffs. The result of it was that we had the lowest priced feeding stuffs in the whole of Europe. There is nothing whatever to indicate that the removal of controls on fertilisers in fact put up the prices. It did nothing of the sort. It happened all over Europe and the reaction of farmers all over Europe is the same as the reaction here. This is the only country in Europe where there is any subsidy on fertilisers at present.
The Minister said I used the same argument regarding feeding stuffs. Is the Minister aware that in the course of parliamentary questions yesterday he stated——
We cannot have an argument at Question Time.
——that the number of pigs presented to factories had decreased in 12 months by 12,000?
Question No. 2.
Will the Minister explain to us how he can reconcile those two statements—that we had the cheapest feeding stuffs in Europe and that we had this drastic drop in pig production?
The facts and figures are there to prove it.
They are not. Is the Minister trying to get this House to believe that because the price controls were removed we had fertilisers as cheap as we had them? Would we not have had them cheaper if they were kept under control?
No.
We would have. The Minister sold out the fertilisers and the feedingstuffs to his friends as he sold out the pig industry, and Deputy Leonard is right. Facts and figures prove nothing.
I have called Question No. 2.