I have to apologise for the absence of the Minister for Agriculture. He had made an appointment for a food conference at Limerick and could not arrange to attend here to-day. His predecessor in the office, Dr. Ryan, who is familiar with the matter, is very busy in the Dáil and is also unable to be present. Accordingly, I have been asked to take charge of the Bill to-day. It is not a very involved Bill. Its purpose is to suspend the operation of the Flax Act, 1936. Hitherto this was done by an Emergency Powers Order but, as the Emergency Powers Act is not now operative and as we have been informed by the Attorney-General that the new Emergency Supplies Act did not give the requisite authority for this purpose, it was necessary to bring in this short Bill. The Flax Act of 1936 put two obligations on the Government. First, to fix the acreage and, secondly, to fix a minimum price up to which the Government would bring the price if the flax did not realise the minimum price on the market. In recent years, the flax crop was disposed of at prices which, owing to emergency conditions, exceeded those which would normally be available and the operation of the Flax Act was not considered necessary or advisable. Consequently, in each of the years 1941 to 1946, the obligations on the Government to make Orders under the Flax Act were removed by means of an Emergency Powers Order. The present Bill is doing only what has been done during the emergency by way of Order and provides for the suspension of the 1936 Act until 1950 or such earlier date as may be determined by the Government. Arrangements are at present being made for the sale of the 1947 flax crop to the British Board of Trade and I am advised that it will be necessary to have this Bill passed before the 31st of this month in order to relieve the Government of their obligations under the 1936 Act.
Flax Act, 1936 (Suspension) Bill, 1947—Second and Subsequent Stages.
There is not much to be said on this Bill. I appreciate the position in which the Minister for Justice finds himself in dealing with a matter of this type. A couple of points occur to me and, if the Minister cannot deal with them, perhaps he would bring them to the notice of some of his colleagues. The original Act made provision for support of the price of flax by the Government up to a certain level. That was not found necessary inasmuch as the selling price of the flax, as graded by the British Board of Trade, was much higher than the minimum mentioned in the Act. Therefore, there was never any call upon the Government in this connection. The Bill which we are to pass to-day is intended to suspend the operations of the 1936 Act, and of the Government's obligation under it, until 1950. I should like the House to take note of the fact that this Act was intended to support the flax price. I am at a loss to know why the Government has decided to ask for the suspension of this legislation inasmuch as, even assuming the Act had been in operation and had not been suspended, there would have been no financial obligation on the Government, as the price was higher than the minimum fixed by the Government which the Act was intended to support.
I do not know what the prospects for flax growing are for the next two or three years. This Bill will suspend the operation of the Flax Act until 1950. During that time, there will not be any support for the flax price by the Government. Does that indicate that, in the Government's view, flax prices are going to fall under the minimum originally mentioned in the Bill? I should like to have heard something more about the reasons why it was felt necessary to suspend the operations of the Act at this stage inasmuch as the Government have not had to pay anything under it. While, legally, there was an obligation on the Government in certain circumstances, there was no call upon the Exchequer. If we are to suspend the Act until 1950, there will be no support for flax prices even though they may fall to a lower figure than the minimum figure stipulated in the Flax Act. That is a matter on which I am not clear and I do not know whether or not we can expect elucidation of it from the Minister for Justice.
Another matter arises out of the sale of flax, which mainly concerns the three northern counties and a district in West Cork. This problem was, I think, raised in the other House.
All I can ask the Minister for Justice to do is to bring the matter to the notice of his colleague, the Minister for Agriculture, who is, of course, cognisant of the circumstances. Flax prices are agreed with the British Board of Trade. There are grades of flax and the prices are fixed in accordance with the grades on somewhat the same lines as has been arranged in regard to the grades of pigs. The grower finds, however, when he goes into the market that the grader is a representative of the British Board of Trade and that there is no choice but to accept his valuation. The Government here have no voice in the matter. That is thoroughly unsatisfactory. I know that many of the flax-growers in Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal have grievous complaints as to how their product is handled by the graders on behalf of the British Board of Trade. There are other points which I should have liked to raise in other circumstances but I could not expect the Miniister for Justice to come here armed with information which would, probably, be available to him only after a good deal of study. That would be hardly fair.
On a previous occasion here, the Minister for Agriculture said we were getting binder twine and such commodities in exchange for flax. I do not know the present basis of payment, but I would be interested to know whether flax is being exchanged with the British Board of Trade for certain other things we cannot produce and which are vital to us, or if we are merely getting sterling exchange. It is a matter of importance. If it be goods, it is strange that we have to take the goods at the British price and sell them our flax and let them grade and classify it at their price. Flax was very important to them during the war and may be during the coming season. Many people with experience of the flax market in the last five or six years have found themselves rather harshly treated and there is a great deal of dissatisfaction.
This matter has been raised here repeatedly. The Government's attitude has not been as strong as it might have been, inasmuch as we had a product the British could not get anywhere else and which was very essential to them. It was not just enough to decide on the price for the particular grade at the beginning of the year and leave it to them afterwards to grade into first or second as they pleased. That was not enough for them. The probabilities are that the area under flax will be reduced, unless the conditions are better than last year. The season was definitely against flax production and the returns to many growers have been considerably lower than they had estimated. Costs were very high and I do not think we got anything like the payment from the British Board of Trade that we should have got.
I understand there will be a substantial increase in price, though the rate has not been fixed yet. If before 1950 the price does not come up to a fair average, the Flax Act will be brought into operation again. The difficulty about the 1936 Act is that you have to limit the acreage of each grower, whereas under the present arrangement all that is grown is bought. I think that is satisfactory from the flax grower's point of view.
As regards grading, the Department has made representations to the British Board of Trade, but we do not know the result yet as to their system of inspection and grading. We all realise that where there is only one buyer it is not the same as if we had alternative buyers. We have to put up with things we might not put up with otherwise. I was puzzled at first as to why it was necessary to suspend the Act, but the reason is obvious: under the Act it was necessary to fix the acreage and check everything. The price will be better this year.
That is understandable.