Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1947 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1945 - 1946

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 26ú Meitheamh, 1947.

Thursday, 26th June, 1947.

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

DEPUTY COSGRAVE in the chair

Mr. J. Maher (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), Mr. P. O’Kelly and Miss Máire Bhreathnach (An Roinn Airgeadais), called and examined.

VOTE 29—AGRICULTURE.

Seán Ó Broin called and examined.

Paragraph 17, Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report:—

“Subhead F.2.—Grants to Private Agricultural Schools, etc.

“In connection with the provision of additional accommodation at Copsewood Agricultural Collage, Pallaskenry, County Limerick, sanction was given for the payment, subject to certain conditions, of a grant equal to one-half of the actual cost of the new buildings, furnishing and equipment, but not to exceed £10,000. Under this arrangement, the full grant became payable and a sum of £9,837 12s. 6d. is included in the expenditure charged to this subhead, the balance of £162 7s. 6d. being defrayed out of the funds derived from penalties imposed under the Corn Production Act, 1917.

The expenditure also includes a grant of £350 made to the authorities of St. Patrick’s Agricultural College, Monaghan, towards the cost of equipment of a science laboratory and a workshop for manual training.”

502. Chairman.—What were the conditions under which sanction was given for the payment of a grant equal to one-half of the full cost of the new buildings? —The grant was for one-half of the cost of the new buildings, furnishing and equipment. When the building was complete and we were satisfied that the equipment had been installed, we paid the grant under the authority given us by the Department of Finance.

503. Chairman.—Paragraph 18, Comptroller and Auditor-General’s report reads:—

“Subhead G.3.—Fertilisers Subsidies.

“The expenditure under this subhead relates mainly to a payment of £14,257 4s. 0d. made to Mianraí, Teoranta, representing subsidy at the rate of 3/- per unit of sulphur in respect of 2,794 tons of Avoca pyrites, containing 95,048 units of sulphur, supplied to manufacturers of fertilisers in the year ended 31st March, 1945.

As stated in my previous report, the payments of subsidy already made on imported phosphates and pyrites amounted to £354,398 10s. 11d. and £228,254 0s. 1d. in respect of the 1942-43 and 1943-44 fertiliser seasons, respectively. The audited accounts of the fertiliser manufacturers disclosed that a further sum of £1,462 7s. 4d. was due in respect of the 1942-43 season and payment of this amount accounts for the balance of the expenditure charged to this subhead For the 1943-44 season the accounts showed that an overpayment of subsidy amounting to £4,044 12s. 4d. had been made and this sum was refunded by the manufacturers and it is included in the exchequer extra receipts. The total charge against public funds in respect of subsidy on imported phosphates and pyrites for the seasons referred to amounted, therefore, to £580,070 6s. 0d.”

Mr. Maher.—The purpose of the paragraph is to show in detail how the charge had been arrived at.

“Subhead H.—Grants to County Committees of Agriculture.

“19. The charge to this subhead comprises normal grant amounting to £117,456, special temporary grant totalling £2,000, and payments amounting to £55,378 6s. 1d. for the purpose of supplementing committees’ expenditure on the provision of lime for agricultural purposes.

The normal grant of £117,456 includes a sum of £73,054, approximately equivalent to the proceeds of the agricultural rate of 2d. in the £ levied under the Agriculture Act, 1931, and extra grants, amounting to £44,402, equivalent to the amount of the income of committees from rates in excess of the statutory minimum 2d. rate.

In addition to the foregoing, a sum of £19 8s. 0d. was paid to a committee from funds derived from penalties imposed under the Corn Production Act, 1917. This payment, together with £162 7s. 6d. mentioned in paragraph 17, exhausted the funds accruing from the imposition of these penalties.”

504. Chairman.—Can you say if the lime scheme is availed of on an extensive scale?

Seán O Broin.—It is availed of fairly extensively, although we do not think that the lime scheme in its present shape is at all adequate to the needs. We think that ground limestone should be made available on a very much bigger scale, but we have not been able to tackle that problem yet.

505. In administering the scheme, when application is made by a farmer for a grant, is his land inspected by an officer of the county committee?—The farmer makes an application and the county committee then supplies him with a docket which entitles him to get lime from the supplier who has contracted with the county committee to supply lime. The fact that he has actually taken delivery of the lime is checked by an officer of the county committe, or it may be checked by one of our own lime supervisors. We have a small staff who make a check, not 100 per cent naturally, but a percentage check all over the country. We try as far as possible to see that the conditions are fulfilled.

506. Deputy Sheldon.—The note on the subhead in the accounts states that farmers failed to avail of the Lime Subsidy Scheme to the full extent provided for. That seems to imply some failure on the part of farmers, whereas the truth is that farmers applied for very much more lime than was available. My own experience is that I got about 10 per cent. of what I applied for?—It means that you cannot really estimate accurately in advance the amount of money that should be provided. You will find that in some cases people cannot get enough and in others farmers may actually apply but cannot take delivery for some reason or another. There are always odds and ends of cases where delivery cannot be taken. In the aggregate, however, every year these represent a deficit, as it does in this particular account.

507. Would it not have been more accurate to have said, as a note in another Vote on the supply of lime under the Employment and Emergency Schemes states, that under-expenditure due to shortage of fuel for the production of lime and to restricted facilities for delivery caused an over-estimation? What I am objecting to is the implication in the statement that farmers failed to avail of the scheme?—The word “failed” does not imply any neglect or apathy or indifference in connection with the supply of lime. It is just incapacity on the part of people here and there to take delivery of all the lime available.

Paragraph 20, Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report:—

“Subhead J.—National Stud.

“Subhead J.J.—Loan for the purpose of establishing Cólucht Groighe Náisiúnta na hEireann, Teoranta.

“Legislation providing for the establishment of a State Stud farm at Tully, County Kildare, was embodied in the National Stud Act, 1945, which became law on 4th August, 1945. The Act provides for the setting up of a company to take leases or licences of the farm and to carry on the business of stud farming, but the arrangements were not completed in the year under review and, accordingly, ordinary farming operatione were continued on the property The expenditure under subhead J. totalled £22,985 17s. 5d., of which the principal items were £3,521 6s. 5d. for wages and allowances, and £17,363 2s. 5d. for the purchase of live stock. Receipts, which are brought to account as Appropriations-in-Aid, amounted to £21,875 11s. 2d., including £20,096 14s. 9d. from the sale of live stock. As stated in the account, a supplementary provision of £250 under subhead JJ. for a loan for the purpose of establishing Cólucht Groighe Náisiúnta na hEireann, Teoranta, was not required as the expenses of promotion, etc., were borne by the company.”

508. Chairman.—The company has now taken over the premises?—Yes, since August.

509. Chairman.—Paragraph 21, Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report is as follows:—

“Subhead M.5.—Improvement of the Creamery Industry.

“As will be seen from the account, no expenditure was incurred under this subhead during the year.

Receipts in connection with the disposal of creamery properties, which are brought to account as exchequer extra receipts, amounted to £6,726 12s. 2d. The total vote expenditure to 31st March, 1946, from moneys provided for the improvement of the creamery industry amounted to £1,197,847 5s. 6d., and receipts were £317,172 1s. 0d., leaving a net charge on public funds of £880,675 4s. 6d.”

Mr. Maher.—That is the annual paragraph. I understand that copies of the accounts will be furnished to the Committee.

510. Chairman.—Are the accounts available?—The last balance sheet furnished was in respect of the year ended 31st December, 1945. We have received the balance sheet for the year 1946, but we have not supplied it to the Committee yet. We hope to do so very soon.*

Paragraph 22, Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report:—

“Subhead M.10.—Potato Reserve Scheme.

“Measures were again taken to cope with a possible shortage of ware potatoes in the Dublin area. In the case of the 1942 and 1943 crops, to which reference was made in previous reports, purchases and sales were made by the Dublin and District Potato Committee, and the net cost of the schemes was borne on the vote. In connection with the 1944 crop, however, the Department of Agriculture was authorized to make purchases up to 1,000 tons direct from merchants in County Donegal and County Monaghan for delivery as required during the period 1st April to 30th June, 1945, to charge the cost of this subhead, and to bring the receipts from the disposal of the reserve to account as Appropriations-in-Aid.

Under the foregoing arrangements, approximately 980 tons of potatoes were purchased for £11,312 0s. 1d., and sales realized £12,185 15s. 7d. A balance of expenditure relating to the previous scheme, amounting to £20 16s. 1d., is also included in the charge to this subhead.”

511. Chairman.—Is this scheme still in operation?—It is.

512. Deputy Sheldon.—It is doubtful if a profit will be made this year?—Yes, doubtful.

Paragraph 23 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General:—

“Subhead O.5—Agricultural Produce (Cereals) Acts, 1933 to 1939, and Emergency Powers (Cereals) Orders, etc.

“A scheme for the assembly of stocks of artificially dried seed wheat of spring varieties was in operation during the 1944-45 season. Each participating seed merchant was required to assemble a specified quota allotted to him and any stocks not disposed of for seed at the end of the season were sold for milling by direction of the Minister for Agriculture, who gave an undertaking that merchants would be paid such sums as would bring their total receipts up to the equivalent of 67/6 per barrel. The quantity of unsold stocks in respect of which the undertaking became operative was subject to a maximum, in the case of any assembler, of 25 per cent. of his agreed quota, and other conditions of the scheme included requirements regarding the variety, germination and moisture content of the grain. Under the terms of the guarantee, sums totalling £478 3s. 10d. became payable to four merchants and are included in the expenditure charged to this subhead.”

513. Deputy Sheldon.—Did the Department check the requirements regarding germination and the moisture content of the grain?—I do not know whether we actually checked all stocks, but we were satisfied that the conditions were fulfilled; that is, our inspectors who visited the premises where these stocks were maintained were satisfied that the conditions were being fulfilled.

514. Would the inspector be able to check such a thing as the moisture content?—He would, if he had the apparatus. In some cases we took check samples and got them tested for moisture content at the State Laboratory.

515. That is why I mentioned it, because when the Vote for the State Laboratory was under consideration I asked was there a check, not so much for this as for imported wheat. They said they did not check the moisture content. It was imported wheat I was referring to, but that check could be done by the State Laboratory?—There is apparatus in the State Laboratory, as well as on the assemblers’ premises, where the moisture content could be checked. I do not think any elaborate process is involved in ascertaining the moisture content.

516. Chairman.—What was the rate per barrel paid in this case?—The assemblers bought it at the ordinary price, plus 2/6 a barrel. They then had to comply with the conditions mentioned here and, in the end, for the wheat not wanted for seed they were given the difference between what was got from the miller and 67/6 (about 4/3 a barrel). This was in respect of a certain quantity which would not exceed 25 per cent. of the total stocks.

517. Chairman.—Paragraph 24 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General reads:—

“Subhead 0.6.—Acquisition of Land (Allotments) (Amendment) Act, 1934.

“Section 7 of the Acquisition of Land (Allotments) (Amendment) Act, 1934, provides for the making of grants to local authorities and other bodies to enable them to supply, free of cost, to unemployed allotment holders, seeds, manures, potato spraying materials and agricultural implements for use in, and for the cultivation of, such allotments. I observed that a payment of £6,188 10s. 9d. made by way of recoupment of expenditure incurred by a local authority included a sum of £87 11s. 0d. in respect of the services of men in charge of spraying, under the direction of allotments instructors. As some doubt exists whether the provisions of Section 7 of the Act can be regarded as covering the recoupment of a charge of this nature, I am in communication with the Accounting Officer on the matter.”

Mr. Maher.—I have since received a reply from the Accounting Officer in which he associates this expenditure with the provision of materials and, in the circumstances, I am of the opinion that it’ complies with the section of the Act and we are prepared to accept his explanation.

Paragraph 25 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General:—

“Subhead O.10.—Emergency Powers (Tillage) Orders.

“The Orders relating to compulsory tillage, made by the Government under the Emergency Powers Acts, required the occupiers of arable lands to cultivate a specified proportion of their holdings, and the Minister for Agriculture was empowered to enter on and take possession of those holdings whose occupiers failed to comply with the provisions of the Orders, and to cultivate such holdings or make conacre and other lettings. The charge to this subhead comprises £56,020 1s. 10d. for salaries, wages and allowances, £20,667 9s. 5d. for travelling and miscellaneous expenses, and £1,787 14s. 9d. representing the cost of seeds, manures and fencing materials, together with the cost of the erection of fencing and of other operations incidental to the cultivation of entered holdings and the harvesting of crops grown thereon.

The Tillage Orders also regulated the disposal of sums realized from the sale of crops and from lettings. The receipts may be applied in or towards (a) defraying expenses incurred by the Minister for Agriculture in discharge of the powers conferred on him by the Orders, (b) paying debts due to a State authority by the occupiers of entered holdings, or (c) paying rates due to a local authority by such occupiers. The total receipts in connection with this service to 31st March, 1946, amounted to £18,560 11s. 10d., of which £14,455 2s. 0d. was applied towards defraying expenses, including £2,547 7s. 4d. brought to account as Appropriations-in-Aid in the year under review. The sums disbursed to 31st March, 1946, totalled £3,158 4s. 6d., comprising £2,715 15s. 10d. to State and local authorities and £443 8s. 8d. to the occupiers of the holdings concerned.”

518. Deputy Sheldon.—What acreage was affected by this?—The total area cultivated was 887 acres. That includes both conacre lettings and direct action. Direct action alone represented 206 acres.

519. You got off very cheaply at £2 an acre for seeds, manures and fencing materials?—That would apply only to the direct action cases.

520. Chairman.—Did the Department make a profit or suffer a loss?—We lost on the whole. We had a surplus in some cases and deficits in other cases, but the total outcome was a loss.

521. If there is a profit on a holding, does the profit over and above all expenses go back to the owner?—Yes, if, after all the other claims are satisfied, there is a surplus. First there are the Minister’s expenses, then the claims of other State Departments, such as the Land Commission, then any money that might be owing to the county council in respect of rates. When all these are satisfied, anything over and above goes back to the owner.

522. In fact, you could not make a profit?—We could not ultimately make a profit, but we could avoid a loss. That is as far as we could go.

523. Deputy Sheldon.—How is the figure arrived at in respect of any particular case? Do you include any over-heads—administrative charges?—We do not charge any overheads; we generally charge the cost involved in the inspector having to visit the place specially. It is largely made up of travelling expenses.

Paragraph 26 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General:—

“Subhead P.—Appropriations in Aid. “Levy on the slaughter of cattle and sheep.

“As stated in previous reports, the provisions of the Slaughter of Cattle and Sheep Acts relating to the collection of levy in respect of cattle and sheep slaughtered for human consumption ceased to be in force as from 1st August, 1936. The amount received in the year under review in respect of levy due but uncollected at the date mentioned was £546 13s. 1d., and the amount of levy outstanding at 31st March, 1946, was £3,512 6s. 8d. As noted in the account, sums totalling £2,097 15s. 11d. were written off with the sanction of the Minister for Finance.”

524. Chairman.—What is the amount now outstanding?—The amount outstanding on the 31st March, 1947, was £2,446.

525. Could you say when the amount will be cleared?—No. We are trying to collect it and we will go on collecting so long as anything comes in.

Paragraph 27 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General:—

“Extra Receipts payable to Exchequer.

“As will be seen from the account, fees amounting to £363 were received in respect of licences granted under Emergency Powers Orders. These comprised £40, being £10 for each licence issued under the Emergency Powers (No. 254) Order, 1943 (Statutory Rules and Orders, No. 337 of 1943), which related to the licensing of persons engaged in the business of producing, processing and selling specified classes of agricultural seeds, and £323, representing £1 for each licence issued under the Emergency Powers (Export of Dead Poultry and Rabbits) Orders, 1941 and 1945 (Statutory Rules and Orders, Nos. 536 of 1941 and 141 of 1945).”

Paragraph 28 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General:—

“General Cattle Diseases Fund.

“Fines collected following prosecutions for offences committed during the outbreak of foot and mouth disease in 1941 were remitted by the Department of Justice to the Department of Agriculture, and the amounts were brought to credit in the accounts of the General Cattle Diseases Fund appended to the appropriations accounts of the vote. Section 9 of the diseases of Animals Act, 1945, authorized the disposal, for the benefit of the Exchequer, of any sum paid into the Fund as a result of a prosecution for an offence related to foot and mouth disease committed after 20th January, 1941 and, as will be seen from the accounts, a sum of £2,769 17s. 1d. was transferred from the General Cattle Diseases Fund in the year under review and is included in the extra receipts payable to the Exchequer.”

526. Chairman.—I notice in the account of the receipts and payments relating to the Fund that there is a difference between the opening balance and the closing balance of over £8,000?— Yes. That balance varies and the Fund has to be maintained in a solvent condition by assessments as it becomes depleted.

527. Deputy Sheldon.—With regard to Subhead E.2., have lands for the Institute been purchased since?—Yes, we have bought a farm near Clondalkin—Browns-town Farm.

528. Does the expenditure under Subhead E.4. crop up only in emergency cases?—There is always a certain amount of expenditure under that heading. We are always carrying out small trials and investigations of various kinds on our farms, for example, testing various processes and seeds and trials with regard to the storage of grain. They are usually small trials and small experiments.

529. Chairman.—Is Johnstown Castle now being run as a school or college?—It is being run as a school to a limited extent. We have not been able to make as much progress with the adaptation of the place as we had hoped. We have some horticultural students there, but we have no agricultural students yet.

530. Is it proposed to erect new buildings?—We are going to do both. We propose to adapt the existing buildings, but we also need to erect some new buildings. Of course, the adaptation and erection of buildings at present is a rather slow process.

531. Deputy Sheldon.—In connection with F.3., has the position improved in any way with regard to obtaining chemicals and drugs?—I think the position is satisfactory enough. I have heard no complaints as to difficulties in getting supplies for the Veterinary College.

532. Chairman.—Can you say, in connection with Subhead G.1., what is the amount of the Department’s contribution to each cow testing association for the supervisor?—The Department pays a grant of 4/- per cow to start with, and we pay additional grants in respect of cows over 250 in an association. These are the main contributions paid by the Department.

533. Deputy O’Sullivan.—In connection with Subhead L., could Mr. Ó Broin say whether the wages paid in the Botanic Gardens are in accordance with the rates laid down by the trade unions?—The wages of the staff in the Botanic Gardens are arranged after consideration by an inter-Departmental committee which takes into account the wages of workers of the same kind employed by the Government—that is, workers under the Office of Works as well as in the Botanic Gardens. I do not think that they necessarily follow any trade union rates, but, of course, they are related to them.

534. Has the rate any direct relation to the agricultural labourers’ rate?—It is higher than the agricultural labourers’ rate.

535. The reason I ask the question is that they naturally must be regarded as city workers and it would be positively absurd, in existing conditions; to relate their wages to the wages of agricultural workers, having regard to the location of these workers?—That is recognised.

536. Would Mr. Ó Broin say if the question of superannuation for these workers is under consideration?—There are just a few members of the higher staff who are eligible for pensions. The ordinary staff are not, and the question has not been considered.

537. Deputy Dockrell.—What is the reason that the work in connection with the arboretum at Kilmacurra could not be proceeded with?—Of course, that is private property and we found it difficult to get the owner to fall in with our suggestions. We have more or less given up the idea of getting anything done.

538. This is Kilmacurra Park?—Yes, there used to be a hotel there.

539. And the scheme is dropped now? —It is in abeyance for the time being. It is not absolutely abandoned, I imagine, but we are doing nothing there at the moment.

540. Chairman.—In connection with the question raised by Deputy O’Sullivan, can you say if the ordinary staff in colleges under the control of the Department are eligible for superannuation, or does superannuation only apply to instructors and the higher staff?—That is so. Of course, they are eligible for gratuities under the conditions laid down in the Superannuation Acts, but they are not eligible for annual pensions.

541. Deputy O’Sullivan.—And the gratuities are fixed on a very old basis? —Yes.

542. Deputy Sheldon.—What is the precise distinction between M.4. and M.6.?—M.6. relates in part to an old scheme that was in operation back in the year 1934—a special scheme for heifer loans. M.4. relates to loans which are issued entirely by the Department. In the case of M.6., there are certain loans for implements costing over £40 which are recommended by the Department, but the money for which is advanced by the Agricultural Credit Corporation. M.4. relates to our own office operations and M.6. to the operations of the Agricultural Credit Corporation.

543. Chairman.—What assistance is rendered under Subhead N.3.—The Horse Breeding Act?—That Act prescribes that all stallions of a certain age must be licensed, and the expenditure referred to here is that incurred in carrying out the provisions of that Act—mainly on inspections and travelling expenses.

544. Deputy Sheldon.—In connection with O.6., has the number of unemployed allotment holders continued to decrease? —Yes, the number was down last year in comparison with 1945, and that, in turn, was lower than in 1944.

545. Deputy Sheldon.—In connection with Subhead P., Appropriations-in-Aid, can Mr. Ó Broin distinguish between seed testing fees and receipts from the sale of pure line seed? How much is received in fees for seed testing—About £770 was realized from seed testing fees.

546. The reason I mentioned it is that it always struck me that if there was one thing about which farmers would need to know, and about which most of them do not know anything, it is the testing of seed and the facilities for that purpose?—We get a very large number of samples at the Seed Testing Station, and in addition, the vocational schools throughout the country test seed. There has been a good deal of propaganda about it.

547. Do you issue any propaganda about it to any of the young farmers’ clubs?—I think the young farmers’ clubs are aware of this arrangement.

548. I know one in particular that is, but are the others aware of it?—I think they are all aware of it.

549. Chairman.—Can you say in connection with Note No. 2 to this subhead, whether the Department has any statistics showing whether the rate of infertility in cattle is improving or otherwise? I am referring to diseases like contagious abortion?—I do not think we would have any precise figures on that head. Our information would be of a rather general character.

550. Well, even generally?—I do not think that we can say the position is improving. It is fairly bad in some parts of the country.

551. Deputy Shelden.—In a note, 23 (b) on page 90, there is a reference to repayments of sums advanced to seed merchants. In what way would that money be advanced to seed merchants?— That would relate to Subhead O.5.

552. Yes. Under that scheme how would repayments from the merchants arise?—This is a scheme that was in operation some years back when there was a bounty on wheat growing and suppliers or merchants supplied the farmers with seeds. The Department advanced half the cost and they recovered the total cost through the bounty payable to the farmer, and paid the supplier the outstanding half. There were some small sums outstanding which we were trying to recover from farmers. That was where bounty did not become payable for one reason or another.

VOTE 30—AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE SUBSIDIES.

Seán Ó Broin called and further examined.

553. Chairman.—The Comptroller and Auditor-General has the following note on this Vote, paragraph 29:—

“Subsidies, Allowances, etc., for Dairy Produce.

“The arrangements made for subsidising the production of creamery butter, referred to in previous reports, continued in operation throughout the year under review, the authorized rates of allowance being of such amount as enabled the price of milk supplied to creameries to be maintained at 10½d. per gallon for the period 1st April to 30th November, 1945, and at 1s. per gallon for the period 1st December, 1945, to 31st March, 1946. Expenditure under this heading totalled £817,813 15s. 10d. The balance of the charge to the vote, amounting to £7,186 4s. 2d., represents allowances paid to butter factory proprietors and non-manufacturing exporters on non-creamery butter acquired by them from producers. The vote provision of £825,000 was insufficient to discharge the commitments in respect of the allowances payable, and after it was exhausted, claims were met from the Dairy Produce (Price Stabilisation) Fund. The amount so disbursed from the Fund in respect of allowances on creamery butter produced and non-creamery butter acquired was £78,166 6s. 0d. and is referred to in the succeeding paragraph.”

Mr. Maher.—The account will be found on page 97. It will be noted that the balance on the 1st April, 1945, was £250,000, and that it had come down to £22,000 in March, 1946.

554. Chairman.—Does this mean that there will be an increased subsidy necessary?

Mr. Ó Broin.—Under the provisions of the Dairy Produce (Price Stabilisation) Acts we have to maintain this Fund. We draw on the Fund to pay some of the subsidy on the production of creamery butter. If the subsidy Vote cannot bear it, then the Fund has to bear it.

555. Chairman.—The Comptroller and Auditor-General has the further following note on the Vote, paragraph 30:—

“Dairy Produce (Price Stabilisation) Acts, 1935 to 1941, and Emergency Powers (No. 270) Order. 1943.

“Dairy Produce (Price Stabilisation) Fund.

“The income of the Fund during the year was derived solely from levies on home sales of creamery butter and amounted to £15,401 10s. 10d., as compared with £101,669 15s. 9d. in the previous year, during which additional receipts accrued from the balance of levies collected on stocks of butter in hand and on creamery butter produced at the end of November, 1943.

In addition to expenditure of £826,526 4s. 10d. from the vote for Agricultural Produce Subsidies and £17,382 16s. 5d. from the Dairy Produce (Price Stabilisation) Fund in the year 1944-45 on allowances in respect of creamery butter produced and non-creamery butter acquired during that year, payments amounting to £58,132 9s. 11d. were also made from the Fund during the year under review, bringing the total cost of these allowances for the year 1944-45 to £902,041 11s. 2d., as against £816,925 9s. 4d. for the year 1943-44. As stated in the previous paragraph, the Fund was also utilized to supplement the vote expenditure on production and acquisition allowances for the year 1945-46, the disbursements totalling £78,166 6s. 0d. Sums amounting to £47,1664 2s. 9d. were paid to creameries in connection with the Department’s schemes for the cold storage of creamery butter for winter requirements, mainly in 1944-45, and the balance of the expenditure from the Fund, £59,581 10s. 3d., related to payments made to the Butter Marketing Committee. Of the last mentioned item, £5,935 represented issues made to meet administrative expenses. In addition, deficiencies in trading accounts, arising mainly from expenditure in connection with cold storage of butter for winter use, were made good to the Committee. The payments involved totalled £53,646 10s. 3d., being a balance of £13,646 10s. 3d. in respect of the year ended 31st March, 1945, and £40,000, on account, for the year ended 31st March, 1946.”

556. We can now turn to the Vote on page 96, and to the account, which is on page 97. Can you estimate, Mr. Ó Broin, what the charge on the Exchequer is likely to be in the current year?—It will be about £2,000,000.

557. And that includes the price for milk?—It will provide for the increased price for milk.

VOTE 31—FISHERIES.

Seán ó Broin called and further examined.

558. Chairman.—The Comptroller and Auditor-General has the following note on the Vote, paragraph 31:—

“Subhead F.1.—Grants to Boards of Conservators and Local Authorities, etc.

“In April, 1944, a Board of Conservators secured a conviction in the District Court, under Section 38 of. the Fisheries Act, 1939, for the unlawful possession of salmon illegally captured, and fines were imposed, the conviction being subsequently confirmed in the Circuit Court. The defendant’s, solicitor, however, then obtained a conditional order of certiorari to quash the order of the District Justice on the ground, inter alia, that the conviction had not been recorded in proper form, and this conditional order was made absolute by the High Court. The case was taken to the Supreme Court, but the appeal was dismissed, with the result that the Board of Conservators was required to bear the costs of the whole proceedings. In the special circumstances of the case, the Minister for Finance sanctioned recoupment to the Board, and the amount involved, £308 9s. 7d., is included in the expenditure under this subhead.”

Can you say, Mr. Ó Broin, what the circumstances were in this case?—I cannot add very much to the information given in the note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. It was a case where the conservators took proceedings in court in pursuance of their obligations to conserve the fisheries. A conviction was secured, but the conviction evidently was not recorded in the proper form, and on that technical ground it was upset. There was finally an appeal to the Supreme Court which the conservators lost. As a result of their action they had to bear considerable expense. We thought that it was a case in which it was right that the conservators, who could not otherwise afford to meet the expenses incurred, should be recouped.

559. Deputy Sheldon.—Who advised the appeal?—The conservators were advised by counsel all along.

560. Did the Attorney-General come into it at all?—We also consulted the Attorney-General and he agreed with the views taken by counsel at each step.

561. Chairman.—Can you say if there were any other similar cases?—I understand that there is another similar case.

562. Chairman.—Has the Department of Finance any views on the matter?

Miss Bhreathnach.—We are in communication with the Department of Justice to see if anything can be done to ensure that convictions will be properly recorded in future, and that mistakes will not be made.

563. Deputy Lydon.—It is quite possible that the man concerned would have gone to jail if his solicitor had not brought the appeal. I think the Department of Finance was rather generous in paying the expenses of the conservators. I know that, in some parts of the country, people do not look on the poaching of salmon in the same light as the Department of Finance.

564. Chairman.—Paragraph 32 in the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General reads:—

“Subhead G.2.—Advances for Boats and Gear.

“No advances were made to the Sea Fisheries Association during the year under review. The total advances for boats and gear to 31st March, 1946, amounted to £138,750. The half-yearly instalments of the annuities set up to repay these advances falling due to 31st March, 1946, amounted to £104,990 4s. 5d., while the sums collected by the Sea Fisheries Association from borrowers and transferred to the Department in payment of the annuity instalments amounted to £101,083 11s. 10d., including £6,937 1s. 7d. repaid in the year under review and credited to Appropriations in Aid. The repayments were, therefore, in arrear at 31st March, 1946, to the extent of £3,906 12s. 7d., as compared with £558 19s. 0d. in advance at 31st March, 1945.”

Do the repayments depend on the sales of fish?—They do.

565. So that we may take it that, in a bad year the repayments would be less? —Yes.

566. Chairman.—The Comptroller and Auditor-General has the following note in paragraph 33:—

“Fishery Loans.

“Repayments of fishery loans, which are accounted for as Appropriations in Aid, amounted to £8 15s. 8d., and the balance outstanding on these loans at 31st March, 1946, was £20,313 2s. 2d., including arrears of £20,275 11s. 10d. There were no remissions during the year under the Fisheries (Revision of Loans) Act, 1931.”

What is the Prospect of getting repayments in the case of these loans?—There is practically no prospect. When the Minister was presenting the Estimate in the Dáil last week he announced, I think, that he had given a direction that we should try to get these arrears written off altogether. Some of them are very old loans and there is no prospect of obtaining repayment. Some of them were issued 30 years ago. I think most of the people who got the loans are dead.

567. Deputy Brady.—On Subhead F.2. —Fish Hatcheries—can Mr. Ó Broin say if the plans for the rehabilitation of the Glenties hatchery are being proceeded with?—I am not quite sure how far we have got. We were held up because our engineer in the Fisheries Branch died. We are doing the work directly ourselves.

568. Deputy Lydon.—On Subhead G.1. —Grant-in-Aid of Administration and Development of the Sea Fisheries Association—I should like to know if it would be possible for the Committee to get a copy of the articles of association of the Sea Fisheries Association?—I think so. If there is not a copy already in the Library we can arrange to have one put there.

569. I am asking the question because I am not at all satisfied that the Sea Fisheries Association is properly constituted. I think that a number of the members are dead and that others are in arrears, and that you have people voting who might be described as land-sailors? —I will see that a copy of the rules is placed in the Library.

570. Deputy Brady.—On Subhead G.2. —Advances for Boats and Gear—can Mr. Ó Broin say what is the prospect of getting boats and gear now?—It is not very good. There is still a great scarcity of these things. We are hoping that the position will improve. We have made increased provision in the hope that there will be better opportunities of getting supplies.

571. Chairman.—Assuming fishermen have the misfortune to lose a boat or gear or to have their boat or gear damaged, does the Department facilitate them in any way in getting new equipment or repairing the existing gear?— Yes. The Sea Fisheries Association does, if the fisherman is a member of the Association.

Deputy Brady.—If he is a member, his boat and gear are insured.

Deputy Lydon.—The Sea Fisheries Association will never develop fishing.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 67—EMPLOYMENT AND EMERGENCY SCHEMES.

Mr. E. J. MacLaughlin called and examined.

572. Chairman.—On this Vote, there is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General:—

“Subhead K.—Farm Improvements Scheme.

Subhead L.—Seed Distribution Scheme.

Subhead M.—Lime Distribution Scheme.

“90. The schemes for which provision is made under the above subheads are administered by the Department of Agriculture acting on behalf of the Special Employment Schemes Office. The charge to Subhead K. includes grants to rated occupiers of holdings for improvement works on their farms, together with administrative expenses in connection therewith and with the schemes for the distribution of seed and lime, direct expenditure on which is charged to Subheads L. and M., respectively. Provision was made for the payment, subject to certain conditions, of grants equivalent to one-half of the approved estimated cost of the labour required for improvement works carried out, the maximum grant payable to any one applicant under any seasonal scheme being £100 and the minimum grant £5, except in congested districts where the minimum grant was £1. The grants paid amounted to £311,856 5s. 10d., made up as follows:—

The administrative expenses referred to above, amounting to £76,176 1s. 1d., account for the remainder of the charge to Subhead K.”

I notice these grants are paid to rated occupiers. Does that mean a person other than a farmer may benefit?—I cannot tell you the exact significance of “rated occupier” there, but the scheme is designed for holdings that are mainly or wholly agricultural—that is the definition.

573. Deputy Sheldon.—I think the occupier has to derive his income wholly or mainly from agriculture?—That is so, yes.

574. Chairman.—I notice that an expenditure of £70 13s 0d. was incurred in connection with the construction of cattle enclosures?—Yes.

575. Is this a new scheme?—1945-46 was the first year this particular scheme was introduced, but it has been in operation since.

576. Chairman.—Paragraph 91 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General is as follows:—

“Subhead O.—Miscellaneous Schemes.

“As stated in my last report, a grant amounting to £4,066, subject to local contributions of £1,800, was sanctioned for the repair and improvement of about 4 miles of road required in connection with mineral development. The county engineer estimated that the work could be carried out by normal employment schemes methods at a cost of £5,830, but it was decided with the approval of the Department of Finance, that unskilled labour for the work should be supplied, without repayment by the Army Construction Corps. The amount of the grant issued to the 31st March, 1946, was £3,870 including £487 charged in this account. In addition, the value of the services rendered, without repayment, by the Army Construction Corps amounted to £42,283 17s. 5d., including, as noted in the account, £12,729 7s. 0d. in the year under review. An additional grant of £775, subject to local contributions of £250, has been sanctioned for further work, including an estimated expenditure of £723 on tarring the portion of the road which has been repaired and improved.”

Is this the famous road in Cavan?— Leitrim and Roscommon—two counties.

577. It is Cavan, is it not?—I think it is in Roscommon and Leitrim.

578. Apparently, the work carried out by the Army Construction Corps was more expensive than if it had been handed to a contractor.—Very much so. They are not workmen in the ordinary sense of course. The expense of their training while engaged on the job is included in the charge.

579. Has the work been completed yet? —Yes, the Construction Corps have left.

580. Having completed the work?— Tarring had to be done after they left. That is not the kind of work they could do. It has to be done by county council workmen.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 51—NATIONAL GALLERY.

Dr. G. J. Furlong called and examined.

581. Chairman.—Can you say, Doctor, if the Gallery is now open at night-time?—It is not, because it has not got any light. They are supposed to be putting it in this year, but it has been held up for various things they could not get. They say they will put it in this year.

582. Did you purchase many pictures last year?—In that year, 1945-46, we purchased four.

583. What were they?—The most important one was a portrait of a Venetian Senator, by Tintoretto, which was a very important picture, and then, a small Italian picture, Isaac Blessing Jacob, by Schiavon. Then two portraits.

584. Can you say if there is any record of the number of attendances?—Yes, we keep a record. It works out roughly at an average of 130 a day. It has gone up slightly, Sunday being the most crowded day, and Saturday being the least crowded day.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 43—DUNDRUM ASLYUM.

Dr. G. W. Scroope called and examined.

585. Deputy Brady.—Under Subhead B. I note a slight fall in the price of a certain foodstuff during that year?

586. Chairman.—Was that confined to food supplied to Dundrum, Doctor?—It applies to beef—a ½d. a 1b. on beef.

587. Chairman.—Can you say if the outdoor staff in Dundrum—the labourers and garden employees—are entitled to superannuation when they retire?—No.

They are not pensionable?—No.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 65—EXTERNAL AFFAIRS.

Mr. F. H. Boland called and examined.

588. Deputy Sheldon.—In regard to Subhead A.3., how did the undercharge for telegrams arise? Was there a change in rates?—Well, no. What happened in that case was: we at that time were dispatching telegrams on behalf of firms and private persons here. The rate per word was being reduced. Owing to a misunderstanding, we applied the reduced rate, which we had ascertained unofficially from the Post Office, before the date on which the reduction came officially into force. As there was a very large number of people involved, the cost of going back and recovering the money would have exceeded the aggregate amount of the loss, and in those circumstances we asked the Department of Finance to write off the difference.

589. Deputy Sheldon.—Besides, it was your error and it would not look very well to be looking for it?—It is difficult to say it was an error. I think that the principal element in it was that the adjustment of the new rate between our Post Office and the British Post Office delayed an official operation of the new rate.

590. Chairman.—On A.5., I notice a big increase there and the note on page 240 says:—

“The number of distinguished foreigners who visited this country during the year and to whom entertainment was given was greater than anticipated.”

How does the Department decide whom they will entertain? Is each case more or less considered on its merits?—Usually, the decision is made for us by accepted usage. In this particular case, a very substantial portion of the excess—not quite half, but very near it—was due to the fact that we had the honour of the visit of the Cardinals-Designate on their way to Rome and again on their return.

591. Deputy Brady.—Would that not come in the year 1946-47 and not 1945-46?—No, they came into this particular year.

592. Chairman.—On B.5., can you say if there is any scheme administered by the Spanish Government or under the Government here, whereby a person injured through participation in the Spanish Civil War could get a pension?— I could not answer so far as Spanish law is concerned, though I would be surprised if Spanish legislation did not make some sort of provision for people who fought. So far as our law goes, there is no such provision.

593. I notice we sent out a number of copies of different speeches, as stated on page 242. To whom were those sent?— They were sent to our missions abroad or procured by them to enable them to meet requests made by members of the public.

594. Deputy Sheldon.—What photographs were sent?—A large number of different ones—Some of those provided for here were photographs of the President. It is usual for foreign missions to have such photographs available for newspapers and so on, when asked for them. Others were photographs requested by the Post Master General of the United States, who happened to come here during the year and wrote afterwards saying he would like to have copies of photographs taken of his party while here. We obtained them and sent them to him. There were other similar cases.

VOTE 66—LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

Mr. F. H. Boland further examined.

595. Deputy Sheldon.—Will this be the last year?—No, there is one year more.

596. Is there any indication yet of what our share of the assets will be?—So far as it is possible for us to determine a figure at this stage, it amounts to about £46,000 in liquid and material assets.

597. Chairman.—Have we any officials out there yet, at the League of Nations? —No. Mr. Lester, the Secretary General ceases to be Secretary General at the end of this month, I think. He is seconded; he is not an effective officer of the Department at the moment. We have no actual officials of the Department serving with the League of Nations.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.

* See Appendix XIV.