HC Deb 26 August 1909 vol 9 cc2428-35

Order for second reading read.

The VICE-PRESIDENT of the DEPARTMENT of AGRICULTURE (Ireland) (Mr. T. W. Russell)

Measures of this kind are already in force in several colonies, especially Australia and Canada. It was produced at the instance of the Council of Agriculture, which is the only body that may be said to represent the entire agriculture of the country, and which has impressed upon me—

Sir F. BANBURY

May I point out that the Treasury informed me the Bill would not be taken if it were objected to, and it is objected to by an hon. Friend. I merely wish to save time.

Mr. T. W. RUSSELL

I would like to have the opportunity, at all events, of explaining the Bill on account of the great interest that is taken in it in Ireland, though I recognise if the Bill is seriously contested it cannot, in the words of the Prime Minister, be proceeded with. I would like to explain what it is in deference to the widespread opinion in Ireland amongst all classes in the community. The reason weeds give so much trouble in Ireland is due to three causes. First of all, under the eleven months' system of letting a large number of people have possession of the land who really have no interest in keeping it clean. There is a second class who take land for mere cropping purposes, and they take no interest in it. Then there are the ditches by the roadside and the roadside itself, nobody attends to them. The result is that these noxious weeds are growing all over the country, and men who desire to keep their land clean are unable to do so. The Bill is not a police measure. We propose to work the Bill, if it becomes an Act, by the officers of the Department as part of our agriculture work. It gives the Department power to serve notice and to compel eradication of these weeds. They are not numerous. I believe that they number three. First of all there is the thistle in all its varieties. I put it as the greatest pest; the second is ragwort; and the third, docks. Some members have expressed a desire that a definition of noxious weed should be inserted in the Bill. If that is desired by any section of members, I shall be very glad to put such a definition in the Bill. Then there are objections as to the penalties. It has been represented to me that the penalties are excessive. I am inclined to agree, and if the Bill gets into Committee I propose to reduce them by one half, substituting £10 and £5 for £20 and £10. An hon Member, who is a member of the Agricultural Council, suggested the other day that I should endeavour to carry the Agricultural Committee of each county with me in this work. I entirely agree. And he asked that the Department, before undertaking any prosecution or issuing any order, should notify the agricultural committee of that county. Another objection urged is that the Bill will give "Castle officials" power to enter upon the land of the people. I do not believe that officials of the Department, who are on the land of the people every day, working with and encouraging the people, are regarded as "Castle officials," and I am certain that this measure, worked in the way the Department propose, will not give rise to that opposition. Already the Department have power of this kind in regard to other matters; their officials can enter upon farms and gardens to deal with defects; and they have never been regarded in that light.

The second part of the Bill deals with agricultural seeds. Poor people, in the West of Ireland especially, are being punished in the most extraordinary manner by reason of deficient seeds—seeds which when planted never germinate, with the result that enormous loss falls upon the people. The Bill proposes that officials of the Department shall be able to enter a seedsman's shop and take samples of the seeds. We do not propose to prosecute, but we desire, in case of persistent offences of this kind, where seeds are found to be defective, power to warn the people of the neighbourhood by posting the name of the wholesale vendor who supplies the seed. I have had communications from English and Scottish Members in favour of the extension of the Bill to England and Scotland. I hope, if we get into Committee, they will not press the point. Next Session the Board of Agriculture will have a Secretary here, and Members will be able to press their views upon him. I hope therefore, they will not punch my head in place of the head of Lord Carrington. The Department here cannot consent to the extension this year. I should be glad if it were possible, but in the absence of agreement on the part of the English authorities I cannot accede to the request. I have now introduced the Bill, but, as the Prime Minister has said, if there is serious objections, I cannot press it. I hope, however, the House will give it a Second Reading.

Mr. W. MOORE

I think it may be quite possible, from what the right hon. Gentleman has said, though I have had no communication with him, to remove any objection I have to the Bill. I think its purpose is a perfectly good one, but I rather object to the way in which it is being carried out. I do not attach any importance to the fact that the Agricultural Department recommends the extension of their own powers all over Ireland; it is very natural that they should. But we have got a very excellent system, and an equally good staff, whereby County Councils have subcommittees of their own for agricultural purposes. The most sensible suggestion I have heard—I say it without offence—was that from below the Gangway, the notice of putting into force of the Act shall in the first place—

Mr. T. W. RUSSELL

It is intended to notify the agriculturists before the Act is put into force.

Mr. MOORE

All I want is that our County Councils and the people generally should not be at the mercy of the Central Department—that remote rural districts should not be at the mercy of an inspector for Dublin. The hon. Gentleman has referred to gooseberry mildew. People who might be ordered to burn their gooseberry bushes would probably consider it a great hardship. They do not know who to go to inquire from, and it takes a long time to write to Dublin. If these points are borne in mind I withdraw all opposition to the weeds part of the Bill. For the seeds part I have nothing but praise. But I think the County Council should—as in a great many other Acts—have the option of saying whether or not they will put the Act into force in the county. There should be no objection to that.

Mr. JOHN REDMOND

I have had the greatest possible pleasure of listening to the remarks of the hon. Gentleman. I think he has in substance expressed the views entertained on these Benches. I understand that the Vice-President of the Council has agreed, in substance, to carry out the views which the hon. and learned Member has expressed, and which have been pressed upon the right hon. Gentleman from these Benches. Under these circumstances, I respectfully suggest to hon. Members above the Gangway to allow the second reading to be taken now. It is possible in the course of an hour or half an hour in Committee to put the matters mentioned right. In view of the great need for this Bill, the great demand for it—it has been demanded over and over again unanimously by the Agricultural Council of the Department, in view of the period of the Session, and the danger of Bills of this kind falling to the ground, I would appeal to hon. Members to let the Bill go through now.

Mr. HUGH BARRIE

I hope the views expressed by the hon. Member for Water- ford will commend themselves to my hon. Friends above the Gangway. I can only repeat what has been said by the Vice-President of the Department, that the agriculturists of Ireland are unanimously in favour of this Bill, subject to the modifications which have been impressed upon the Vice-President. Speaking for myself, I would be exceedingly sorry if the Bill should not be placed upon the Statute Book this Session.

Lord BALCARRES

One word on the Bill. It seems to be analogous in certain respects to the clause which was discussed last night about the powers of the Department to deal with trees in Ireland. That clause was extremely wide in its scope—so wide that it was not possible for it to be carried out. Here we have something of about the same character. Personally I agree with what has been said by hon. Members that the County Councils who are on the spot are much more likely to be acquainted with the difficulties of the case. I do, however, wish to enter a protest against the authorising of the Central Department to declare any vegetable matter to be a noxious weed. Some people consider the yew tree a noxious weed. If the Department is going to decide that the County Council one day is to cut down a yew tree, and that another County Council on another day is to cut down another tree—

Mr. T. W. RUSSELL

I have already said that I am quite prepared to insert in the Bill a definition of what is a noxious weed.

Lord BALCARRES

If the right hon. Gentleman will do that, and if he will go further and place it in the hands of the local authorities rather than in the Department of Agriculture which cannot be as familiar with the necessities of Galway as the people on the spot, I shall be satisfied, I think, also, if people are convicted of selling inferior seeds they should be prosecuted.

Mr. E. H. CARLILE

I think it is rather to be regretted that the right hon. Gentleman should persist in asking the House to read this Bill a second time to-night. It was arranged between the Front Benches that certain Bills should be passed tonight. A number of the Bills which we have already allowed to go through would certainly have been debated had we known that the arrangements come to between the Front Benches was going to be broken. It was clearly understood that this Bill was not to be included, and therefore I think it is regrettable that this Bill should have been brought forward.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Joseph Pease)

I explained to the Opposition that in the event of this Bill being opposed, I should at once move the adjournment of the Debate. I proposed to call upon the Order to ascertain whether the Bill might be regarded as a non-controversial Bill, and if not, I was hopeful we might secure its second reading. Only Committee points have been raised, and therefore I think we should get the second reading.

Mr. CARLILE

The right hon. Gentleman is entirely mistaken. If he looks at the Paper he will see there are a number of Motions against the second reading of the Bill. That being the case, I think this is a rather curious way of carrying out the arrangements that have been made. Many of us are in sympathy with the objects of the Bill, and we know that in many parts of Ireland weeds flourish very much. I am entirely in sympathy with the desire to do away with these weeds, but I do not think legislation is necessary in order to induce people in the West of Ireland to clear their land. Agriculturists in this country are inclined to clear their land themselves, and to induce their neighbours to do the same. There is an increasing tendency in Ireland, a great deal more so than in this country, to expect the Government to do every mortal thing, and that view is liable to be fostered by the spiritual advisers of the people. If the Bill is insisted upon, I hope it may bring about the good which the right hon. Gentleman desires. It seems to me that the penalties imposed by the Bill are extremely high. If we compare them with the rents paid by these old farmers they strike one as being most severe penalties, even when fixed at £5 or £10. There are very few of the tenants whose lands are filthy who pay anything like the amount of those penalties as an annual rental. I suppose that in the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman nothing short of those penalties will bring about what the Government desire. If the second reading is persisted in we have no alternative but to vote against it. I repeat what I have already said, that this is a clear going away from the arrangement made with us, and in future we shall have to place arrangements made Whips.

Mr. T. M. HEALY

As the hon. Member who has just sat down has stated that Ireland relies so much upon the English Parliament in these matters, perhaps I may be allowed to give him the reason why. The reason is that the English people and the English Government have stolen the Irish Parliament and the Irish Government, and the result is that we have no other Government to rely upon, except gentlemen of the kidney of the hon. Member for St. Albans (Mr. Carlile), and that is perhaps the greatest misfortune that ever happened to any country. The right hon. Gentleman has brought forward a very valuable Bill, but I would beg of him not to schedule the weeds. In some counties I know the weeds are a great nuisance, but in others they are not of the same character. I think if the officer of a union reported that a particular holding was in a foul state, the Board of Guardians should have the right to prosecute. I think the scheme in this Bill has too long a range, and I cannot really see how a Department in Dublin can carry out this system. You want to get more into touch with the local Boards of Guardians who would be able to give a tenant notice. I also think that the word "eradicate" will have a tendency to throw a heavy burden on the occupier in the earlier years of the operation of the Bill. Then, again, I think you should only allow this provision to be put in force by the local authorities during the time when the weeds are seeding. They are very great offenders, but to throw upon these bodies who gain no profit the burden of eradication would, I think, be a rather strong thing, and it would be unjust to expect them to do more than cut down the weeds. I respectfully commend the right hon. Gentleman for his care in bringing in this Bill, and I am glad to recognise that portion of it-dealing with fertilisers to be absolutely necessary. There is no doubt the Germans are a greater trouble to us with their bad manures than with their Dreadnoughts. They undoubtedly, in connection with the spraying of potatoes, indulge in adulteration in the shape of German imports which, instead of doing any good, have absolutely destroyed potatoes for many areas, and unfortunately led people-to suppose spraying, instead of being any good, is deleterious.

Mr. C. CRAIG

If the right hon. Gentleman could give us the assurance asked for by my hon. Friend behind me (Mr. W. Moore), and leave it to the County Councils whether or not they put the Act into force, he would remove from us the least opposition.

Mr. T. W. RUSSELL

If the Bill is read a second time, I will undertake to consult with hon. Members on both sides of the Gangway opposite as to the best method of dealing with it. I am not wedded to a central authority doing everything, and I desire to carry the local authorities with me in what would be a delicate and difficult matter.

Bill committed to a Committee of the whole House for Monday, August 30th.—[Mr. T. W. Russell.]

Whereupon, Mr. Speaker, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 20th August, adjourned the House without Question put.

Adjourned at Sixteen minutes before Twelve o'clock.