LAND FERTILITY SCHEME. (Hansard, 23 May 1940)

Mr. Hudson
I beg to move, That the Land Fertility Scheme (Postponement of Prescribed Date) Order, 1940, postponing the prescribed date provided for 385 in Sub-section (3) of Section 1of the Agriculture Act, 1937, a copy of which was presented to this House on 30th April, be approved. Like the last Motion, this one arises out of the Act of 1937. The three years for which it was to operate have expired, and it is now desired to extend it for another 12 months. It has been extremely successful. About 4,250,000 tons of lime and 1,250,000 tons of slag have been put on the land, at a cost of£3,000,000, very largely due to the excellent work of the committee under the chairmanship of Lord Cranworth which has been supervising these operations. I hope that the advantage of this service will continue, because there is plenty of land in the country requiring this treatment.

§ Mr. Wilfrid Roberts (Cumberland, Northern)
I wonder whether the Minister can give us a little more information as to the cost and the use of this excellent scheme, which has worked extremely well. Can the Minister tell us, for example, whether the use of lime and slag has gone up recently, and the comparative figures between different periods? Has he in mind any plans for meeting the unequal distribution which appears to exist? In some parts of the country very full use has been made of these benefits, but in others, very little use seems to have been made. Is there any power by which he can recommend or compel farmers to use lime? Can he cheapen the lime and slag, and particularly the lime, in some parts of the country which may be far from sources of lime? I do not know whether that information is available, but if it is, some of us, I am aware, would like to know whether increased use is being made of these subsidies and advantages which the farmer has, and whether farmers all over the country are taking advantage of them.

§ Mr. Snadden (Perth and Kinross, Western)
I do not want to detain the House for more than a minute, but I understand that the Motion before us applies to Scotland. I would like to ask the Minister whether he has considered supplying synthetic manures, other than basic slag. No restriction should be placed at all in the way of agriculture or of any other industry when it comes to mobilising the resources of the country. Looking ahead, I feel that 386 the slogan of 1941 will probably be "Manure for victory" instead of "Dig for victory." Will the Minister consider, in the light of victory, that ultimate objective of Government policy, the necessity of producing the maximum amount of food from the land? If this objective is to be attained, no restrictions should be placed in the way of its achievement.
At the present time two restrictions stand in the way of the land fertility scheme. First, there should be no separation whatever between the land fertility scheme and the land drainage scheme, because the one is dependent on the other. I would also ask the Minister whether it is unlikely that we shall get an increase in 1941 in our cropping programme, because of the existing conditions, and whether he will consider the extension of the subsidy given to basic slag to include all phosphatic manures. This is a very important point in Scotland, where we have many types of land. Any practical farmer knows that the application of high-grade slag to certain types of land has a miraculous effect. On heavy land and heavy clay the result is extraordinary, but on lighter soil, and particularly on what we call shallow land, it is equivalent to throwing a cheque on the fire to put basic slag upon the land; but that land responds to mineral phosphates. I am not sure whether ground mineral phosphates are in good supply or not, and the Minister will no doubt inform me as to that, but it is necessary that the Government should extend the grant available for basic slag to 50 per cent. instead of 25, and give an equivalent grant to the farmer who may be unable to use basic slag but can use ground mineral phosphates.
I hope I am in order in mentioning this point, but I think that it is now becoming evident that a long-term agricultural policy is not necessarily the one which is going to be the best We are told that we are involved in a short-term war and we probably want a short-term agricultural policy. Therefore, this question should be considered very thoroughly at the present time.

§ Lieut.-Colonel Heneage (Louth)
I would like to ask the Minister whether the war agricultural committees have power to order the farmer to use some of 387 these manures which are mentioned in the Order, or whether there is no power. There is a division of opinion. If there is such a power it would be a most excellent thing and it would be very beneficial in the coming season.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
Perhaps the Minister is not yet aware that the Scottish farmer views the situation with alarm. If he puts his back into it, as he is doing at the moment, using slag and lime and every other kind of manure that he can get, in order to make the production of food more prolific, he fears that rents will be raised.

§ Mr. Speaker
I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not pursue the same argument that he used in relation to another Order. It is quite out of order.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
I do not intend to use the same argument. We are on another question. I could make the same speech and still be in order, but all I wish to say is this: There is no better farmer in the world and no more patriotic man in the country than the Scottish farmer, and he is viewing the situation with alarm because of what happened after the last war. He wants to do what he can to get a guarantee from the present Government that there will be no increase in his rent. Landlords in the past have always taken advantage—

§ Mr. Speaker
We are concerned with the extension of this Order for another year.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
I do not wish to fall foul of you, Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Speaker
Then do not do it.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
Supposing it is being extended only for another year. It means that this is coming before the House, and it is one of our opportunities because these matters come before the House whereby we can raise questions which affect the men who will get this grant.

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Member is out of Order.

Mr. Hudson
The hon. Gentleman opposite asked if I could give any figures to show what has been done since the grants were made. It is difficult to say 388 exactly what the increase was in comparison with the years immediately before because there were no figures which are comparable. The best estimate I can give is that the total quantity supplied in the first year is four times as great and in the second year four and a half times as great compared with any normal pre-war year. The actual amounts are: 300,000 tons of lime in the first year, and 700,000 tons in the next year. A question was also asked about difficulties of supply. One of the results of the Act has been to increase the number of lime burners in the country and therefore there has been more for agricultural purposes.
I was asked a question about phosphatic manures. In general I can say that the total quantity available has already been used. Therefore, to increase the grant for them would not increase the quantity available.

§ Lieut.-Colonel Heneage
I asked the Minister whether the War Agricultural Committees have power to order farmers to use these manures?

Mr. Hudson
The answer is "Yes."

Mr. J. J. Davidson (Maryhill)
Has the question of rents been considered? I would like to know whether the rents of the farmers are likely to be raised to such an extent that it would have a prejudicial effect upon the fertility scheme? If the farmers left the land and did not take part in agricultural production because of higher rents, would not that affect the land fertility scheme?

Mr. Hudson
As far as I am aware at present, that is an unsettled question. Perhaps we can wait to discuss it when the situation arises.

Mr. Davidson
Have you no evidence of that taking place?

Mr. Hudson
None whatever.

Mr. Davidson
You should apply to the Scottish Secretary to get some.