asked the Minister for Agriculture why cattle that have reacted under the Bovine Tuberculosis Eradication Scheme are not bought by his Department within a reasonable time; whether his Department have stopped buying reactor cattle at present; and if he is aware that the failure of his Department to buy and take away reactor cattle is causing serious loss to farmers, and is spreading tuberculosis amongst the healthy cattle on the farms.

I am satisfied that there is no avoidable delay on the part of my Department in the buying of reactor cattle. The purchasing of reactors is proceeding normally except in the case of "green-tag" cattle reacting to the 14-day test. The arrangement under which these cattle were being taken up is suspended pending examination.

I have no evidence of the position described in the last part of the Deputy's question.

Is the Minister aware that there are cattle which have reacted under the ordinary herd test which are left for anything from three to six months on the farmers' hands and are not yet brought under the scheme? I can give him several instances of that. I am informed that the reason for the delay is that there is only one factory holding a contract to buy reactor cows and one factory holding a contract to buy reactor dry stock. Is that not true?

As far as reactor cattle under the test in the clearance area are concerned, I do not think the Deputy's information is right. Let me say that in many cases, where these animals are retained unduly long on the owner's holding, that retention by the owner may be caused by the fact that he is unwilling to accept the offer of compensation made to him by our valuers. In some areas we have had a few of these cases but I should not like, and in fact I would not be prepared at all, to admit that the blame in such cases rests with us because I am personally conscious of the fact that the owners of these stocks are not only treated fairly but treated very generously.

I can give the Minister——

The Deputy must put a question.

——positive evidence where the stock has failed on the test and nobody called on the owner for three or six months.

Apart from Parliamentary Questions altogether I keep a very close eye on such matters, especially in the area part of which the Deputy himself represents.

I could give the Minister several instances in the matter.

Could the Minister say what he considers to be a reasonable period?

Three weeks is the usual time. When the stock is tested, a report is sent into the office inside, say, a week. The valuers go out the next week and try to collect them within three weeks.

Does the Minister suggest that the normal practice is three weeks?

I am talking about the clearance area.

I know of cases in which that is not so. I know of a case where there were five telephone calls made to the office to get somebody to go out and nobody has been there for two months.

My information, and I am in fairly close touch with this matter——

The Minister may not be getting the information.

——is that when some of these people are visited by the valuer and their stock is valued they refuse to accept the valuer's offer. They expect these valuers to be on their farms every day of the week. That cannot be done.

Might I point out that there are still 35 Questions to be answered and I would suggest Deputies should make their Supplementaries brief.

There was a good headline set by the Minister for Health yesterday.

I am not doing badly myself to-day.

Question No. 12.