asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries why he made an order discontinuing the summer dipping of sheep and fixing only one annual statutory sheep-dipping period from 1st October to 31st January; and if he is aware of the serious implications such an order will have for the sheep industry.

The requirement under which flockowners had to dip their sheep twice each year—in the summer and in the autumn—is for the purpose of eradicating sheep scab. It has been established that the mite which causes this disease does not generally become active until the late autumn and winter months and experience here and in other countries has shown that the only way fully to control or eradicate the disease is to dip all sheep during those months. For that reason I am now about to make a new order providing for only one annual dipping, to be carried out during the period from 1st October to 31st January following.

Full compliance with the new statutory requirement can achieve the eradication of sheep scab from the national flock within a few years. This will be of immense benefit to flockowners and will facilitate the continued expansion of the sheep export trade. The new dipping period was discussed by my Department with the Irish Farmers' Association which fully support the change.

Is the Minister aware that our sheep farmers are completely opposed to the proposal to have only one statutory sheep dipping period? Would he say if he has consultations with the county committees of agriculture and the associations representing sheep farmers on this matter?

The Deputy is aware that the sheep farmers are well represented on the IFA. We discussed these changes with them and they fully agreed with them. I do not understand the objections of sheep farmers to a reduction from two to one dipping when, according to the advice I got, the one dipping I am providing for is more effective.

Is the Minister aware that the period from December to January is most unsuitable for dipping sheep because at that time sheep are heavy in lamb? Is he also aware that vermin, such as maggots, are inclined to damage sheep and wool more during the end of August and September than any other month? Is he also aware that the summer dipping is most important? Is he convinced that the one dipping period is enough?

Brief questions, Deputy, please.

They are for two different purposes. It is assumed that farmers will continue to dip sheep against fly strike in the summer but it will not be a compulsory dipping any longer.

Would the Minister indicate if the payment of the lamb subsidy is completely dependent on dipping?

Yes. If sheep are not dipped the lamb subsidy will not be paid.

I think the Deputy is anticipating the next question.

As Deputy O'Leary said, the county committees of agriculture were not consulted. I am not saying I disagree with that but in my opinion the two dippings should have been made compulsory because they are for two different purposes. The winter dip is for scabs——

The Deputy is making a statement.

According to the Minister's reply he is keeping only the winter dipping.

Heretofore, it was thought that two dippings were necessary for scab eradication.

It is not.

But it was thought previously that they were, and that was the only reason for compulsory dipping. They did not succeed.

My final supplementary. Deputy O'Leary mentioned the harm that can be done to wool by maggots. In my view both dippings are essential——

At Question Time Deputies should seek information, not impart it. Question No. 20.

How much will the Minister save?

Is the Deputy referring to the saving of taxpayers' money, if a saving is effected by doing a better job?

I am asking how much money will be spent and how much will be saved by concentrating on mite and not paying due attention to the maggots.

I am calling Question No. 20.

20.

asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if, in view of the fact that his Department have dropped the summer sheep dipping arrangement, he will now pay the sheep and lamb subsidy at an early date as in the past to enable the sheep farmers to sell off their lambs as usual from July to September.

The intention is that the sheep subsidy schemes should operate at the same time as in previous years.

Would the Minister agree that one of the reasons for having one dipping period is that the winter dip costs less than 50 per cent of the cost of the summer dip?

The question of cost has not come into this at all. What counts is the effectiveness of the dipping from the point of view of the eradication of scab.

The Minister indicated that unless sheep are dipped lamb subsidies will not be paid. Is he aware that because of the physical conditions obtaining in some areas, it is not possible to dip sheep? Does he not think that in these circumstances it is unfair to deprive the sheep farmers concerned of the lamb subsidy? I am referring in particular to offshore islands.

They always had to dip their sheep.

No. In some of the offshore islands there is no need to dip sheep.

They still get the subsidy?

No, they do not get the subsidy. As the Minister will recall, it was I who introduced the subsidy.

I will not give the obvious answer to Deputy Haughey.

The introduction of the subsidy was a new development. Traditionally these people did not dip the sheep; there was no need to and they could not because they were on offshore islands. Because of those physical conditions they are being deprived of the subsidy.

They are not being deprived of something they never had.

Other sheep farmers get this subsidy.

Is it correct to say that that was the position when Deputy Haughey was Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries?

Yes, but I was not aware of it then.

I will have another look at it. I was not aware of it either.

Is the Minister aware that the requirement that the sheep must be dipped in order to qualify for the subsidy prevents them from getting the subsidy? It is just one of these anomalies that arise in this sort of scheme. I would ask the Minister to look into it.

I will have a look at it.

Could I ask the Minister if the land subsidy will be paid on the same basis and during the dipping period?

Yes, there is to be no change.

Some of these lambs were checked during the months of July and August. Now they cannot be checked until October, so there has to be a change.

Would the Minister state whether it is necessary for sheep owners to present a certificate for dipping in order to qualify for subsidy?

Yes.

They will all be gone before the subsidy is given.

Question No. 21.

That means there will be no subsidy paid this year.

Next Question.

One final supplementary.

I have called the next question.