asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will agree to raise the price being paid for reactors in view of the severe losses being suffered by farmers whose herds are affected, especially in the Fenor-Dunhill areas of County Waterford.

The grants available for animals slaughtered under the TB and brucellosis eradication schemes apply equally in all areas. I am keeping the question of raising the existing rates of grant under review in the light of the prevailing Exchequer situation.

Special check testing has been carried out in the Fenor-Dunhill area of County Waterford with a view to clearing the area of disease as quickly as possible.

What percentage of a herd must be affected before a hardship grant is payable?

I have not that figure here but I will get it for the Deputy.

The Minister has said that he is keeping this question under review. Has he any plans now to fulfil the commitment he gave last July to accept the recommendations of the Animal Health Council regarding the level of reactor payments? Has the consideration under which he has been keeping this matter ever since, and to which he has referred on numerous occasions, reached a point where he can make a statement about what he intends to do?

I have at all times made it quite clear that this would have to be considered in a budgetary context and this is what will be done. The Deputy and the House will have to wait for the budget in January when we will spell out what we are doing in this as in all other respects.

Is the Minister now saying that he does not intend to make any change in reactor compensation grants before the next budget? Is it true that the funds which this party identified last June as being available in his Estimate to increase the level of reactor payments are now among the savings which he has agreed to make in his Department?

I was at pains to emphasise at all stages that any increase in reactor compensation grants would have to be considered in a budgetary context. A strong case has been made by the Animal Health Council for an increase in these grants. We are running the country on sound budgetary lines and we were elected on that basis. We will proceed to the end of this financial year on that basis and in the next financial year we will make appropriate provision for matters of this kind.

Is the Minister saying that he does not propose to increase these grants before the next budget? Yes or no?

This matter——

The answer is "no".

——will be part of the budget consideration. This is the Government's job, based on confidential examination of the facts and figures.

Would the Minister agree that the price being paid for reactors is only a pittance? When did the last increase in reactor payments take place and can we take it from the Minister's statement that there is a commitment to increase reactor prices in the next budget?

There will be no commitment from me, but I can give an assurance that this matter will be looked at in the overall context of agricultural expenditure within the budgetary framework and the financial constraints that will inevitably apply.

Question No. 20.

I am entitled to ask a supplementary.

I have allowed enough supplementaries. I am not allowing any more.

In view of what the Minister said last June in speaking on the Agriculture Estimate, I am saddened by his statement.

You cannot make a speech.

Does the Minister realise the grave hardship being experienced by many farmers who have an outbreak of disease in their herd? Does he realise that it has reached the stage where farmers cannot afford to co-operate with the Department in the disease eradication schemes?