CO885-(11-12) — Page 371

98

This campaign has been allowed to grow to serious dimensions without its administrative and financial issues being faced. It reveals a misapprehension of the functions of Government. It is not the duty of a Director of Agriculture to catch beetles. That is a task which cane planters can perfectly well do for themselves. once they have been shown how to do it and why. It is the duty of the Department of Agriculture after a preliminary period of practical instruction to devote itself solely to research in the means of biological control. So far is this from being realized that at present the department does not possess a high grade entomologist capable of dealing with the scientific problem, while the Director is tormented with the task of securing the proper payment of his rewards for the tinfuls of beetles in circumstances where no check is possible.

We have no hesitation in recommending that the Government should spend no more money on capturing or giving rewards for the capture of the phytalus. The special export duty levied for this purpose should no longer be collected. The posts of the phytalus officers should at once be abolished. The task of dealing with phytalus by these direct methods should be left to the planters themselves; they are in a better position to do the work than Government; the destruction of phytalus is now a. matter of common knowledge, it is even a matter of common knowledge that. besides the method of capture, the tiphia wasp can be used against them, so that the sale of tiphia has, like the destruction of phytalus, also become a minor industry: the planters know the damage which phytalus does, and they are better able to assess how much money they should spend on its destruction; it is also far easier for them to see that their money is not wasted. For operations like these a centralized system is helpless, the only possible method of control is local, and there can be no more powerful local control than that of a landowner spending his own money in his own fields.

Our view is that this work is not a function of Government and that it must be left to those who can do it more cheaply and more efficiently. This is not a revolutionary proposal, for we have the best authority for saying that the estates are at present organizing the capture of the beetles which attack their canes; but the estates then sell the beetles to the Government and obtain the reward. This would be justifiable from one point of view, if the funds for the campaign were found wholly from the sugar export tax: but this is not the case. The export duty produces Rs.40,000 and the cost is Rs.119,740. Why should the Government pay the balance? But the Government must take its appropriate share in the campaign and this share is the active conduct of research. We recommend immediate action for the appointment of an ento- mologist. The pay of the post should be Rs.9,500-500-12,000

99

according to our general scheme for the pay of senior scientific officers. The abolition of subordinate phytalus posts and other minor savings will cover the cost.

6. It is not necessary for us to comment on the other two research divisions, as the value of both is beyond question. We hope that the Sugar Cane Research Station will shortly have its full strength of officers. The posts of Sugar Technologist and Assistant Technologist are also valuable, and the fact that a large part of their time is occupied by direct assistance to the factory owners is justified by the special payment from the sugar trade which covers the cost of their salaries. We see no reason why these officers should not be on the regular pensionable staff of the department.

The same consideration must affect our view of the Agricultural College. The building is a fine one and the equipment good, but there are only seven students. The income from fees is trifling and to maintain so elaborate an institution, to spend Rs.14,000 on its minor charges, and to provide laureateships at a cost of Rs.16,200 a year would be excessive if the cost had to be charged to general revenues, especially as not a little doubt has been ex- pressed as to whether there is really a market for the type of employee which the College can produce the increasing concentra- tion in the management of sugar production must tend to diminish the demand for sugar chemists.

But the sugar trade directly pays for the College, and should therefore be the judge as to whether it should be kept open.

We have already stated our view that the extra payments given to several agricultural officers for their work in the College should

be regarded as part of their normal emoluments and should be -o expressed in the budget.

7. The Farm School must be judged from a different point of view, as it is a charge on the general taxpayers. The school takes in eight pupils in each year, pays them Rs.15-20 a month, together with free travelling, and offers them cadetships at a cost of Rs.1,560. The total cost is Rs.5,915, not including a large part of the time of the Assistant Agricultural Officer, whose emolu- tuents are Rs.4,088. The pupils work on the land of the agri- cultural stations, keep gardens and have some ordinary schooling, as their educational standard is described as deplorably low, although the Director has a field of eighty boys from which to make his selection. The objective of this instruction is vague: the pupils are trained to be decent employees for the estates, yet when they obtain service as overseers they cannot cominand as high a rate of pay as they receive for being students. Two are trained for forestry, for which there will be no real demand when the lower forest service is restricted. There is a possibility of students becoming agricultural instructors.

13271

44

D 2

"

293

PUBLIC

PECORD OFFICE

Į Į Į | | | | | | | |

Is by ho do b

Reference -

C.O.882/12

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE | BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO]

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

པ་ཇམ་ ———་ -