Special Committee Pigs and Bacon Bill, 1934 debate -
Wednesday, 10 Apr 1935

SECTION 55.

(1) Until a bacon (production from carcases of pigs slaughtered in licensed slaughtering premises) order has been made and come into force, a veterinary examiner shall apply the mark prescribed by the regulations for the marking of carcases in the manner prescribed by the said regulations to every carcase of a pig presented to him at any licensed premises, if, but only if, one or other of the following sets of conditions have been complied with, that is to say :—

(b) in case such premises are licensed curing and slaughtering premises and such pig was slaughtered in such premises—

(iii) that the carcase of such pig was opened and eviscerated in his presence, and

(2) If a bacon (production from carcases of pigs slaughtered in licensed slaughtering premises) order is made, then, as on and from the date on which such order comes into force, a veterinary examiner shall apply the mark prescribed by the regulations for the marking of carcases in the manner prescribed by the said regulations to every carcase of a pig presented to him for examination at any licensed premises, if, but only if, the following conditions have been complied with, that is to say :—

(d) that such carcase was opened and eviscerated in his presence, and

Deputy McGovern

I beg to move amendment No. 33 :—

In sub-section (1) (b) to delete paragraph (iii), page 28, and in sub-section (2) to delete paragraph (d).

Having regard to the fact that there will be an ante-mortem and postmortem examination, I think this portion of the section would hardly ever be applied in practice. Even if you had a great number of veterinary inspectors, they would never carry it out in practice and in my opinion the clause would only serve one purpose and that is to furnish the profession with a lever to appoint about twice as many veterinary inspectors as would be necessary. In the circumstances, any practical man would be prepared to take the word of the butcher as to whether there was anything wrong. When they are a while at the business, the butchers know if there is anything irregular and they can tell you just as well as any member of the veterinary profession. I do not suppose that part of the section will ever be made operative and the Minister can save himself an immense amount of trouble by cutting it out.

Minister for Agriculture

A number of amendments submitted by Deputy McGovern stand on the same principle. If we adopt the principle of having veterinary examination, both ante-mortem and post-mortem, we must give ourselves power to enforce those regulations. I do not think there is very much in Deputy McGovern's argument that this will be used in order to exert pressure on the Minister to have more veterinary inspectors appointed. Under this Bill one of the ideas is to appoint veterinary examiners in order to see that absolutely nothing can go wrong with the bacon, that it must be certified as wholesome and free from disease. These enabling sections are only making it illegal for the bacon curers to resist in any way the enforcement of those regulations. I think the Deputy did intend to move the abolition of Section 51. If he had moved it, those would be consequential, but seeing that Section 51 remains, I think these amendments cannot stand.

Deputy McGovern

Does the Minister intend to put that portion of the section into operation and see that the veterinary inspector stands by at the evisceration of every pig ?

Minister for Agriculture

That actually takes place in the case of fresh meat. In cases where pigs are slaughtered for the export of fresh pork the veterinary surgeon looks at the pigs and passes them as being healthy before they are slaughtered. He passes along after they are slaughtered and examines the offals, the plucks, and so on. The veterinary surgeon does not stand by and look at the pig being slaughtered and immediately opened. He does it perhaps in a more orderly way.

Deputy McGovern

I understood from the section that it would be done in his presence and that he had to stand by at the operation.

Minister for Agriculture

He is present in the factory, but not at the killing of the pig. He looks at perhaps 100 live pigs; he passes them; he may reject two or three; but having passed them, they are killed and put along on hooks and the offals and so on are turned out into a pan underneath, but not actually severed. He examines them in a row and gets through a very big number of pigs in the day. He cannot be deceived in the way it is done. No bacon curer could bring in the offals of one pig and put them alongside another animal.

Deputy McGovern

Would the Minister be prepared to insert the words " if necessary " ? Surely it should not be obligatory.

Minister for Agriculture

I am afraid if we did it would destroy the whole effect of our Bill. When we have our regulations working we are able to say that every side of bacon turned out in the Free State is inspected both ante-mortem and post-mortem. It we put in the words " if necessary " it will spoil the whole Bill. We must have it final and binding.

Deputy Haslett

The post-mortem examination is the best test ?

Minister for Agriculture

That is true, but the veterinary profession say it is necessary to have an ante-mortem examination also. I did not think it was, but they say it is.

Deputy Belton

They examine the pigs alive. Do they put any mark on the pigs so as to identify them when dead ?

Deputy Haslett

They are all numbered.

Minister for Agriculture

The pigs that do not pass are marked.

Deputy Belton

But the ones that are passed for killing—are they marked ?

Minister for Agriculture

I do not think so. I have been in a bacon factory where this was going on. I could not exactly vouch for all the details, but I was convinced that even if the bacon curer tried he could not deceive the veterinary surgeon from the way things are done.

Deputy Belton

Theoretically, of course, the regulations could be evaded if they were not marked but in practice I do not think they would. The inspector has to supervise the killing of a lot of pigs. You just pull out the insides of them and leave them unattached. The inspector can see that these are the insides of these pigs. But what evidence has he that these pigs are the pigs that he examined in the pens before killing ? If there was any particular mark on the carcase he would know. It is a very tiny technical point. I quite see in practice how the thing will work.

Deputy Dillon

In practice the Deputy would find that no pig could find its way into the slaughter house that had not come under the attention of the veterinary inspector. He would be satisfied that every pig inside the slaughtering area had come under his notice.

Minister for Agriculture

That would be just the position.

Deputy Belton

That is a good explanation.

Deputy Haslett

I happen to know that the practice is that there is a steel clip put in the pig's ear and the inspector takes a note of it.

Minister for Agriculture

That is quite true. I have seen that.

Deputy Belton

If he were put on oath as to whether he did examine a particular pig alive, the inspector could not say he did. Deputy Dillon will admit that, I am sure.

Deputy Dillon

Deputy Belton will, of course, agree that no matter what regulations are made, some means will be found of getting around them. It would then fall to the Minister to make other regulations to cover that abuse.

Minister for Agriculture

If the bacon curer sets out to deceive the veterinary inspector then the veterinary inspector could say " I will not leave this pig go through until he is killed in my presence ".

Deputy Belton

It is only in the West that he would have to do a thing like that.

Section 55 agreed to.

Section 56 agreed to.