Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 16 Jul 1935

Vol. 58 No. 5

Rates on Agricultural Land (Relief) (No. 2) Bill—Money Resolution. - Agricultural Produce (Fresh Meat) (Amendment) Bill, 1935—Second Stage.

I move: That the Bill be now read a Second Time. The experience gained in administering the Agricultural Produce (Fresh Meat) Acts of 1930 and 1931 shows the necessity of some amendments which are incorporated in this Bill and which aim at a smoother working of the Acts. In the first place, it is proposed to exempt in certain circumstances beef exporters from the inspection fees payable for the examination of animals slaughtered for export. It is intended to use this provision only in exceptional cases and it is for the purpose of encouraging an export trade in beef offals to relieve the surplus of cattle. Under the Act of 1930 we are compelled to charge the full fee for inspection even if only one particular organ of the animal is exported.

Under the Act of 1930, where the registration of slaughtering premises has ceased, the exporters' licence remains in force and there appears to be no legal way of getting over that difficulty. It is proposed under this amending Bill that if the registration of the slaughtering premises is cancelled the exporter shall automatically lose his licence.

Under an arrangement made with certain local sanitary authorities, the veterinary officers of these authorities are appointed as veterinary examiners for the purpose of the Fresh Meat Acts. There is a danger that, as they do not devote the whole of their time to the working of the Public Health Acts, their right to pension is possibly jeopardised. That point was dealt with in the Pigs and Bacon Bill in which their position was safeguarded and the same thing is being done under this Bill.

The amendments proposed in the Schedule are of a minor character and are generally intended to provide for a more satisfactory certification of exports. The words "free from disease" are being changed to "fit for human consumption." There is also the position that carcases which are mutiliated or perhaps not fully developed might quite possibly be free from disease but not fit for human consumption and the original Act is being amended to give the examiner power to reject meat as not being fit for human consumption even though it is free from disease.

Then the object of the amendments to Sections 36 and 40 of the Act of 1930 is to permit a licensed exporter to collect offals from other licensed exporters and export all from his own premises. As the Act stands, nothing can be exported from licensed premises except it is exported direct from that premises. There was, for instance, some trade for livers to Germany last summer and it was very difficult for the exporter to get them sent from each registered premises. It would have been much more convenient if they could have been all collected in one registered premises and exported from there, and this amendment is being introduced to meet such a contingency. There is nothing of any great principle in the amendments. They are designed, in fact, to meet administrative difficulties, and I do not think they should give any great trouble to any Deputy.

This is the Bill which the Minister said he had to bring in to amend a Bill of ours?

Dr. Ryan

Yes, this is one of them.

Was there ever such a specious case made for an amending Bill?

It is very hard to understand all these Bills. Here is a Bill to amend another Bill and then we will have another Bill to amend another Bill connected even with things that will be done under this Bill. How can we hope to keep in touch with all this legislation? The Minister said that it is more or less immaterial, that it is only administrative, but really legislation is being enacted here at such a rate that one never knows what it means afterwards. You have a Bill passed and then you have a Bill to amend it. That sort of business is hardly fair to people who are not lawyers. It is very difficult to follow these Bills and this legislation implementing or changing something else. Part of this Bill refers to some section in the 1930 Act. How can an ordinary man follow that?

Dr. Ryan

Does the Deputy think that I should circulate some sort of a memorandum?

Dr. Ryan

I have no objection to doing that.

I am commenting on the fact that this is a Bill amending another Bill passed three years ago, to delete a section here and add something to another section. The Minister will agree that we cannot follow all these things.

Dr. Ryan

If the Deputy wishes, I shall circulate a memorandum before the Committee Stage explaining each section.

All right.

I think the point that Deputy Curran makes is a very good one and that the Minister ought to take it into consideration. This method of legislation is all right in connection with Bills affecting lawyers mostly, but in the case of the Cereals Act, for instance, there were three amending Bills. It is not fair to farmers or millers that that should be done. I understand that Deputy Professor O'Sullivan mentioned that the Executive Council might consider some method of dealing with a situation such as that. We have had a whole series of Bills of that sort amending, and amending, and amending, and, at the present time, I think one of these Bills requires a person to have two of one year, one of another, and another of a third year. It is very easy for people to lose sight of one of these amending Bills in the circumstances, although it is said that where there are penalties involved to mention that would get one out of them. That is not the question, however. The question is to make it easy for people to live. The trend of legislation for the past few years has been to make it as difficult as possible for business people or people engaged in agriculture to get along. Some scheme ought to be adopted to get in a single form those enactments dealing with agriculture or business generally.

Question put and agreed to.
Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 23rd July.
Top
Share