asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if his attention has been drawn to a report which emphasises the big difference in the price of Irish export fat cattle and beef compared to that paid in Scotland, Great Britain, and the Six Counties; and, if so, if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Irish Export Cattle and Beef Prices.
7.
I have seen a press report in this matter. The differences between the prices paid for fat cattle here in the second half of 1966 and those paid in Scotland, England and the Six Counties are attributable to a number of factors, mainly the following:
(1) The transport and marketing costs which have to be incurred by Irish exporters;
(2) Fat cattle marketed in Scotland and England comprise a higher proportion of special quality animals, including some intensively fed young beef cattle, than the fat cattle marketed here. Many of our top quality animals are, of course, exported as stores and these would be included in the price returns for fat cattle marketed in Britain.
(3) The average prices computed here cover all fat cattle but those computed in the UK cover only cattle up to the standard prescribed for the Fatstock Guarantee Scheme.
(4) In the periods of heavy supplies the bulk of the Irish beef has to be sold at large wholesale markets in Britain such as Smithfield where prices tend to be under greatest pressure, whereas a good proportion of British fat cattle is sold locally or in smaller centres where prices tend to be firmer.
(5) There is a British trade preference for home-killed beef and this has more effect on prices when supplies all round are plentiful.
(6) When markets are depressed, prices in a surplus exporting area tend to fall more than those in a deficit importing area.
The difference between prices here and prices in the Six Counties was very much less than the difference between our prices and those in England and Scotland. A higher proportion of the Six County output of fat cattle is, however, slaughtered in Britain and, therefore, benefits from the preference for home-killed beef. Also, it has been suggested that price factors played a part in some financial problems encountered in the Six County meat trade during the past year.
Is it a fact that the difference in price was as much as 40/-a cwt. for quite a long period? Furthermore, is it a fact that part four of the Minister's reply is the important part, the fact that our beef was being dumped in Smithfield and not really being marketed simply because there is no meat marketing board, or meat marketing organisation?
The Deputy is in favour of a meat marketing board?
For a long time.
I should love to hear the Deputy elaborate on that.
Is the Minister aware that in the past the variation was only from 17/- to 25/- and here it is from 42/- to 50/-? What happened to the difference?
Deputy Clinton said about 40/- but Deputy L'Estrange has added his own little bit.
The Minister will see that it has been 40/- to 52/- for the past six months. Who was pocketing the difference? The farmers were not getting it. Does the Minister believe that there should be a difference of even 40/- a cwt.?
I do not believe anything of the sort. I have given six reasons which make sense, if the Deputy reads them.
While I accept what the Minister said as being an accurate assessment of the situation, does he not agree that the paramount point is that Irish meat is being dumped on the British market when there is a surplus here and steps should be taken by the Department to see that this does not happen again?
We are taking every possible step to see that there is not a slump and if a slump occurs and if it can be said that we are sending cattle which may be subsidised before they go abroad, we should be commended for taking steps to get rid of them in some way.
Could the Minister say what exact steps he proposes to take in regard to the difficulty of dumping?
To try to find additional markets for our additional cattle.
When there is a surplus in the Dublin market, would the Minister not consider putting in a buyer to buy the cattle and hold them over for a period?
If there was only the Dublin market in question from one week to another, it would not be beyond us, but of course Dublin only reflects the position in the country.
It is more than a reflection.
Let it be what it is but it is typical of what is general. The idea of some board or agency being able to buy the cattle in order to keep up the price involves more difficulty than would appear at first sight.
Would the Minister——
This is becoming an argument. Question No.8.
May I ask the Minister a question?
I am calling Question No. 8.