asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if the British Government requested the recently announced increases in the differential at certain times of the year between the payment made to Irish meat factories under the beef and lamb export guarantee scheme and the equivalent payments made to Northern Ireland factories.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Beef and Lamb Export Scheme.
42.
As already announced, the adjustments of our beef export subsidy rates are designed to encourage a greater proportion of marketings of fat cattle in spring and early summer when export factories here are short of supplies and export market prices are best. These adjustments were not requested by the British Government.
43.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he will enumerate the assurances given to the UK Government in relation to the operation of the beef and lamb export guarantee scheme; the reasons for them; and when they were given.
44.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if his attention has been drawn to a statement in the British House of Commons on 15th July that the Irish Government had given an undertaking that no change would be made by them in the minmum differential of 1¼d per lb between the British rate of deficiency payments on carcase beef and the rates paid by the Irish Government to Irish producers under the beef export guarantee scheme; if he will comment thereon; and whether this differential was originally introduced at the request of the UK Government.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 43 and 44 together.
The recent British arrangements for imposition of levies on imports of cattle and beef and duties on imports of mutton and lamb have been the subject of consultation between my Department and the British Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food over the past year. While our carcase meat exports to the UK are excluded from these levies and duties, it is in our interests to co-operate with the British authorities to ensure that such exclusion does not lead to a disruption of British marketing arrangements. The undertakings, which we gave to the British authorities on 12th July, 1971, may be summarised as follows:
(i) If the British deficiency payments on fat cattle are reduced in any week because the average market price is below the target indicator price an equivalent reduction will be made in our rate of beef export support.
(ii) In the event of our proposing to reduce the present differential of 1¼d a lb between the Irish and British beef subsidy rates we will consult with the British Government in advance.
(iii) If at any one time (a) our beef export subsidy rate falls below 1¾d a lb——these are old pennies ——(b) a British beef import levy is in operation and (c) our exports of fat cattle rise to more than 200 head a week, we will impose an export charge on fat cattle to maintain an appropriate balance between our live and our carcase exports. The rate of this export charge will be the equivalent of the amount by which the beef export subsidy falls short of 1¾d a lb.
(iv) Our mutton and lamb export subsidy will continue to be at a rate not exceeding the British deficiency payment on fat sheep and lambs.
(v) We will not allow the import of meat or livestock from third countries to the UK through this country.
I have seen a statement of 15th July made in the British House of Commons which I take it is the one referred to. It is a fair summary of the arrangements agreed upon.
The 1¼d differential between the British rate of deficiency payments on carcase beef and the rate paid here under the beef export guarantee scheme dates from 1969 and is not a differential introduced at the behest of the British Government. The increase in the level of support payment given here in March, 1969, was 1d less than that given in Britain. The remaining ¼d is an abatement of the subsidy rate to provide funds for Córas Beostoic agus Feola.
Is the Minister aware that the effect of these arrangements is to put the southern Irish meat trade at a permanent disadvantage vis-á-vis its competitors in Northern Ireland? Would he further agree that it is almost unprecedented that we should agree to put a surcharge on our exports in certain circumstances?
No. On the contrary, I think it is to our advantage that we maintain a level supply into the British market in order to keep an even supply there so that the British market will not have to take corrective action which might have an adverse effect on our beef producers. Secondly, I do not think a combination of the circumstance of our beef subsidy rate falling below 1¾d while, at the same time, the British beef import levy in operation can, in fact, happen at all and, as the Deputy is aware, the shipments of live fats has been extremely low in recent years. The relativities between the exports of live store cattle and carcase beef is another factor which must be kept under constant consideration.
Is the Minister aware of any precedent of an agreement being made by his Department or any other to penalise Irish exports?
On the contrary, apart from any other countries shipping meat into Britain, we are not subject to the import duties as others are. Far from being penal it is an arrangement to even out the supply of Irish beef into the British market.
At the expense of the Irish farmer.
This exercise is an exercise in aid of the Irish beef producer.
Does the Minister not realise that when Ministers are asked simple questions and give long-winded answers, their purpose is obvious? The Minister is beginning to emulate his senior colleague.
Obfuscation.
If I gave a deficient answer there would be another objection.