asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he will detail the progress to date of the brucellosis eradication scheme; and if he is aware of the hardship and financial loss to farmers whose cows failed the test six to 12 months ago and who now have to buy cows at an increased price.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Brucellosis Eradication Scheme.
48.
As regards the progress to date of the brucellosis eradication scheme, I would refer the Deputy to the reply to a question on the same subject asked by Deputy Enright on 29th February.
With regard to the second part of the question, I am aware that some herd owners have been hard hit because of extensive or persistent infection in their herds. My Department cannot pay more for the reactors than the market value at the time of purchase but in recent months have allowed some controlled restocking of restricted herds before they are finally cleared. Also, a subsidised loan scheme is available to owners of such herds in the clearance area to assist in the purchase of replacement animals
Is the Minister aware that the maximum price being paid all during the spring and even up to now is £140 and that to replace those animals would cost up to £200 now and, in some cases, £210? Therefore, many people are being paid about £60 less than the market value and some people who sold animals last October at, say, £100 each, will now have to pay £100 extra for each beast they purchase.
What the Deputy is saying is in conflict with the information available to me in the brief I have from the Department.
Whoever compiled the brief should read the market reports.
It says here that the Department cannot pay more for reactors than the market value at the time of purchase.
I am telling the Minister that at any market or fair today a springer can cost as much as £210.
Lest there should have been any misunderstanding regarding this question I will have it examined again.
It is the case that there is a requirement in the Act that reactors should be paid for at market value at the time they are taken away?
I am afraid the Deputy will have to ask that question next week.
It is a separate question.
It relates specifically to the question tabled.
That may be so but it is different from the question on the Order Paper.
If this is to be the position, there is no point in asking supplementaries.
Should the Minister be satisfied that the price being paid for reactors does not represent their market value, would he agree that there is an injustice being done to farmers who are losing cows and that that situation should be remedied immediately?
If the information that I have given in reply to the question should not be accurate, I would think that the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries would give the matter very serious consideration.