asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he will undertake an immediate inquiry into the case of a farmer (name supplied) in County Laois who had his herd inspected and passed by a veterinary surgeon about 9th July, 1972, after which an inspector of his Department called on the farmer to say that no such inspection had been carried out; if he will take steps to correct the error made in this case by the inspector (name supplied) and to have the blue cards at present held in his office in Naas, County Kildare delivered to the farmer and to prevent such inconvenience to herd owners; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Laois Herd Inspection.
36.
At a tuberculin test of this herd on 11th February, 1972, four animals gave positive reactions. Two of the reactors were found on slaughter to have lesions of tuberculosis. The normal procedure in such cases is that the herd must pass two further tuberculin tests before it can be regarded as free of tuberculosis and the blue cards restored.
The herd was tested in July by the herd owner's veterinary surgeon. There were no reactors. An official test by a veterinary surgeon nominated by my Department was then arranged for 13th September. The herd owner was given advance notification of this but when the veterinary surgeon called the herd owner could not be located. A further official test was arranged for 27th September and on that occasion the herd owner would not allow his cattle to be tested. The herd must therefore still remain under restriction.
Might I inquire whether the Parliamentary Secretary or the Minister has investigated the fact that there was no record in the Minister's Department of the test which took place in July and that the herd owner was informed by the officer from the Naas office that no such test was carried out? The veterinary surgeon who carried out the test was available and the farmer was present when the test was being carried out. In fairness and justice this man is entitled to his blue card. Would the Parliamentary Secretary have the matter further examined in the light of the extraordinary discrepancy between what the herd owner and the veterinary surgeon say and the attitude adopted by the Department?
I think the position is quite clear. As stated in my reply, there was a herd test in July, as a result of which there were no reactors but a further test was arranged for 13th September and it is in the interests of the owner, and of everybody else, that he cooperate and have this further test in order to have his blue card returned to him.
Is it not a fact that the officer, whose name I have given to the Minister when submitting the question, informed the farmer that no such test was carried out in July and that it was because of this difference of opinion that the Department's officer and the farmer disagreed and there was a most unsatisfactory ending to this visit on the part of the officer of the Department? In the special circumstances, would the Parliamentary Secretary have this case reopened as soon as possible so as to facilitate the farmer concerned, who has a genuine grievance? Further, would the Parliamentary Secretary undertake to see that the officers of his Department are both accurate and reasonable when dealing with farmers in a matter of this kind, particularly when the farmer is right?
I will bring the Deputy's remarks to the notice of the Minister.
Thank you very much.