asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries why he withdrew the consumer subsidy on cheese in view of the recognised nutritious value of this commodity; and if he took into account the likely adverse effect on cheese production which has a considerable employment content.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Cheese Subsidy.
152.
Application of the EEC Common Agricultural Policy in relation to milk and dairy products involved the termination of the subsidy. I do not accept that an adverse effect on cheese production is likely to result.
Could I ask the Minister if there was any rigorous compulsion to withdraw the subsidy? It is well-known that in each member State of the Community there exists a great many of these national aids which, while according to the letter of the EEC law, might be repugnant to EEC regulations, are, nevertheless, continued? Am I to understand that specific reference was made by the Commission in Brussels to the Irish Department of Agriculture and Fisheries to the removal of this particular subsidy?
I think Deputy Gibbons knows the position. He spoke about the letter of the law but he knows that if we were sticking to the letter of the law we would have removed this subsidy on 1st February.
My point is that there is no need on the Minister's part for the indecent haste to remove this subsidy.
The pressure to remove these subsidies is increasing very much. All the aids to agriculture are under the strictest scrutiny to ensure that there is no unfair competition as between one country and another.
All the aids have been under scrutiny for many months and none of them has been withdrawn. I am not aware of any new circumstances which would accelerate their withdrawal.
It is not right to say that there has been scrutiny for many months. It was only started recently. The Commission are only getting down to it now. Officers from my Department are in Brussels regularly.
They have been there for a considerable time.
May I ask the Minister whether the usual consultations took place between the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries and the Department of Industry and Commerce about this type of question on this occasion?
Yes. The usual consultations have taken place.
Was the Minister for Industry and Commerce fully aware of the fact that this subsidy was about to be withdrawn at the time it was withdrawn?
If the Deputy is asking me the exact timing—he was aware, of course.
He was not taken by surprise?
No, he was not taken by surprise.
Could I ask the Minister to elaborate on the position of workers in the industry and the producers of milk who find themselves caught between a refusal on the part of the Department of Industry and Commerce to increase the market price for cheese on the one hand and on the other hand the withdrawal by the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries of the production subsidy of 3½p a pound?
I understand that there is a procedural difficulty with the Prices Advisory Body. It is not in my Department and I cannot answer for it.
It is not sufficient for a Minister to say that it is not the responsibility of his Department when both his Department and the Department of Industry and Commerce are involved. The situation now leaves the workers in the cheese production industry and the milk producers for that industry without any prospect at all except a reduction in their incomes and in the production of cheese.
Probably the Deputy is over-stating the position a little. He knows that only 13 per cent of all the cheese is for the home market. Only 13 per cent would be affected by this position.
I am saying that I do not think there is any obligation on the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries to withdraw the subsidy.