asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he is aware that numbers of animals are sold to the meat factories by his Department under the brucellosis eradication scheme and are in turn sold back into intervention at large profits; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Cattle Trade.
11.
No. Brucellosis reactor cattle sold by my Department to meat factories are debarred from "intervention".
I am aware that they are debarred from intervention but has the Parliamentary Secretary any actual proof that some of the brucellosis meat is not going into intervention? I have heard from various interested people that as much as 12 per cent of the brucellosis meat beef goes back into intervention, having been sold to the factories at 10p per 1b., and is now being resold at 26p per 1b.
That is an assertion that factories are engaged in fraudulent practices. If the Deputy has any information that any factory is guilty of such practice, the Department will be glad to have such information and will take appropriate action because——
How can the Parliamentary Secretary keep a straight face?
——it is illegal.
(Interruptions.)
What proof does the Parliamentary Secretary have that this beef is not going into intervention.
It is illegal to do so.
That is not the point.
If a factory is acting illegally and a Deputy has evidence of this, there is an obligation on him to communicate this information to the Department. I can assure him on the Minister's behalf that the information will be treated in the strictest confidence.
There have been many meetings between the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries and the two main organisations for the farming community. This allegation has already been made at those meetings by these organisations. Has the Minister looked into this?
The Department always look into any assertion or allegation of fraud.
Have they looked into this?
Can the Parliamentary Secretary state categorically now that he, the Minister and the Department, are perfectly satisfied that none of this brucellosis meat has or is being sold into intervention? Can he further say that any allegations of this nature which have been made before today have been thoroughly investigated by him and his Department?
Any allegation brought to the attention of the Department is thoroughly investigated.
12.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if his attention has been drawn to an article (details supplied) regarding the £20 million in excess profits which meat factories have made; if he has been urged by various interests to hold a public inquiry into these profits; and if he will agree to do so.
I have seen the Press article referred to and suggestions for a public inquiry into meat factory profits. I indicated some time ago that I was keeping an open mind on the question of an inquiry. In the meantime, the meat factories have, of course, agreed to provide funds for the issue of vouchers enabling small farmers who have difficulties in foddering young cattle this winter to purchase some cattle feed at reduced prices.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that 120 tons went into intervention before the end of December at a net profit of £160 a ton, or 7p a 1b., deadweight? Would he not consider this excess profit and hold a public inquiry into this?
In answer to the first part of the Deputy's question, I am not so aware. This question was debated at length at Question Time, on the Adjournment Debate and on a number of occasions during the last six months. Deputy Crinion promised publicly and privately to supply documentation which would help the Department when making inquiries into the allegations he made here.
I supplied that information with photographs of cattle sold. Would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that there were excess profits where factories were paying from 22p to 27p a lb. for cattle and the same meat was going into intervention at between 33p and 35p a pound?
I repeat what I and the Minister have already said: everything that can be done to ensure that the producer gets the last possible penny for his animal is being done by the Minister and the Department within the limits of their authority.
(Interruptions.)
We have listened here to allegations, which are supposed to be documented, particularly from Deputy Crinion who has not sent us those statements. He is just giving us Press cuttings, which we can read ourselves, and making general statements. There is an obligation on the Deputy, seeing that he has a great deal of correspondence to prove his point, to let us have it. The Minister is particularly mindful, on this question of beef prices——
Would the Parliamentary Secretary agree that a profit of £50 to £60 per animal is an excessive profit in the current situation? I am talking about factories making in the region of £54,000 per week per factory.
He is some socialist.
The Minister has given particular attention to this question. The Minister and officers of the Department have had discussions with meat factories. We must bear in mind that 45 per cent of the factories are farmer owned.
Nonsense. That is a cliche.
Yes, 45 per cent are co-operatives and 55 per cent are privately owned. We are at the commencement of a new year and if the returns from the various factories for 1974 indicate excessive profits we will become aware of it shortly. I do not accept it at present. Neither would the Minister accept it.
(Interruptions.)
The Parliamentary Secretary said the Minister was keeping an open mind on the position. The fact that the factories were contributing a penny per pound seemingly was used by him to justify his refusal to have a public inquiry into what is one of the greatest scandals in the meat trade in the history of this State. Is this the pay-off, the buy-out, because the Exchequer is not able to meet the voucher scheme on its own?
The Deputy knows the position so far as public inquiries are concerned. I said here on 31st October and I repeat it today that public inquiries are rarely approved in this country by any Government. If there is a case for an inquiry I have no doubt the Minister will be only too pleased to hold an inquiry. Perhaps such an inquiry would require legislation in this House. You cannot hold an inquiry loosely. We have had allegations made here without any documentation. No responsible Minister could hold an inquiry without having the necessary documentation. Any urban Deputy might as well ask the Minister for Industry and Commerce to hold an inquiry into the profits made by an O'Connell Street or a George's Street firm.
(Interruptions.)
The Chair has allowed a lot of latitude. We must have a final supplementary.
Can the Parliamentary Secretary say, speaking not just on his own behalf but on behalf of the Minister, the Department and the Government, that he is perfectly satisfied that things are above board with regard to the meat trade and have been for the last six or nine months?
I am saying on behalf of the Minister that he is, to use the term set down in the question, keeping an open mind on this question. The first time we can make assessment of the position is when we get the returns from the various factories.
And they will give you their heads on a plate like St. John the Baptist, will they not?
Question No. 13.
The profits will be concealed, as well he knows.
You must have a very poor opinion of the farmer co-operatives. I will not reflect on any group of meat processors unless I am satisfied that the reflection is warranted.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary happy that things are above board?
I should like to raise this matter on the Adjournment.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
I remember what the Deputy raised on the Adjournment in June, 1973.
13.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he is aware that the standard weight requirement for beef being sold into the EEC intervention system in this country could be lowered, resulting in tremendous financial benefit for the many thousands of small farms in the north western, western and south western parts of the country; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Beef accepted into intervention must accord with the required specifications for conformation, fleshing and fat cover and with a killing-out level of more than 50 per cent. Subject to these requirements there is no rigidity in regard to carcase weights, which are however used as general guides.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that it is a function of the Government to lay down minimum standard requirements for beef being sold into intervention to the benefit of the Irish farming community and is he aware that if the present standard weight requirement were reduced many thousands of small farmers west of the Shannon would benefit and that the specifications outlined by him in his reply would be met?
I told the Deputy that beef accepted into intervention must accord with the required specifications for conformation, fleshing and fat cover. Subject to these requirements there is no rigidity in regard to carcase weights which are, however, used as general guides. The four categories which qualify are:
Steers—very good conformation and fleshing, little fat covering.
Steers—very good to good conformation and fleshing, medium evenly distributed fat covering.
Heifers—very good to good conformation and fleshing, medium to slightly heavy evenly distributed fat covering.
Cows, cow heifers and best young cows—very good conformation and fleshing.
As can be seen no weight requirement is specified but in order to measure up to requirements which are mandatory animals must be of a certain weight and the weights set down are just guidelines.
Arising out of what the Parliamentary Secretary has said, which is grossly irrelevant to the question asked, can he say whether cows, heifers or bullocks of under 500 lbs. deadweight are eligible for intervention prices?
Provided they comply with the stipulations set down here. It is set down here quite clearly that no weight requirement is specified in the regulations.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary not aware that the grading that has gone on in the factories is purely by weight and not by any other means whatever?
Deputies
Hear, hear.
I have read out what the requirements are.
Question No. 14.
Can the Parliamentary Secretary give an assurance on behalf of the Minister that cows from 400 lbs. dead weight upwards will be eligible for intervention prices?
The only assurance I can give——
For God's sake answer the question.
——is that cows measuring up to the regulations will be eligible.
(Interruptions.)
14.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the anticipated export levels of Irish beef to Britain and the EEC in 1975.
I see no reason why the through-put of beef for export should not be as high as in 1974, when it reached a record level, but I cannot of course speculate on future market situations in particular areas during 1975.
Does the Parliamentary Secretary anticipate that there will be imports from third countries that could affect our trade with the EEC during 1975?
Of course I cannot predict what the Council of Ministers will decide or what the imports of meat to the EEC from third countries will be but it is assumed that our level of sales will be as high in 1975 as in 1974.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary state if there is any possibility of an increase to EEC countries? Practically nothing was exported to Europe in the past year.
I should like to hear the Deputy's definition of "nothing". Some 22,400 metric tonnes were exported to the EEC——
They are in cold storage in Finglas.
15.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he is prepared to issue licences for the export of calves throughout 1975.
Under the EEC system exports of any class of cattle are not subject to licensing or quantitative restriction. Only necessary veterinary requirements apply.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary say what efforts, if any, the Minister and his Department have made to get markets for calves outside the EEC countries? I am told such markets are readily available.
This is an on-going process. Marketing is very important and every effort is made to get markets for our exports in any part of the world. We are exploring the markets in different countries.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary say if it will be possible to export young calves quite freely in the coming months? Will there be any restrictions on the export of the calves?
Of course there will be restrictions. It will be necessary to comply with certain EEC regulations.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary state what are these regulations? There seems to be some confusion about the matter.
Export of calves over 14 days old to EEC member states are subject to the provisions of Directive 64/432, as amended, which include for certain ages pre-export brucellosis and TB tests. Exports of calves less than 15 days old are subject to the national veterinary requirements of member states. Export of calves to countries outside the EEC are subject to the veterinary requirements of the importing countries.
Am I correct in assuming that no obstacles will be placed in the way of those people who wish to export calves other than the requirements listed by the Parliamentary Secretary?
I am glad Fianna Fáil have changed their policy——
The Parliamentary Secretary should answer my question and get off his soap-box.
The answer is "yes". This is certainly a change-about by Fianna Fáil.
I am calling Question No. 16.
The Parliamentary Secretary should answer my question if he knows the answer.
Of course I know the answer. I have told the Deputy the answer is "yes". I am glad we have converted Fianna Fáil.
Is it the case that there will be no restrictions and no obstacles——
I have read out the restrictions for the Deputy.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary state——
The Chair has called the next question. The Chair should be obeyed by both sides of the House.
16.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the progress made to date in securing markets in the coming year for young cattle.
The bulk of our young cattle are marketed at home as replacements for mature cattle disposed of in live or dead form. With the aid of the various EEC market support measures such as beef intervention, the cattle slaughter premium, the import ban on third country beef, refunds on cattle and beef exported to third countries and the green £ arrangement, record numbers of mature cattle are being disposed of, thus enabling outlets to be created among feeders for young cattle.
In recent months, export markets for young cattle have been secured in Italy, Greece and North Africa.
Exploration of the possibilities in other markets such as the Middle East has also been going on.
The importance of ensuring adequate outlets for cattle, including young cattle, is of course being borne in mind in connection with the negotiations now in train by the EEC concerning agricultural price and market arrangements for the year 1975-76.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary be more specific? Will he tell us the value of the exports he expects will be sent to Greece and North Africa?
No, I cannot at this stage.
The Parliamentary Secretary has stated that valuable contracts have been secured.
Yes, but I cannot put a figure on them.
How does the Parliamentary Secretary know they are valuable?
I have said we are exploring markets and we have secured export markets for young cattle in Italy, Greece and North Africa.
Yes, I heard the Parliamentary Secretary's first reply. I want him to tell us how valuable are the markets he has told us he has secured in Greece and North Africa. If he says they are good he should tell us how he knows this.
I am calling the next question.
Why call the next question when this one has not been answered?
It may be that the demand in one or other of the places may not be great. The aim of the Department is to find lucrative markets even if the number required is small.
The Parliamentary Secretary is making a statement without knowing what he is talking about.
It is a factual statement.
The Parliamentary Secretary cannot back up what he has said.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary state if any of the markets will include the operation of a transport subsidy to make them profitable?
I do not think so.
It is the Dandelion Market.