I would like to say a few brief words on this Bill and I will not detain the House and the Minister very long. Although it might appear that this Bill is primarily or even exclusively of concern to people who might identify more closely with the agricultural sector than with an urban area, there are dimensions of it which give national concern. As our spokesman, Deputy Bruton, has already pointed out, possibly the Bill is necessary in order to give certain protection for people involved in research and development in that area, but obviously a word of caution needs to be brought into the debate in order to ensure that any tendency towards monopoly of exclusiveness with regard to proprietorial rights of ownership of genetic diversity in seeds would be guarded against. The experience of Third World countries in this regard or with regard to the exploitation which some of them have suffered from multi-national conglomerates who have abused the privileges which this type of legislation has allowed them to avail of should teach us to be very wary about legislation which is fundamentally restrictive or which would tend to curb rights to the freest possible access to the freest possible standards of enterprise or basic independence.
Therefore, this Bill has to be dealt with very gently from this point of view and with a certain amount of concern. Accordingly, an attempt must be made to underline that concern in the Bill, perhaps necessarily by way of amendment. This type of legislation under some circumstances can give undue power of an unnecessarily restrictive nature to organisations and interests whose concerns may be far removed from the concern which is at the heart of the Minister's Bill. We have access now to new insights and new experiences arising from the heightened focus of attention which Third World countries are experiencing at present and which show that many of the apparent improvements and innovations of a technological or developmental nature, often imposed from outside and often without regard to local culture or local agricultural—or even in some cases demographic— implications, can be more damaging than good. Accordingly, we must understand that this is not just simple technical legislation. It could under some circumstances be argued to embody a basic principle, that of the right of people to develop, to research, to experiment and to own the seeds of the earth which, after all, are the heritage of every man and woman regardless of nationality or colour.
I have no doubt that this House would act sensibly to ensure that these concerns would find expression in amendments if necessary which would ensure that the kind of excesses and exploitation that we are talking about would not occur. The Minister knows that some voices have been raised in opposition to a principle. They are timely in the sense that they alert us to the kind of abuses to which this sort of legislation could lead. People who spend years in this area of research are entitled to certain protection and guarantees, but we can endeavour to insist that these minimum safeguards which are seen to be necessary should never become a source of manipulation by perhaps much greater conglomerate interests than the kind of individual whose concern is at the heart of this Bill would suggest. If, for example, a situation were to be potentially possible where a virtual monopoly with regard to genetic diversity in seeds or specific of variety of seeds would allow a pricing structure to be dictated by individual companies or by a small cartel of companies, clearly it would be much to the detriment of not just the Irish grower, developer, farmer and citizen but to the interest of the whole nation.
These safeguards are not yet insinuated into the Bill as fully as some of us would like. Apart from the basic question of ensuring safeguards, there are other perhaps subordinate but, nevertheless, important elements to which it is appropriate to draw attention and I would be grateful if the Minister would refer to them in his concluding remarks. For example, what are the administrative costs of the Bill and who is to pay them? Is it those who would benefit from such an innovation who would be expected to contribute? Could these administrative costs in some cases be unhelpful to the growers whom evidently the Minister is endeavouring to protect? Would there be specific evaluation of individual cases which would allow for flexibility in relation to the administrative costs?
Also, it is important that we ensure that in our endeavour to protect the domestic situation we do not precipitate a situation which would encourage the royalties from such seeds to flow out of the country or into the coffers of large companies. It is not that we have anything in principle against large companies, but the kind of moneys to be made from intense experimentation and development in this area and their application and assignation are matters of concern, and we should be able to give reasonable estimates of the outcome of the benefits accruing from this legislation in the course of the discussion we are having here on the Bill. I understand that the Minister has not yet taken the opportunity to advert to these matters of finance which it would be appropriate to consider. Obviously, it would be less than appropriate if this House was to spend undue time in considering legislation which might do little more than give a substantial bounty or bonus to the coffers of multi-national companies far removed from these shores. These aspects of the Bill are important.
While the Minister is talking in financial terms, perhaps he might also mention if any fee which is charged in the context of this Bill will be index linked or keep pace with inflation in some other way as an analagous fee structure in the Patents Office. This does not appear to have been done.
I wish to endorse the views of our spokesman, Deputy Bruton, in this area who put our party view on the record. I simply rose to express concern that this type of legislation in some circumstances could become a weapon of exploitation rather than the enlightened law reform measure which I know the Minister wishes to have. The experience of some Third World countries clearly indicates that we have something to learn in that regard. Perhaps the Minister might do us the courtesy of commenting on the couple of points I mentioned.
