Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 5 Dec 1984

Vol. 354 No. 8

Private Members' Business. - Registration of Potato Growers and Potato Packers Bill, 1984: Committee and Final Stages.

SECTION 1.

(Limerick West): I move amendment No 1:

In page 2, line 20, after "State" to insert "or imported into the State".

The thinking behind our amendment is that potatoes imported into this State should be subjected to the same inspection, the same grading and packing regulations as will be introduced by the Minister under the provisions of this Bill for our own produce. On a later section we shall be moving another amendment concerning the state of origin of such potatoes.

While I can see much merit in the Deputy's amendment it poses problems for us in that we could not provide that growers and packers in other countries would be registered. Therefore a problem arises there.

In an effort to meet the Deputies point I should say that imported potatoes from whatever source or State must meet our grading standards. Certainly they would have to comply with the same grading standards as Irish potatoes. Suppose such imported potatoes emanated from Holland or some other country, if such imported potatoes are put on offer here as imported potatoes then we can actually go after the supermarket or store where they are on offer. I am sorry that we could not see our way to including this amendment. My advice is that it cannot be included in the provisions. In a subsequent amendment I may be able to meet the Deputy's point.

(Limerick West): Would the Minister consider even in cases of potatoes not subject to the regulations that such regulations would be applicable to the packers? Surely the Minister could accept an amended portion of this amendment in so far as it refers to packers.

Oh, yes, that is part of the provisions of the Bill anyway. If an Irish packer decides to pack imported potatoes and if, for instance, they are imported in bulk from the North of Ireland — I presume that is the sort of thing the Deputy has in mind — then the packer in question must be registered and the same packer could be taking potatoes from an Irish farm. In that case it will be the packer who will be held responsible for the quality of the product. That point is taken care of in the Bill. Where imported potatoes are packed in Ireland it is the packer who is held responsible.

There are two aspects of the Bill which puzzle me. On the definition of package——

We are dealing with the amendment first and will deal with the section later.

The Minister may be under the impression that the amendment refers to potatoes coming on to the market here from Northern Ireland but potatoes are also coming in through our own ports from such places as Cyprus and we are not entirely satisfied that the Bill will cover that type of importation. Can the Minister not agree to consider this amendment for a later stage?

The Deputy might think differently at the end of Committee Stage. We may be able to get around it another way.

The Minister seems to dwell on importations from Northern Ireland which are creating problems. He tells us that this problem can be resolved because when the potatoes are being packed here there will be an obligation to register. What happens when potatoes which have been packed outside the State arrive on supermarket shelves:

These potatoes arrive through a limited number of ports. We keep a close watch on the ports for many reasons. When they arrive packed it is easy to monitor quality control. Invariably they are in super quality. This is a point we must accept. We have very little to complain about. For the sake of argument, if potatoes arrive in poor quality on a supermarket shelf then the owner of the supermarket will come under the terms of the Bill.

Would the Minister accept that 60,000 tonnes of subsidised potatoes have been withdrawn from the Northern Ireland market, where a floor price is given? I am led to believe that a considerable amount of those subsidised dyed potatoes are already finding their way into markets here. Any price they obtain is a bonus because they have already received a subsidised price.

The Deputy made that point yesterday. If they are pulling the wool over the eyes of the Northern Ireland Ministry by covering the vehicle I find that strange, but if it is happening that is it. The potatoes must be packed somewhere and if the packer does not come up to the mark he will be dealt with under the terms of the Bill.

The potatoes are up to the mark but they have already been withdrawn from the Northern Ireland market. They are dyed, regraded and then find their way here. That is one of the reasons why we have asked the Minister to consider all imports.

The person who handles the potatoes referred to by Deputy Gallagher would be easily identified because he would have dye on his hands. Potatoes imported supposedly for animal feed are later sold on the market here and are causing a serious problem. There should be restrictions on imports just as our potatoes are subject to restrictions by our marketing board. The country of origin will be on the potato bags. We should impose restrictions as to quality and size on all imports.

When we reach the section relating to that matter I will have a few things to say about the country of origin.

This is an important amendment and I appeal to the Minister to give it due consideration. If we are to subject producers and those involved in the sale of potatoes to strenuous rules and permit an anomaly in regard to imports there is little point in bringing the Bill before the House. We must ensure that the same regulations apply to imports and home produced potatoes.

The same rules apply to imports and home produced potatoes.

The rules may govern imports and home produced potatoes but if they are not applied the home market may be undermined. We must protect home producers. We must ensure that the same rules apply across the board. Imported potatoes must be clearly identified. We must do all possible to preserve and improve the home market.

I will deal with the question of the country of origin when we debate the relevant section.

I hope the legislation is intended as a beginning to regularise the potato industry here. Potato imports sold on the Irish market cannot be disregarded. Any legislation must take into consideration the fact that potatoes are being imported from Cyprus and other countries. At certain times of the year those imports seriously distort the home market and that has shattered the confidence of producers. Unless the legislation reflects a desire to bring regularity to the industry by dealing with imports it will be useless.

Assuming that imported potatoes are packed and graded before they reach here, who is the responsible person or agent, apart from the unfortunate retailer, who will be subject to the penalties in the Bill? Bearing in mind that the potatoes are foreign grown and packed on whom may we visit the penalties that are rightly in the legislation?

Potatoes are imported through licensed merchants and in 95 per cent of cases they are packers. In that event they are registered. If they are not packers they will have to display their name on the sacks. Potatoes sold through retail outlets, whether imported or native, will have to carry the name of the wholesaler.

This matter comes under section 2.

I am not too sure that that is the case but my point is relevant on the section. Are we to take it that the act of importing is tantamount to producing, that the registration regulations to be laid down will apply to importation as if they were leaving a home farm or packing station? Does it follow that there is no way we can reach out and penalise foreign growers, put them out of business and stop them sending their produce here rather than saying that the importer must carry the baby? What action will the Minister take if there is, as there has been for a long time, heavy imports from the Netherlands where farmers, growers and packers have been heavily supported by various grants and aids to preserve potatoes in an almost new state for between six and nine months before flooding our market at a time when our own produce are about to be made available? In fact, those potatoes are truly being dumped, but to prove that is the problem. Those people get grants for storage and refrigeration to keep potatoes in good condition so that when they are released in March they are in the same condition as they were the previous September. The cost of energy used for this refrigeration for horticulture producers is charged at a lower rate than applies generally in the Netherlands. It amounts to a subsidy and I should like to know if there is any way the Minister for Agriculture — I would rather it was he than any other Minister — can use the legislation before us to stop the import of potatoes from the Netherlands or any other country that tries the same game? Those countries are subsidising their farmers in a round about way while our producers suffer.

With regard to third country imports, such as those from Cyprus, they are only allowed in under licence. With regard to the Netherlands, the effort we are now making started precisely because of the point Deputy Blaney made. In the winter of 1982-83 farmers in their anger dumped Dutch potatoes into the sea. We endeavoured to put that situation right. I do not have to tell the Deputy about the difficulties of being a member of the Community because he knows more about that than I do. We are in the Common Market. The extraordinary thing about the Dutch potatoes was that they were not cheap, but they were so beautifully packed and presented that those of us who worked on this legislation felt that there was only one way to cope with the Dutch and that was to beat them at their own game and to present our potatoes in an identical manner, which we are now doing. At present all our supermarkets in Dublin are presenting superb Irish potatoes.

May I ask——

I would remind the Deputy that we are only on section 1.

I know but this is Committee Stage.

We have only one hour ten minutes to complete all.

That is unfortunate particularly if you come from my area because this market has been a scandal over the years. Many people have been ruined and more people will be ruined this year and for as long as we are importing potatoes. Four years ago an EC directive required potatoes to be graded but damn all was done about it. The Dutch did something about it. They have refrigerated stores where they keep their potatoes in very good condition and they are brought here to compete with our new crop. I believe there should be a ban on imports at that time of the year because of the skulduggery that has been going on.

I remember when we supplied the Dutch with seed potatoes but now they have beaten us at our game. Our best customer for seed was the Netherlands. My county exported 40,000 tons at one time, but now we are lucky if we export 10,000 tons at a price even approaching what we got ten, 15 or 20 years ago.

(Limerick West): I appeal to the Minister to accept our amendment. The growers of imported potatoes should be subject to the same regulations as Irish growers. This market can be very vulnerable and countries can dump their potatoes here, irrespective of their quality. Surely it is not asking too much that these growers should be subject to the same regulations as our growers? Again I appeal to the Minister to accept our amendment.

All I can promise is that we will look at it but my information is that it would not comply with EC law. The only thing we can do is to insist that the potatoes will be of the same quality as our potatoes.

(Limerick West): How can the Minister insist that the potatoes will be of a certain quality? How does our amendment contravene EC regulations? We are importing these potatoes but all we are insisting is that they are of top quality.

They are top quality.

Suppose they are not?

(Limerick West): All I am asking is that foreign potato producers be subject to the same stringent regulations as our growers.

They are.

(Limerick West): In what way?

There are two types of imported potatoes. The first are the loose potatoes coming across the Border. They are packaged here and that is covered by the regulations because the person packaging is registered and he will be responsible. Secondly, there are the potatoes which are imported by well known merchants. These potatoes are already packaged and will carry the merchant's name and address so that they can be traced and the merchants or the supermarkets can be penalised if necessary.

I support the amendment. Our growers have lost a lot of confidence in various Governments down the years because EC regulations were not enforced. Perhaps the Minister could tell us why these directives were not enforced. The conditions the producers were looking for over the years should have been implemented. As Deputy Blaney said, I cannot understand why when the regulations were already there action was not taken to protect the small producers. In my county the smaller farmers grow potatoes and medium size farmers grow potatoes to supplement their dairy and beef income. Why are there not quality guidelines for imported potatoes? As all speakers on this side of the House said, it is important that the same regulations apply to imported potatoes as apply to Irish potatoes.

I see what Deputy Noonan and his colleagues are getting at but what they are saying is not logically possible. The definition of potato in this legislation allows the Minister to exercise controls under section 2 and if they are not obeyed, somebody can be in breach of section 3.

We are dealing with section 1.

Ultimately if they do not comply with that they can be liable to a criminal offence. Deputy Noonan and his colleagues seem to be suggesting that if someone in Holland is growing potatoes for sale in Ireland he should be required to register as a grower with our Department of Agriculture ——

The Deputy is not in touch with agriculture.

——and if he does not register as a grower he should be liable to a fine of £1,000 for not complying with this Bill. Those Deputies do not seem to see that, but that is the logic of what they are saying.

The Deputy is on a different subject.

The point the Minister is making is that the controls are exercised when potatoes are imported. Are the Deputies suggesting that every potato grower in Europe should register with our Department of Agriculture in case they export potatoes to Ireland? I do not see the logic of that nor can I see how that law is enforceable. If they want to make this State the laughing stock of Europe, proceed with that type of proposal.

I think the Minister has treated the Opposition Deputies very lightly. The case being made is that we are trying to put controls on the Irish grower which will not apply to imported potato growers. There will be controls on the importation of potatoes, but how can the Opposition expect us to control potato growers in Holland or anywhere else in Europe or outside the EC? I do not see the logic in this argument. The Minister deserves the applause of this House for the control he is showing in dealing with this argument because there is no logic in the proposals being made by Deputies opposite.

Applied as the Deputy said this would be ludicrous, but do not forget we have experience in the reverse direction because we have exported seed potatoes over the years, this year included. Through seed exports over the years, including this year, representatives of the State to which they are being consigned visit our ports of export before the consignment leaves and they reject or accept them before they leave the port. There are regulations in force which we know a lot about because we are affected by them. We can have potatoes inspected two or three times during their growing period. We can also have them inspected in the stores of the farmers or merchants and, if they are given the OK, they go to the port where they are to be loaded and shipped. There will be a representative inspector from the country to which they are being consigned who can reject the potatoes. We could also do this and at least it would have a slowing down effect.

If you produce a main crop of potatoes and allow them to grow to their full size, you will have a much bigger yield and the cost per tonne to the grower is very much less, if you are aided by the Government to preserve them in their newly dug state until the market begins to rise when our own potatoes are coming to an end. If they compete with our own new potatoes, clearly the new potato crop has not got a hope because the other potatoes are more mature, more uniform in size than our own potatoes and have a better appearance. The housewife goes into the supermarket or greengrocer and, although the quality may not be what she is used to, it is better than the early ones. The price does not matter at that stage. We are doing nothing about this and perhaps the Minister could assure us that there will be assistance to our growers and packers to do the same as they are doing in other countries which is wrecking our markets with financial assistance from their Governments and subsidised energy to store their potatoes in a way that turns them out six months later the same as they went in. If we had that system we could compete equally but at present there is not a hope of doing this.

It is obvious that Deputy Shatter has not an association with farming or potatoes. We are asking for the same regulations for our ware potatoes which are being exported from Derry. They have to be packed and assembled for size and there must be no mechanical damage. There are very rigid regulations and potatoes are being exported year in year out. Large potatoes such as King Edward, Arran Banners and the seed selected for the Canary Islands and Spain go to other countries also. The bags must be branded with the country of origin, the grower's certified seed number and there is also a very rigid examination at the ports. Inspectors from Israel come over to Derry every year. They empty the bags of potatoes, scrape the skins with a penknife to see if there is any sign of blight or other disease. We want rigid control on imports also.

I am still very worried about the importation of subsidised potatoes and whether it is legal under the common agricultural policy to subsidise potatoes. I am anxious to know what the Minister of State is going to do about this. While Deputy Shatter may be an expert in some fields, he did not know that there is a seed growers' register in existence since 1930 and there are strict controls as outlined by Deputy Blaney and by Deputy Leonard.

That does not arise on this section.

We have very strict regulations regarding imported seed but we are talking about ware potatoes. The merchants directly concerned and the packers are happy with the situation as it is. They questioned me pretty thoroughly and they feel that there will be adequate security in the programme which we have laid out under this legislation.

Amendment put and declared lost.
Question proposed: That section 1 stand part of the Bill."

There are two aspects in section 1 which concern me. I cannot see why in the context of package we have to define a package not merely as a bag, box, carton or container but as an envelope. Who in the Department of Agriculture envisages people sending potatoes in envelopes? Is it suggested that An Post might have a new method of raising funds by posting potatoes around the country? I have done research on this aspect of the legislation and I will not detain the House too long. I went through the Potato (Maximum Prices) Order, 1947, the Agricultural Produce Potatoes Act, 1931, and all the way back to the Potato Root Eel Worm Order, 1951. Nobody in their wisdom defined the packaging of potatoes as including putting potatoes in envelopes and I do not know what encouraged the parliamentary draftsman to include this phraseology in this section. It is the type of thing that makes us look slightly ridiculous. I defer to the Deputies opposite: maybe I am not as expert on potatoes as some of them but perhaps they can reveal the mysteries of the function of the envelope in the sale of potatoes. Perhaps the Minister can reveal the mysterious aspect of envelopes. Is an envelope a euphemism for what you put potato crisps in? I do not know but I do not see the logic in it. I suggest in all seriousness that the concept of packaging potatoes in envelopes should be deleted from the Bill. Is this a newfangled marketing concept to outsell the Dutch? If so, I do not think it will take off.

I want to make a point about the definition of potatoes which might sound funny but this legislation is a serious attempt to deal with the problem. The definition of "potato" is central to the capacity of this legislation to operate properly and is central to the powers available to the Minister in the event of people not complying with the regulations. The definition of a potato appears to be unique. The potato crop is something that is close to the hearts of everyone in this country but it is peculiar that we are not able to define the potato in a way that would make sense to anyone outside this House. A potato is said to mean a potato grown in the State, not intended for planting. Is it the potato or the person holding the potato that has to have the intention?

The Deputy is being ridiculous.

We all know that we are talking about seed potatoes. Going through the various legislative measures——

(Limerick West): On a point of order, the Bill has nothing to do with seed potatoes.

I will be brief on this matter.

There are only 50 minutes left.

I will conclude in one minute. Perhaps the Minister could tell me why we have not adopted the definitions contained in previous Acts and regulations to which I have referred? All of these define potatoes as being either seed potatoes or potatoes that are not seed potatoes. I make a prediction that if a prosecution is commenced on the basis of this legislation with potatoes defined as they are defined it will not succeed. It may seem an odd point and it may be one the Deputies will laugh at in what they regard as a serious debate but I think we have got it wrong. We are adopting a definition that will render this legislation extremely difficult to enforce if we try to enforce it. I should like some clarification from the Minister. I should have thought the Deputies opposite would have looked at earlier legislation and have suggested a different modification to the definition of potato rather than just dealing with the point they made regarding exports. The point I have made is serious and is central to the operation of the Bill.

We got the definition from the legal people. The matter has been to the Attorney General's office and I am happy with the definition we got.

Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 2.

(Limerick West): I move amendment No. 2:

In page 3, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following subsection:

"(4) If the applicant is both a grower and a packer of potatoes, the amount of the fee payable pursuant to subsection (3) (b) shall be the same as if he were either a packer of potatoes or a grower of potatoes only".

This amendment is self-explanatory. If the grower and the packer are the same person we propose that the registration fee should not be doubled.

I can respond favourably to this. There will be only one fee. However, there is no need for the amendment because we believe it is quite clear in the Bill that there will be one fee for the grower and the packer. Some 85 per cent of the people concerned are both growers and packers. There is no problem here.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

(Limerick West): I move amendment No. 3:

In page 4, subsection 7 (b), line 16, after "Minister", to insert

"and such Order, specifying the annual fee which may be prescribed pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subsection, shall be laid in draft before both Houses of the Oireachtas."

In another section it is stated that regulations shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas. Where there is a change or an increase in the registration fee the matter should be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas so that it may be discussed.

That is accepted. We think it is clear enough in the Bill that it will be laid before the House.

(Limerick West): It does not state that and we should like the Minister to accept the amendment.

I accept the spirit of the amendment and I will consider it.

(Limerick West): I am afraid that in law that is not enough. I should like to see my amendment accepted as part of the Bill.

The Minister should consider the matter of imported potatoes. These come in in large quantities and they should be on a fee basis related to tonnage rather than to the packer. Since we cannot identify the growers we will not be able to collect from a number of them.

That would be more appropriate on the section.

I thought we might get it all over together because the Minister said he agreed with the spirit of the amendment.

This is normally a ministerial function. In the event of a change in fees it is normal to lay the matter before both Houses of the Oireachtas but it may not be debated unless a Member so wishes. Many of these ministerial changes do not come before the Houses of the Oireachtas but if a Deputy so wishes he may discuss them here.

(Limerick West): That is the problem. Under section 2 we do not have that opportunity as we have under section 5 with regard to the Minister bringing in regulations. I ask the Minister to accept my amendment. We are not asking for very much in our amendment.

Either or both Houses of the Oireachtas can annual what the Minister does if they wish. For instance, if a £20 registration fee were imposed and if Deputies were not happy about it, it could be brought before the House.

(Limerick West): No, the section is quite specific. There is no reference to laying the matter before each House of the Oireachtas as is specified in section 5 in respect of the regulations.

It is covered later in the Bill.

(Limerick West): No, it is not. Is there any objection to the amendment being accepted since it is not covered?

Under section 2 (7) (a) the Minister from time to time may prescribe, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, an annual fee to be paid by registered growers and registered packers. That is the way it is normally put in this type of Bill. If the Deputy is unhappy with it at that stage, my information is that he may lay it before both House of the Oireachtas.

Is the amendment being pressed?

(Limerick West): Yes.

Is the Minister saying that the Minister can decide on the imposition of any fee, because it is not going to come before the House?

The purpose of the Bill is merely to cover the cost of registration. We are not even saying that it will be an annual business.

(Limerick West): That is not the point. I am asking are we to have an opportunity of discussing this fee?

My information is that the Deputy has an opportunity.

(Limerick West): Under what section?

When the Minister makes that regulation it can be raised under section 7 (a).

(Limerick West): Section 7 deals with the powers of authorising officers. This is something that is prescribed by the Minister under regulations made by the Minister. That is where I take issue with him. Why is there not an opportunity of discussing this in the House if the fee is being changed — and it will be changed upwards?

Fees are being changed all the time. The House would be doing nothing else but discussing various items like that every day of the week if we were to include that matter. We would be then making it obligatory, if we wanted to raise the fee by £1, that it be brought before the House.

(Limerick West): What the Minister is saying is that as the Bill stands at the moment we have an opportunity of discussing it here. Under what section?

I am told that under that particular section ——

(Limerick West): That section says that the Minister may prescribe with the consent of the Minister for Finance. That is not very clear.

It is section 2 (7). The Minister can only prescribe under regulations ——

(Limerick West): It does not say that. It says that the Minister may from time to time prescribe, but says nothing about regulations. All I am asking is that we be given an opportunity of discussing it.

We can go back again to section 1.

(Limerick West): It does not necessarily mean that we would avail of the opportunity. All that we are asking is to have that opportunity.

Take the definition of "prescribed", under section 1. "Prescribed" means prescribed by regulations made by the Minister under this Act.

The Minister is misinterpreting what we are requesting. What we are asking is that whatever fees are to be imposed would be notified and laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas.

That will be done.

We are asking the Minister to accept that amendment. If necessary, the Members of the Oireachtas may choose to debate or discuss the fees, or will accept them, as is usual procedure. All we want is that safeguard and that opportunity. It is a very simple request.

Apparently, that is the normal way of doing it. I have no hangup about this.

Perhaps this discussion might be more relevant on section 5 of the Bill. Perhaps it would be more appropriate under that section.

(Limerick West): The amendment is withdrawn.

I had a suggestion to make on it, but if it is withdrawn, it is withdrawn. The Deputy should have held on to it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Question proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill."

On this section, might I again suggest to the Minister, rather than holding him and the House up with the very limited time available for these sections and amendments in which there is a hell of a lot more than meets the eye, that the Minister could consider between now and the Final Stages the idea that since the supplies of potatoes which originate outside our jurisdiction are grown by growers who contribute nothing whatsoever by way of a registration fee, there should be a tonnage levy on these imports at the point of entry into the State? There is plenty of justification for that on the basis that the bigger packers who buy from our small farmers, each of whom will have to pay the registration fee, will be substituting for imported potatoes grown by people in other States who have not paid any registration fee to anybody. An advantage is thereby given to the imported product.

Much as I would like to do that, I do not think that I would get away with it.

I think the Minister would. What is wrong with us in many of these cases is that we do not chance our arm to see whether we would get away with it or not. If we banned the import of potatoes at times, the trouble would be over before they even caught up with us. That is what they do elsewhere.

On section 2, I would ask the Minister to elaborate more on the fee of £15 and if he would confirm that this will be a once off fee and not a yearly one. Secondly, what provision is there for the small farmer who does not actually sell his potatoes, but barters them because he would not have sufficient money to purchase provisions for his family? Would the Minister consider him a grower and would he be selling potatoes? I contend that that person should be omitted from that category in this Bill. There are many such people in rural areas who barter their potatoes for other provisions from the small shopkeepers. Could the Minister make certain provisions for those people?

There is a feeling in the potato industry on this matter of the fee, that whether it is going to be annual or not is not very clearly spelt out in this Bill. As I said on Second Stage debate last night, about 75 per cent of the producers here will grow under one acre per year. Could I suggest that the Minister would consider the possibility of the fee being related to the acreage of potatoes grown rather than the fee being demanded for each producer? The feeling is that the fees, of whatever amount might be collected, are intended by the Minister merely to cover the registration costs. Will the fees provide financial help for the promotion and marketing so sorely needed for potato products? Would the Minister consider that possibility and in his response to the requests by Deputy Gallagher and myself, consider the possibility of relating the annual fee, if it is to be annual, to the area of potatoes grown by each producer in question?

What about the foreigner? He does not pay this.

Much time was spent on this matter. I must say I favoured that system originally, but we ended up with an across the board fee of £15. It is not possible for me to say that it will be a once-off fee. People will be registering all the time. The only point that I am making is that the purpose of the money is to open the register and keep it. It is a non-profit making operation. It has been costed carefully. Deputy Gallagher raised a difficult question and dealt with whether one could call giving a few bags of potatoes in return for groceries selling. I am prepared to look at that.

I know how little the record counts for when it comes to what is in the Act. Following the trend of the Minister's statement that the registration fee levied on growers and or packers is intended to cover the cost of keeping such a register, can the Minister give us any more information on that and assure us that it will not be used as another revenue producer to the detriment of our farmers while foreign growers pay damn all?

No, it will not.

(Limerick West): It is an annual fee.

No, it may not be.

(Limerick West): It may not continue to be an annual fee?

That is right.

(Limerick West): At the moment it is an annual fee according to section 2.

Yes but it could be a zero fee.

(Limerick West): By regulation?

The figure of 90,000 for potato growers has been mentioned. Has the Minister any idea of the number of people who would normally sell potatoes?

The number of growers?

We came up with a figure of around 80,000 for people growing potatoes.

About 40,000 or 50,000 people offer potatoes for sale.

Will we still have a register of growers, as we have had for a number of years, of seed——

Yes but this Bill does not deal with seed.

They also produce ware. Will it also apply to ware?

If you take the seed out of the crop you have ware as night follows day. Will the fact that they are already registered growers carrying numbers for years but as a side product still have ware potatoes mean they come under this register?

They will.

Would we not have a situation that there would be a number for one set of bags on one side of the sorter and another number for another set of bags on the other side of the sorter for the same man on the same day?

It would only help him to identify his product.

He knows his product. There will be confusion if he has two numbers. There will be two sets of bags, two sets of printing and the two bags on the same grader, one on the left and one on the right.

Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 3.

Deputy Noonan to move amendment No. 4. When we come to amendment No. 5 we can discuss that amendment together with amendments Nos. 6 and 7.

(Limerick West): I move amendment No. 4:

In page 4, subsection (2), between lines 24 and 25, to insert the following:

"(b) the country of origin is stated on the package,".

With regard to the import of potatoes, it is reasonable to suggest that the country of origin be stated on the package or bag to ensure that the source of origin is clear to the consumer.

I have a lot of sympathy with this amendment. I am inclined to accept it. However, I advise the Deputy it may be one that we would have to do under the Food Standards Act rather than on this Bill. I accept the amendment but we will have to notify the EC to clear it. I must point out that it may not come under this Bill.

We must be clear. If the amendment is being accepted it will become part of this Bill.

Is the Minister in a position to say that what is intended by the amendment will be in another Act and will be available as early as this one might be applied?

That is something I could accept.

(Limerick West): With due respect, my amendment is to amend section 3 of this Bill. Is the Minister accepting the amendment? If not, why not?

There is some difficulty with the amendment. I am informed that it would be more in order under the Food Standards Act.

(Limerick West): We are not discussing the Food Standards Act.

Apparently that is where it would have to come.

May we have it until it is put into the other Act?

(Limerick West): Why can it not be part of this Bill? What is the objection to accepting it?

I have no objection.

(Limerick West): Then the Minister will accept it?

I must be guided by advice, and the advice I am getting is that I must be careful. This should be done by regulation under the Food Standards Act. We must notify the EC about it.

(Limerick West): Why can it not be done under this Bill?

I have already told the House about the EC obligation.

There will be so many numbers on the small bags that no one will be able to read them.

There seems to be some difficulty about accepting this amendment. We have already spoken about imported potatoes coming into the State. Surely this is a simple amendment asking for clear identification of the country of origin to be put on each pack of potatoes offered for sale. That should not have anything to do with the Food Standards Act, which has to do with hygiene and so on. We cannot be subservient to the EC. We must preserve our own identity. We must ensure our products get fair and equal treatment. If we can bring in an amendment which ensures that, there is no reason why it cannot be enshrined in legislation. It is vital that the Minister accepts this to preserve people in business and to give a clear identify to the housewife or consumer in the market place vis-à-vis the product they are purchasing whether it is home or foreign produced. Therefore we appeal to him to accept this amendment.

(Limerick West): In support of what Deputy Treacy has stated, surely we are identifying the produce of our own growers by way of number, and I ask the Minister to accept my other amendments regarding the name of the grower and producer. Surely it is only fair that the country of origin of the imported potato should be identifiable on the bag to enable the consumer to make up his or her mind.

We have thought about this. I have had it in mind, but I was ruled out at the time on the basis that the rules of origin are very complex. However, I am prepared, if given time, to examine this further and the Minister can bring it in by way of regulation.

We have no guarantee of that.

The Deputy has my word on it in this House.

We are the legislators.

I am referring now to fish. When people in this country are packing for the UK market it is obligatory on the processors here to indicate the country of origin by way of code or otherwise stamped on the cans. If it is necessary for us to do that for other countries then it is necessary for other countries to do it as far as we are concerned. If this breaks some EC rule, then the other people are breaking it, but I do not think they are. I feel they are right in asking us to do that and, conversely we should insist on this. The Minister should accept this amendment and we should not leave it to regulation.

(Limerick West): With other produce from other countries the name of the country is branded clearly on the pack or the can. Why not this in the case of potatoes?

When we were discussing the ware potato and seed potatoes it was stated that bags for export are stamped on the top with a semi-circle and the words "Republic of Ireland. Ware potatoes". That has always been a regulation of the Irish Potato Marketing Board. The grower's registration number is at the bottom in the case of the seed potatoes. That is not on the ware.

Is the amendment being pressed? I am putting the question

Will the Minister accept it?

I said that if there are not problems of implementation I am prepared to accept it, but I do not want it into the Bill until we clarify some aspects of it.

It is clear that the Minister is not accepting the amendment.

(Limerick West): It is quite clear, and the Minister should state clearly that he is not accepting the amendment. There is little point in deferring it. He cannot defer it because by order of the House the Bill must be concluded this evening. Therefore, he is either accepting or not accepting it.

I am saying that from the Chair's point of view it is clear that the Minister is not accepting it in the sense that it is not to be included in the Bill.

If the Minister is not prepared to accept it now, can he accept it on Report Stage? Are we completing the Bill tonight?

In a quarter of an hour.

There is great talk about a Buy Irish Campaign coming up to every Christmas. As Deputy Noonan said, we want to know and the consumer wants to know what is Irish. I cannot understand why the Minister of State will not accept our amendment to have the country of origin put on the packets.

The Committee and Final Stages is to be taken tonight. It is ludicrous. It is the manner in which the whole potato trade and industry has been handled over the years and it may well be due to lack of knowledge on the part of Whips who arrange this sort of time. Is there any possibility at this stage that, in the interests of the Minister, ourselves, the industry, the growers and the country, at least we try to finish Committee Stage tonight? But, of course, it would not be finished finally at this stage because there is just not time?

I must make it clear that I have an order of the House under which I must put the question at 10.30 p.m. which will conclude this Bill in toto

Totally?

It goes to the Seanad then.

It is a closure motion to get rid of it?

It was a motion agreed unanimously in the House today.

They should have given us two hours on votes tonight which may or may not have been anticipated. It is ludicrous and I think the Minister will regret it.

My information is that we must approach the Community on this. I am prepared to do that and, assuming that there are not problems, I am prepared to have it included in the Bill. That is my undertaking.

(Limerick West): So the Minister of State is accepting the amendment?

On condition that we will not have problems. I cannot say that we can put it in this evening.

(Limerick West): If we cannot put it in this evening there is little point in discussing it further. As the Ceann Comhairle has stated, the Bill must be concluded this evening.

But there are rules and regulations in the Bill.

(Limerick West): We have no guarantee that it will be included.

What I am giving is an undertaking.

(Limerick West): I suggest that the Minister of State accept our amendment, have it included as part and parcel of the Bill and then go for clearance from the EC, as other member states do.

And if necessary bring in amending legislation.

If it is not accepted, how do we take it out of the Bill?

It cannot be applied if it is not accepted.

Let me make a simple suggestion to the Minister of State in regard to accepting our amendment. I put it to him that, with all the force and authority at his disposal and all the muscle available in the Department of Agriculture, they may accept it. If they do not accept it he can bring back amending legislation to amend the Bill later on, be it next year or the year after, if we find it inoperable. Why not put it to Europe and try to help preserve what is Irish?

Let me draw the attention of the House to the fact that repeated efforts to have a common policy on potatoes have been frowned upon and thrown out by the said EC, so why the hell should we be in a tizzy as to what they think about how we handle our potatoes?

(Limerick West): Let the Minister accept it and bring in amending legislation.

If it is any help to the House, I would point out that the Bill will go to the Seanad and it can be dealt with there.

Stop the clock.

As I understand it, the Minister is not accepting this amendment.

(Limerick West): Will the Minister say that?

First of all I repeat that we were presented with an amendment this morning and I have been informed that this suggestion could be done by regulation under the Food Standards Act——

(Limerick West): We are not discussing that.

——but not under this Bill at all. It is probably more appropriate under another Act.

Not with the grading or marketing.

Because of the complexity of the rules of origin I am not in a position to say that we can put it into the Bill.

You would not think of withdrawing it?

Is the amendment withdrawn?

I am putting the question: "That the amendment be made".

Question put and declared lost.

Amendment No. 5: amendments Nos. 6 and 7 are cognate. Amendments Nos. 5, 6 and 7 to be taken together by agreement.

(Limerick West): I move amendment: No. 5:

In page 4, subsection (2) (b), line 27, after "registration number", to insert "and name".

At this late hour the Minister of State might accept both amendments. He has not accepted any amendments from this side of the House yet. All we are saying in these amendments is that in addition to the registration numbers of the grower and packer their names should be on the bag.

My concern in that regard would be that with the smaller packs, the three or five kilo packs, there would be so much information that it might not be legible. I would hope that such important details as the size, the quality and even the starch content of the potatoes would be noted on the pack. Would all this information render it impossible for us to read it? Would we have to be supplied with reading glasses?

There is nothing about glasses in the Bill.

(Limerick West): The information could be put on the bag by way of a label as is the case in other countries.

We spent a long time on this one. There was a request from the growers' representatives that we would not insist on the names being included in the information on the bags. There are a number of reasons for this. One big problem in that regard would be a number of people in the same locality bearing the same name. We considered that the registration number would be sufficient.

The feedback I get from the growers in my area is different. They consider that in order to bring some sense of regulation and sanity into the industry it would be necessary to include on the bag details of the name and address of the grower as well as the registration number. Promotion of products in the names of growers will be an integral part of the promotion of potatoes if we are to have a grip on the area of import substitution that was identified by the Minister in his opening address.

Therefore, I am asking the Minister to consider the amendment seriously. I do not see any great difficulty about the practical operation of what is being sought. In many ways this information would enhance the appearance of the bag, not to mention the convenience of being able to readily trace the origin of the potatoes. The would establish in the consumer's mind a contact with the producer.

As I have said, we listened carefully to the growers' representatives and their point was that since 85 per cent of the growers are also packers, it would not be worthwhile, for the sake of the small number who are not also packers, to include the names on the bags.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments Nos. 6 and 7 not moved.
Sections 3 and 4 agreed to.
SECTION 5.
Question proposed: "That section 5 stand part of the Bill."

Is this the section dealing with the regulations?

A question that is most important in terms of trying to retrieve the loss we have suffered on the home market is whether such details as the variety, the size and the starch content of the potatoes are to be included on the pack. Our loss on the home market has resulted from the deplorable condition in which potatoes have been packed and sold down through the years. Are we now to have grading, for instance, grades one, two or three, noted on the pack? We must have some such information so that the housewife will know what she is buying.

Details as to size and variety would be included.

Is it possible to have quality control as well as variety control? I ask the question because as we all know it is possible to find bad potatoes among those with one of the best names and good ones among those that have a bad name.

The definition of "variety" in this context varies as between one country and another. Strangely, potatoes which in the past might have been considered inferior by the housewife are now in demand. A variety such as Pentland Del, for instance, would not have been considered some years ago as suitable for the table but they are now popular. In other words, tastes are changing in that regard. Whether for better or worse, what seems to count for quality now is what the housewife decides and she will be influenced by the appearance of the produce. We must cater for that.

Sound in wind and limb, so to speak. Is it possible, under this Bill for the Minister to go a little further than what is being provided in respect of quality?

Not in this legislation. The Bill relates to registration. It does not relate to quality but anybody offering potatoes for sale will have to have the size, the grade and the variety right.

The point I am making is that even when a variety has a good name, there may be bad ones among them

Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 6.

(Limerick West): I move amendment No. 8:

In page 5, between lines 18 and 19, to insert the following:

"(2) An authorised officer appointed under subsection (1) of this section, shall not be a grower, packer or seller of potatoes within or outside the State.".

This amendment is to ensure that there will be impartiality so far as the officer is concerned and that he will not be a grower, a packer or a seller of potatoes.

Or the local TD.

I am accepting the amendment but we have had to alter the wording slightly to read:

An authorised officer appointed under subsection (1) of this section shall not be a grower or packer of potatoes for sale.

(Limerick West): The Minister is leaving out the word “seller”.

(Limerick West): What is the reason for that?

We consider that it is not necessary. There is just the correction of the wording.

(Limerick West): I suppose half a loaf is better than no bread. We will accept the Minister's amendment.

Will the Minister please read out the amendment that is being accepted.

It reads:

(2) An authorised officer appointed under subsection (1) of this section, shall not be a grower, packer or seller of potatoes for sale.

It now being 10.30 p.m. I am, in accordance with the resolution made in the Dáil this morning, putting the question: "That the Bill is hereby agreed to and is reported to the House as amended; that Fourth Stage is hereby completed, and the Bill is hereby passed."

Question put and declared carried.
Top
Share