Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 9 Dec 1986

Vol. 370 No. 9

Private Members' Business. - Eradication of Bovine Diseases: Motion.

Dún Laoghaire): By agreement, and notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, Members shall be called in Private Members' time this evening as follows: 7 p.m. to 7.25 p.m. Opposition speaker; 7.25 p.m. to 7.40 p.m. Opposition speaker; 7.40 p.m. to 8 p.m. Government speaker; 8 p.m. to 8.10 p.m. Government speaker; 8.10 p.m. to 8.30 p.m. Opposition speaker.

(Limerick West): I move:

That Dáil Éireann, aware of the current lack of progress in the eradication of bovine tuberculosis, condemns the Government's failure to implement the scheme in an effective manner and calls for urgent action to remedy the situation.

I always try to avoid excessive language and emotion when I speak in this House. I try, and I think I usually succeed, to be temperate in my remarks here. However, I find it difficult to be temperate when I speak about the failure, the neglect so clearly shown by this Government in their handling of the agricultural industry and in particular their handling of the scheme for the eradication of bovine TB. Any Government with a sense of responsibility towards agriculture, the main industry of this country, and their responsibility through agriculture to the whole economy could not have acted as this current administration have acted as regards the BTE scheme. Government neglect over the past four years of this scheme is, unfortunately, typical of their general attitude towards agriculture. A Government made up of many dissenting elements, as this Government clearly are, cannot give to agriculture the kind of coherent leadership and encouragement that it needs if that industry is to play its part in our economic development. The Government have shown no recognition of the importance of agriculture. There was a token recognition in their plan, Building on Reality 1985-1987— a pipe dream one might say — but that recognition died a very sudden death. There was no quick advance to give effect to the beliefs and intentions of that document. Instead, once again under this Government agriculture has been subjected to a series of swingeing cutbacks in a whole range of important schemes necessary for the development of that industry.

I am afraid the farmers have lost confidence in this Government. Farmers are fast losing confidence in their own industry. Nowhere is there better evidence of Government neglect of agriculture than in the scheme for the eradication of bovine TB. The Government are showing farmers they do not intend to do anything for that industry that they can avoid doing. One might say that avoiding doing anything avoids dissension within the two parties in Government on spending money and the allocation of money.

I warn the Minister of State that farmers at present are keeping a very close watch on developments in the BTE scheme and have every reason to do so. It has cost them a great deal of money in levies, in the eradication of reactors in their herds and in loss of income. Every farmer knows, therefore, what the consequences will be for him if reactors turn up in his herd. His normal business will be brought to a sharp stop and a receiver of sorts will be effectively put in charge of his livestock business. Of course, farmers are well aware of the lack of progress with the BTE scheme. They know there are hold-ups because of inconsistent Government funding and, at the same time, they are well aware of the levies they themselves are required to pay. How can any farmer who is waiting 12 months or more to have a normal ground test carried out on his herd have any confidence in a Government who put him in such a difficult and uncertain position?

As an example of the worries which farmers have about the scheme, I should like to mention a very large meeting held in Cavan last week at which the Minister's Department were not represented either by their political head or by an official. The meeting was attended by 600 concerned farmers, including farmers from neighbouring counties as well as from Cavan. All these men were particularly worried about the risks to their herds now being increased because of excessive and uncontrolled movement of cattle across the Border. Farmers' meeting of the same kind are being arranged in other parts of the country. Everybody knows that the uncontrolled movement of animals carries a serious risk of spreading the infection of bovine TB. I take this example of a County Cavan meeting to show the wide farmer interest and concern. I could quote many other examples to the Minister, including many from my area and county.

A few weeks ago I posed in the Dáil a question to the Minister for Agriculture about the position of a herdowner who had not had a test in the previous 12 months and who applied to the Department to have a test carried out because of his concern for the state of his herd. The Minister's reply was that such a request would be favourably considered by his Department provided — I draw attention to this — the test fitted in with the Department's programme of testing for the area or if the herd was considered to be particularly at risk. What a way to run a BTE eradication scheme which is of such importance. In other words, the normal answer to such a request would be to refuse it. That, I am sorry to say, was a very unsatisfactory answer but of course it fits in with the general neglect by the Government of this scheme. The result of this neglect is quite evident from the figures revealing the percentage of herds which show to be reactor herds. The figure for reactor herds compares unfavourably with those of the early years of this decade. The carrying out of testing has simply not been frequent enough, consistent enough, or extensive enough. Consequently residues of the disease still remaining in various parts of the country are not being tackled in a way that will eradicate the disease once and for all. There is a risk that things will get worse if effective action is not taken quickly. I would not like to give the kind of wrong impression that was given recently in the report by the Dáil Committee on Public Expenditure about the BTE scheme. That report gave a dangerously wrong impression to anyone who was not aware of the facts. Since 1954 we have been endeavouring to get rid of TB. Since then expenditure by the State in current terms would amount to about £1 billion. The scheme has dragged on and on although by now it should have been well finished. However, compared with the high level of the disease in the fifties very good progress has been made. The only way to deal effectively with the disease at this stage is to make sufficient money available to have a complete round of testing carried out without delay. The problem areas will need special attention.

Early in 1985 I as spokesman for Fianna Fáil in agriculture published a ten point plan which clearly showed how bovine TB could be dealt with once and for all. A few weeks ago the Taoiseach expressed regret that the sum of £4,500,000 would be cut off from this year's BTE programme. Regrets will not undo the damage which will be caused by this serious cutback. I can reassure the House that Fianna Fáil in office will provide sufficient funds to enable the scheme to be fully implemented and finished. Fianna Fáil will in Government, as in the past, have a proper realisation of the importance of agriculture to the economy. Agriculture depends on the soil, the climate, the people farming the land and to a large extent on our livestock. Our livestock is one of our greatest national assets. We must always be prepared to do all we can to improve its quality. No effort must be spared in carrying out the work necessary to maintain the health of our livestock to the best standards throughout the world. We have a proud record of maintaining our country free from many serious diseases such as foot and mouth disease which affects livestock in other countries. We also have a proud name for producing food in a clean and wholesome environment. We should use our good reputation to encourage our trade in agricultural products to expand so as to enhance our economy. Fianna Fáil have always indicated that when they return to Government they will enable agriculture and its industries to be properly developed. A final clearance of bovine TB is part of this policy.

Farmers are becoming more aware of the need for everybody connected with agriculture to look towards the final consumer. Nowadays farmers are anxious and fully aware of the need to deal with bovine TB. They pay a very heavy tax in the form of levies and that goes towards the cost of disease eradication. Now, as never before there is a farmer awareness and farmers are prepared to participate fully in a determined effort by Government to declare us free of bovine TB just as in the past year we have been able to declare ourselves free of brucellosis.

The report of the Committee on Public Expenditure also drew attention to the need for Government action to tackle the BTE scheme in a final way and I applaud the committee for this. The report however gave a wrong impression by implying that the BTE scheme was simply thought up to give the impression to countries importing Irish livestock products that we have such a scheme while at the same time giving the impression that a scheme did not exist at all. I am especially concerned that such reports might appear in trade journals of countries connected with meat and livestock industries here. Equally damaging in the report is the suggestion that at times reactor cattle are not taken up and slaughtered even when they proved to be reactors. This is not true. There are other mis-statements in the same report including the over hopeful suggestion about the blood test to decide whether an animal has TB. My understanding is that the prospects for such a test, currently being tested in Australia, are not as good as the report suggests. There may be some merit in it but we will have to await developments in that area.

The report also recommended that a new executive be set up to take over the work of eradicating bovine TB. I do not agree with that suggestion. Equally, I do not agree with the suggestion attributed in the report to a farmer leader, that the operation of the scheme should be taken away from the Department of Agriculture. When something is wrong we tend to take the easy way out by saying that those operating the scheme are not capable and by setting up another body to do the work. Implied is the suggestion that this new body will be successful. We should not fool ourselves about such things. Setting up an executive unit or some similar new body would be like having a dog and barking oneself. The BTE scheme to be successful must be operated by Government. This means keeping it within the control of the Department of Agriculture. To be successful there must be full co-operation between all those connected with the scheme. Fianna Fáil in Government will direct and finish the scheme effectively for the benefit of the country.

The ten point plan which I published last year is as follows: the process of bringing to court those who fail to comply with the disease eradication scheme should be speeded up because at the moment it takes too long. Severe penalties should be applied to all who infringe the BTE regulations. Veterinary surgeons identifying reactors should issue reactor permits on the spot and the animals should be sent for slaughter as soon as possible afterwards. Greater amounts of money should be spent in research to find the root cause of the disease, the type of germ, if it lives in the soil and how it spreads and there should be a more thorough follow up to research findings. Grants should be at realistic levels. There should be a movement permit for all off-farm movement with pre-movement testing to reduce the likelihood of transmission of disease in the movement of cattle. Annual testing is imperative and this is where the Government are falling down badly. All hauliers of cattle should be licensed and their vehicles should be subject to hygiene tests. There should be immediate testing of herds of farmers adjacent to affected herds as soon as reactors are identified and there should be statutory provision for the reporting of all incidents or suspected incidents of disease at time of slaughter.

At this stage, the following points need to be specifically emphasised. Reactor herds are not being retested because of inadequate funding. Adjacent herds to reactor herds are not being tested, again, because of inadequate funding. Herds are not being depopulated even when recommended by technical experts in the field, again, due to a lack of funding. Farmers strongly feel that the official attitude to the scheme lacks urgency — what a pity — because of a lack of leadership and guidance by the Government.

Farmers came up with increased contributions towards the cost of this scheme but farmer increases were met by a reduction in Government funding. As I said at the outset, I am rather temperate in my remarks. What I have said with regard to herds not being retested is factual, I have seen it on the ground. The reports I am receiving from the various local offices indicate very clearly that what I am saying is correct. Therefore, I want to say to the Minister that the results of what has been happening during the past year is because of the stop-go policy, inadequate funding, inconsistent testing and all that goes with it. The money which was spent in 1985 may not as well have been spent at all because it was money largely wasted.

The only means of eradicating this disease once and for all is to have adequate funding, consistent testing, removal of reactors and the depopulation of herds, if necessary, provided that the farmers concerned are provided with adequate funding. Our motion calls for urgent action to remedy this situation caused by the Government's failure to implement the BTE scheme effectively. The only possible action which the country can now see is the urgent removal from office of the Government so that a party can take over Government which will deal not only with the BTE scheme but with the many other difficulties which are currently besetting the country.

I am glad to have this opportunity to speak on the TB eradication scheme. I note that the Minister for Agriculture has put down an amendment to our motion which states:

That Dáil Éireann notes that, notwithstanding the constraints imposed by the budgetary situation, the Government's programme for the eradication of bovine diseases is achieving satisfactory results.

The Minister makes two points in the amendment, the first being the constraints on finance and the second that he is quite satisfied that his Department are achieving satisfactory results. I wish to take these two points and debate them in the limited time I have at my disposal.

My advice to the Minister and his Department would be to prepare properly the agricultural Estimates in advance each year. There is no sense over-estimating in certain areas and leaving money unspent at the end of the year in other areas. A clear example of this is where the Government provided in the 1986 Estimates the sum of £9.7 million under the heading of M1, section 1, farm improvement programme, aid for young farmers and the farm modernisation scheme. I put down a parliamentary question on 5 November asking the Minister the amount which had been paid out to date and I was informed in his reply that £4.578 million was the amount paid or owed at that time under this heading. I assume that all 1986 applications were processed at that time which means that £5.122 million had been unspent. This is a clear indication that the Minister's Department officials had seriously miscalculated the finance needed under this heading.

It is also obvious that the present critical financial farming situation, the lack of confidence by farmers in the future agricultural development due to reduced EC quotas and the complete lack of confidence of the farmers in the present Government were the main reasons why £5.122 million was not taken up by farmers in 1986. The Minister and his officials at the commencement of 1986 completely misread this situation. This £5.122 million could have been used to carry out a full national herd test in 1986 if the Minister and his officials had not misread the situation.

On Wednesday 12 November, I put down another parliamentary question asking the Minister, dut to the failure of his Department to pay veterinary fees due to TB testing if he thought a Supplementary Estimate for 1986 would be necessary and if he would make a statement on the matter. The reply I received was that there had been no failure by his Department to pay veterinary fees for testing and it was not anticipated that a Supplementary Estimate would be required for such payments in the coming year. I am aware of some veterinary surgeons who had to wait for payment of fees due even though the Minister is of a different opinion.

In his reply, I would like the Minister to explain why he sought a Supplementary Estimate in this House on Friday last, 5 December, for the sum of £1.3 million under the heading C.2, bovine TB scheme, because I assume that this sum is for extra expenses other than veterinary fees. If this is so, it is very strange to me. I hope the Minister and his officials are of the opinion that veterinary fees are only a small portion of the total TB eradication scheme each year. I cannot understand why there should be cutbacks in this area and no cutbacks in the administrative areas. To me, that is ridiculous. There are 800 veterinary surgeons and 1,300 administrative staff. What I would like to know from the Minister is whether all the administrative staff are engaged in the TB eradication scheme. Surely, the Minister is aware that any cutbacks in veterinary fees for testing means a huge reduction in the number of livestock tested? It is said that a 10 per cent cutback in funds could mean a cutback of up to 50 per cent in testing. It is strange that this is the area where cutbacks are being made. At the same time, the total cost of the administrative staff is withheld.

Another point is that the farmers contributed £7 million in 1985 and £14 million in 1986 through levies on the sale of beef, milk and so on towards the TB eradication scheme, yet the Minister decided to give less Exchequer revenue to the scheme. The first part of the Minister's amendment is inaccurate. There was ample money to hold a full herd test in 1986 if the Estimates had been properly drawn up at the beginning of the year. The second part of the amendment refers to the Minister's satisfaction with achievements to date. That I cannot understand.

There is a very serious situation in Longford and Westmeath. The Minister of State, Deputy Hegarty, said in the Seanad on 23 October last that at the end of the round 206 herds or 5.29 per cent of the herds in County Longford were locked up. The corresponding figures in County Westmeath were 194 herds restricted, or 4.25 per cent. Surely the Minister for Agriculture cannot state he is satisfied with the scheme in view of these statistics? The Minister of State also said that the highest allocation of funds in the country as a whole went to the Longford-Westmeath area. Other counties had to suffer as a result. In Meath there are 6,000 herds but only 3,000 herds were tested in 1986. This means that the Minister is prepared to allow reactors to move around on farms in County Meath, spreading the disease until they are tested next year. This is crazy and I hope County Meath will not end up with the same results next year as Westmeath and Longford.

The TB eradication scheme must be a national priority. There is no sense in spending taxpayers' moneys administering half schemes. There must be a long-term plan of full testing over a period of years with proper follow-up and research; otherwise in 30 years' time we will be in the same position as we are today. If we as a country do not reach the standards required under EC regulations, there is a great danger that our agricultural exports will be seriously curtailed, causing further unemployment. Even now the EC consumer is becoming cautious of buying our dairy food products.

It appears the Minister's officials are of the opinion that the scheme for the slaughtering of reactors is satisfactory. My information is otherwise. There are delays of two or three weeks from the time an animal is identified as a reactor to the issue of the movement permit and slaughtering. That is not acceptable. Surely seven days is a reasonable time within which a reactor could be slaughtered. The Minister and his officials should fully investigate the matter. There is no sense in allowing reactor animals to remain on farms spreading disease. In many cases there are unnecessary delays. The compensation payments need updating. This would certainly improve the administration of the scheme and ease the anxiety of the farmers who find themselves in this position. I suggest that a computerised register of the national herd be compiled and that all livestock be moved by permit. This would certainly reduce the costs of administration.

An executive unit to deal with bovine TB should be set up immediately with an advisory committee combining farmer and veterinary interests, to be co-funded properly by levies and the Exchequer. It is time the Department sought the advice and assistance of others to help to improve the administration of the scheme. I am sad to say that it seems at present as if the doors are locked. One thing is certain — the TB eradication scheme should have been more successful over the past 30 years. There must be a rethink. The report of the Committee on Public Expenditure on the TB eradication scheme recognises the good work done by all concerned but it recommends on the basis of debate with many people involved that the TB eradication scheme should have been more successful. Nobody in this House would disagree. There is no sense in carrying out a 1.3 national herd test in 1985 and then carrying out a half test in 1986. This is a complete waste of taxpayers' money and it is not fair to the 80 per cent of farmers who have been clear for over a decade.

The TB eradication scheme operates on a year to year basis and it is not known until the beginning of the year what the scheme will comprise in that year. On 12 November 1986 I asked the Minister for Agriculture if extra finance would be made available to carry out a full test in 1987. He stated in his reply that the 1987 TB eradication scheme was currently under consideration and it was not possible at that stage to indicate the scope of the scheme. It is a sad situation that veterinary surgeons, Department officials and the farming community still do not know today what the scheme will be for 1987. This is ridiculous and it is quite clear there must be a long-term plan of full herd testing so that everybody will know what is happening. Otherwise the scheme will continue with the results it has had to date. The scheme must be changed. It is not good enough.

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:—

"Dáil Éireann notes that, notwithstanding the constraints imposed by the Budgetary situation, the Government's programme for the eradication of bovine diseases is achieving satisfactory results."

In considering the Government's performance on bovine eradication any balanced assessment must consider not alone the TB situation but also what has happened in relation to brucellosis in recent years. At the beginning of the 1980s about 9,000 herds were restricted due to brucellosis and in 1980 alone 75,000 brucellosis reactors were removed. Today, only about 70 herds are infected and the progress made has enabled us to declare the national herd officially brucellosis free, thereby removing longstanding restrictions on exports.

There is a natural tendency for problems, however serious, to be quickly forgotten once success is in sight and it is remarkable how little we hear nowadays about brucellosis. Nevertheless, there are many farmers throughout this country who will not easily forget the ravages caused by brucellosis and will sleep easier with the thought that we have managed to bring the eradication process to its final stage and that the risk of the dreaded abortion signalling imminent ruin is now much diminished. The progress made is directly attributable to the Government's commitment to disease eradication and the particular achievements this year are due in no small part to our decisions, once we attained OBF status, to remove the limit on grant payments from the depopulation fund. This enabled many farmers with infected herds to accept the veterinary advice to depopulate. It is also a particular cause of satisfaction that, following our conclusion of a three year contract with the dairy co-operatives, we have had the fullest co-operation in reorganising the arrangements for the milk ring test which is an essential mechanism for the early and accurate identification of brucellosis. This will enable us to press ahead with our brucellosis campaign in 1987 and, while there can be no complacency in relation to the disease, it is our aim to reduce the number of infected herds by a further 50 per cent next year. So in discussing disease eradication let us acknowledge a resounding success on brucellosis.

Turning now to bovine TB, let me say, first, that I understand the concern of many people, particularly of farmers and taxpayers, at what they see as a failure to eradicate the disease despite a huge level of spending. It appears on the face of it that little progress has been made over the last ten years and the frustration that is generally felt at this situation is shared by the Minister and the Department. Unfortunately, there is a tendency to see the TB scheme in stark terms of either success or failure. The situation, however, is much more complex in reality. The TB scheme has brought about immense benefits to animals and human health and has been instrumental in safeguarding our valuable export trade in live animals and livestock products. An indication of how far we have come is that when the scheme started 30 years ago one in six animals was considered to be infected. Over the 1986 programme about one in 300 animals reacted to the test in a situation where the programme was concentrated on the herds at highest risk. We have a situation also where the level of TB lesions in clean animals, which is a very good indication of the TB situation taking a long term perspective, is, at 0.19 per cent, at its lowest level ever.

Many of the recent criticisms have been founded in the cutbacks in the scheme in 1986. I want to sketch out the background to the situation in order to put the issue in perspective. In the national plan, the Government identified the eradication of bovine disease, especially tuberculosis, as an urgent priority. A comprehensive programme was to operate over the three years 1985 to 1987 and important changes in procedure were introduced, namely farmer nomination to be replaced by direct Department of Agriculture nomination of veterinary practitioners to test; fees to be paid direct to the practitioner who carried out the test; reactor animals to be removed for slaughter within ten days.

The 1985 round of testing, which began in June 1985 and finished in April 1986, was the most comprehensive since the TB scheme began in the fifties. In addition to a full round of testing, special programmes were operated in areas with the most serious disease problems. The net effect was that the national herd was tested to the equivalent of one and a half times over a nine month period. At the end of the round in April 1986, 4,629 herds or 2.49 per cent of the national herd were restricted. The serious disease situation experienced in countries such as Clare, Cork south west, Longford, Offaly, Tipperary north and Westmeath was taken into account fully in the 1986 programme. The 1985 round was highly successful in that for the first time in several years, perhaps ever, the extent of bovine TB throughout the country was accurately identified.

The severe budgetary difficulties in 1986 only allowed for the allocation of £24.5 million for disease eradication and, despite the difficult financial situation we supplemented the allocation by a further £1.7 million, bringing in total expenditure on the schemes in 1986 to £26.2 million. In order to get the best return from the reduced funds available, resources were allocated among counties on a basis related to the disease situation and the worst affected counties got the greatest allocation of funds. In badly affected counties almost all herds were tested, while coverage was less in counties where the disease level is low. Nevertheless, over the calendar years 1985 and 1986, two full rounds of testing, at least, were carried out on the national herd and expenditure in those years was at an all-time high level. At the end of November 1986, 5,280 herds, that is a prevalence level of 2.8 per cent were restricted due to TB, at the same time in 1985, 6,917 herds that is, a prevalence level of 3.7 per cent were restricted. When account is taken of the fact that these results are based on a selective programme concentrated on the herds at highest risk, any suggestion that TB is not under control is misplaced, to say the least. The results are based on a substantial amount of testing, in other words over 90,000 herd tests have been carried out since April and a corresponding number of private tests have taken place — and on that point I should like to say that we are maintaining that position——

That is not correct.

That is the information I have and if there are any instances higher than that, I should certainly like to know about them. The normal case is six to seven days.

The Minister's information is incorrect. On a point of order, it is very misleading for the Minister to quote about 5,200 herds as restricted, when only half of that number were tested.

That is not in order.

The figures are accurate. They were issued by my Department and we can stand over them.

They are very misleading.

This relatively optimistic assessment does not mean that particular areas, e.g. parts of the Midlands, are not a cause of serious concern. A special intensive programme is currently in operation in County Longford and all possible measures are being taken to limit disease spread there. There will be no let up in our activities in the county and I am hopeful that we will shortly see a reversal of disease trends there. All in all, therefore, I feel we will look back on 1985 and 1986 as years in which the final breakthrough was made against brucellosis and, hopefully, which saw the beginning of the decisive phase in TB eradication.

We had a similar problem in my own area in Cork and in Cork south-west, but something happened there which I would like to see happening elsewhere. Everybody admits that a great deal of money has gone into this scheme, but money alone will not solve the problem. If we are to get results it will mean a partnership between a number of people — farmers, veterinary surgeons, the Department, the marts and the co-operative societies. In Cork we decided to initiate such a programme. We had a number of meetings and identified problems but there are areas where we are not making progress. For instance, it is difficult to get farmers to openly admit they have a disease problem on their farms and to get them to advise their neighbours with animals to keep away. It is also very difficult to get farmers to have disinfectant foot baths and to take proper precautions when strangers approach their farms. This is a normal precaution in the United Kingdom and in other countries, and it is a measure which will have to be implemented here if we are serious about eradicating this disease.

Do not put all the blame on the farmers.

I am not doing that, I am making a recommendation. In places like Longford I would like to see people getting together to work out a system where reactors would be transported directly to the factories. As I said, we have initiated such a programme in my county and I would like to see it tried out in other areas.

The recent report of the Dáil Committee on Public Expenditure on the TB scheme is under consideration in my Department. The central recommendation of the report, that a new scheme should be drawn up with guaranteed funding over five years and implemented by an executive agency, has many implications which will require very careful consideration. While some interests may feel that TB eradication should be removed from the sphere of central Government, the implications of any such development must be carefully assessed as any organisational changes in the scheme could have the gravest repercussions not alone from the point of view of the level of disease in the future but also of the guarantees to our trading partners. Unfortunately, some important errors appear in the report. For example, there is no basis whatsoever for the suggestion, underpinning important conclusions in the report, that my Department adjust the interpretation of tests to reflect the financial situation at any particular time. On the test itself, I would again assure herdowners that the test when properly done is fully capable of identifying reactor animals.

Despite my reservations on a number of aspects of the report which does not appear to have taken full account of the complexities of the scheme and of the initiatives being taken, for example, on the research side and on the reactor collection service, we will examine the recommendations in a constructive way.

Of course we would have liked to have spent more money on disease eradication, but it is quite easy to call for greater expenditure without having the responsibility to find the resources. We did not, of course, stand aside bemoaning our lot when we found that the financial situation would not allow us to carry out a further full round from April to December. Instead, we redoubled our efforts in the form of researching carefully where the resources could be put to best use in the form of a strategic testing programme and we set about having the maximum possible testing carried out by our veterinary inspectors. As a result of this we have been able to carry out over 5 million animal tests under the 1986 programme, and when you consider that there are about 6.4 million animals to be tested over a full round you get an idea of the considerable amount of testing activity that has taken place in recent months.

We have not of course been idle on other points either. We have overseen the introduction of a pilot reactor collection service in County Cork. I feel that this type of initiative, apart from being essential from the point of view of cutting down on the risk of disease spread, is a good illustration of how co-operative societies supported by farmer interests can play an active role in the eradication effort. I hope that the example of the Cork Co-operatives will be followed by others throughout the country, especially as eradication involves much more than expenditure. In the last analysis our efforts will stand or fall by the interest taken by farmers and their organisations both at the individual level and collectively.

The criticism that tends to be levelled at us on the research side stems I feel from a strong conviction especially on the part of farmers who become victims of bovine TB, that there should always be an immediate explanation for outbreaks and that secure remedial measures can be put in hands immediately to rid them of the disease. Unfortunately, as other countries have found, the eradication process is a hard struggle with no short cuts and there is no substitution for secure fencing, minimal contact with other herds and good nutrition. This will not, of course, guarantee against the introduction of disease but it will certainly cut down the risk. On the research side my Department, working through the TB Research Group which consists of expert veterinarians from both inside and outside the Department, are continually in touch with developments at home and abroad and have initiated and supported a number of studies on a wide range of subjects including ways of improving the detection rate in slaughtered cattle, detailed research on post-mortem findings in chronic herds, detailed studies of chronic herds, disinfectants, and the possibility of establishing an economic model for bovine TB control. The group have also looked into the possible connection between bovine TB and wildlife. As regards wildlife the investigations are only undertaken by my Department where all other possible explanations for the persistence of TB have to be ruled out. The operations are carried out with scrupulous attention to animal welfare considerations and we actively discourage any initiatives undertaken without the full approval of the Department of Fisheries, Forestry and Tourism. It is too early yet to draw any definitive conclusion from our investigations which are on a modest scale.

Another important development that took place during the course of the year was the installation of a computer system at all the district veterinary offices. While the system, which is arguably the most ambitious in the entire public sector, is still in a fledgling state it has got off the ground remarkably smoothly and I have great hopes that it will ultimately prove to be a powerful instrument in the eradication process, not least because it will enable us to introduce much tighter movement control. For the moment we are gradually building up on computer details of every animal in the national herd and our aim is to put in place a movement control permit, instead of the present identity card, in 1988. Apart from providing immediate data to management on the operational aspects of the scheme the computer will also play an essential part in enabling the district veterinary offices to put into place at short notice a strategy to cope with outbreaks of TB in their counties. Notwithstanding the cost of the new system which was well in excess of £1 million we see the move to computers as an essential investment that will pay worthwhile dividends in the years to come.

Nothing will convince some commentators but that the TB scheme is an industry for the benefit of officials and veterinary practitioners, and indeed this is a sentiment that finds an echo in the report of the Committee on Public Expenditure. It is not true, however, that over 1,300 people are employed on the scheme at a cost of £14.7 million. The real figures are of 923 people engaged full time on the scheme at a cost in salaries of about £9 million. This does not mean that we should not be constantly in search of economies and getting value for money. This is an ongoing task that will continue to be carried out. Nobody should be under any misapprehension that my Department's continued involvement in disease eradication is motivated by self-interest. On the contrary the primary consideration has been and will be the efficient discharge of a disease eradication programme that will get results. I believe that an enormous amount of good work has been done.

It is my pleasure to support the amendment. While the Minister has outlined the progress which has been made in the last number of years with regard to the bovine TB eradication scheme, all of us, including the Minister, have noted with regret that the success has not been greater. We would all like to be satisfied that the TB eradication programme is practically coming to an end but unfortunately that is not so. The reverse is the case so far as the brucellosis eradication scheme is concerned. The Minister and his Department can be proud of the success rate under that scheme.

The Minister and other speakers referred to the comments of the Committee on Public Expenditure with regard to this scheme. All of us must note those comments. Very often one got the impression from the report that the people involved in its drafting did not fully realise the drastic implications for farmers when faced with an outbreak of TB or very often did not realise the financial commitment made by farmers who contribute to the eradication of bovine TB. One could have got the impression from the report that farmers are benefitting directly from the huge expenditure down through the years. It is only fair to put on record that farmers receive only a very small percentage of the money allocated under the Vote for Agriculture for TB eradication and that is by way of compensation for reactors. It is a nominal sum by any standards but it is important to put that point on the record.

Every farmer dreads the day he will have an outbreak of TB. When that happens he is faced with tremendous financial loss. He can no longer buy and sell as he wishes, he may have to remove his breeding herd and there is a tremendous loss of milk production and of calf production. All of this has a tremendous effect on family farm income. We must consider all of those things and we must work together to try to bring about a bovine TB-free herd.

I ask the Minister to examine the possibility of carrying out greater research. The Department and successive Governments have failed to carry out sufficient research into the cause of TB and how best it can be controlled. That whole area should be examined urgently. The type of outbreak today is different from the type of outbreak of five or ten years ago. If there is an outbreak of TB in a herd today in 12 months the entire herd may be gone. That was not the case some years back. I would like to ask the Minister to have his Department carry out more research on the spread of TB and on how it crops up in a herd into which very few cattle are bought and only on the basis of a 30 day test. This area needs a lot of research and examination.

I was delighted to learn of the success with regard to testing between 1985 and 1986 and to hear that every herd had two rounds of TB testing. Very often the impression is conveyed that much of the herds have not been tested. From the Minister's speech I note the reduction in the number of restricted herds. That is a very welcome step when one considers that the testing that has taken place was in areas of high risk. It is welcome news that the percentage of herds restricted has dropped from 3.7 to 2.84.

The Minister referred at length to the partnership between the co-operative movement and the farmers in the south with regard to the brucellosis eradication programme. I assure the Minister that the farmers in the west and, I hope, the co-operative movement, will not be found wanting. He should put his total weight behind a comprehensive programme to achieve the same goal as has been achieved with regard to the brucellosis scheme. It is in our vital national interest to ensure that we reduce the level of bovine TB in our national herd.

I agree with some other points in the Minister's statement. He referred to areas with a very high incidence of TB, namely, Offaly, Westmeath and Longford. As I pointed out to the Minister for Agriculture on Thursday when speaking on the Supplementary Estimate, all of those counties border my own county. The only thing dividing us is the lordly River Shannon which, God knows, at times creates many headaches for us. On this occasion it is probably creating a barrier against the spread of disease. Nevertheless, the level of outbreak of TB in these three adjacent counties is extremely worrying for Roscommon farmers. I ask the Minister to do everything possible to ensure that the outbreaks of TB which are extremely alarming, in Longford particularly, are brought under control as speedily as possible. There is a lot of mixing of stock between the two counties. I appeal to the Minister to see what he can do in that regard.

I ask the Minister to have regard to farmers whose herds are restricted. When testing a number of cattle for sale only one beast may be found to have TB. This is an extremely difficult problem in the west as it is mostly a store cattle area. Farmers may have store cattle to sell on 1 January and they have a 30 day test to prepare those cattle for sale. If one animal fails the test, the farmer automatically faces financial ruin. He would not have the feed to keep the cattle until May or June and very often he has not the financial resources to do so. If one animal is restricted the whole herd is restricted and therefore the farmer cannot sell any of the cattle. There is compensation for reactors and there is a hardship fund but it is of no use to this farmer who finds all his assets locked up overnight through no fault of his own. There is a grave injustice being done to those farmers. It is one aspect of the disease eradication scheme that the State has not faced up to. It has a moral and a legal duty to do so. I appeal to the Minister to examine this urgently. I know farmers who face bankruptcy as a result of it. They cannot sell their cattle and they do not have any money to buy feed for them. The Minister should do something to alleviate the plight of those farmers.

I should like to support the motion tabled by my party which states:

That Dáil Éireann, aware of the current lack of progress in the eradication of bovine tuberculosis, condemns the Government's failure to implement the scheme in an effective manner and calls for urgent action to remedy the situation.

I am concerned at the terms of the amendment tabled by the Government which reads:

To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:—

"Dáil Éireann notes that, notwithstanding the constraints imposed by the Budgetary situation, the Government's programme for the eradication of bovine disease is achieving satisfactory results."

We should not fool ourselves or try to justify the very high levels of bovine TB. The number of outbreaks according to the report of the Committee of Public Accounts, had doubled in the last five years. It is time we adopted a positive approach to this problem and tackled this scourge aggressively. It is foolish to try to pretend that we have eradicated the disease. There has been a lot of criticism of State and semi-State bodies that have been baled out by the Government, and rightly so, but the cost of the animal disease eradication is greater than them all put together. A huge amount of money and time has been spent on the scheme but little progress has been made.

We should have personnel qualified to draw up a programme to eradicate the disease. We must accept that after a huge expenditure on the scheme we are still at the bottom of the EC league as far as bovine TB is concerned. Our national herd is our greatest asset and it has great potential for the creation of wealth. When we joined the European Community it was the one area we were confident of developing but many herds have been wiped out by TB down the years and milk production has dropped. Many farmers have a low milk quota because of the damage done to their herds by TB. I accept there is a need for co-operation but at the end of the day the person who suffers is the farmer who has diseased cattle removed from his land. His income is slashed when those animals are carted away on the back of a lorry. It is almost impossible for those farmers to recover.

We must agree that after 32 years little has been achieved. It is not an eradication scheme but an effort to contain the disease. We are all critical of the movement of cattle by farmers whose herds have been found to be contaminated. I can recall a meeting of farmers in my area to discuss bovine TB. They were frustrated because they could not discover the reason why it was spreading from one farm to another. We were told about contact with animals, bad fencing and water supplies but no official ever clearly identified the cause of the spread of the disease. We have heard of executive agencies or others being responsible for the administration of the scheme but I do not care who administers it if at the end of the day the results are achieved. I am not concerned if this scheme is administered by 1,300 officials or 900 officials: irrespective of the figure it is twice too many, but we need results. We have to tackle this disease immediately.

I attended a meeting of farmers in Lavey Inn last Tuesday to discuss the spread of the disease. There was a huge attendance at the meeting and many of the farmers had travelled up to 70 miles. Farmers do not travel that distance on treacherous roads in December unless they are concerned about something. I was asked at that meeting why officials of the Department who had been invited did not attend. Today I asked the Minister for Agriculture to give the reason why senior Department officials failed to attend the meeting on the eradication of bovine tuberculosis in County Cavan on Tuesday 2 December and in the course of his reply, the Minister said:

Those officials at headquarters who received invitations to the meeting were precluded from attending because of prior commitments and each of them so informed the organisers well in advance of the meeting.

While senior officials of my Department are available regularly to the farming organisations to discuss the disease eradication schemes, in the case of the many regional meetings that take place from time to time the normal practice is for my Department's local veterinary officer to attend where possible. The Superintending Veterinary Inspector for County Cavan was present at the meeting in question.

If we have 1,300 or 900 officials involved in that scheme it should have been possible to send one official to the meeting. An attendance by an official from the Department would have indicated to those present that the Department were concerned about the spread of the disease. Those present were entitled to be addressed by a Department official or to have had a statement sent to them outlining the position in the county.

In the past 32 years £1,000 million has been spent on this scheme. There is no doubt that bovine TB is the greatest drawback to agricultural development and is the cause of frustration in the farming community.

The Minister implied tonight that there is no scarcity of money. I will quote from Building on Reality covering the subject we are discussing. Section 2.51 states:

The final clearance of bovine TB from the national herd remains one of the most urgent problems facing agriculture. It is evident despite substantial cost to the Exchequer, little progress towards complete eradication has been achieved over the last few years. Faced with a situation where it is essential to get rid of the disease in order to safeguard our exports of livestock and livestock products, the Government must be satisfied that funds committed to the eradication programme in future are spent effectively. Since the present arrangements for tackling the disease have not proved effective, the Government believe that there must be radical changes in those arrangements.

According to that, the reply we got tonight is not justified. Each Deputy will go back to his own bailiwick, and I will examine returns during the past five years for the five counties in my region and compare the incidence of bovine TB in 1980-81 with the 1985-86 figures. In Cavan, the incidence was 1.73 in 1981 and it is 4.03 now, an increase of 133 per cent. In Leitrim the percentage rose from a very low figure of less than 0.50 per cent to 5.28 per cent; in Longford the percentage has risen frm 3.04 in 1984 to 5.66 per cent in 1985-86; Meath had an increase from 2.60 per cent to 3.16 per cent; Monaghan is the only county of the five which had a reduced incidence, from 2.30 per cent to 2.17 per cent, a reduction of 6 per cent; Westmeath had an incidence of 3.49 per cent in 1981 and it has increased by 86 per cent to 6.49 per cent.

I take it that the data prepared for the Minister was done on a national basis. When we go down to the regional areas we find that the picture is completely different and this is a cause of major concern. If we are thinking of national legislation we must get down to the regions to select where is the high incidence of the disease. We cannot fool ourselves by taking one area with a low incidence and saying it represents the entire country.

In Border counties there are particular difficulties in relation to bovine TB. Everybody knows there has been excessive uncontrolled movement of animals in the region, particularly in the past few months. This poses a serious risk of the spread of the infection. We can relate our incidence of the disease with that across the Border. Northern farmers are great feeders of animals, much more than we are. They have great movements of animals in the North, yet their incidence of TB was less than 1 per cent in 1969. In 1977 it rose to 2.57 per cent but it is now down to 1.6 per cent. Northern farmers are coming south to bring cattle north, but they are still able to control the disease. In the EC league we are bottom of the table — Italy and Greece are near the bottom with us. We have 17 times the incidence of Portugal and 130 times that of West Germany. Such figures bring home forcefully to us that something has to be done here urgently.

We must examine particularly the system of ear tagging. We have had examples of the switching of ear tags particularly in the past couple of months. I addressed a question to the Minister for Agriculture asking him what action he proposed to take to eliminate the possibility of false ear tags and false identification of cattle accepted at meat plants. The evidence is there to show that the system is unsatisfactory or is being worked very unsatisfactorily. In 1978, Members of the Oireachtas were invited to the IIRS who were developing a new type of tag which was supposed to be foolproof and tamper-proof. The official present was a native of my area and I said to him that if he could have a tamper-proof tag a great job would be done. Two years went by but that tag did not come on the market. I wrote to the IIRS and they said there was a flaw in that tag. Apparently that flaw is still there. They were supposed to perfect that tag but they have not done so. In the past couple of months we have had allegations of unauthorised people manufacturing tags, which are freely available. The Department must come to grips with this in a very tough way very quickly.

Another matter which caused grave concern to those at the meeting in Cavan is the levy farmers are being asked to pay, amounting to £13.7 million. The cost of veterinary fees last year was £11.2 million. Why not give the product of the levy to the veterinary officers? Let them do the job and forget the £24 million or £25 million spent on administration by 1,300 civil servants. In 1985-86 testing was at 137 per cent and cost about £4.50 per animal. This year we are spending almost the same amount of money but with the cutback of £4.5 million testing is at only 60 per cent. We cannot have reliable results when testing is down by half. A week ago I put down a question asking if a herdowner wishing to have his herd tested could be facilitated.

Debate adjourned.

We are resuming on item No. 8 which for the purposes of debate is being taken with items Nos. 9 and 20. Deputy Lenihan was in possession.

Top
Share