asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the total amount paid to the veterinary profession under disease eradication schemes for each of the past five years; and if he will make a statement on the new campaign to end bovine tuberculosis.
39.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Disease Eradication Schemes.
3.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if he will outline the mandate and powers of the bovine tuberculosis eradication board; and whether there will be a separate budget for research.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 and 39 together.
The new arrangements for the bovine TB scheme have been introduced in accordance with the Programme for National Recovery. By guaranteeing adequate funding for the disease eradication schemes in the medium term, the arrangements should ensure that a comprehensive and consistent programme is undertaken during the next few years and that the target of reducing existing levels of bovine TB by half over the new four year plan can be attained.
Central to the new arrangements will be the establishment of an executive office for disease eradication, to be headed by a national director who will be given authority to take all the necessary operational decisions in relation to the schemes. The competition for the post of director will be announced tomorrow. The director will work under the guidance of a management board comprising nominees of the main bodies concerned, that is, farmers, farmer co-operatives, veterinary surgeons, in addition to officials from my Department and the Department of Finance. The board will be involved in all the major aspects of disease eradication, that is, setting objectives, priorities and timetables for achieving them, reviewing the operation of the schemes, especially the results being achieved, on an ongoing basis, drawing up the annual disease eradication programme prior to submission to the Minister for approval, and making recommendations to the Minister on any necessary changes in legislation.
Other important elements in the new structures will be the establishment of local committees which will review progress in their areas and promote co-operation in the attainment of the schemes objectives locally. While there will not be a separate budget for research there will be close liaison between the executive office and the TB research group, a body comprising all strands of expert veterinary opinion; proposals for research will be vetted by that group and funding provided for approved projects. Important changes will be made also in the operational area with a new system of herd categorisation being introduced, guarantees to herdowners of annual testing of their herds, increases in grants and adjustments in the requirements for the TB and brucellosis pre-movement tests.
The new arrangements will be subject to review at the end of the third year of the programme, that is, March 1991, when the appropriate structures to apply from 1992 onwards will be decided. I am confident that we will be reporting significant progress at that stage. The enthusiastic response of all of the parties concerned to the new arrangements encourages me in the belief that the opportunity now provided by the Government will be fully availed of and that the target will be achieved.
Fees paid annually to private veterinary practitioners for testing under the disease eradication schemes over the past five years were as follows:—
1983 — £10.6 million; 1984 — £8.3 million; 1985 — £11.9 million; 1986 — £11.0 million; 1987 — £12.0 million.
I am not asking the Minister to say that vested interests have hampered progress in this area in the past but is he satisfied that the new structures will ensure that the scheme will go ahead without any pressures prevailing on it to prevent the implementation of a proper, regular and continuous programme of testing and the elimination of herds with disease?
One can never be satisfied absolutely in this life but I am satisfied that the new structures are the best possible to achieve the objective. I am satisfied that for the first time all the interested groups, the farmers, the veterinary profession and the taxpayers represented by the officials of my Department, will be co-operating on the pitch together. Instead of the situation which existed hitherto when vets were complaining about the Department, farmers were complaining about vets and the Government were complaining about farmers, all the players will be on the pitch wearing the same jerseys. The only opponents will be those who are not interested in achieving the objective. I am satisfied that this arrangement plus the guarantee of continued funding over four years is the best possible structure and I am confident, if not absolutely satisfied, that it will get the result.
I am not over-critical of the Minister on this issue since he has adopted most of the proposals I circulated in June last year.
The IFA circulated them.
They produced a document as well, but 90 per cent of what the Minister proposes is similar to what I circulated last June. There are still some aspects open to question. The target I set out in my policy document was to reduce over the four-year period the incidence of disease prevalence to that obtaining in Northern Ireland. I was advised that the prevalence of TB here was five times higher than in Northern Ireland.
Does the Minister think that the target he has set of having these levels over the four-year period is too modest or could more be achieved? That is the first question. The second question relates to the management board which I, in my policy document, envisaged would have a free hand in the management of the scheme. Can the Minister now tell us whether the management board will, in fact, have a full free hand in the management of the scheme and a mandate to operate it without bureaucratic interference? The third question relates to the area of research. In my policy document I wanted a high priority for research, a separate allocation of funding within the overall budget and clear responsibility to be allocated to full time research staff. In his press release the Minister said that research people would work closely with executive officers but I am worried that would not fully implement that aspect of my policy. The last point I want to touch on——
I want to dissuade the Deputy from putting a series of questions in omnibus form.
And an excellent question it is.
This is the fourth part of the question.
It is the fourth supplementary.
We now have Fine Gael policy on the record.
I should like to remind you, a Cheann Comhairle, that I have a Priority Question on this.
I appreciate that and I am anxious to facilitate the Deputy.
The fourth is the last question I want to raise.
I will not allow the Deputy to go beyond four supplementaries together.
The Minister has not touched on the question of wildlife. In my policy document I set out a policy on the problems in relation to wildlife which is quite a vexed issue but the Minister has ignored that difficult issue. Can the Minister tell us what his policy is in relation to that problem?
I am both flattered and surprised by the fact that every single group, including Fine Gael, can find in the proposals I was eventually able to bring forward proof that I was following their proposals. Fine Gael say I am adopting their proposals, the IFA say I am adopting their proposals and the House will not be surprised to learn that the ICMSA, who were also enthusiastic, say I am adopting their proposals.
You might be glad that I set the ball rolling last June.
If this is the case I wonder why one could not have done this relatively easy job long ago.
With all due respects, that is a bit ungracious.
(Interruptions.)
Order please, the Minister without interruption.
Having said that I am glad that Deputy O'Keeffe can, as he has done, endorse and support my proposals. I want to express my appreciation — and I make this comment very genuinely and sincerely — for the support which has come from all sectors for the new proposals.
With regard to the question about whether we should have gone for a more ambitious target than halving the incidence level, I would prefer to leave the implementation of this to the board and the new director within what I thought was a reasonable target. To set what might be an impossible target for them, namely the levels of incidence in Northern Ireland, over a three or four year programme, could both discourage them and give rise to some degree of frustration and dissatisfaction with the community generally if this was not achieved. The target I have set is about right and we will, of course, review it. As Deputies will appreciate, the circumstances in Northern Ireland are very different from those here. I do not want to go into all of them now but the circumstances there are very different in terms of mobility, land tenure and in a whole range of other areas.
The third point related to research. I do not think the Deputy need worry about that.
The management board.
In what sense?
The free hand of the management board.
There is no question about that. It will really be the director, under the management board, who will have responsibility for this. I want to indicate to the House — and I think everyone will agree with this — that I will remain accountable to this House and, through it, to the taxpayer for the success or otherwise of the programme. Having set up the board, there is no wish on my part to interfere with them. That would be counter-productive and I want to ensure the House that I have no intention of doing that. Apart from anything else I have enough to keep me busy.
You have 4,000 civil servants who might be happy to keep their claws in it.
I want to assure the Deputy and the House that research is going to be an essential element of a very major programme. One cannot put research into a little encapsulated, isolated area and say "That is TB and it is on its own". Research must derive from a whole body of ongoing research, from which one can draw. That is why we are using the central research unit. This will be available fully at the request of the board, on terms requested by the board, in relation to TB.
The final point related to wildlife. There are very strong feelings which I share, about the importance of our environment and wildlife. I do not want to come to the conclusion that any aspect of life, for instance, badgers, can be responsible for the spread of TB. I am not prepared to come to that conclusion. The group can study this matter and then it will be open to them to make such recommendations as are necessary. Wildlife will remain the primary responsibility of a different Minister.
Is that not evading the issue in the context of the research that is available?
Please, Deputy. I have made little progress today, three questions in 25 minutes. That is not good enough. I will hear one brief supplementary question and then I am going on to make some progress on other questions. All questions on the Order Paper are equally important to the Chair.
I will be as brief as possible. The Minister is giving fairly lengthy replies which are——
I shall hear a brief supplementary, Deputy, and no more.
I am sure the Minister will agree that there is considerable cynicism about the whole scheme. Arising out of the Minister's reply, can he say if there is a penalty system in his scheme which will ensure that this situation whereby some people have allegedly made careers out of this over a long number of years will be ended? The Minister said that £52 million was paid out to vets in the past five years. Can I ask the Minister if there is a penalty system which will ensure that there is no fraudulent use of the scheme, no fraudulent practices?
I am sure the Deputy does not mean that there is cynicism about the new proposals.
Last year.
If we learn from the mistakes of the past obviously there will be some degree of cynicism. I am satisfied that this structure will enable us to overcome that. Penalties will be a matter for the board and the director to consider among a range of things. If they make recommendations to me for statutory penalties that are different from those which are there at present I will, as I indicated in my reply, certainly give serious consideration to such recommendations.