asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the total amount and value of Irish meat and dairy products sold into intervention in the 12 months ending 30 April, 1988; if he will indicate the position for the 12 months ending 30 April, 1987; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Total Value of Irish Intervention Stocks.
11.
The total amount and value (at the prices paid at time of purchase) of Irish meat and dairy products sold into intervention for the periods referred to are as follows:—
|
Product |
12 months ended 30 April 1987 |
12 months ended 30 April 1988 |
||
|
Quantity Purchased |
Value |
Quantity Purchased |
Value |
|
|
tonnes |
£m |
tonnes |
£m |
|
|
Beef |
136,000 |
398 |
96,000 |
222 |
|
Butter |
73,848 |
175.8 |
20,372 |
50.5 |
|
Skimmed Milk Powder |
8,193 |
11.8 |
None |
Nil |
The intervention arrangements for both beef and dairy products were substantially modified in April 1987 arising from decisions taken by the Council of Ministers in December 1986. As a result intervention availability has become more restrictive in both sectors and this outlet is now being availed of to a lesser degree than in the past, especially in the case of dairy products. The continued availability of market intervention continues, however, to play an important role in underpinning market prices and in maintaining confidence in the industries concerned.
As Minister for Agriculture and Food, I have always encouraged a more market oriented approach and I am pleased to note that our reliance on intervention outlets is declining considerably. I would also remind the House that Irish cattle prices have reached record levels recently, and in recent weeks the average price has been at or above the Community average price.
Could the Minister indicate whether in his opinion the reduction of reliance on intervention in the case of beef and meat products is a result of a shorter supply or whether it is entirely as a result of better marketing? Could he indicate further the amounts of dairy and meat products sold out of intrevention in the same period and so give us some indication as to exactly how effective the whole system is at present?
In each of these cases it is almost invariably as a result of better marketing. I think shorter supply has little to do with it. Look at the amount that has been purchased. In beef it dropped from 136,000 tonnes to 96,000 tonnes, in butter from 73,848 to 20,372 tonnes and in skimmed milk powder it not only dropped, it vanished from 8,193 tonnes. That is a consequence of our processors and producers being out there in the world markets selling our products at top prices wherever they are in demand and I have encouraged them to do that wherever it is — in Germany, South America or anywhere else. I hope this trend will continue. If the same trend was evident in the rest of the EC we would not have the problem we face now in the price negotiations in relation to the amounts of beef in intervention. The experience in Ireland is not matched elsewhere. Intervention stocks are going up elsewhere, showing the market demand for their product is not quite as good, to say the least, as the market demand for ours.
What about disposal of the intervention stocks?
Such as they are, at home we are disposing of them very well. We have made arrangements, such as the one I referred to a moment ago, for special categories. I am also looking for special permission — I cannot go into detail on this yet — to use bone-in beef for further processing here, to purchase that out of intervention and to sell it. That is a delicate problem but we are working strongly on it.
Would the Minister accept that a drop in beef intervention may have been contributed to by the fact that there was a drop in slaughtering because of a shortage of supply? That might be one of the major factors affecting the situation.
If that is one of the factors, I am glad to say that, for instance, there is a drop in slaughtering of heifers and cows.
There is a much bigger drop in the number of animals.
If there is a drop in the number of three-year-old bullocks, all I have to say to the Deputy is that, whoever else can be held responsible for that, I cannot. I was not Minister three years ago when herd maintenance should have been promoted. I live with the fact that three years ago action was not taken and I cannot suddenly create a three-year-old bullock now and bring him in for slaughtering.
(Interruptions.)
If I had the power I would be a very good worker.
Would the Minister agree that the drop is also due to the plants availing of a very remunerative market in the British supermarkets and that there is ample room for an increase there? Is the slaughtering not a direct result of inactivity for a number of years when we have had continuously for four years a declining cattle herd and no remedial action was taken?
Does the Minister accept there is a problem here?
The facts of nature will demonstrate to all Deputies, particularly spokespersons for agriculture, that if there is a problem in relation to the beef herd, that problem was caused three years ago or four years ago. I cannot suddenly wave a wand and say "There is a three-year-old bullock, slaughter him" but I am going to do something about it now for three years down the line. I want to assure the House that, subject to that, the demand for our product throughout the EC is the top demand in Germany, the Netherlands, wherever you go, and we must maintain that. We will get top prices and we will shift stuff out of intervention.