Vol. 451 No. 2
16 Mr. E. Byrne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry if his attention has been drawn to recent reports indicating that efforts to eradicate tuberculosis from the national herd have made no progress; if he will amend the regulations governing the eradication scheme with a view to making it more effective; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6350/95]
114 Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the total amount of moneys spent on tuberculosis tests, subventions and eradication; if he will give a breakdown of such costs; if he will give a progress report on the eradication programme; and his views on this programme. [6554/95]
I propose taking Questions Nos. 16 and 114 together.
It is important to clarify that the level of bovine tuberculosis in Ireland is at a low level — over 99 per cent of the seven million animals in the national herd are clear of this disease. The remaining incidence is essentially residual infection. At low levels, progress in achieving further reduction in infection is generally slow. I am continuing to place emphasis on improving the efficiency of the programme including the refocusing of resources towards research designed to overcome technical barriers and so progress towards full eradication.
The net operational costs of the bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis eradication programmes at the end of 1994 was £349.5 million, details of which are included in the following table which I will circulate in the Official Report.
Costs of the TB and Brucellosis Eradication Programmes to end of 1994.
|
Expenditure |
£m |
Receipts |
£m |
|
Payment for reactors |
320.9 |
Sale of reactors |
51.9 |
|
Testing fees |
244.3 |
Disease levies |
256.3 |
|
Supplies/Services/Travel |
106.9 |
EU Conntribution |
14.4 |
|
672.1 |
322.6 |
||
|
Net Cost |
349.5 |
Because of accounting mechanisms it is not possible to readily separate the exact expenditure on bovine TB. The bulk of brucellosis testing is carried out in conjunction with TB testing and is estimated to cost annually about one sixth of the combined expenditure. It is necessary to highlight that, as recognised in an independent analysis, the bovine tuberculosis eradication scheme has been beneficial in protecting market access for our agricultural exports and that the costs involved in operating the scheme have been outweighed by the benefits.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Will he agree that the attempt to eradicate TB from the national herd is an ongoing scandal in the history of agriculture and probably runs second to the Larry Goodman episode? Will he tell the House, and perhaps allay the fears of hard pressed PAYE taxpayers, that if we are spending £60 million in an attempt to eradicate TB from the national herd why it has not been 100 per cent successful given comparative figures for other EU national herds where there has been complete eradication of TB?
In regard to the traditionally held view that the Exchequer and taxpayer is footing the bill for the TB eradication scheme, this has been only partially accurate in recent years. The position is that farmers pay two thirds of the £42 million annual operating costs of the TB and brucellosis eradication schemes by way of direct levy amounting to some £30 million annually. It is also important to recognise that the annual rounds of testing are essential to protect our trading position in beef and dairy products. We would all wish to see total eradication but we must recognise that we have a very high health status in our national herd. Nevertheless we will have to strive for total eradication. I hope we can put the mechanisms in place, with the IVU, to ensure that happens. I have asked the IVU to co-operate with me to ensure a reduction in the levels of TB and brucellosis which are low but, as the Deputy said, compared with other EU countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands — where TB has been almost eliminated — they could be considered high. While we have a high health status there is room for improvement. Certainly I will do my utmost, in co-operation with the IVU, to ensure further progress is made.
I accept that 99 per cent of the herd is TB free but, according to the Minister's figures, it will be costly to eradicate TB in the remaining 1 per cent. Given that we have been working to eradicate TB for the past 30 years, will the Minister say who he considers to be at fault for the failure to totally eradicate the disease? Does he agree that the fault lies with a number of sectors, for example, farmers who are refusing to implement some of the regulations, cowboy cattle dealers and farmers who have engaged in the notorious practice of switching herds over border lines — in the past some of these people were successfully prosecuted by the Department — and vets who can earn huge sums of money from the continuation of the programme? The taxpayer has not been given a fair return by the agricultural sector for the money spent on this programme during the past 30 years.
It may not be possible to completely eradicate TB from the cattle herd. In 1965 the Minister for Agriculture, Mr. Haughey, declared Ireland a TB free zone. The incidence of TB increased during the intervening period and in 1991 approximately 4 per cent of every 1,000 animals was infected. A number of reasons have been given for the failure to totally eradicate TB, for example, the methods of testing, the growing resistance to tuberculin and the ability of wildlife to transmit the disease to bovines. All these factors must be seriously addressed as they can contribute to the spread of TB.
I have read a number of articles on our failure to make progress in this area and I hope a deliberate effort can be made with the co-operation of the IVU and other interests to eradicate TB. The EU has offered funding of £4.5 million to assist us in our TB eradication programme contingent on agreement with the IVU on a rotation system. I hope the IVU will accept the EU Commission proposal that there should be one-third rotation in this round of testing. I hope this method will enable us to take out more reactors, thereby making the scheme more effective.
I am glad the Deputy put down this question as there is widespread concern about this among the farming population who are paying a large percentage of the operating costs of the programme. I hope we can make progress in this area during the next two years with the co-operation and agreement of the IVU.
Will the Minister agree that the charges made by Deputy Byrne that some farmers are not abiding by the regulations are totally unfounded on the basis that the biggest contributors to the scheme are farmers and that in recent years they have strongly lobbied for effective mechanisms which will completely eradicate TB from the cattle herd?
I take the Deputy's point. It is very unfair to blame farmers who are very responsible and conscious of the health status of their herds for the failure to achieve 100 per cent eradication. Some farmers have lost their livelihoods as a result of TB and brucellosis and it is not in their interests to refuse to abide by the regulations. The number of cowboy farmers or cattle dealers is exceptionally low. Most farmers have a responsible attitude to their herds and the Deputy was probably exaggering when he made his point about them.
Given the widely accepted belief that the badger plays a major role in transmitting TB to cattle, will the Minister say what action has been taken in this area and whether any vaccine for badgers has been developed?
Consideration is being given to the use of a vaccine and I understand some progress has been made in this area. One must get a licence from the Office of Public Works to kill badgers and any eradication programme must operate in conjuction with a programme to control wildlife if it is to be totally effective. If we are to have an effective programme, consideration must be given to the control of wildlife.
I agree that the vast majority of farmers are interested in the welfare of their cattle and would not do anything to threaten their health. Will the Minister agree that the cattle which were impounded were not released by Dublin inner city gangs?
I am glad the Deputy has clarified his statement and has not branded all farmers as mavericks or cowboys. As regards his second question, I do not know who was responsible.
Given that we have one of the worst records in Europe in TB eradication, will the Minister look at the programmes in other countries which have a TB free status? Our bad record in this area is causing damage to our trade. Obviously there are weaknesses within the Department and no-one should blame the farming community who are genuinely concerned about this issue.
As regards the comparison with other countries, it has been said that we have a higher incidence of TB and are taking out more reactors because we are so diligent in tackling the disease while other countries may not be so diligent. That being said, our objective must be to achieve the levels in Denmark, the Netherlands and most of Great Britain. As long as I have responsibility for the TB eradication programme I will strive relentlessly to bring our standards up to the European average.
