Brian Cowen
Question:23 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the plans, if any, he has to retract his insistence that rotated testing must happen in relation to this year's TB eradication scheme. [14544/95]
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Bovine TB Eradication.
Kathleen Lynch
Question:28 Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the proposals, if any, he intends considering for the establishment of an alternative methodology for tuberculosis testing in cattle; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14560/95]
Hugh Byrne
Question:29 Mr. H. Byrne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry when he will put in place an effective cost-efficient bovine TB eradication scheme, including a detailed research programme to remove all infection, including TB-infected wildlife; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14402/95]
Liam Fitzgerald
Question:32 Mr. L. Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry if he intends to reduce excessive disease levies paid by farmers by at least 75 per cent with effect from 1 January 1996; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14415/95]
Robert Molloy
Question:34 Mr. Molloy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the proposals, if any, he has to produce an effective TB eradication scheme; if he intends to privatise this scheme; if he will consult the veterinary profession on the future of the scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14576/95]
Noel Ahern
Question:55 Mr. N. Ahern asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the steps, if any, he is taking to ensure that the EU offer of £4.25 million for TB testing will be drawn down; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14416/95]
Brian Cowen
Question:142 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the detailed study, if any, he has initiated into his proposed privatisation of the TB eradication scheme; the cost of such a privatisation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14692/95]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 23, 28, 29, 32, 34, 55 and 142 together.
The level of bovine tuberculosis in Ireland is low with over 99 per cent of the seven million animals in the national herd clear of the disease. The remaining incidence is essentially residual infection which has been difficult to reduce. At the same time, we must keep essential eradication arrangements in place if we are to maintain our trading status and our access to EU and third country markets. My objective is to introduce an effective programme which, while meeting that requirement, is also less costly on both taxpayers and farmers.
For 1995, I have been seeking to implement the programme that was approved for EU funding in 1994. That programme provided for an element of rotation testing between practices and drawdown of EU funding is contingent on implementing this. Following rejection by the IVU of negotiated terms, I issued phase three of the 1995 round on an area basis to seek to deliver on the terms of the approved programme and to secure EU funding. That approach was also opposed by the IVU and other arrangements had to be made to seek to implement the required level of rotated and other testing. I have recently issued phase four of the round in the normal way. It was essential to take the foregoing measures to seek to secure EU funding both for 1995 and later years and to avoid creating undue difficulties for farmers who wish to sell cattle.
I am currently having discussions with the farming organisations on revised arrangements for the scheme for 1996. These arrangements would cover, inter alia, partial decentralisation of responsibility for aspects of the scheme, more focused use of the veterinary resources available directly to the Department, greater use of technology in the programme, and more effective wildlife control. Emphasis will continue to be placed on improving the efficiency of the programme including research designed to overcome technical barriers in testing methodology so as to progress towards full eradication. It is envisaged that a restructured eradication scheme will lead to a reduction in the current level of bovine disease levies. Decisions on EU funding for the scheme in the future will be taken following discussions later in the year with Commission officials on the operation of this year's programme and on the new arrangements to be put in place for the future.
The Minister's reply confirms that his experiment failed and presumably the confrontational approach he adopted has now ended. Will rotation, which he attempted to implement without agreement, be a central feature of the restructured scheme?
My action regarding rotation testing was purely to implement an agreement I inherited that has some merit in it.
We are back to that old line, are we?
It is true. It was agreed in 1994. There is no confusion or mystery about it.
This is the greatest Government at ducking issues. The Government has been in power for a year. It is time it did something on its own and stopped blaming everyone else.
There are four priority questions and I wish to accommodate the Deputies concerned but I cannot do so if this level of interruption obtains.
The position is straightforward. We still have a chance of drawing down £4.2 million in EU funding this year. FEOGA and EU auditors will come here next year to see how many tests we rotated in 1995. I am confident that between now and the end of the year we will rotate sufficient tests. That is why the action I took, despite the intransigence of the IVU, was essential. If we do not get EU funds we face the prospect of increased levies or seeking a greater contribution from the taxpayer. The Deputy asked about the 1996 scheme.
I asked a simple question but I am getting a very long answer.
I will let the Deputy ask another question.
The Minister can answer the first question. Will rotation be a feature of the restructured scheme? The Government suffered a humiliating climb-down this week. The Minister says there is a chance of obtaining £4.2 million in funding. When he introduced rotation he said it was a prerequisite to obtaining the funds. Is it true that under the third phase only 2 per cent of the total herd was involved in the rotation testing? How does that square with the Minister's claim that two-thirds of the herd needed to be rotated in order to receive the money? The Minister embarked on a confrontational course with the IVU and sought to overturn its decision and right as a union to decide whether to accept the negotiating position. Without any strategy, the Minister has gone headlong——
A question please, Deputy.
The Minister is back in his bunker. He is forgetting about rotation and saying he will get the money anyway. It was a red herring from day one.
The position is clear. The scheme has a long history.
Forty years.
This is the fifth scheme approved by the EU. In all cases IVU intransigence prevented one penny of the money being drawn down. I was not and am not prepared to see the practitioners hold those funding the scheme — taxpayers and farmers — to ransom. I am adamant about that. I am hopeful that we will convince the Commission we were sufficiently serious to take on the IVU. The Commission has a cynical view of the veterinary role here. Rotated testing is proceeding satisfactorily under phase 3.
Two per cent of the herd.
We must move on.
Is the Minister aware that as UCC statistics are based on 74,000 herd tests there is a level of spontaneous rotation at present? It shows the private veterinary surgeon tests 53.6 per cent and between different private veterinary surgeons in the same practice, departmental veterinary surgeons, temporary veterinary surgeons and others involved in this area 47 per cent of herds have been tested. Why did the Minister not make that argument to the Commission rather than engaging in this bungling effort that alienates farmers and veterinary surgeons? The scheme is supposed to be crucial in maintaining a disease free status. It is disgraceful.
There is a gross misunderstanding. The EU Commission had a three year deal with the Irish Government based on one-third rotation. That is the basis on which we draw down money. I was not in a position to change the game in the middle of the match. I had to show my bona fides in implementing the agreement.
The Minister sought to impose his will and he has been shown to be incompetent.
The principle of rotation, where the farmer-vet link is broken, was at the insistence of officials in the Commission. I did not negotiate it. The scheme I am working on at present for 1996——
It is someone else's problem.
——will have an element of rotation, but it will be broadly different in principle from the system I inherited.
The knight on the white horse has gone back to the stable.
The hard man image has collapsed.
Another hard man gone.
It is a big fall.
The two big boys have gone to ground.