Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 16 Nov 1995

Vol. 458 No. 4

Ceisteanna—Questions. - TB Eradication Progress.

Brian Cowen

Question:

2 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the current position regarding the TB eradication programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17117/95]

Helen Keogh

Question:

20 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry if he met the representatives of the EU commission investigating the TB eradication scheme during their visit to Ireland; the conclusions, if any, which have been communicated to him or his Department; the nature and consequences of any such conclusions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17050/95]

Brian Cowen

Question:

22 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the plans, if any, he has to curb costs in view of the fact that £20 million out of £64 million being spent by his Department on animal disease eradication is spent internally on administration and is the only component of the scheme's cost rising above the rate of inflation. [16993/95]

Ivor Callely

Question:

25 Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the scheme measures available to a farmer when his herd is hit by TB, particularly when there is severe loss over a relatively short period of time and where there has been no TB in the area for a prolonged period; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16927/95]

Michael McDowell

Question:

36 Mr. M. McDowell asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the research which is being undertaken on the role of infected wildlife in the spread of bovine TB; the annual spending by his Department and TEAGASC on such research; and the results of such research. [17049/95]

I propose taking Questions Nos. 2, 20, 22, 25 and 36 together.

The 1995 TB testing programme is proceeding satisfactorily, with about eight million animal tests completed out of a planned ten million tests. The objective is to complete a full monitor of all herds as well as to undertake any consequential testing from reactor breakdowns.

My objective for the future is to introduce an effective programme which, while meeting that requirement, is also less costly on both taxpayers and farmers and to seek to develop technology to finally earadicate TB. Work on this programme is well advanced and I hope to publish it on Wednesday. I am, therefore, not in a position to comment in detail at this stage.

The level of bovine tuberculosis in Ireland is low with more than 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 control arrangements in place if we are to maintain our trading status and our access to EU and Third Country markets.

In the context of a request for funding in respect of Ireland's programme for 1996, the EU Commission recently sent a mission to Ireland. I met the mission representatives on Friday last and impressed on them the need for a positive recommendation to the Commission in relation to providing funding for the 1995 TB programme particularly in recognition both of the degree of rotation achieved and the efforts made to implement the approved programme. I also stressed the importance of having EU support for the efforts now being made to introduce revised arrangements from 1996 onwards. The mission has not given its conclusions on the visit; instead, it will draw up a report which will be taken into account in considering the provision of funding for the 1995 programme and for later years.

The £20.3 million current administration costs of the national scheme is comprised of the salary, superannuation and office/laboratory accommodation costs of my Department's administrative, veterinary, technical, research and laboratory staff. The actual number of staff involved has fallen by 15 per cent over the past seven years. On putting a new scheme regime in place, I am prepared in the context of the strategic management initiative and reorganisation to have an assessment undertaken by an independent consultancy firm into the staffing levels and other resources required to deliver the agreed programme from 1996 onwards.

In relation to compensation, my Department operates a scheme of grants which supplement the slaughter value of reactors and is designed to bridge the difference between the slaughter price and the cost of an equivalent average commercial replacement animal. In addition, herdowners whose herds are depopulated totally or partially in the interests of disease control may also qualify for depopulation grants and income supplement.

It is now widely recognised from research to date that badgers can play a significant role in the transmission of bovine TB to cattle. Given the difficulties in adequately preventing TB spread by badgers with currently available methods, substantial resources and efforts have been assigned to the development and delivery of vaccines for use on the badger population. A submission for funding for a TB vaccine development project in collaboration with other countries was submitted to the European Commission in April of this year. In addition there are eight separate ongoing research projects quantifying the role of wildlife funded by my Department at a cost of approximately £500,000 per annum. It is envisaged that this scientific research will continue for the foreseeable future.

Will the Minister outline the position regarding the involvement of the veterinary profession in any scheme he may introduce in the future? There is deep concern about the attempt by the Minister to break the farmer-vet link. On a television programme earlier this week, he mentioned privatising the scheme. What would be the up front costs of privatisation? How will he ensure the testing takes place? What evidence does the Minister have that "soft tests" have taken place up to now? All the evidence points to the contrary, based on departmental spot testing carried out this year.

I intended to consult the veterinary union once we agreed detailed proposals with the funders of the scheme, that is, the Department of Finance, on behalf of the taxpayers and the farm organisations which pay considerable levies through milk and slaughter premia payments. Those discussions are due to culminate next week and I will be happy to send the Deputy a copy of the proposals.

The main focus of the annual round will be to switch from a position where the Department organises the test, commissions it through the DVO and pays for it. Farmers will be obliged, within phasing arrangements, to carry out the test and pay for it. However, there will be a substantial reduction in the levies, which will be greater than the cost of doing the text. The vet-farmer link will be such that the farmer can select his own vet in conjunction with DVO. Those tests will not be rotated.

Will the Minister confirm that the level of rotation testing achieved this year was not higher than 2 or 3 per cent of the national herd? Was this the basis of the Minister's statement that he sought to convince the Commission of the degree of rotation achieved? The third and fourth phases represent only 10 per cent of the national herd and even if one took the most optimistic estimate of the Department, that 20 per cent of those phases were rotated, it means that 2 or 3 per cent of the national herd was rotated. I again ask the Minister to outline the up front costs of the privatisation proposal. How is the Minister seeking to eliminate the administrative costs of the existing scheme, which represents over 34 per cent of its cost?

The level of rotation in 1995 is primarily related to the third phase which is proceeding. A number of vets are co-operating and PVPs have been hired to do it. The decision on whether we will qualify for EU funding, notwithstanding the IVU's effective boycott of the scheme, will depend on an audit by EU officials that is likely to take place next spring. However, it is our view, despite the IR difficulties we faced, that we deserve EU funding for proceeding unilaterally in 1995. There is a separate scheme for next year. In relation to savings on administration——

What percentage of the herd? What is the current estimate?

Each day goes by and more tests are rotated. The final picture will only emerge when I make a decision on the fifth and sixth phases regarding whether I wish to rotate those as well as the third phase.

What is the current estimate?

It is far too early to indicate the eventual outcome.

What is the current estimate? The Minister will not tell me.

The Deputy asked about the cost of privatising the scheme.

The Deputy must allow the Minister to reply in his own fashion and without constant interruption.

I asked about the estimate.

I will answer all the questions.

The Deputy should listen to the reply.

The Deputy asked about the cost of the annual round under a privatised scheme. It is estimated that the annual round costs approximately £14 million, which farmers must pay if the scheme goes ahead.

I am concerned about the administration costs. A study is being done as part of an ongoing review. I will be happy to implement its recommendations. However, in all circumstances, the administration costs will be borne by the Department and not by the farmers.

For the third time, what is the Department's current estimate regarding the number of cattle involved in rotation testing this year? Will the Minister confirm it is not more than 3 per cent of the national herd?

I do not have an exact figure with me, but I would have thought it was somewhat in excess of that.

By how much?

Whatever the figure, I am satisfied phase three will be rotated along the lines I set out. I await a decision on other phases. I have released phase four and phases five and six could still be rotated. I have at all times valiantly attempted to implement a scheme I inherited. I am not entirely critical of the scheme but the IVU decided to boycott it and effectively jeopardise the EU funds. I have moved on to a different scheme for 1996 but our bona fides have been established by the efforts we made in hiring outside people and persisting with it in the face of a dispute. The money sought from the EU should be paid.

Top
Share