Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 3 Jul 1996

Vol. 468 No. 1

Private Members' Business. - An Bord Bia (Amendment) Bill, 1996 [ Seanad ]: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Mr. E. O'Keeffe

Consumers are always right and it is important that they have confidence in the beef product. Red meat is very important in our diet because of its high protein level and it is essential that the quality is of the highest standard.

Some years ago under the Abattoirs Act we got rid of the small village butcher. We wanted to improve the quality of meat and ensure higher standards of hygiene but in doing so we handed the business over to the large processors and got rid of the village butcher who sold good quality fresh meat with a good flavour. If the flavour is not right, then the meat is not right. I urge the Minister to look again at the Abbatoirs Act. I am aware of what is proposed in EU directives but Spain and England did not implement the directive in this area in its totality. A report in a UK newspaper stated that that country got a derogation from that directive. The village butcher was very concerned about his consumers with whom he had a more personal relationship than the large processor. He was only interested in killing the best animals and selling the highest quality product.

In addition to the changes which have taken place on the European front, many changes on the home scene in recent years have helped destroy the quality of our beef. I sympathise with the Minister of State who is doing a good job. He has been sent in on many occasions to save the day for the Government. I am not praising him because I am friendly with him but because I admire him for the good job he is doing. I do not know how long he will be in this position but I will not try to destroy him while he is there.

Feed compounders in Europe must list the ingredients used by them either on the packaging or the invoice. It is very important that the ingredients of the food given to ruminant animals are known and that there is greater contact between the consumer, processor and primary producer. It is not unknown for consumer representatives to visit producers' premises. For example, suppliers in the South regularly bring the representatives of a large Northern multiple to the farms where the animals come from so that they can see for themselves what kind of product they are selling to their customers. We cannot ignore this trend which is the only way of restoring confidence in the product and increasing consumption to its original level.

It is also necessary to reduce the age profile so that animals are slaughtered when they are younger. The days when 12-year-old or culled cows were slaughtered are long past and we are now entering an era when cattle of little more than two years will be slaughtered. This will ensure a better and higher quality product which is more consumer-oriented. The Department must work progressively in that direction. In other countries the ingredients used in feed compounds are listed on the packaging or invoice and I do not understand the resistance by producers here to doing this. By listing the ingredients people know what was fed to the cattle which were slaughtered. I ask the Minister to use his influence to ensure that this is done here.

Farm examinations will become a reality as consumers become more interested in what is happening. Marks & Spencer, one of the flagships of the UK retailing industry, buys its beef from a corps of suppliers and knows the farms from which it comes. I understand that Tesco, Sainbury's and Safeways, the other three major multiples in the UK, operate on a similar basis. It must be remembered that the UK, which has a market of 57-60 million people and is on our doorstep, is not self-sufficient in food. We will be subject to similar scrutiny. While the perception is that all Irish beef is grass fed, this is not altogether true.

Because of seasonality and difficult winters we are dependent on other feedstuffs. Identification and the source of the feed is vitally important. The only people who can provide such identification are the feed compounders. We are entering a new scene. If we are to gain consumer confidence as an export oriented country, exporting practically all we produce in the beef area, we will have to adhere to strict rules and disciplines and adopt an open approach to the business. I have referred to the four largest multiples in the UK, one of which already has such disciplines while the other three are working towards putting them in place. Many of our large Irish food processors are exporting to the UK and supplying those multiples. If we do not gain consumer confidence and if the Department does not give leadership Irish farming is doomed.

I wish An Bord Bia every success. It must be seen to be a consumer-oriented organisation. All organisations involved in the promotion of food products will have to change their direction. There will have to be greater emphasis on promotion rather than on marketing. We have been advised that in the European context there will be larger groupings in the food area. Promotion rather than centralised marketing is the answer. There is a strong case for the ingredients of animal feedstuffs to be made known to the multiple which buys the product so that the consumer can be informed where it came from. In that way we will gain consumer confidence and our food industry will become the envy of the world. As an island country we have lost much in the past ten or 11 years because of our liberal approach. We failed to protect what we had but we have learnt our lesson. The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry has a major role to play in giving leadership and regaining our position. We could be the food flagship of the western world.

Mr. Nolan

I fail to understand why within 12 months any Government should have to introduce a second An Bord Bia (Amendment) Bill. On 27 June 1995 we debated an amendment to the principal Act and within a year we are debating another small addition. Why was this proposed change not implemented last year when the 1995 Bill was introduced?

The debate has been rightly used by a number of Deputies to outline the concerns and the crisis in the beef industry. It is worth recalling a statement issued by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry on 20 January 1995 at the Green Week food fair in Berlin. He was referring to our food industry and the decline in demand for beef in Germany by 12 per cent in 1994. He said:

The problem in Germany is merely a temporary little setback because of the BSE scare... Our controls and the quality of our food in Europe are such that the Germans will be well able to differentiate our beef from British beef.

Recent events have shown that consumers on the Continent and worldwide have not been able to differentiate between Irish and British beef. This has caused outrage to a number of beef producers. Since 20 March when the famous House of Commons statement was made it has been all downhill for a number of our beef producers and processors. Whether we like it or not, consumer perceptions will determine the market for Irish beef and world beef. We must be aware of their concerns and fears.

I compliment An Bord Bia on what it has been trying to achieve. In an efficient manner it has tried to counteract some of the fears and concerns of the consumer. Because it is a market-led industry it is important that An Bord Bia, as the marketing agency for Irish food products, should be leading the way. I compliment it on its recent HORIZONS food fair in the RDS which could compare favourably with any in the world. It was its first food fair and I had the pleasure of being present with our spokesperson on agriculture. I was surprised at the standards attained and the quality and presentation of Irish food. International buyers were equally impressed by the standards of presentation.

While BSE has created problems for the Irish food sector, a problem that should not be overlooked is the strength of the Irish punt in relation to sterling. While it has remained at between £1.02 and £1.03 against sterling it has created ongoing problems for a number of our food producers. The weakness in sterling has caused problems for a number of companies. This Government has not granted assistance where it is needed. In an industry where Irish manufacturing costs are 5 per cent above their UK competitors it is difficult for companies to compete on export markets when the punt is trading at or above parity with sterling. The exchange rate between the punt and sterling is a crucial factor in maintaining the competitiveness of the Irish agri-food business. It affects exporters who are trading in the UK market and in other European and world markets as their competitive edge is compromised because the UK competitors are at a distinct advantage. It also has the double effect of making English agricultural products more competitive in the Irish market. The present weak state of sterling is making it very difficult for Irish food exporters to maintain market share. The effect is serious and is threatening employment in this important labour intensive sector.

The Government must acknowledge the contribution of the food industry to the economy because of its output, value and low import content. The only thing which is saving many companies trading in today's economic climate is the fact that interest rates are remaining low, otherwise we would have serious problems in our food manufacturing industry. The food industry has a major role to play in our economy and this should not be lost sight of by the Minister and the Government.

Food companies will have to think more as customers do rather than as producers. In the past producers have thought of themselves as producers only. They will now have to see what the customer wants and produce goods at a price and, more importantly, at a standard which the customer needs. The professional approach of An Bord Bia in marketing Irish food products is to be complimented.

The obvious solution to the problems associated with the fluctuations in the currency exchange rate is the creation of a single currency with all European countries involved. However, recent evidence suggests that this goal is a long way off and is further complicated by the fact that Britain is becoming cooler by the day to the single currency idea. Indeed, it has negotiated an "opt-out" provision in relation to this proposal. It is the only viable long-term solution to our problems and would give Irish businesses involved in the export market some stability so that they can plan on a medium to long-term basis. Over 40 per cent of our exports go to the UK and any changes occurring in the exchange rate between the punt and sterling have an effect on trade with our near neighbours.

The problem is exacerbated when one considers that 75 per cent of our food exports go to the UK. These amounted to more than £1.4 billion last year, not an insignificant amount. We currently supply almost 11 per cent of Britain's annual food imports. Our exporters should be complimented on the market share they have secured in the United Kingdom. Apart from the UK, and to a lesser extent Germany, the European consumer associates Ireland with the production of first class alcoholic drinks, such as Guinness, beer and Jameson whiskey rather than a main producer in the food sector. We should not be fooled by our green image, many continental consumers do not hold that image of us.

Our food companies are relatively small compared to some of their international competitors. If our food is to find its way to the shelves and tables of more world markets, producers will have to seriously consider options such as alliances, partnerships and the production of branded products for major multinational food companies. A number of companies have taken that route in the past few years.

Given the challenges that face our food industry following CAP reform and GATT and the need for our food producers to compete successfully on the world market, it is appropriate that we have set up a single agency to deal with the marketing of our food and drink products. In its short time in existence, An Bord Bia has made a good start in this area. In the past 12 months it has held discussions with more than 100 retailers across the European Union. Most major supermarkets have been contacted by An Bord Bia and it has made more than 112 presentations to potential customers here and throughout Europe. If we are to succeed, we must continue to encourage and cajole foreign multinationals, the big players in the retail food market, to locate here. It is not good enough for us to know we have a quality product, we must convince the big players in the world market, particularly in Europe.

Much lip service has been paid to the horticulture industry, but its only success has been the production and marketing of mushrooms. We have failed to properly market field vegetables, such as apples and soft fruits. An Bord Bia should examine the improvements that can be made in the production and presentation of such vegetables. With the co-operation of producers, processors and marketing companies, field vegetables can achieve the success of the mushroom sector. Tomatoes and lettuce could be produced in abundance, with a market on our doorstep, but we have failed to take advantage of that opportunity. We must tackle the major structural problems that hinder the processing and marketing of our horticultural produce. While the most important market for such products is the fresh market, there are great opportunities for onward processing. I compliment the Minister of State, Deputy Deenihan, on his work in this area, but we are disappointed the Government failed to appoint a Minister or Minister of State with responsibility for the food industry.

A number of Irish companies have spent approximately £1.2 billion on acquisitions in the past seven years. As part of a large international group we have access to larger markets and international methods of doing business. We could piggyback on the success of multinational and international companies. If Irish companies are serious about competing in world markets, they have no option but to join forces with large multinational food giants. We urgently need to improve our international and brand marketing. If our food industry is to prosper and grow it must diversify from low margin commodity products, such as beef and dairying which are in surplus, and move into value added downstream processing.

The Government stands indicted for not appointing a Minister with responsibility for the food industry. Since 1987 a Minister of State has been responsible for this important sector and, while it is universally accepted that the primary responsibility of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry is to the farming sector, it is increasingly acknowledged that the food industry needs political clout at national and European levels. The Minister cannot serve two masters. I ask him to reconsider the possibility of appointing a Minister with responsibility for food.

I was pleased the Minister stated that up to £640 million, supported by EU and Government funding, will be invested in the food industry in the period up to 1999. This will result in an increase in output of 25 per cent to £12 billion and an increase in exports from £4.3 billion to £7 billion. This displays a confidence in our food industry, despite the difficulties in An Bord Bia. As a market led economy we must promote our food industry if we are to survive. We can compete successfully with the giants on the international stage, but to do so our food industry needs the support and encouragement of the Government and its agencies.

Mr. H. Byrne

I welcome the Bill, but I agree with Deputy Cowen that it is an inadequate and belated response to a crisis in the food industry by a Minister who set out to promote himself rather than agriculture. The Minister of State, Deputy Deenihan, appears to have been wheeled in to deliver the bad news. The Minister contributed to very few important debates in the House in recent times.

I compliment the Minister of State, Deputy Deenihan, for facing the music. The situation in agriculture is disastrous, particularly in the beef industry. Is the Department, the Minister of State or the Minister aware of the levels of disgust and disappointment in the farming and food industries?

I join my colleague, Deputy Nolan, our party's spokesman on food, in expressing my disappointment that there is not a Minister of State with special responsibility for food. I know it is the Minister of State's area when it suits, but when any announcements are made it is not in his area. We see this every other day.

From time to time I have been castigated by the Minister of State for attacking my constituency colleague, the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, Deputy Yates. I do not attack him for the sake of it. I tell him precisely what I hear in County Wexford which has a proud farming tradition.

The Minister has an interest in agriculture having been born on a farm. Unfortunately, however, he is in Government with Democratic Left. I am disappointed not to see any of that party's Members here this evening.

Mr. Deenihan

The Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, was here earlier.

Mr. H. Byrne

Even if they were here, they would certainly not support the Government's stance because they have always displayed an arrogant disregard for the farming community. Whether it is through convenience or otherwise, they forget that many jobs depend on the farming community. On every occasion we have had a debate on agriculture, Democratic Left opposed farming and the agriculture industry in general.

The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry is constrained in making proposals to the EU, although I do not know whether that will be affected under the Irish Presidency. When the Minister is in Europe seeking compensation, price increases or extra quotas he is reminded that he is in Government with a party opposed to the Common Agricultural Policy. That is not helpful when it comes to securing a reasonable deal for agriculture. Democratic Left and Labour, which is not inclined to support the agricultural community either, should be told clearly that agriculture is not just about farming. Some 40 per cent of the population is directly or indirectly involved in the agriculture industry, whether in farming or in food and other associated industries. Agriculture is our biggest industry and is likely to remain so for the forseeable future. Any money that comes in through the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry or his successor must be welcomed.

As the Minister of State knows, a farmer spends money building, buying materials — including fertiliser and feed — hiring contractors, buying machinery, haulage and other overheads. It is a very big industry which deserves the support of the Government, not just one party in it. I know the Minister is spancelled but he must shake that off in the interests of the agriculture industry.

While the Bill is welcome, the Government has taken a casual approach to the issue. Last November when export refunds were lowered it had a disastrous effect on the beef industry. During Question Time last week, the Minister of State said we had been told export refunds would be reduced as time went on because of the GATT. We were told by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry on the same occasion that there would not be a fall in cattle prices as a consequence of lowering export refunds. That proved to be very inaccurate as well as being disastrous for farmers who bought in cattle on the basis that the Minister, Deputy Yates, would hardly mislead them. I do not suggest he misled them intentionally but he totally misread the indication, as plain as the nose on his face, that this would happen. He was badly advised and it caused a desperate situation which required corrective measures which were not taken.

On 20 March 1996 the situation was considerably exacerbated by the announcement in the House of Commons concerning a possible link between BSE and CJD; something that has not yet been proved. That caused a loss of confidence among European consumers and, consequently, caused beef prices to plummet still further. The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry was very slow to react to the announcement in the House of Commons. It was evident there was a serious problem with BSE in Great Britain. Although there was a problem in this country, it was a very small one.

The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry waited to see which way the wind would blow before he made a decision but he should have been out and about dissociating our industry from Britain's. Because of the Minister's dilly-dallying, and because he feared he might make a political mistake, Irish and British beef were regarded as one and the same throughout Europe. The delay in reacting was the greatest mistake.

I as a beef producer and many such producers take pride in our industry and in the quality of our beef. Beef producers work morning, noon and night to keep BSE and every other disease away from their herds. On this occasion, however, we were sadly let down by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry with whom the buck stops. He should have shown leadership but no such leadership was demonstrated on that occasion. One cannot afford to wait in such a situation. If, like everybody involved in agriculture, the Minister had confidence in the industry, he would have succeeded. The beef industry has lost the confidence of the consumer. At times matters seemed to improve and then they disimproved; the graph rose and fell. On many occasions since 20 March Fianna Fáil asked that a concerted effort be made to regain the confidence of the consumer in Irish beef, but today we got a token response.

It is important that a representative of consumer groups is included on the board of An Bord Bia. I hope that will go some way to correct the difficulties facing farmers, not only now but in the coming winter. We need to restore confidence. Will the Minister say what precisely the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry has done to restore confidence? Is this his only response to that request? Is he aware that confidence is so low that the consumption of beef has dropped substantially? He does not appear to be, if he was he would promote our beef. The suggestion that he is in Russia is not good enough, PR exercises have very little effect. Everybody, particularly farmers, are aware that the Minister's PR machine is the most important part of his portfolio, and that is not good enough.

I am anxious that, even at this late stage, the Minister would try to regain the confidence of the European markets on the basis that we have a very strong case. Every beef producer is proud of the quality of our meat and everything possible is done to dissociate ourselves from Britain in that regard. However, during the debate in Europe in recent months Britain took the high ground. All the talk was about British beef, BSE in Britain and how it affected that country. Despite the fact that we did not cause the problem and that beef is more important to this country than to any other economy in the EU, we were unable to get the matter on the agenda. We had a strong case, yet since 20 March we had to stand back in the queue and let Britain hog the limelight. Our case was so strong and the quality of our meat so good that the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry should have ensured that the Irish problem was dealt with in the first instance. There will probably always be a relationship between the two countries, but if the Minister had a conviction about the quality of our meat, the matter would have been on the agenda earlier.

However, that time has passed, we can do nothing about it now, but we can do something about the future. The Minister probably has more interest in the agricultural scene than in self-promotion and I ask him, even at this stage, to encourage the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry to save this sinking ship, because it can be saved.

We are facing into a winter of discontent. In 1974 farmers who went to the marts to sell calves found in some instances when they returned to their cars there were calves in their trailers which other people did not want. Not £1 was paid for a calf at that time. I predict that will happen again this winter unless a genuine effort is made to resolve the problem. This proposal is a tiny but token start to that process.

Our beef industry is very important not only to farmers but to the nation in terms of exports and wealth generation. If the farmer, who is no different from any other business person, is not paid a reasonable price for his product he will not produce it. To break even, a beef finisher must make about £1.05 per pound, but with the price of cattle at 88p per pound, the farmer is losing hand over fist. It is estimated that in some instances they are losing £200 per head, and the response by way of compensation is £50 per head. I accept it is a short-term measure and that farmers cannot be bailed out with compensation, but the beef industry can be bailed out by promoting our beef. Unless that is done we will not solve the problem. If the consumer is not on our side we will not win. There is little point producing a product that no one will buy and, therefore, it is vitally important that the consumer is on our side.

I hope the person appointed to the board is a member of a consumer group, a person who knows the business, and not selected on the basis of political allegiance. If, however, that is the case, I hope he or she is not a member of Democratic Left. I ask the Minister to please appoint somebody with an interest and a belief in the beef industry.

I am disappointed there have been very few speakers from the Government side. That indicates a vote of no confidence in the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry and in what he has done, or failed to do for the beef industry in the past eight or nine months. It is not too late. The situation can be retrieved. The winter can be better if the Minister concentrates on his job which is to support agriculture, not necessarily himself.

Mr. M. Kitt

I welcome the opportunity of contributing to the debate and the fact that consumers will be represented on the board the Minister is setting up. I realise it is a cliché to say we should produce what consumers want, not what we think they want, but it is important they have representation on the board. The Minister has not been supportive of consumers during his time in office. He seems to have aligned himself with the producers.

Small farmers in the west have suffered in recent times and their difficulties have not been addressed by the Minister. During the period from 20 March to 21 June no attempt was made to deal with the major crisis in Irish agriculture, and the outcome of the meeting in Florence on 21 June was disappointing.

Since I was elected to the Dáil 21 years ago, at the time of a major crisis concerning cattle, there have been food scares almost on a yearly basis. Doubts have been raised over the years about meat, butter, antibiotics in milk, etc. To be fair, an effort was made in the past to address the genuine concerns in regard to these issues but it is ironic that butchers feel compelled to put up signs in their shop windows indicating that their meat is hormone free and that people in the milk business have to say their milk does not contain antibiotics. Why should questions be raised about the quality of their food products?

In many ways the large multinational companies have given the impression that some smaller producers are unable to produce food in a healthy environment. That is totally wrong. I have always defended the smaller producers, including butchers, the people running small poultry farms, etc.

Representation are made to me on a monthly basis about markets being closed down in some of our towns. In Galway city, for example, where there is a fine market every Saturday, concerns have been expressed that people are not allowed to sell brown bread or eggs. I realise we tend to blame Europe because the many directives it issues can tie us up in knots, but we must examine this problem in a realistic way and help people who are not associated with the large multinationals.

Deputy Cowen referred to the importance of traceability in rebuilding confidence in the industry, particularly the meat industry. I hope we hear a great deal more from the Minister in that regard because the problem has been addressed successfully in other countries. With all the technology available to us I fail to understand the reason we do not have a proper system of traceability. If we continue the way we are going, and if we have a disaster similar to that in 1974-75 when calves were given away in Galway — I am sure that occurred in Kerry also because many of our farmers travelled to Kerry to buy calves — it will result in severe difficulties for small farmers.

The Minister is aware that farmers in the west urgently require a resumption of the light cattle trade. I heard the Minister and the Minister of State refer to promotional trips to Sweden and Russia to assist the industry. I accept that is important and that Europe has a major role to play in this regard because compensation is only a temporary measure, but we must get the markets in Egypt, Libya and Saudi Arabia reopened and continue to promote trade with the third countries.

Our spokesperson, Deputy Cowen, and two of his colleagues made a successful trip to Iran. They were pilloried to some extent by the Government which described the trip as a political stunt, but that is what happens in Opposition. If we try to promote something it is regarded as a stunt but in Government it is regarded as the business of the nation. I am disappointed that the Minister has not been active in trying to reopen the markets in those third countries, although I know the Taoiseach made a number of telephone calls to the Heads of State.

I do not lay all the blame at the door of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry. Why has the Minister for Foreign Affairs not made any promotional trips? I understand the Minister of State at the Department, Deputy Gay Mitchell, who is heavily involved in the EU Presidency, will negotiate on behalf of the Government, but the Minister for Foreign Affairs has been derelict in his duties in that he has not used his office to obtain more trade, particularly for the live cattle industry.

I want to return to the question of compensation. We waited a long time for the decision made at the Florence Summit. Compensation and nonco-operation by Great Britain were the main issues addressed at the summit. I welcome the £70 million in compensation but given that the losses to Irish farmers have been conservatively estimated at £150 million, it represents only 50p in the pound, if not less.

Our farmers are solely dependent on beef exports and exports to the European Union are down by 50 per cent. That issue must be addressed in addition to the question of promoting Irish beef in European supermarkets which is vitally important. There are reports that Irish beef is not being promoted in countries like Britain and France and we must make every effort to ensure it is promoted in these countries. An Bord Bia should address that issue because it is vitally important that confidence is restored and to do that we must ensure there is no doubt about the high quality of Irish beef. We have a very good product and we must continue to promote it.

I welcome the fact that the needs of the consumer are being recognised in the Bill but I am concerned that the Minister and the Government are not doing enough to promote Irish beef and to safeguard the incomes of Irish farmers. We are heading for a serious drop in incomes in the autumn if action is not taken by the Government.

Mr. Killeen

I welcome the opportunity to make a brief contribution on this Bill. I hope the appointment of a consumer representative to An Bord Bia will restore consumer confidence. I find it difficult to judge if this Bill is meant to be a significant response to the problems which the recent BSE crisis caused in the beef industry. It has few support measures, therefore it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that it is unlikely to have a significant impact on restoring confidence in the beef industry.

It is important to take this opportunity to remind ourselves of the extent of the crisis which has beset Irish agriculture over the past eight to ten months. While the BSE crisis was the most recent difficulty, there were others for the beef farming sector, including the removal of export credit refunds which had and continues to have a severe impact on farmers, in spite of the Minister's recent proposals. In addition, the Irish sheep sector was badly wounded by the Government's mishandling of its case. A large number of dairy farmers suffered a reduction in their incomes because of the super levy and the difficulties with milk quotas. I raise these issues to place in context this relatively insignificant effort to address a small part of the problem in the beef industry.

I welcome the fact that consumers will have a representative on An Bord Bia. This is important because the consumer will decide what will be bought or sold. Ireland has suffered more than any other country from the BSE crisis in the three and a half months since the announcement by the House of Commons. Ireland has made the least effective effort at Government level to redress the situation. Irish farmers are concerned about the manner in which this matter has been handled by the Minister, who was initially painted as a potentially great Minister. However, that view has changed in farming circles. Many producers, particularly of smaller store cattle and weanlings, fear the future. They fear a glut in the market and a massive price reduction in the autumn when beef producers try to sell their animals. This challenge must be addressed by the Minister and the Government.

While I welcome the appointment of a consumer representative to An Bord Bia, it will not have the positive impact the Minister hopes. There is a fundamental difference between the role of An Bord Bia as a sales unit for Irish food products and the role of the consumer. While there is room for an overlap, the impact which one representative on a body of 13 or 14 will have is minimal. There is a greater need for a stronger and more complete package which ensures traceability from the farmyard to the consumer. Such a system should be put in place. The Minister said it will cost approximately £12 million or £14 million. This is a small amount of money in comparison to what is being spent on policing the Border at present. I urge the Minister to establish a system of traceability.

Perhaps the Minister should examine the role of Teagasc and the need to ensure ongoing research. I am worried that the research scientist on organic beef no longer works for Teagasc. The Government does not have its priorities right when it moves in that direction.

If this Bill is the only attempt to restore confidence in Irish beef, it will fail. It will only have an impact if it is introduced with a number of other measures. Irish agriculture is in crisis because internationally people are questioning the quality of Irish beef. Irish beef is clear of BSE and the message needs to be driven home. The consumer must be satisfied that Irish beef is the quality product we know it to be.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Brendan Smith.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. B. Smith

I am glad to have this opportunity to make a short contribution on the Bill, which is welcome but which is a belated response to an industry that has been writhing from a severe fall in confidence over recent months, particularly since the fatal statement in the House of Commons. If we want a vibrant food industry, it is essential that we have the confidence and the commitment of both the producers and the consumers. A food industry in a vibrant agricultural sector is essential for an economy such as ours which is heavily dependent on agriculture.

In my home county, where only 16 per cent of the population live in towns, it is obvious that the farming community is the biggest generator of wealth. County Cavan is dependent on agriculture, which accounts for 32.7 per cent of persons in employment compared with the national figure of 14.3 per cent. The proportion employed in that sector is on a par with the national level, whereas the 36.4 per cent employed in the services sector is well below the national average. The food industry is the main subsector in manufacturing in my county and directly employs approximately 1,300 people. Direct support for the industry should be targeted at new small scale and specially food projects.

I appeal to the Minister to provide the necessary funding and support to ensure that product diversification takes place. New and existing food companies need to develop suitable added value food processing enterprises and quality innovative projects. In my constituency there is a particular emphasis on dairying, mushroom, poultry and pig meat industries, but there is little emphasis on added value. The necessary research and development is not being carried out in those sectors. Research, whether in individual agribusiness or in the higher institutions of education, must provide better uses for the primary product through formulations to suit customer requirements.

Too much of our agricultural product is in commodity and not enough is in added value. Research, adding value, customer requirements and the creation of customer needs must be interlinked if we are to derive maximum value from our agriculture industry. There is an obvious need for the establishment of satellite units or small food research centres in areas in which there is special emphasis on a particular agricultural commodity. From his recent visit to the Cavan area the Minister will realise it is a prime location for such a unit with possible co-operation from our neighbours in the North.

The desire of the United States Administration to help job creation in Border regions provides an obvious opportunity for us to strengthen our national food industry. It has given us the opportunity to aim to exploit to our best advantage the large markets of the United States and the European Union. Satellite food research centres could provide advice on product development, marketing, labelling, testing and facilities which would meet stringent European regulations. I appeal to the Minister to use his good offices with Forfás and IDA Ireland to have an advance factory provided in Cavan geared specifically towards the food industry with an emphasis on development in a cross-Border context. At a time when there is much talk about the need to regenerate the Border economy, it is opportune for such agencies to put the necessary funding and facilities in place.

Unfortunately, in the past few months the confidence of the agricultural community has been severely dented. As Deputy Cowen mentioned, many producers fear the autumn when the markets we desire for our beef products may not exist. Unless there is a buoyant trade by the autumn, there will be a major drop in the income of the farming community. The concerted political campaign to restore and maintain our markets was not effected by the Government. The Taoiseach, the Tánaiste, the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, senior members of the Government and junior Ministers should have travelled to foreign markets to ensure that customers in those markets knew Irish beef was not British beef and that our beef product was of the highest standard and nutritious value. To our detriment there is not a sufficiently clear delineation between British and Irish products in those markets. Unfortunately, the necessary efforts were not made by the Government to guard against a downturn in markets for Irish beef products.

I appeal to the Minister to ensure that during the Irish Presidency of the EU every effort will be made to restore consumer confidence in our beef industry, 80 per cent of which is dependent on exports.

Mr. Creed

I welcome the opportunity to make a brief contribution in support of the Bill. This is the third attempt to get matters right. I welcome the thrust of the Bill, but I question if it goes far enough. It appears to be a token to consumers rather than ensuring that they are the driving force behind our marketing effort. It does not endorse Irish food, a major contributor to our economy.

In 1994 the principal Bill was introduced by the former Minister, Deputy Walsh. At that time there was considerable angst among the farming organisations because they were not represented on the board. We were all guilty in failing to recognise the importance of the consumer in the food chain. We effectively slammed the door on consumers then and also on the second attempt when an amendment Bill was introduced by the Minister, Deputy Yates. We have now recognised the role of the consumer, but is the appointment of one consumer representative to the board an adequate recognition of the very important role ultimately played by the consumer in endorsing or rejecting our food product, whether beef, fish, poultry or another product? We need to pay far more attention to the voice of the consumer. In the Upper House, Senator Fergal Quinn is a constant champion of the consumer and he has argued consistently for removing the responsibility for the food sector from the Department. I am not sure that is the answer, but I question if this measure adequately recognises the ultimate role played by the consumer.

Much of the debate focused on the BSE crisis and we have been dragged screaming to the altar to recognise that. Regardless of all the marketing gurus one can employ, without consumer endorsement of our product marketing efforts are useless. However, there is great need for a concerted and co-ordinated marketing drive by An Bord Bia and, in that sense, I congratulate it and the Department on organising the recent food fair held in the RDS to which there was a positive reaction and I hope it resulted in additional orders.

Much unfair criticism has been levied at the Department, particularly at the Minister, in this debate because of alleged inactivity in securing new markets or regaining old ones for Irish beef. We cannot force people to eat beef if they do not want to eat it. It will be a slow and painful process to regain the ground lost if that can ever be regained. There will also be a painful readjustment for those involved in the primary agriculture industry in beef production. Ongoing political, technical and diplomatic endeavours are being made by the Minister and veterinary section of his Department to rebuild confidence by making a clear distinction between Irish and British beef in the international markets. We suffer a significant disadvantage because of our land border with the UK. While we might have an exaggerated opinion of our status in the international world of politics and business, there is a tendency internationally to wrongly refer in a bland fashion to the British Isles as including Ireland. It requires all the technical and marketing competence of An Bord Bia and the Department to highlight the distinction.

The BSE problem is not one of the Government's making or one that can be resolved as we might be led to believe by the commentaries of some Members. It will involve a painful readjustment in Irish agriculture and it is questionable if we can regain 100 per cent of our previous market. There is not a quick fix in that regard.

The Minister should be complimented for the compensation package he secured with his EU partners in the past week which will be available to those who will have suffered most in the context of the recent drop in cattle prices. I should like suggestions from farming organisations on how best that compensatory fund can be applied so that it is targeted at those who need it most in which endeavour no doubt the Minister and Government would be very willing to work in tandem with them.

I compliment the Minister and Government on introducing this Bill. However, I have a reservation that it represents a token rather than a serious recognition of the role of consumers within the food industry, on which the Minister might comment when replying.

Mr. Browne

(Wexford): I welcome reservedly the Minister's decision to incorporate a consumers' representative on the board of An Bord Bia which, as many others said, is probably too little too late.

The Minister assumed office in a blaze of glory and, at the outset, was in the pockets of the farming organisations, particularly the IFA, evidenced by the fact that he recruited some of its members to his inner Cabinet, leading many farmers, particularly smaller ones, to the conclusion that the Minister was working to an IFA agenda.

Consequent on the BSE crisis, it is only in the past month or two that the Minister recognised the role of the consumer, the fact that they are up in arms at the manner in which that crisis has been handled and that many of them no longer purchase beef products to the same extent. The Minister decided to offer them a token gesture by placing a representative on the board of An Bord Bia.

Some Members have been very complimentary of An Bord Bia and its operations to date. I am not so sure that agency has played the major role it should in relation to the overall BSE crisis and I am aware it lacks adequate staffing and resources. Even at the height of the crisis, when it established a free telephone inquiry line, I and many other Members received complaints from consumers who had been unable to establish contact with its personnel and who, when they lodged complaints afterwards, were informed of its inadequate staffing and resources. Therefore, the Minister should seriously consider providing that agency with adequate resources for its overall operations as its role and importance to our economy is beyond question. It is time the Minister came down from his high PR horse — adopting an attitude that, on the day, everything will be all right — and do something concrete for farmers, processors and consumers. Most people are beginning to see that the Minister's actions amount to no more than a public relations whirlwind exercise nationwide of very little substance.

The BSE crisis has lowered the overall confidence of the farming community. Since I live adjacent to the County Wexford farmers' mart, on Monday and Tuesday mornings I listen to the genuine complaints of a substantial number of farmers very critical of the fact that they are losing substantial amounts of money, experiencing great difficulty in surviving and seeing very little light at the end of the tunnel.

It also appears the Minister knows very little about how the banks operate when one listens to him say that the banks and Department will be sympathetic to the plight of farmers in this crisis. Already the banks are putting the squeeze on many beef farmers, telling them that if they were unable to meet their repayments over the past year, they will certainly not give them more money to purchase stock or material for 1997. I predict farmers will really only experience the crisis first-hand in September and October next when they will have great difficulty in getting an adequate price for their product and-or financial support. We all know how banks operate, when a farmer, businessman or anyone else is not making substantial profits, they do not want to know, adequately demonstrating that the Minister's constant theme that the banks will be sympathetic to the plight of farmers amounts to nothing more than a red herring.

Having served in the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry, with responsibility for food, I know the amount of time, energy and resources invested in promoting our food industry on the European scene, all of which has been negatived by the Minister's inadequate response in recent months. He has been unable to adequately guarantee Irish meat products of the highest quality, that no consumer across the European Union need have any worries about them. Neither has he been able to press home the fact that Irish produce has no connection with its United Kingdom counterpart. We are all aware of the attitude of other European Union member states to meat products from Britain. With the exception of very few, our farmers have been producing top quality meat products, within a green environment, conforming to highest health and hygiene standards. We should fully exploit the misfortunes of British farmers but, for reasons best known to the Minister and his Department, we have been unable to do so.

An Bord Bia should take a positive, tangible role in that respect at present. There is no point in the Minister saying two or three people are promoting Irish beef in the United Kingdom or throughout the European Union. There is a need for many more people to sell our produce to European consumers, pointing out that it is of the highest quality, comforming to highest health standards. Until we get that message across we shall make no progress. I do not know why the Minister appears so reluctant to visit Iran or any other far flung country to rekindle our sales there. He appears to want a cast iron guarantee before hand that he will be successful. Anybody engaging in any marketing strategy must be prepared for the hard sell, to slog it out and convince prospective buyers of the excellence of one's product. The Minister appears to want a telephone call from Iran, Iraq or Egypt asking him to visit them, saying that their markets are about to be reopened, when all the news will be good. That amounts to a pathetic ministerial response. The Minister must make a genuine effort to sell our farmers' top quality produce.

While for some 18 months after assuming office the Minister was popular with the IFA and rancher farmers, I assure him he is anything but popular with them now. I know this having attended public meetings in Wexford and observing farming organisations march on this House. They are disillusioned, disenchanted and annoyed with the Minister's recent action. It is time he realised the importance of agriculture to our economy, to job creation, farmers' survival and our economy overall. It is very important that the Minister recognises that and sets in train a set of objectives to restore confidence in the Irish meat industry at home and abroad. The first challenge is for the Minister, the farm organisations and the processors to convince Irish people that we have a product of the highest standard and then to convince the wider European community so that jobs will be protected and we will have the financial resources to meet the changing situation in which we find ourselves.

I welcome the fact that An Bord Bia will have a representative of the consumer. It is very much a token gesture at a late hour, but it is recognition at last by the Minister that the consumer is the number one person in Ireland and across the European Union. It is time we spelt out that message loudly and clearly. If An Bord Bia is hamstrung at the moment, it should be given the freedom to promote and sell our products. I see little action on the part of An Bord Bia, but perhaps I am being unfair and work is going on behind the scenes. Over recent months we have not been able to come to grips with the BSE crisis despite the fact that it was not of Ireland's making, that we are producing a top quality product and that the processors are adding value to that product. The Minister, the Department and the marketing agencies have failed in their efforts to deal with this matter.

I would like to thank the Chair for giving me the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this issue. However, I am somewhat disillusioned and disappointed, having spent ten months in the Department and been aware of the promotion of the food industry with emphasis on the fact that our food is produced to the highest health standards in a green environment. That was four years ago. Everywhere we went in Europe, we were pushing an open door because buyers openly wanted Irish products. Four years down the road we find ourselves at a standstill, unable to get ourselves out of the mess we are in because of lack of action by the Minister and his agents. The value of the food industry which was so important to the economy and to the producers seems to have been eroded. We seem to have lost our ability to sell on the wider European table. That is a pity, and it is a problem the Minister must come to grips with, and soon.

Mr. Doherty

I am glad to see that a Labour Party representative has come into the Chamber. All too often the Minister, in this case the Minister of State, Deputy Deenihan, has to sit here on his own. It is extraordinary that for a debate on our most important industry, in respect of which public confidence has been seriously undermined by what has been happening over recent months, there should be no support for the Minister from Members on the Government side of the House. The presence in the House of the parties in Government might give people the solace of knowing that there was even minuscule political interest in the matter. I do not see any Members of Democratic Left who, since they went into Government, have engaged in publicly destroying confidence in Irish processing to the extent that the consumer is seriously concerned about the quality of our beef.

Many of my colleagues have said that the Bill is too little, too late. If it is too late, it certainly is too little. The crisis that is rumbling towards catastrophe has been with us for some time. There must have been evidence before the development of the BSE crisis of consumer difficulty which needed to be addressed to protect the good name of farmers and the quality of Irish beef. Naturally, it would not have been expected that the situation could be retrieved because of a certain attitudinal change towards beef consumption. However, the developing crisis was crystallised by the BSE crisis and nothing has been done to avert disaster.

The placing of an additional member on the board of An Bord Bia is a public relations exercise. Why was this not done months ago? Why was it not seen as a necessary, justifiable response to the most serious crisis we have had in the industry? I cannot understand why the short Bill before the House could not have been introduced months ago. It is extraordinary that when the BSE crisis first broke the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry was in Donegal campaigning in a by-election while the biggest industry in the country was going down the tubes. It would have been a better contribution to the interests of the Donegal farmers, the sheep farmers and the beef farmers, had the Minister been out in the marketplaces of the world saying what should have been said, but he was engaged in a political exercise that, in the event, failed miserably. More particularly he allowed the situation to roll on.

There are people here who are very concerned tonight because, whatever might have been said in the past about the urban/rural divide, it must be recognised that a collapse of the beef industry would have serious implications for urban communities. After months of not doing anything we find ourselves making a token gesture, a necessary public relations exercise that somebody has told the Minister he should engage in.

The existing markets should have been the subject of an immediate response and a team should have been put in place. Every available Minister and Minister of State with an economic, agricultural or enterprise portfolio should have been on an aircraft to markets which could be protected or opened. However, this did not happen and the Fianna Fáil spokesperson on Agriculture, Deputy Cowen, had to assemble his colleagues, travel to markets, make a case and do the very job in which this Government should have been engaged.

The people do not expect Fianna Fáil to govern the country while in Opposition. However, this is not the first time such a thing has happened and people can see clearly that the sooner Fianna Fáil is back in Government the better, before the whole State is damaged irretrievably by economic policies and responses such as that which the beef industry elicited. The crisis is real and the consequences will be disastrous.

Farmers are worried about the absence of any serious intervention system. They are concerned about their homes, children, personal finances and ability to continue in the light of their businesses being wiped out. I am not the only one saying this; it has been said by representatives of the farming organisations, indvidual farmers and many others. The only people who do not seem to know or care about what is happening, if one is to judge by their response, are the Minister for Agricuture, Food and Forestry and the Government.

Is there some invisible shackle restraining the Government? Is there some veto on how the Government and the Fine Gael Minister respond to the biggest industry in this country? Does the Deputy De Rossa have some power or control which restrains the Minister from acting responsibly and capably? These questions must be answered and they can only be answered by a response which shows concern, compassion and realisation of the implications of the collapse of the beef industry.

Deputy Cowen had to lead a delegation. He did not have to be prompted because he recognised the urgency of the situation. In his speech tonight he recognised the deficiencies which are a direct result of a delayed response. Irish beef is produced by the best farmers in Europe. For many, farming is more than just an exercise in commerce; it is a way of life and a tradition. It is at all times and above all else a recognition of the desire to produce a good quality, grass-based product.

Irish farmers would have expected that what they had been doing down the years and the special trust which had developed between them and consumers would have had the support of Government when the crisis occurred. The marketing of Irish beef did not receive the effective and sincere response which was necessary.

The Irish beef industry has suffered much in the past few years because of the behaviour of certain individuals in this House who, while they could have pursued other methods to achieve an end, were not prepared to do that. They were prepared to engage in a cynical political exercise that was bound to undermine the industry when other methods could have been invoked and other roads could have been taken.

What did the Minister do to put a marketing team in place? Did he tell his colleagues to get on aircraft because their place was in the market? Did he tell them to bring with them the best marketing personnel, from both the public service and the private sector, who have the ability and capacity to put forward convincing arguments? He did not and I regret that I have to say it.

The response was to send hundreds of members of the Garda Síochána to the Border. This response will cost millions of pounds and has left the streets of Dublin and the rest of the country denuded of a police force during the biggest crime crisis ever. We have witnessed destruction and cowardly and horrendous loss of life. It was Deputy O'Donoghue who this week caused the Government and the Minister for Justice to respond to the crime crisis which has affected not just the streets of Ireland but the homes and integrity of our people. The tracing which is desirable and necessary in the content of the BSE crisis could have been put in place. The use of gardaí can only be described as hamfisted, crude and outdated.

The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry is going to Libya, but only after his Australian counterpart has visited there and contracted for 50,000 cattle and 0.5 million sheep. Our Minister comes out of the doldrums and awakens from his deep political slumber to head off to a country where the market share has been obtained by competitors from the southern hemisphere.

The Government has not heard the last of this. It will not be enough to window dress the crisis with a little Bill providing for the appointment of an additional person to An Bord Bia to represent consumer interests, as if that in itself is a meaningful response to the crisis. By next October and November we will know the depth of the crisis. The farmers in the west are fear stricken, they already have many difficulties but now they have the added difficulty of finding buyers for their livestock. In the 1970s calves were allowed to run away because it was not worth while to bring them back at £1 a calf. Potentially that situation may arise again.

When the day of reckoning comes, what my colleagues and I have been saying tonight will be remembered, there will be a political response for which the Government will be to blame.

Mr. Ferris

I do not know if this simple Bill will address the problems of the industry but it will give representation to consumers on the board of An Bord Bia. I am sorry Deputy Doherty left the Chamber because when I entered he said my presence reassured him we had an interest in the industry. I would like to have reminded him in his presence that I know as much if not more than he will ever learn about the industry because I have been involved in agriculture since I left school. I served on the animal health council and participated in disease eradication schemes before Deputy Doherty knew from which end of a cow milk came.

Mr. Cowen

I did not know it came from either orifice.

Mr. Ferris

All parties, irrespective of their backgrounds, have an interest in an industry that is a major employer and makes a major input to the economy. Difficulties arose in this country as a result of the infamous statement in the House of Commons. All European countries have faced the trauma of coming to grips with the problem of BSE. The Joint Committee on European Affairs requested experts from agricultural and scientific fields and representatives from the Department of Health and the consumer interests to appear before the committee but the consumer interests did not show.

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,

Mr. Ferris

The Iranians are one of our major customers for beef. During a discussion with the Iranian Ambassador he told me that comments by certain Members of the House undermined the marketing of Irish beef in Iran and was one of the problems in the marketplace. This had nothing to do with the quality of the beef or BSE. The former Minister for Agriculture, Senator O'Kennedy, had introduced regulations on the removal of meat and bone meal from feed for ruminants much earlier than other European countries and had secured an agreement with the Iranians for the purchase of Irish beef. Members making irresponsible comments because they have a vested interest in nailing particular individuals in the beef industry do not realise that their contributions are published all over the world. No wonder the marketplace can be in trouble. Anybody who does not know of the meetings of the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs with the Iranians should check with him and the IFA. I am glad that view has communicated to the IFA, the ICMSA and other interested bodies. In case Deputy Doherty, who is still absent, is not aware of the fact that the Labour Party has an interest, I suggest he read the record of the Joint Committee on European Affairs and other committee proceedings which have been trying to ensure that the beef industry is supported and not knocked by individuals with a vested interest.

The expertise available to the Joint Committee on European Affairs proved that there is no link between BSE and CJD. The committee members were given the scientific evidence that refuted the link between BSE and CJD.

I commend Deputy Cowen on his visit to Iran in the middle of an election. It is useful to promote your country even during an election. As Members know Ministers do not just pop into countries without clearing the decks and having made arrangements. Nothing has happened to the market since Deputy Cowen returned from Iran but when the Iranians visit they will know that the agreement they signed with the former Minister for Agriculture, Senator O'Kennedy, will be honoured.

Mr. Cowen

They were asking for Deputy Ferris in Iran.

Mr. Ferris

I very much doubt it. I will leave Deputy Cowen to cement those relationships because I deal with the ambassador.

Mr. Cowen

He also mentioned the Deputy when I was talking to him.

Mr. Ferris

Deputy Doherty commented on whether we should patrol the Border because of the difficulties in Dublin or subject the national herd to sabotage which would happen if we allowed infected cattle to be smuggled in as it would ruin the industry.

Mr. Cowen

Who suggested that?

Mr. Ferris

The Deputy was not in the Chamber when Deputy Doherty spoke.

Mr. Cowen

It is called computerised movement permit system and it costs less than a Garda Síochána would cost. The Minister submitted that at the Estimates meeting to which the Deputy did not go.

Mr. Ferris

I was disappointed that consumers did not turn up for the debate in the House on the BSE crisis. We can have the best product in the world but what are we to do if the consumer does not use it. Providing for consumer representation on the board will go some way towards redressing the perception that it represents the interests of producers only. It is important that the consumer is represented.

I have contributed to this debate because I was anxious to try to convince Deputy Doherty who has left the Chamber that Government Members have an interest in this matter and that he is not the only one who can make a parish pump speech.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry (Mr. Deenihan)

I thank Deputies for their contributions to the debate, in particular those who support the changes to be made up to the composition of the board and its subsidiaries. These important changes will ensure that in seeking to develop the marketing capability of the food and drinks sector An Bord Bia has the widest possible expertise available to it.

The appointment of specific consumer representatives will give added focus to the board which has it eyes firmly fixed on the consumer dimension of food production and marketing. These appointments will reinforce that important dimension and add weight to the message that the consumer is the most important element in the food chain and, in the final analysis, the ultimate determinant of success and failure. On the enactment of this legislation arrangements will be made to fill these positions quickly. The manner of their filling will be a reflection of the spirit in which the legislation was brought before the House.

I have referred time and again in this House, and the Seanad, to the pivotal role of the food industry in the economy and the Government's plan to consolidate and expand that role. In investing £283 million of Irish and European taxpayers money in this industry in the period up to and including 1999 the Government is showing its confidence in the ability of the food sector to meet the demanding output, export and employment targets set in the food development strategy.

In particular it is placing on the shoulders of the board and management of An Bord Bia the considerable responsibility of achieving an increase in exports of food and drink products of some 60 per cent by the end of 1999. The board has already shown itself capable of rising to the challenge. Last year exports increased by 11 per cent and the Horizons exhibition which it organised has been hailed by exhibitors and customers alike as the international benchmark for others to emulate. The additional skills which the board will have available following the passing of this Bill will help to further the growth and development of the food industry in the widest possible sense.

The issue of food traceability has been mentioned. I touched on it earlier. This is a crucially important issue. There is an unrelenting demand by consumers for complete information on the food they eat right back to the farm of original production. Farmers and food processors have a duty and an obligation to respond to these demands in a positive spirit. If they do not, they will suffer large scale loss of market share.

Developing quality assurance programmes which are transparent and comprehensive is the single most effective way of assuaging consumer worries about food. Nowhere is food traceability more important than in the beef sector. Beef exporters are to be complimented on the comprehensive quality assurance and traceability programmes they have introduced as an integral part of their marketing programmes. However, in order to consolidate and cement this the Minister has embarked on an initiative which will ensure that the traceability of raw material is underpinned by the expertise and independence of Teagasc's research and advisory services and will also encapsulate the animal movement permit system which is being refined in the Department.

Food safety and traceability are the main challenges facing the food industry. If we can successfully reassure customers and consumers about the quality, integrity and origin of the food we produce we will have overcome the first marketing hurdle.

I wish to respond to some of the many points made during the course of the debate. To respond to Deputy Cowen and a number of other Deputies, I never suggested that this Bill is the Government's response to the BSE crisis. It stands alone as a measure to expand the range of expertise available at board level to enable the sector to be developed comprehensively.

The representatives of the ICMSA and the IFA are not on the board as of right, they have been appointed, like all other appointees, for fixed terms. It is important that farmers are represented on the board. It was a mistake to exclude them initially. It is important that their organisations are represented as of right.

Mr. Cowen

Is Dan Browne a farmer?

Mr. Deenihan

As we are all aware, farmers are an important element in the food chain.

Mr. E. O'Keeffe

Is the chairman a farmer?

Mr. Deenihan

With the addition of consumer representatives the board is more balanced. Their presence reflects the importance of developing a fully integrated food sector as advocated in the Cullition report.

I agree with those Deputies who said that we have to develop a new system to ensure traceability in the industry. On the issue of Border security, a number of Deputies, including Deputies Cowen and Doherty, mentioned Operation Matador. As they are aware, this was a necessary response to the EU-wide ban on the export of beef products. The Iranian delegation travelled to the Border today and left happy and confident that there is a high level of security, that it is properly policed and there is no movement of cattle across it. I agree with those Deputies who said that there is a need to take special measures to ensure consumers can differentiate between Irish and British beef. In order to do this we have to ensure that the Border is secured.

A number of Deputies suggested that there was a lack of ministerial visits to markets. I paid two successful visits to Sweden and Italy. The Minister visited Spain, Italy and Russia and arrangements are being made for him to visit Libya. Following the Taoiseach's intervention with the President of Egypt, Mr. Mubarak, that market was reopened.

Mr. E. O'Keeffe

How many tonnes are exported to Sweden?

Mr. Deenihan

We export £24 million worth of beef to Sweden. It is an important market. An Bord Bia maintains a full-time presence in all these countries and has implemented a large number of measures to ensure that consumer confidence in beef is restored.

Deputy Cowen mentioned the establishment of a single food safety agency. The existing arrangements for food safety are currently being examined by an interdepartmental committee under the chairmanship of the Department of Finance.

Mr. Cowen

I am glad that idea has been taken up.

Mr. Deenihan

On the points made by Deputy O'Malley, there has already been a number of debates in the House on the BSE crisis. This Bill was not put forward as a solution to it. It is aimed at giving the board an added dimension in its marketing drive for all food and drink products, not just beef. The Deputy referred to large Irish food companies which invest abroad. They are doing this successfully and some of the profits are reinvested at home. In the case of the Kerry Group this reinvestment has ensured that the price of milk has been retained at last year's level. This investment abroad is positive to the extent that it strengthens the companies' operations at home. Under the food sub-programme £640 million will be invested between now and 1999 while £357 million will be invested by the industry with the support of EU funds of £283 million. I do not see anything wrong in these companies investing abroad provided they also invest at home.

Deputy O'Malley referred to the size of the board and the lack of consumer focus. Contrary to what he said, the size of the board is not an inhibitory factor. The board is working well at present and is cohesive, while its marketing development strategy shows it has a clear emphasis on consumer needs and requirements. Most of the people on the board are senior executives of companies which are driven by consumer demands and are, therefore, conscious of what the consumer needs and wants.

The Deputy has tabled an amendment on the nomination of organisations. The Bill does not have to refer to several organisations as, according to the Attorney General's office, in law the plural includes the singular and vice versa. The Minister can, if he so wishes, select members from one organisation to nominate the representative. The Deputy also referred to the reliance on intervention. The main thrust of the food sub-programme is towards sustainable commercial markets. An Bord Bia's market development strategy is weighted heavily towards building strong links between consumers and suppliers. I agree it is unfortunate that we have to return to intervention at this stage but it is one of the solutions.

Deputy O'Rourke referred to consumer representation on the three boards. The Bill will simply strengthen the board, all of whose members were appointed on the basis of their knowledge of the industry and of consumer requirements. Deputy Nolan referred to the current situation. As I am sure he fully understands, under EU regulations we cannot provide grant aid to the food industry because of it. The way to deal with this issue is to build a more competitive industry, which is one of the main aims of the Structural Funds sub-programme. He also referred to the marketing of vegetables and soft fruit. This is a function of An Bord Glas which is trying to improve the marketability of these products through its quality assurance scheme which is working well. He referred to the mushroom sector which has been a major success but it should be remembered that An Bord Glas is also doing a very good job in other areas.

Deputy Byrne said the BSE crisis was not part of the agenda of European Council meetings. This matter has been on every agenda since last March and will be the top priority of the Minister during the Irish Presidency. The Deputy referred to the media preoccupation with the British position. Naturally this arose as a result of the banning of British exports by the EU. On the other hand, Irish exports had, and continue to have, access to all markets within the EU. The Minister, our embassies and An Bord Bia will continue to press the case for Irish beef in the EU and on world markets.

The Deputy claimed that the commitment to agriculture was constrained by the presence of Labour and Democratic Left in Government. Members of both parties made positive contributions to this debate. The considerable increase in the budget for An Bord Bia from £16 million last year to £23 million this year was achieved with the agreement of both parties. This emphasises the total Government commitment to An Bord Bia and to the promotion and marketing of Irish food. The Government also supported the rendering industry with a package when it was needed at the start of the BSE problem.

Deputy Doherty said the Bill was too late. When his party was in Government it failed to appoint a consumer representative to the board. The Bill not only guarantees the appointment of three consumer representatives but does so in a way which ensures there will always be a specific place on the three boards for a consumer representative.

Deputy O'Keeffe made a very balanced contribution. I agree that An Bord Bia will have to be consumer oriented and that we must make greater efforts to promote our products. The Deputy referred to traceability, which is very important. I also agree that Ireland could become a flagship for the European food industry.

I thank all Deputies who contributed and who made excellent contributions. The position was difficult enough before the beef crisis but there is no doubt the industry is facing a major challenge. The Florence Agreement will help but it is only a temporary measure. Certainly the 1996-97 budget must provide further aid and compensation for the beef industry.

The Minister who comes from a county which depends to a great extent on the beef industry is conscious of the importance of obtaining further compensation for the sector. Various figures have been mentioned ranging between £100 million and £200 million by the end of the year. This is serious and could be the end of a number of beef farmers. This is a crisis and I am confident the Minister will ensure during his Presidency that this sector is kept at the top of the agenda and that any further compensation will be made available to the beef sector.

I thank Members for both their positive and, at times, critical contributions.

Question put and agreed to.

An Ceann Comhairle

We now proceed to deal with Committee Stage in accordance with the Order of the House of this day.