Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 30 Jun 1998

Vol. 493 No. 3

Bovine Diseases (Levies) Regulations, 1998: Motion.

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the following regulations in draft:—

Bovine Diseases (Levies) Regulations, 1998 copies of which were laid in draft before the Dáil on the 24th day of June, 1998."

The proposed regulations will be made under the Bovine Diseases (Levies) Acts, 1979 to 1996, and their purpose is to reduce the contribution by the farming community towards the cost of the TB and brucellosis eradication programmes by £2 million in a 12 month period.

Diseases levies were introduced here in 1979 under the Bovine Diseases (Levies) Act, 1979, to provide for the farming community to make a financial contribution towards the cost of the TB and brucellosis eradication programmes. Under this Act a levy was imposed on all cattle slaughtered in the State, on live exports from the State and on each gallon of milk delivered for processing.

The rates of levy were last adjusted from 1 April 1996 when they were reduced from £7.30 to £2.50 per animal slaughtered or exported live and from 1.3p to 0.5p per gallon of milk delivered. That reduction resulted in a saving to farmers of £18 million in a 12 month period and was made in recognition of the additional cost to farmers who from that time were to pay private veterinary practitioners directly for the first TB and brucellosis test on their herd each year.

As Deputies will be aware, access to European Union and Third Country markets is underpinned by our relatively high animal health status and freedom from major diseases and by our application of animal health rules provided for in EU legislation. These factors will continue to be decisive in maintaining our access to markets as the animal health status is raised throughout the Union and elsewhere. In the foregoing context, Ireland operates a number of measures aimed at preventing the introduction of animal diseases and at controlling, reducing and eradicating diseases. The most important national animal disease programmes in terms of human, animal and financial considerations are the bovine TB and brucellosis eradication programmes. For trading purposes and to comply with EU legislative requirements, it continues to be necessary to operate annual programmes for both diseases which are costly to farmers and to taxpayers, while progress towards reduction and the eventual eradication of the residual levels remains difficult.

Since the introduction of the TB eradication scheme in 1954, the total expenditure on the TB and brucellosis eradication programmes has exceeded £1 billion. Since the disease levies were introduced in 1979, farmers have contributed about £315 million up to the end of 1997 while £28.7 million has been received from the EU Veterinary Fund. While these are large sums of money, they should be seen against the value of our cattle, beef and dairy export trade.

In 1997 farmers contributed some £10.6 million by way of levy to the £38.8 million operational costs of the bovine TB and brucellosis programmes. The Exchequer carried the balance of the operational costs, that is, £28.2 million as well as the costs of salaries of administrative, veterinary, technical, laboratory and clerical staff. The farming community is contributing a considerable amount of money towards the cost of the programme. It is estimated it contributes approximately £16 million per annum for private testing and £10 million by way of levy, making a total of £26 million. The Exchequer contributes about £50 million. It is an expensive scheme but it is important from the point of view of human health, customers worldwide, and access to EU and third country markets. It is important, from the point of view of animal disease, that Ireland's status remains at its present high level.

The proposed draft regulations to reduce the bovine diseases levies from 1 July 1998 to £2 per animal exported live or slaughtered and to 0.4p per gallon of milk delivered for processing should generate an aggregate amount of some £2 million savings to farmers in a one year period. The proposed reductions are made against the background of the restructuring of many of the operational aspects of the brucellosis eradication scheme, which I have put in place in recent months.

The incidence of TB has remained relatively unchanged over recent years. However, and while the incidence of brucellosis in cattle had remained fairly stable over the years 1988 to 1995, the position began to deteriorate in 1996. This deterioration continued during 1997. There are no definitive or clear-cut reasons for the increase in the disease levels; veterinary opinion is that changing farm practices allied to a degree of complacency on the part of some farmers in purchasing cattle and a susceptible cattle population are mainly responsible. There is a need for awareness of the problem. It is a most difficult and severe problem for farmers whose herds are afflicted by this disease. A great deal of discipline is required.

To address this deterioration and after protracted discussions at the National Animal Health Forum, I introduced a range of additional initiatives early this year.

The key elements of the initiatives include the following. From 23 February 1998, all eligible animals being moved into or out of holdings — other than direct to a slaughter premises — must have passed a blood test within 30 days preceding the date of movement. In addition, all bulls over 12 months and female cattle over 18 months of age may not be sold more than once whether by public or private sale on foot of a brucellosis test, and such cattle must be moved from the holding where tests were undertaken direct to either the purchaser's holding or direct to a mart and from there direct to the purchaser's holding. A full round of blood testing of all eligible animals is being carried out in 1998 to augment and complement existing arrangements, including monthly milk ring testing. A full round of blood testing of all eligible animals in the worst affected areas has been completed in the two month period, March-April 1998. A range of operational-administrative measures were introduced aimed at improving the operation and delivery of the eradication measures, including an awareness campaign, increased epidemiology, early removal of reactors, improved monitoring and other operational measures. A revamped compensation regime came into effect from 27 April 1998.

These measures were additional to those introduced during 1997. All parties represented at the NAHF accepted that these additional measures and initiatives were essential to address the deteriorating brucellosis situation and to protect our trading status in both livestock and livestock products. While the "one sale" aspect is over and above the strict requirements of the EU regime, it is accepted as being essential if the brucellosis problem is to be turned around quickly. These are rigorous regulations and they cause hardship to farmers. The NAHF and I believe that doing the job quickly and achieving a rapid turnaround is the best way of addressing the matter. In the negotiations, the farming bodies pressed strongly that my Department should bear the costs of the additional testing, which is estimated at about £4 million a year. In the context of securing the full backing of the farming bodies for the initiatives under the brucellosis eradication scheme and, partially relieving farmers of the additional testing costs, it was agreed towards the end of April 1998 that the bovine diseases levies should be reduced by amounts yielding about £2 million per annum which equates with 50 per cent of the additional testing costs on farmers. Necessary Government approval for this was secured on 9 June 1998 subject to obtaining necessary approval today from both Houses of the Oireachtas of the motion before each House. The reductions proposed will be effective from tomorrow, 1 July 1998.

I fully appreciate that the new requirements, particularly those relating to testing and the "one sale" regime, impose additional constraints on farmers and others. At the same time, the farming and veterinary bodies and the representatives from my Department and the Department of Finance involved in the negotiations over an extended period in the latter part of 1997 and earlier this year accept the veterinary advice that the new measures and initiatives already outlined would be essential, together with the full use of current technology and good herd management practices to redress the brucellosis problem in cattle, safeguard animal and public health, and protect our trading position for livestock and livestock products.

The additional testing regime resulted in a huge increase in the volume of blood samples received for testing in both the Cork laboratory and the Sligo laboratory. For example, some 2.66 million blood samples were received in the Cork laboratory up to the end of last week this year compared with 1.6 million samples for the corresponding period in 1997. Due to the increase in throughput in the Cork laboratory and some delays in recruiting staff, there were some delays earlier this year in processing results. However, the position now is that, following initiatives taken by me, there are no arrears in the laboratory — the backlog was cleared over the June bank holiday weekend — and the processing of blood samples commences on the dates they are received in the laboratory. The improving situation should be further underpinned by a number of other measures already in place or being introduced, including in particular, an inquiry desk, further e-mail facilities and the use of An Post's Swift Post system for delivery of test samples to the Cork laboratory. The latter system includes a guaranteed delivery timescale as well as a tracking and tracing capability.

I appreciate the staff under Dr. Heneghan in the Cork laboratory and the staff in the Sligo laboratory working unsocial hours, weekends and overtime, particularly over the June bank holiday weekend to clear up the backlog so they have a clear desk each morning. This ensures there is a rapid turnaround and the shortest possible time elapses between taking the sample and returning the results. I am confident the systems in place and the initiatives and measures I have taken enable the Cork laboratory to provide a satisfactory turnaround for the volume of blood which will now be received. Some further steps are being taken to speed up deliveries. I am confident no further delays will occur and that if they do they will be identified early and redressed rapidly. I will continue to keep the situation under very close review.

The new regime has been in place since the end of February and I am satisfied with the level of co-operation as regards blood sampling. There is a very good awareness of the dangers of brucellosis. We have identified a higher number of new reactor herds to date by comparison with 1997. However, this must be seen in the context of the additional testing undertaken and the locations in which a high percentage of blood samples have been taken given that the programme has focused on areas with the highest levels of disease. At the same time, the figures give cause for concern and underpin this need for strict observance of, and compliance with, these new measures by all concerned. If we persist with this programme, it will achieve the desired results.

I recommend that these regulations be accepted by the House.

Mr. Connaughton

The proposed reductions in the animal disease levies which are being announced here today are minuscule when taken in the context of what farmers must pay for the TB and brucellosis test and the fact that the brucellosis pre-movement test must be paid for also. I am surprised at the small decrease in the levies, given what went before. An average small farmer with 40 cattle in any part of the country must pay £110 for the annual round of TB testing, that is 40 cattle at £2 per head. Assuming that half the herd are females, the farmer must pay an additional £1.50 per head. In addition and as the Minister stated, every time a farmer sells a female animal, there must be a pre-movement test. Because many farmers do not have a large number of cattle, it is likely, even with a herd of 40 cattle, that the farmer would have two, three or five animals tested at a time. In such instances the charges are much higher, between £5 and £7 per head. The total bill comes to £160. If the farmer can sell ten of the animals, he will gain £5 or 50p per animal as a result of these changes. It will not pay him to lick a stamp. The new tuberculosis testing system under which the farmer pays for the test took a heavy load off the Exchequer. It was implicit at the time it was introduced that when the levies were tampered with something significant would be done. A dairy farmer with a quota of 20,000 gallons will gain £20.

There is an array of levies. I had to pay no fewer than six levies in respect of an animal that I sold last week. I had to pay a veterinary levy of £3.70; an insurance levy of £1.50; a Bord Bia levy of £1.50; an IFA levy of 0.1 per cent — 10p per £100 — a bovine disease levy of £2.50 — from today this will be reduced to £2 — and a special risk material levy of £3. The total bill came to £12.52. It costs £10 on average to transport an animal to the factory. Therefore, between testing and levies it costs between £25 and £30 to have an animal killed. A levy of 69p is payable on every sheep. I do not know how the Minister arrived at the figure of 50p but it is out of all proportion to what the Exchequer saved.

On brucellosis testing, successive Governments took the foot off the pedal. I have often said that other than health problems inside the door nothing affects farmers as much as brucellosis outside it. It is a horrible disease. I cannot understand why there is not a full round of milk testing — the milk ring test — on a continual basis. I am informed that this has not happened in the past four to five years. There are four or five black spots which, to coin a phrase, are rotten with brucellosis. Something has to be done about this. I hope in time we will be able to move from a restrictive testing regime about which farmers are upset.

On the blood testing déba cle, I join the Minister in congratulating staff in Cork and Sligo for delivering the goods. Although the Department had known for a full six months that the pre-movement test was to be introduced, it failed to provide the necessary facilities. It was only after several debates inside and outside the House that it dawned on it that there were insufficient staff in Cork. It was not in order that farmers only had a few days in which to sell an animal tested for brucellosis. I sound a note of caution. During the high summer fewer samples are sent to the laboratory. On 1 September there will be a rebellion in farming circles if there is a recurrence. This must not be allowed to happen.

On the question of compensation under the brucellosis and tuberculosis schemes, I appreciate the Department and ERAD have to be extremely careful in dealing with herds which have to be depopulated a second time. There is bound to be suspicion that fair procedures were not followed on the first occasion. I know of a farmer in the Minister's county who finds himself in this position. I have been led to believe that he has crossed every "t" and dotted every "i" but it appears that ERAD will not depopulate the herd on the same basis on this occasion. Neighbouring farmers are at their wits' end as cattle are continuing to abort. Why is the Department not depopulating the herd?

I know of another farmer in County Galway who had his herd of 20-30 milch cows cleaned out earlier this year. Due to a technicality concerning the number of gallons of milk supplied to the creamery he fell on the wrong side of the eligibility rules. Three cows in high lactation had to be killed but this could not be taken into account. He would have qualified for an extra £100 for each animal.

In transporting an animal to the factory, if one of the two yellow tags is lost, departmental staff are under instruction to turn the animal back. If the remaining tag matches the cattle identity card, the blue card, and everything else is in order, I cannot understand why the animal is not killed. I would appreciate if the Minister could give a direction to his staff in this regard.

I am concerned about the accuracy of the brucellosis test. For whatever reason, a number of animals that were tested for brucellosis and given the all clear, aborted a number of weeks later. When replying, will the Minister indicate whether this serious problem is widespread?

Another matter to which I wish to refer — I brought it to the Minister's attention on previous occasions — involves animal health and issuing herd numbers. As Members are aware, herd numbers are no more than a mechanism designed to control animal diseases. In the past I was led to believe that there were four main criteria farmers had to meet to qualify for a herd number, namely, that they owned livestock, that they owned land or occupied it under long-term lease, that they had stock handling facilities — a cattle crush — and, most importantly, that there should never be intermixing of herds with those owned by neighbouring farmers, spouses, daughters or sons. However, it appears that this has been thrown out the window in respect of a number of categories of farmers. For example, the rules which apply to most people in terms of granting a herd number do not apply to farmers and their wives who operate separate farming businesses. The Minister will be aware that the Department's district inspectors ask at least 40 questions of these people which would not be put to ordinary farmers.

It is not acceptable that there should be one rule for a certain category of farmers and a different rule for others. Will the Minister indicate whether the regulation being considered by his Department in respect of the issuing of herd numbers applies to everyone or whether the Department or the European Union harbour greater suspicion of farmers whose spouses or offspring are also involved in farming? This is an important matter and the Minister must clarify whether there are two rules or merely one.

One of the criteria introduced in respect of payment of the top rate of compensation for brucellosis animals is that they should be retested when they are brought on to farms, a fact of which many farmers are unaware. Will the Minister take action to publicise this requirement through local vets testing during the annual round, through the Department's local offices or by some other means? If such action is not taken, farmers who may have infected their herds through the purchase of cows, which were not 30 day tested when brought on to their farms, will not receive the compensation to which they are entitled.

Mr. Wall

With the agreement of the House, I propose to share time with Deputy Ring.

An Ceann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Wall

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. I commend the Minister on bringing forward the reduction proposed in the regulations because it represents a step forward for agriculture. Unfortunately, it represents only one step and there is a need for many more before the regulations meet the needs of the farming community.

Farmers have been obliged to contend with successive levels of red tape. Every action requires that a form be completed, a test taken and a fee paid. The regulations represent a new trust for farmers who have worked extremely hard to raise standards and improve practices. The TB eradication programme may not have rid the country of that disease but it has improved the safety of beef and meat in general. If we continue to take small steps, the Department and the farming community will eventually be successful in eradicating TB.

Farmers are now more aware of what is required to meet consumer demands and the regulations are a recognition of this. Irish consumers demand quality and safe meat products. Increasingly, they ask questions regarding the content of food, its origin and its safety. While farmers have been criticised in the past for their production practices, they have made significant headway in improving the quality of their produce. Farmers must be commended for their co-operation with disease eradication programmes, angel dust bans and herd inspections. Many have incurred significant costs in complying with inspections and testing.

The reduction of levies put forward in the regulations is important because it will contribute a raising of standards on farms. However, this is only the first step in the complete eradication of the problems which gave rise to the regulations. We must continue to make provisions which will enhance agricultural practices and the standard of produce. To this end I impress on the Minister for Agriculture and Food the importance attached to the control of farmyard pollution scheme and the need to make immediate provision to reintroduce it immediately. The farming community is on tenterhooks while waiting to see if he is committed to the scheme's reintroduction. It is time that full details of any plans to reintroduce it were announced.

Farmers must also be provided with a more efficient service in respect of the speed at which they are provided with the results of blood tests from the Department of Agriculture and Food. They are interested in safety and quality but many are frustrated by the delays in the return of blood tests taken under the disease eradication scheme. I call on the Minister to review the system of returning test results and to ensure that farmers are provided with those results as a matter of urgency. The sale of stock and farm work are often adversely affected by the delays to which I refer. Will the Minister and his Department investigate these important matters and liaise with the farming associations to reach an amicable agreement?

Mr. Ring

I welcome the announcement of the reduction in costs for farmers, for whom the past 12 months have been difficult. Compulsory blood testing for TB was introduced in 1954 and I am amazed by the amount of money which has been spent in that regard. It is a national scandal that animal diseases have not been eradicated, particularly in an age when men have landed on the moon, heart bypass operations have become common and computer technology and the Internet are a part of our daily lives. Despite the amount of taxpayers' money used on disease eradication schemes, we do not appear to be any closer to resolving this problem.

Everyone must support the Department of Agriculture and Food in respect of the measures it puts in place to deal with this problem. Agriculture is a national industry and it has come under attack in recent years. We must do everything in our power to improve the industry and provide it with assistance.

I welcome the Minister's announcement in respect of testing. As Deputy Connaughton stated, farmers are obliged to pay a vets' levy, an insurance levy, a brucellosis levy, an IFA levy and special risk levy. Members of the general public believe that farmers do not contribute to these schemes. I am glad that a message will be sent from this House that farmers pay their fair share. I accept that taxpayers have been obliged to pay a large part of the cost in respect of this ongoing problem but agriculture is an important national industry and must be supported.

Will the Minister reconsider the system dispatching blood samples for testing in Cork? The Minister and the Minister of State have done a great deal for that county in recent weeks but a number of farmers there are outraged by some of the decisions taken by them. I do not intend to become involved in an argument about County Cork because I do not live there. However, I am concerned that farmers in the west are obliged to wait between 21 to 23 days for the results of blood tests. Would it be possible to establish a blood testing centre in County Mayo or would it be possible for farmers in the five western counties to use the existing centre in County Sligo?

I ask the Minister to put a proposal to Cabinet that people in the western counties could go to Sligo rather than Cork. Farmers were outraged at the length of time they had to wait for the blood tests to come back and some of them were delayed in selling cattle at the marts. My proposal would provide an easy solution to the problem. I hope the Minister could select a place in County Mayo and I will give him whatever assistance I can in that regard. If not, Sligo would provide the answer.

I had a telephone call from a farmer in County Mayo last night whose herd has been locked up. The greatest tragedy for any farmer is to find out that his herd has tested positive and has to be locked up. This farmer had bought a lot of milk quota and he had built a slatted barn for which he did not get a grant, although he was obliged to build it. He had intended to pay back his borrowings to the bank and the building society during the five months when milk yield is highest.

I ask the Minister to consider the case of this young farmer with a young family whose wife will have to earn money to keep the bank at bay. This man has worked hard to build up his farm and has sought no assistance from the State. He did not get a grant under the control of farmyard pollution scheme and he bought the extra milk quota. I ask the Minister to try to assist this man in the difficult circumstances he faces. He is afraid that he may have to sell his land to pay the banks. We all know what vultures the banks can be. One bank used have an advertisement using an umbrella which spoke about the good days. However, the banks take back the umbrella in the bad times. I will write to the Minister on this case and I ask him and his officials to give it favourable consideration. It involves a young man with a family who has built up his farm and, tragically, his herd has been struck with TB.

Farmers have had a bad year and this measure will assist them in a small way. It is not a major reduction but it is a step in the right direction. I hope farmers will get good news at the end of the week with regard to the levies as they were outraged by the circumstances surrounding the tests.

Mr. Sheehan

I wish to share my time with Deputy Deenihan.

An Ceann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Sheehan

With this announcement the Minister is taking a step in the right direction towards dealing with the huge costs farmers have had to pay over the years with regard to the eradication of TB and brucellosis. Farmers have had to face severe demands seeking to be rid of the scourge of TB and brucellosis. Farmers face serious hardships in meeting the requirements of the animal diseases Acts. They face great frustration when, having had clean herds for ten or 15 years, their herds are found to be infected with brucellosis and TB.

There must be a method of combating the spread of these diseases. For all the money that has been spent, the Department does not seem able to come up with a solution that will be of benefit to the farming community. However, this measure may be the straw that breaks the camel's back. The reduction announced is so small that it will have little or no effect on the hardships endured by the farming community. The reduction will amount to a total of £5 per 40 head of cattle tested. It is an insult to the intelligence of the agricultural community to offer such a small reduction.

Once and for all the Minister should seek to give the farming community some relief from the strain under which it labours. Farmers have survived a range of taxes in seeking to stave off these dreaded diseases. The taxes to be paid on each animal slaughtered amount to about £13 per head. Surely the time has come to get rid of these bovine diseases and to try to level the playing pitch for farmers. The US and many European countries have eradicated these diseases over the past decade and cleared their herds. However, for some unknown reason, they still break out in Ireland despite the action the Department has taken.

The owners of herds which are locked up are on the bread line. I know farmers in my constituency who owe huge sums to banks, building societies and local authorities for loans they took out to make improvements to their farms. I do not see why the Minister cannot grant a greater reduction. Otherwise the farmers will not survive.

Mr. Deenihan

I welcome this reduction which follows the substantial reduction granted in 1996. Although it is small, any such reduction at a time of falling prices is welcome. I wish to highlight the problem in my constituency with which the Minister's officials will be familiar. I appeal to the Minister of State to designate north Kerry, Limerick, north Cork and south Tipperary as black spots, where something has to be done, because the initiatives introduced in February are not working. I will give some statistics. In 1994, four herds were depopulated in the north Kerry area; in 1997 this amounted to 45; and to date, 40 herds have been depopulated in north Kerry. This is a problem of epidemic proportions which must be seriously addressed.

The Minister of State came down and gave a commitment to put a special police force in place to chase up offenders. I appeal to him to go back again to the constituency. The affected herds had never before been affected. The owners practised a very high standard of hygiene and animal husbandry and had not bought in. They did everything right. Nevertheless, their herds are being destroyed and their whole economic future is in doubt. To illustrate the seriousness of the problem let me give the number of reactors removed from herds. In 1994, 809 animals were removed, in 1997, 3,172 or more animals were removed, and there are 70 herds locked up in Kerry at the moment. That is well ahead of last year's rate. The problem of brucellosis is not waning but increasing.

The operation of the compensation scheme is very confusing and totally bureaucratic. It is a year since I was in the Department of Agriculture, but people are totally confused. They now have to fill in six forms. It is impossible for ordinary farmers to come to terms with the bureaucracy, and this should be looked at very seriously. In Kerry, people had to wait two months for the new forms, which they received in the past few days. The regulations introduced last September were not publicised. People who bought in extensively knew about the regulations. However, others, who were not buying in heifers or replacement cows, but who bought in a bull or, in some cases, two bulls, were not aware of the link between pre and post-movement testing and compensation. Having bought in a bull who had been pre-movement tested but which they did not have post-movement tested, they lost thousands of pounds in compensation. This is being examined at the moment. I appeal to the Minister of State, the Minister and the officials to show some sympathy for this section of the farming population. They are few in number, but if they are not granted some allowance they could suffer total economic ruin and may have to leave farming.

Given the epidemic in Munster and the fact that there is no sign of it waning, perhaps the introduction of vaccine could be considered. Would that be totally out of the question? Is it forbidden by EU regulation? I think it is the only solution because we will have the same problem at the end of this year as we had at the end of last year.

Mr. M. Brennan

I welcome the fact that the Minister of State, Deputy O'Keeffe, went to Sligo yesterday to see the veterinary laboratory for himself. He is the first Minister for Agriculture to have done so since a former Minister for Agriculture, Mr. MacSharry, went there.

Mr. Deenihan

I kept it open. It would have been closed but for me.

Mr. M. Brennan

It is not good enough just to keep the laboratory open. It must be modernised, and I would like to see £150,000 or £200,000 being spent on it. I agree with Deputy Ring that all cattle in the north-west should be tested there. I would go further and say that cattle in the whole of Connacht-Ulster should be tested there because Sligo is the capital of the north-west. Deputy Ring mentioned that he would like to see the testing done in Mayo, but we should leave the laboratory in Sligo since it is there.

Quite a lot of testing has been done in Sligo. In May, 12,696 blood samples were tested in Sligo. In April, 16,649 samples were tested there, and in March, 11,748 samples were tested. This testing was done by two staff, two girls. There is only one girl there at the moment and one student because the other two are on maternity leave. The laboratory is in need of modernisation. There is a proper computer system in Cork but in Sligo testing is done in the old way. While this is adequate, we want a more modern system.

I thank the Minister of State for coming to Sligo yesterday, but there is no use in him coming to Sligo unless we can get the finance to make improvements. I ask the Minister of State to speak to his senior Minister and to the Minister for Finance to make sure that the necessary finance is made available to make this laboratory into the very modern laboratory to which we are entitled in the north-west. The whole north-west region is a great area for the export of cattle, especially the blue heifer and the Aberdeen Angus which are exported to Scotland and other parts of Europe. We have to keep the Sligo laboratory open and modernise it. Testing has to be carried out and not just in respect of exports. I want to see scheme testing for the whole of Connacht-Ulster.

I thank the Minister for sharing his time with me.

Mr. Sargent

I am glad to have the opportunity to speak on the Bovine Diseases (Levies) Regulations, 1998. The fact that this matter comes before the House today, 30 June, before coming into effect tomorrow, 1 July, is a classic example of legislating on the hoof, whatever about anything else. That holds true even if the Statutory Instrument before us forms part of that vast corpus of secondary or subordinate legislation which arises from Acts passed by the Houses of the Oireachtas.

It is welcome that the costs of Irish farm producers are to be reduced, if only by a little. It is important to recognise that the pressure to force down the prices paid to farmers is huge. The Government must make a priority of tackling this very destructive pressure, which is largely driven from outside this country, or it will ultimately decimate our farming industry. In this context it is important to mention the regulations of the Minister for the Environment and Local Government to limit the size of super stores because it is the shareholder bases of those industries which is driving down the prices paid to Irish farmers. The future of Irish farming is not a matter for concern to those shareholders. If they cannot get their produce from Irish farms they will get it elsewhere. As long as it is on their shelves they do not care where it comes from.

If this measure is a swallow, to use the metaphor, it does not tell us that the summer of sustainable agriculture and sane policy in the area of food production and distribution has arrived.

There is a particular worry in the area of milk production. Although milking parlours and so forth are scrupulously clean in the great majority of cases, whatever reduction there has been in the incidence of bovine diseases in dairy herds may equally be attributable, in some instances, to the dramatically increased use of pharmaceutical preparations and antibiotics in recent years along with the increasing intensification of farm methods. That applies largely in relation to piggeries of enormous proportions, many of which I have visited.

That intensification represents a trend which, if it continues, will tempt fate when it comes to infection and epidemics. Such intensification of agriculture has to be addressed in overall policies when we are talking about the control of bovine diseases as well as other infections which would affect farming generally.

I read a report of a recent meeting of the International Co-operative Association which took place in Cork. A delegate to that conference from the Seikatsu Consumer Co-operative in Japan explained the origins of that movement which have important parallels with this country. In the late 1960s, a mother in the city of Kanagawa in Japan began to notice a connection between her child's asthma and the milk she was drinking. She set out by bicycle to find a farmer who produced milk without pharmaceutical inputs. She found her farmer and a small co-operative group, called a HAN group, formed to take that farmer's weekly milk supply.

That was the beginning of the Seikatsu Consumer Co-operative which is now the largest consumer co-operative in the world. It has more than 200,000 members, is a major employer and has been the inspiration for citizens' action programmes which have seen almost 100 Japanese women elected to local government on the policy platform of safe food, fair trade in the chain of food distribution and direct links between producers and consumers.

If such an idea were to take off here, it would be in the interests of Irish farming which currently is strongly controlled by pharmaceutical interests whose dominant control, in turn, is outside this country. Irish farmers and consumers must recognise those links and begin to take initiatives which would help everybody concerned.

These essential objectives are the same for environmentalists the world over and are a core part of the Green Party's food policies in Ireland. The lesson is that food safety is a matter of great public concern — we do not have to be reminded of that — and the treatment of bovine diseases is equally a matter of public concern.

As regards the levy on animals slaughtered or exported live, it is a pity that the Minister has not used his discretion to differentiate between the two likely fates of cattle raised for beef on Irish farms. One group of cattle is slaughtered here and another group is exported live, taking whatever added value they have with them.

Although the Green Party is disposed towards the economic efficiencies of a mixed farming economy with much less consumption of meat, we are realists who have a vision of the ideal. As realists, we are of the view that it would be appropriate for the Department of Agriculture and Food to distinguish between slaughter in the domestic economy and export on the hoof in the same way as the Department of Finance distinguishes between leaded and unleaded petrol. Both substances perform the same basic function but with different side effects. Both slaughter and export are economic uses of the bovine species by humanity. This levy system does not differentiate between the two outcomes. If we are thinking of the long-term self-reliance and viability of Irish farms, the levy system should so differentiate.

Living along the coast in Balbriggan, I am surrounded by both a fishing and farming hinterland. It is becoming much more obvious to the fishing community that simply catching the fish and selling it is effectively exporting a great deal of added value. Enormous efforts are currently being put into the development of processing which could have been done in the past but was not; perhaps people are now seeing the light in that regard. In that way there will be less reliance on the export market which is important but volatile. I ask the Minister to take that on board while welcoming the regulations.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food (Mr. E. O'Keeffe)

I thank the Deputies who participated in the debate. While the debate was of short duration, they expressed keen interest in the subject.

We are discussing an important subject and there was much praise for the Minister and the Government. I am delighted with that because while this has been a good week for Irish agriculture, last week was exceptionally good due to the Minister's negotiations in Luxembourg which resulted in a saving of £2 million, making a total of £6 million. I commend my colleague, Minister Joe Walsh, for his negotiating skills on the prices package for 1998 and 1999. The decisions taken will particularly benefit beef and cereal farmers at a time when they are in need.

As beef is Ireland's flagship industry, it was a particularly good outcome in that 60 per cent of the deseasonalisation premium has been retained for 1999. The new arrangement should ensure that Ireland continues to have a more regular supply of product for export markets and that there is no swing back to a large autumn peak.

We should all appreciate that Minister Walsh successfully rejected the Commission's proposal to fund the deseasonalisation slaughter premium by reducing the 22 month special beef premium. I commend the Minister and his officials for the outstanding job they did in Luxembourg. They went there in difficult circumstances and arrived back with a good deal for Irish agriculture.

Mr. Connaughton

It would be good news if only it were half as good as what we have.

Mr. E. O'Keeffe

Furthermore, the Council agreed a set-aside rate of 10 per cent for 1999 to 2000. This will help to curb the threat of huge cereal surpluses and so protect cereal farmers' incomes. The early decision will facilitate farmers in planning the new season's crops.

I greatly appreciate the comments of Deputies this evening in welcoming the spirit of these regulations. I listened attentively to all the comments and Deputy Sheehan was more than complimentary.

Mr. Sheehan

It was a guarded welcome.

Mr. E. O'Keeffe

The most important national animal disease programmes in terms of human, animal and financial considerations are the bovine TB and brucellosis eradication programmes. Since the introduction of the TB eradication scheme in 1954, the total expenditure on the TB and brucellosis eradication schemes has been more than £1 billion.

The cost reductions involved in TB and brucellosis eradication programmes give support to the farming community and a saving of £2 million should be achieved in a 12 month period. These changes were agreed at the Animal Health Forum which again has proved itself to be a constructive model for dialogue across the agri-sector.

Following a visit by Minister Walsh, Seamus Healy, Assistant Secretary, and other officials in the Department to the national brucellosis laboratory in Cork, delays in processing blood samples have been eliminated. The processing of blood samples commences on the dates they are received in the laboratory. This is a welcome step which improves efficiency. Many problems arose in the teething stages with the huge volumes of cases involved. I am glad that, in co-operation with farming organisations and others, the matter has been speedily resolved to the satisfaction of all herd owners and private testing is working satisfactorily.

Mr. Connaughton

We shall see in September if that is the case.

Mr. E. O'Keeffe

I thank Deputy Brennan for his compliments on my visit to Sligo yesterday. The laboratory there is a fine facility. Like Deputy Ring, Deputy Brennan made a case for setting up such laboratories on a regional basis. If money was available there are many things that could be done, but there are budgetary constraints. There may be merit in that argument, however, and I will speak to the Minister about it.

The eradication of disease is a priority for my Department. As our farmers are guardians of the countryside and are at the coalface of the disease problem, any opportunity to support their endeavours deserves full support from my Department.

A number of queries were raised and I will take them in the order raised. I accept there are a number of levies in the agriculture sector, which were introduced for purposes relating to meat inspection, Bord Bia and the disease eradication scheme. The IFA levy was also mentioned. That organisation does great work and is very helpful to farmers. Bord Bia is a very deserving organisation that undertakes promotion and development on the home market and abroad. Were it not for Bord Bia greater difficulties would be experienced. That organisation does outstanding work on behalf of the food industry, not only in development but in bringing interested people to the coalface of business to see the Irish product. The developments in the past three or four years have been worthwhile for the food industry.

In regard to disease levies, with the new rates farmers will pay about £8 million per year towards a scheme which will cost £75 million per year. I accept farmers pay for some testing, but they carry less than one-third of the total cost of the schemes. In addition, compensation for reactors, depopulation and other supports to farmers amounted to £26 million in 1997 and will reach a similar level this year. Thus farmers get back in compensation what they contribute in monetary terms.

Some years ago farmers paid £28 million in levies. That was reduced to £10 million per year when farmers agreed to pay for first round tests each year. This £18 million reduction, which is separate from the proposal being considered today, was intended to compensate for the extra costs incurred by farmers at that time. The reduction now under consideration is intended to meet about 50 per cent of the further costs of brucellosis testing.

Deputies Connaughton and Deenihan referred to blackspots. There is a programme in place to deal with blackspots. Intensive contiguous testing is undertaken and areas have been targeted for the testing programme this year. It must be remembered that there were herd breakdowns in all but two counties in 1997. Thus it was necessary to introduce the regime throughout the country rather than on a regional basis.

In regard to brucellosis tests, the range of tests undertaken are prescribed in EU trading regulations and currently are the best available internationally. As with all such tests, there are some inclusive results and false positives, but the numbers are relatively small in the overall context.

Deputy Connaughton also raised the issue of depopulation. An intensive depopulation regime has been pursued in regard to brucellosis. For example, 254 herds were depopulated in 1997 and 111 herds were depopulated so far this year. Each case is looked at on its merits and the first option is to save the herd. If this is not possible, depopulation will usually be advised. Deputies will appreciate that where disease reappears on a farm where depopulation has taken place recently, we must seriously consider whether a further depopulation is necessary. Individual cases are considered on their merit and some holdings have been depopulated on more than one occasion.

Deputy Deenihan raised the question of compensation. There is a comprehensive system of compensation in place. The system, which was complex, has been simplified somewhat by the recent changes. Despite advertisements and individual letters to farmers, it remains difficult to get across to all farmers details regarding obligations and requirements. We must, however, apply the rules fairly to all farmers. If Deputies send me details of specific instances, I will arrange to have them examined.

Herd numbers are granted for disease control and testing purposes and there is no question of discriminating against spouses where similar circumstances obtain in other cases. If Deputies are aware of cases where difficulties arise, they should send me the details for examination.

Deputy Deenihan raised the issue of brucellosis in Kerry. I agree the position is more serious in the south western part of the country than elsewhere. Measures are in place for those counties. It is too early to draw conclusions from testing results to date but, as the Minister said, they are a cause for concern. We must fully apply the measures introduced and adopt a disciplined approach to cattle purchasing and herd management. Discipline is very important. If there is lack of co-operation between the Department and the various agencies involved and if there is no discipline at farm level, many millions of pounds of taxpayers' money will be spent in this area. If the measures introduced are applied fairly, we will have a disease free status and will be the envy of every country in Europe.

Question put and agreed to.