Vol. 576 No. 2
58 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the number of cases of BSE to date in 2003; the way in which this compares with the same period in 2002; the number of these cases which involve animals born after the imposition of the ban on meat and bonemeal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29199/03]
A total of 168 cases of BSE have been confirmed to date in 2003, including one case from a depopulated herd. In addition, depopulation measures were applied in a further three cases where animals tested positive on the screening test but where it was not possible to confirm the result because of the condition of the sample. The number of confirmed cases this year represents a reduction of more than 46% on the corresponding period in 2002 when 313 cases were confirmed. These included four cases from depopulated herds.
Additional control measures were introduced in 1996 and 1997 in the light of new information relating to BSE. To date this year, all but two cases were in animals born prior to 1997 while nine of all confirmed cases were in animals born after 1996. Fewer than 2% of cases to date in 2003 and in 2002 were identified in animals aged six years or less at the time of diagnosis, compared with 16% and 40% in that category in 2001 and 2000 respectively. The overall trend, therefore, provides confidence in the effectiveness of the control measures.
The increasing age profile of animals in which the disease is confirmed and the declining numbers of BSE cases are positive indications that the enhanced controls introduced in 1996 and 1997 are having the desired effect and that the incidence of BSE will continue to decline in 2004 and later as older animals leave the system.
I welcome the fact that the numbers are declining. Considerable concerns have been expressed in Britain regarding a large number of animals that have tested positive for BSE at a young age. This implies there are glitches in the system that have not been taken account of.
Does the Minister of State have any concerns about the risk or possibility of meat and bonemeal being imported into Ireland after the ban? Will he consider providing a subsidy for taking older animals out of the population? This would be an obvious and straightforward way to reduce the incidence of BSE. While I do not have figures on it, it would seem to me that the cost of culling entire herds is expensive and it might be worthwhile to invest in removing the older animals while excluding BSE positive tests in the future.
Maybe we could do something similar in politics.
I am not volunteering.
Pet food was one of the main concerns regarding meat and bonemeal usage and imports into the country. I raised this in my recent meeting with the Commissioner and he indicated that he would look at the issue.
Ireland operates a different regime to that which operates in Britain and we do not accept that what has happened there has any serious implications for us. Since 1999, there have been only two cases of BSE in animals born here. Evidence suggests that this may have resulted from contaminated older food that was held in silos. We have further evidence to suggest that there may have been illegal disposal of animals, particularly animals that were fed to dogs. There are possible prosecutions pending in those cases and I do not want to say too much about them.
It is important to note that the trends are positive. BSE was a serious concern some years ago and the incidence of it is now steadily declining. The graph has dropped dramatically with each year and we expect it will continue in 2004. It proves that the regime we have put in place has been successful. While we know there may be a sting in the tail to this story, I am confident we are moving in the right direction.
I welcome the drop in the number of BSE cases and it reflects our vigilance on the issue. With the drop in BSE incidence, is it possible to change our policy of slaughtering entire herds and only slaughter the infected animals? The culling of entire herds has created much hardship and puts great pressure on people.
I would have had the same questions some years back.
The Minister of State has changed.
Because of the importance of the market, particularly our export market, and considering the costs that are involved, it is imperative that we continue with the policy of depopulation. While we may dislike it, it is nonetheless in the interests of the meat industry, which exports meat worth billions of euro each year.
We are paying for a perception.
We cannot risk the income from the excellent product we export for the reasonably small amount of money, subsidised by the EU, that it costs to cull a herd.
Meat factories or co-ops would be unlikely to buy milk or product from a herd that had an infected animal. This is particularly true in the dairy industry as if anything were ever found to go wrong, it would have serious consequences down the line.
The second part of my question referred to the selective culling of older animals. Surely it would make commercial sense to selectively cull older animals that are a high risk. Data on the Department's website shows that animals testing positive for BSE are aged between eight and 14 years. Surely it would make sense to cull, for example, all animals at or over age ten. This would eliminate the risk of having to cull entire herds.
The Deputy will understand that we operate under the best scientific evidence available to us. While I raised this matter with the Commissioner in my recent meeting with him, we have not yet received a response. Before we make any serious changes in this, we must be mindful of how much is at stake for this country, particularly the significance of our export beef market. We cannot afford to take any chances. Everything we do will be based on the best possible advice.
I welcome the decrease in the number of BSE cases in Ireland. We all know the effects BSE has had on our economy and the importance of agriculture to the economy. I compliment the Minister and his officials on the great job they have done in this regard. Does the Minister of State think that we will see circumstances where only the infected animal, and not the entire herd, is slaughtered? This has a severe effect on a farmer unfortunate enough to have an outbreak of BSE in his herd.
Does the Minister agree that while the Danes do not cull entire herds where an animal with BSE has been identified, it does not seem to have negatively impacted on their exports? The French food safety authority has said there is no scientific evidence that supports the line we have taken. While I understand where the Minister of State is coming from, no scientific evidence supports our current position.
The Minister of State is probably aware of a study being conducted in Britain on 59 cases. Are we liaising with the British authorities on how that study is going?
We are in constant contact with the British authorities. We cannot compare ourselves to any other European country. No other country exports a similar amount to that exported by us. As 90% of our product is exported we must show a higher standard than anybody else. The Department keeps full depopulation under constant review. Our export markets and domestic consumption are worth more than €2.1 billion for beef and milk.
Costs are reducing in line with BSE case numbers. The net cost was €28 million in 2002, will be €16 million in 2003 and is expected to be €10 million in 2004. I am not prepared to risk a market worth €2.1 billion for the €10 million cost of anti-BSE measures.
