Olivia Mitchell
Question:92 Ms O. Mitchell asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food when compensation will be issued to sugar beet producers; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [3556/07]
Other Questions.
Sugar Beet Industry.
The compensation package negotiated in the context of the reform of the EU sugar regime is worth in excess of €310 million to Ireland. It is comprised of three elements.
The first is the sugar beet compensation which has been incorporated into the single payment scheme with effect from 2006. It will be worth approximately €123 million to Irish beet growers over seven years. The second element is the EU restructuring aid for the sugar industry, which in Ireland's case is worth approximately €145 million. In accordance with EU regulations, the Government made certain decisions last July regarding the implementation of the restructuring aid, in particular the percentage to be reserved for beet growers and contractors. These decisions are now the subject of judicial review proceedings instituted by Greencore in the High Court. Under the EU regulations, the first instalment of aid would fall to be paid in June 2007. In view of the legal proceedings, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further.
The third element of the compensation package is the diversification aid, also provided for in Council Regulation (EC) 320/2006, worth almost €44 million in Ireland's case. A national restructuring programme has been prepared and submitted to the EU Commission, in accordance with the EU regulations, with a view to drawing down the diversification aid. The regulations provide that payment of this aid would commence in September 2007.
In reality, farmers are getting only approximately a quarter of the available compensation, a far cry from the 60% to 40% split from the sugar beet crop return. Every farmer in Europe, whether he or she produces beet, gets the single farm payment, so that does not form part of the compensation package.
The restructuring fund falls due in June, but does the legal action currently being taken threaten that due date? Could it be the case, depending on how long the legal proceedings are ongoing, that the due date may occur later? Perhaps the Minister could clarify the matter.
Is the diversification fund separate from the legal action taking place, and will it definitely be paid in September, subject to the European Commission being satisfied with the proposals put forward? With regard to tax implications, the Minister for Finance has stated that more than 80% of the compensation package is liable to tax. Has the Minister discussed the matter with the Minister for Finance, as it would have major implications for farmers?
With regard to the judicial review and restructuring aid, the case is due to be heard on 1 May, and we all hope it can be finalised soon so we can proceed with the June date. We will have to await the outcome. The diversification aid of €44 million is separate from the disputed amount. The matter of tax implications is currently being assessed by the Department of Finance and I have held initial discussions with its Minister. We await the examination of the proposals forwarded by my Department for further discussion.
On the Deputy's question regarding the single farm payment and compensation, although people receive the single farm payment, they receive a differential in the single payment on the basis of compensation for the reduction in the price of sugar.
I accept that, but everybody involved in the beet industry in the past receives that single farm payment. Discussions have been ongoing with Greencore and the Government has its golden share with regard to the disposal of assets. Will the Government put forward the case that at the time the property was disposed of to Greencore, it was undervalued because of the impact of the golden share? It is now an extremely valuable asset, which should be part of the case being put by the Government.
As a result of this issue, the growers and contractors were hard done by in only getting a quarter of the available compensation, when such a very valuable land bank was being made available to Greencore at a knock-down price.
It is important to reiterate that the Government made a decision on the basis of an independent report by Indecon, which took into consideration all aspects of the EU regime. On the basis of that independent expert appointed by the Government, it was decided to reserve 32.38%, which was €47.1 million, for growers and contractors. This sum was made up of €40 million for growers and €7.1 million for machine contractors, relating to loss of specialised machinery.
It is on the basis of this decision we are now being challenged, and it is completely inappropriate for me to make any statement on the matter. Although the Deputies on the Opposition side may smile, I am very aware of the implications of making any statement that could compromise the impartiality or independence of the decision made by the Government, even in the confines of the House. Although anyone would regret the dispute, that is the democracy in which we live. People are entitled to express their view and I hope the matters arising from the judicial review proceedings will be dealt with as quickly as possible.
They got a very valuable asset for nothing.
The Deputy is a bit of an asset himself.
Food Safety Standards.
Olwyn Enright
Question:93 Ms Enright asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the reason butchers cannot bone out bovine animals on their premises over 24 months; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [3551/07]
Regulation (EC) No. 999/2001 designates certain bovine tissues as specified risk material, SRM, and lays down rules for its removal as a public health protection measure in the context of BSE controls.
In its opinion of 28 April 2005, the European Food Safety Authority concluded that a scientific basis existed to review the age limit for the removal of certain SRM in bovine animals, in particular as regards the vertebral column. In July 2005 the EU Commission adopted a reflection paper, the TSE, transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, roadmap, looking at the next steps that could be taken with regard to BSE in the short, medium and long term.
After consultation with member states and stakeholders, Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1974/2005 was adopted in December 2005. This regulation provided that the age limit for removing vertebral column, including dorsal root ganglia of bovine animals as SRM, could be increased from 12 to 24 months. Provision is also made for further review of the age limit, which would have to be on the basis of scientific advice.
The requirement for authorisation of retail establishments such as butchers for the specific activity of handling and removing SRM is prescribed in European and national regulations. The environmental health officers service of the Health Service Executive, under service contract to the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, implements these regulations in retail butchers shops. Butchers are required either to declare non-handling of SRM or to comply with the standards for authorisation for handling of SRM. Authorisation ensures that this material is removed and disposed of in a manner that protects consumers. Butchers seeking authorisation need to demonstrate the presence of systems to ensure adequate identification, separation, removal, storage and disposal of SRM.
Retail butchers who choose not to handle SRM can handle all beef from animals under 24 months. In addition, unauthorised retail butchers can handle beef from animals over 24 months if it has been boned out or has its vertebral column removed prior to intake. The handling of SRM at retail level has been identified as a priority area for protection of consumers. The Food Safety Authority of Ireland has consulted the trade on the approach to implementing these regulations and it has published an extensive set of frequently asked questions to assist the trade in understanding these requirements.
The EU Commission has indicated that an opinion is awaited from the European Food Safety Authority that will determine whether an increase in the age limit for the removal of vertebral column as SRM, from 24 months to 30 months, can be considered. However, it may still take some time for the European Food Safety Authority to reach a definitive conclusion on this matter.
Any provision for a change in the age limit for the removal of vertebral column would have to be on the basis of a proposal from the European Commission and approved within the framework of the standing committee on animal health and the food chain.
I thank the Minister of State for his response. The Minister of State will be aware that many family butchers are under significant financial pressures currently, and many are going out of business. The loss of that sector of the market would be bad from a farmer's point of view as it provides some kind of competition to the big meat plants. It also gives variety to the consumer, which is critically important.
Scientific advice is currently that animals under 30 months do not need to be tested and there is no risk associated with BSE for animals under that age. Why is there a 24-month rule when a 30-month rule is already in place that considers the matter from a scientific basis?
When will the European Food Safety Authority make a decision on the issue? The difficulty is that with beef up to 24 months, the bone to meat ratio is quite high. As a result, there are significant additional costs on butchers boning out animals themselves or having to pay a meat plant or abattoir up to €500 for every four animals boned out. As this is putting considerable financial pressure on the butchers, will the Minister of State indicate a timetable on the matter?
Deputy Naughten raised a number of important points. All of us were delighted to see some new butcher establishments open and we know the great service those traditional butchers continue to give. We want them to be in as competitive a position as possible in the supply of meat and other products.
At political level, through the Minister, Deputy Coughlan, and at senior chief veterinary officer level at the Standing Committee on Animal Health and the Food Chain, Ireland has argued strongly for an increase in the time limits. We have argued this consistently and strongly for some time. The matter has been raised by the Minister and by me with the Commissioner. It has been raised at Council of Ministers' meeting level and it has also been argued vigorously by the chief veterinary officer. The position is that we will continue to pursue that issue.
We have not been given an indicative timeframe for when the European Food Safety Authority is likely to issue a further recommendation, but it is an issue that we have consistently kept on the agenda of the Standing Committee on Animal Health and the Food Chain and of the Council of Ministers. We realise the issues involved on which we need to make progress.
Has any progress been made on the other section, that 30 months is still being held as the time by which animals must be tested? It is clear that at least 36 months would be realistic and would make a considerable difference to the cattle trade. This change would have implications right down the line.
Deputy Crawford probably will be aware that a negative conclusion was reached in the European Parliament. The proposal now is that the Commission would give each member state the competence to make the decision itself. Unfortunately, that will not happen tomorrow either. It is also an important issue on which there has been some progress. We want to see further progress, as the Deputy rightly pointed out.
One important aspect of the specified risk material regarding BSE which would be welcomed by all sides of the House is that while the number of cases in 2002 stood at 333, that figure had reduced to 41 by 2006. We hope to see even further progress on such incidences this year.
Animal Diseases.
Shane McEntee
Question:94 Mr. McEntee asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food, further to Parliamentary Question No. 377 of 27 June 2006 regarding equine infectious anemia, if she will furnish a response to the issues raised; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [3585/07]
The issue raised in the Deputy's question of 27 June 2006 continues to be the subject of a thorough and comprehensive investigation by our Department, as part of which officials have travelled overseas to consult with international colleagues.
An extensive amount of information has been gathered as part of the investigation which is currently being assessed. It is not possible at this stage to state when the investigation will be concluded other than to say that it remains our position that if sufficient evidence is gathered to support a prosecution, we will seek to have the case prosecuted through the courts. I am sure the Deputy will appreciate, in view of the circumstances, that it would be entirely inappropriate for us to comment any further on the progress of the investigation.
As regards the disease, the position is that since the initial case was confirmed in June 2006, the Department has taken very significant steps to contain the outbreak and progress its eradication and to protect the valuable Irish bloodstock industry.
To date, 28 cases have been confirmed, the most recent on 10 December 2006 — over eight weeks ago. This is, by some considerable distance, the longest interval between any two previous cases and, with over 14,000 blood samples having been tested last month, gives increasing confidence that the outbreak has been contained and we are well on the way to its eradication. Monitoring is continuing and the Department is currently following up a suspect case where there is an inconclusive test result.
I thank the Minister of State for her response. I am concerned that seven months after the initial outbreak was reported, the Department is still investigating it. We all know what is circulating on the rumour machine. It is critically important if prosecutions are to be taken that action is swift and the necessary evidence is garnered as quickly as possible. This particular incident had the potential to decimate the industry in this country. I acknowledge that the Department is doing everything in its power to fully investigate it, but it is critically important that its action is seen to be swift.
Second, will the Minister of State outline the steps being taken to support owners of animals which have been inadvertently infected by swamp fever? There are a number of cases of which she will be aware. What measures, such as financial supports and scientific and veterinary expertise, are being provided to the owners?
The Department is continuing to progress the investigation into the circumstances in which the disease was first introduced to the country. The investigation is a comprehensive one and the Department will, in the event of sufficient evidence being established, endeavour to pursue a prosecution. Due to the nature of the investigation, the Department is not in a position to comment further on its progress at this stage.
On Deputy Naughten's second question, the Department is paying for the testing. There has been a comprehensive surveillance programme, the cost of which was largely borne by the Department. Separately, the Department provides a financial contribution for each visit by a vet to take blood samples from horses, subject to movement restrictions, and also covers the cost to the Irish Equine Centre of analysing the samples.
As this is clearly of such significance to the horse industry, are there any changes in the protocol, quality control and quality assurance procedures arising that should be applied to the importing of other batches of that product and similar biological products?
The Veterinary Council is dealing with that and has introduced new protocols. The Department has given advice to horse owners and in view of the veterinary association involvement in this matter, the Department is reiterating the advice consistently given over the past five months that veterinary practitioners should at all times observe the highest standards of hygiene and should ensure that in all circumstances contaminated veterinary instruments are either appropriately disposed of or thoroughly sterilised before reuse.
The most recent of the 28 cases was confirmed on 10 December 2006. That is over eight weeks ago, or 57 days. Prior to this, the longest period between cases had been 27 days, 25 days and 20 days, respectively. This period of 57 days since 10 December last is important and we hope that the outlook is improving.
Is the Department specifically investigating the issue of the 57-day period? Based on that period and on the history of the disease to date, it would seem that there may be some other reservoir at play. What is the Department's view in that regard?
Some of the owners of these animals are small operators who rely solely on the income from them. They have been left without an income through no fault of their own. It is not acceptable that the Department, while paying part of the costs of veterinary expenses, should leave these people without an income when this was completely outside their control. This matter needs to be addressed by the Department.
I stress that the Department has made clear that it does not intend to make any contribution to horse owners in respect of losses claimed to have occurred as a consequence of being restricted.
On vigilance, testing and the 57-day period of which I spoke, no doubt a great deal of testing has taken place in this area. There have been 14,000 negative tests in January alone, we have completed the targeted surveillance programme and a further 10,000 samples should be tested by the end of March. We are increasing confidence in this area and are working with the industry. We continue to keep the industry updated and we acknowledge the work of the Irish Thoroughbred Breeders Association and the stud masters. Everyone is working together because of the importance of the industry.
The lengthening intervals between cases is giving comfort and reassurance that the situation is stable and the outbreak contained, but there is no room for complacency. Despite the progress made to date there is a need to maintain vigilance and continue testing. The Department and the industry must continue to work together for the benefit of the Irish bloodstock industry and to ensure the disease is finally eradicated from Ireland with all reasonable steps taken to prevent its introduction.
Rural Environment Protection Scheme.
Paul McGrath
Question:95 Mr. P. McGrath asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food when the REPS 4 will be open to applicants; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [3546/07]
The rural environment protection scheme, REPS, 4 will form part of the new rural development programme for the period 2007 to 2013. The programme was sent to the European Commission in late December and has to go through its approval process. We cannot be definite as to how long this process will take but we continue to pursue early approval. Our officials are in ongoing contact about it with our counterparts in the Commission services.
Will the Minister give an educated guess as to when this scheme will be in place? A number of farmers were on the REPS 2 scheme, which lapsed on 31 December, and they cannot apply for a new scheme until REPS 4 becomes available. Will the Minister extend the REPS 2 scheme as an interim measure, either for six or 12 months, to get over the anomaly that exists? Farmers who were in REPS 1 and continued into REPS 2 have found themselves in limbo until the new scheme becomes available. Is it possible to facilitate a continuation of REPS 2 in the interests of good environmental management and to maintain the income those farmers have had up to now?
Last year we took advantage of the Commission's transitional rules to make special provision for REPS 2 contracts that expired up to 30 November 2006 to be extended for a further year. This option is no longer available to us because the EU regulations governing REPS 2 and REPS 3 expired on 31 December 2006. It is now legally impossible to approve or extend contracts under either of those schemes. Farmers whose REPS 2 contracts are expiring have had two opportunities to transform their undertakings into new five-year contracts in REPS 3. We are doing our best to make sure REPS 4 will be available for them as early as possible.
In light of the funding they received by the colleague of the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food through the national development plan and in the budget, surely a national scheme could be introduced to get over this issue until REPS 4 becomes available. We are talking about a small number of people but they should not be left high and dry.
It would take far longer to do what the Deputy suggests than engage in the process we are going through at the moment. There will be a meeting next week. The Minister has raised the specific issues and we do not anticipate problems regarding REPS 4 — we are doing all we can to progress it. Meetings have been undertaken with the Commission on this matter and further meetings are planned.
The Minister of State is doing her best to announce it before the election.
It is a great scheme and there will be more money for everybody. There will be better environmental returns and great choices and options. The scheme will be open to intensive farmers for the first time and it will be such a wonderful scheme it will be worth waiting for.
Do not forget the forestry end of it.
As Joe Dolan said, "more and more".
Food Industry.
Pat Breen
Question:96 Mr. P. Breen asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if she will ensure that provision is made under the new meat plant investment scheme to provide facilities for farmers to clearly view weighing scales in factories; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [3543/07]
In keeping with commitments given in the Agri-Vision 2015 action plan, the Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Coughlan, announced in November a beef and sheepmeat processing sector investment package totalling some €50 million. This grant assistance, which should trigger investment of some €120 million, is yet another clear indication of the Government's commitment to the continued development of a modern, competitive, innovative and market-focused food industry.
The word processor is a great thing.
The objective of the scheme is to make financial assistance available towards the cost of the construction and acquisition of buildings, new machinery and equipment and, consequently, assist the industry in improving efficiency and competitiveness and, in so doing, not only strengthen primary processing but also underpin agricultural incomes.
As regards the operation of weighing scales, I would point out that officials of the Department carry out regular inspections of meat plants to ensure that weighing equipment is operating efficiently and that weighing procedures are being correctly carried out in a consistent manner. In some meat plants, farmers have a clear view of the scales read-out where the plant has installed a special viewing area specifically for this purpose. In some instances it might not be practical for the meat plant to install a viewing area because of building design. In such cases it would be a matter for the plant to decide, taking account of hygiene and health and safety concerns, whether a farmer would be permitted access to the scales area during processing of his or her animals.
Last year 94% of all beef produced was exported and this amounts to 516,000 tonnes.
Is the Minister of State saying that there is to be a U-turn in February on the commitment given by the Minister for Agriculture and Food before Christmas or is the Department seriously considering providing viewing facilities for farmers as part of the €50 million meat processing development budget as indicated by the Minister? The difficulty with weights is the Department of Agriculture and Food cannot legally take a prosecution if there is an anomaly with them. Is it the case that officials in the Department of Agriculture and Food cannot take a prosecution because, owing to industrial action, officials in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment are not calibrating the scales on a regular basis.
The Metrology Act 1996 covers the last issues raised by Deputy Naughten, and Enterprise Ireland will shortly announce the details of the major investment programme which will trigger a total investment of €120 million in this sector. Companies may apply for grant aid to make their businesses more competitive and create greater efficiencies which will be for the benefit of the farming community.
Another U-turn.
There has been no U-turn.
Things are in reverse gear.
We are in fifth gear.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.