Topical Issue Debate

Food Quality Assurance Scheme

Deputy Michael McNamara

First, I should outline what the quality assurance scheme is, as many Members of the House are not acquainted with it. The quality assurance scheme was developed by Bord Bia, and it is important to bear in mind that this is a State agency, because the cost of developing this scheme was borne by the State.

It is an excellent initiative because it ensures that quality-assured food that is produced and processed in this State will have the Origin Ireland quality mark, a little mark featuring the tricolour that is often seen on food packaging. It means those products have been produced with the highest level of care and attention from the farm through to arrival on the shop shelf. It is a story of high-quality standards against which members of the quality assurance scheme are regularly audited by Bord Bia.

There are currently 36,000 food producers in the country, and 122 processors and packers are certified as quality-assured. In addition to meeting strict legal requirements, farmers are audited against a range of standards, including those relating to animal health and animal welfare. Animal welfare is increasingly important for consumers and they are keen to know that animals are properly treated on the farms. Other standards relate to traceability, water and feed and pasture management. This last standard presumes that cattle are largely grass-fed. The fact that cattle are grass-fed and grass-finished gives Irish beef a unique flavour, which we get not only from Irish cattle but Irish sheep as well. The unique taste of Irish meat is increasingly recognised abroad. I spoke to a German yesterday evening who told me that dry-aged Irish beef now retails at between €40 and €60 per kilogram in Germany. I am unable to verify these prices, but it is certainly far higher than the price at which Irish beef is retailing in Ireland. This indicates that we have a prime product at our disposal, one that costs a good deal for Irish farmers to produce.

Notwithstanding all of this, over 90% of all beef produced on Irish farms is produced under the quality assurance scheme and on quality-assured farms, yet fewer than half of the producers or farmers who brings the animals to the slaughterhouse get any bonus for that. This is clearly an abuse of a system designed to ensure that good-quality beef is being produced. The producers who bear the cost of producing this product are not being rewarded for it. The reason is that additional conditionality has been added by the processors. They maintain they will only give the bonus to quality-assured beef from a quality-assured farm when the animal is under 30 months.

I am unsure whether the Minister of State or any Deputy in the House knows the age of the beef they are eating, but I suspect not. A person from my office went into the five supermarkets in Ennis - namely, Aldi, Lidl, Centra, which is from the Musgrave group, Tesco and Dunnes Stores, and asked someone in each shop the age of a certain piece of beef for sale. Only one person was able to answer, but he said he had never been asked that before. It is not something that consumers request or want. Rather, it has been imposed by processors. They are imposing it because generally cattle are not fit to kill until they have lived through their third summer on Irish grass. Previously, factories had to pay a premium for cattle that were ready to go to the processing houses earlier. Therefore, they brought in the 30-month requirement to flush them out, bring them in early and drive down prices for the producers. That is simply wrong, and I am concerned about it.

I support the setting up of the beef price forum by the Minister, but I am concerned that the outcome will not sufficiently address the matter. I note from the outcome produced by the Department that processors agreed to a targeted cost-neutral price incentive for all steers and heifers from quality-assured farms. That sounds good on the face of it: a targeted cost-neutral price incentive. However, the quality pricing system introduced in 2009 was to be price-neutral, but an analysis of the system carried out by an independent journalist, Martin Ryan, has shown that three years after the introduction of the quality pricing system the payment was far from price-neutral. The total average yearly penalties applied to O-grade cattle amounted to €3.2 million, while bonuses of €1.5 million were paid to producers of U-grade cattle. This indicates that a reduction of €2.15 million was taken from farmers' cheques in a supposedly price-neutral endeavour. For this reason I am doubtful about the idea that it can be price neutral. Farmers incur a cost in producing quality-assured cattle. The State incurs a cost as well. The product is prized in Germany and many places. The producers get a premium for this but they are not passing it on to the farmers. The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine is not forcing them to pass it on to the farmers, notwithstanding the fact that the quality assurance scheme is a State-sponsored endeavour.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (Deputy Ann Phelan)

I wish to inform the House that the Minister, Deputy Coveney, is unavailable. He is currently at a Cabinet meeting and he sends his apologies. The Bord Bia beef and lamb quality assurance scheme is an integrated scheme under which the producer and the processing plant work in partnership to provide the customer with quality-assured products, as the Deputy has outlined. The scheme describes the essential quality assurance requirements, from primary production through factory processing to final despatch, that are necessary to meet customer requirements. In addition, the scheme lays down additional standards to be complied with at each step of the production chain.

Producers seeking membership can initially apply directly to Bord Bia or through their meat processor. A special application form is provided and must be signed by the producer. The application is then evaluated and, if appropriate, a full independent audit of the producer will be carried out to evaluate the capability of the applicant to meet all the requirements of the standard. This audit is conducted by an independent auditor from a Bord Bia-appointed inspection body. When the producer is deemed to have complied with the requirements of the standard, the herd is then considered for certification under the scheme. When certified, the producer is issued with a certificate for the herd which is listed on the Bord Bia register or database. Before the certification expires, the producer receives a reminder letter from Bord Bia advising that a further audit is required to maintain certification.

At producer level the scheme sets out several essential requirements covering both product and process. There are procedures covering hygiene, chilling and product traceability along the production chain, to which the Deputy has referred. Processors must develop a food safety management plan based on the principles of HACCP. Processors are subject to independent audit during which their compliance with each of the scheme requirements is assessed. When processors are deemed to have complied with the requirements of the standard, they are considered for certification under the scheme. When certified, the processor is issued with a certificate for the scope of the process audited and is listed on the Bord Bia database.

Currently there are 46,000 producers in the beef and lamb quality assurance scheme. This includes more than 34,000 beef-only herds and almost 10,000 mixed sheep and beef farms. There are 2,000 lamb-only farms included as well. I am confident that the system, which is accredited to internationally accepted standards, is robust. Almost 9,000 new applicants have come to the scheme this year on top of almost 10,000 new applicants last year. The figures show that the scheme is not subject to abuse or one in which farmers do not have faith. The reality is quite the opposite. The scheme is vital to the marketing and positioning of Irish products in Ireland and further afield, a fact which is understood and acknowledged by Irish farmers. Irish beef is now listed with more than 75 high-end retail chains across the European Union. This wide portfolio of customers has contributed significantly to higher returns for Irish beef in recent years and reflects the success of Bord Bia's differentiation and premiumisation strategy, which focuses on the key attributes of Irish beef - that is to say, environmental sustainability, grass-based production systems, and full traceability and quality assurance at all stages.

Among Bord Bia's initiatives this year is the continued development, global promotion and marketing of the Origin Green initiative, designed to establish Ireland as a world leader in sustainably produced food and drink. Over 200 companies are currently working with Bord Bia to develop sustainability plans, setting out clear targets on emissions, energy, waste, water, biodiversity and corporate social responsibility activities.

I cannot overemphasise the critical importance of the beef quality assurance scheme in accessing premium markets and underpinning the reputation of Irish beef among retail and food service customers.

Deputy Michael McNamara

It is clear that the Minister of State and I agree on the importance of the quality assurance scheme. Deputy Paul J. Connaughton, who is present, is equally aware of its importance. However, the Minister of State says it is not subject to abuse and that farmers have confidence in it. I cannot agree with him. Mr. Michael Maloney, the Bord Bia official in charge of the scheme, has said we have the best portfolio of high-end accounts in Europe and that these high-end markets require quality assured beef. It is our ticket to supplying these markets and he is absolutely right. Farmers know this and support the scheme for that reason. The Minister of State has said the scheme secures a higher return for Irish beef - a higher return for whom? The core problem is that the higher return for quality assured beef is not making its way back to the farmers. I am very afraid that the cost-neutral price which is to be introduced will be achieved by reducing the base price. One of the few tangible benefits of the beef forum was that there would be an agreed base price. The processors brought in the quality price system, but while it was potentially beneficial, they abused it to drive down prices. Absent action by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, they will abuse the scheme to drive down the base price.

The second thing agreed was that the Department would continue to support and facilitate live exports by inspecting and approving vessels presenting for inspection for the purpose of transporting live animals overseas. This is an issue I have raised many times and the Minister of State and I even raised it together when she was a humble backbencher like me. While I welcome the agreement, I note the bias in the Department against live shipments, an issue which must be addressed. On the very day the agreement was released, my information is that a livestock vessel was refused a licence. The relevant market will now be met by taking the cattle on a roll-on roll-off ferry as far as the south of France where they will board a vessel to cross to north Africa. I admit that Ireland is one of the few countries that produces cattle that must traverse the north Atlantic, but it is not the only one. My information is that the boat that was refused a licence was an American vessel licensed to carry American beef across the north Atlantic. If it is good enough to carry American beef from American producers and shippers who do not want to lose their product or ship, I do not see why we should set such high standards.

I had a meeting with departmental officials before the last Topical Issue debate on this matter. We discussed Ireland's uniqueness in having cattle traverse the north Atlantic. While that might be true, they also told me that it was great that Europe was looking to Ireland because of the high standards we imposed. I agreed that it was great and that we all wanted high standards but asked if it meant that when the high standards were met by other European countries and a common licensing system was introduced, we would adhere to it. The answer was "Oh, no." The reason we would not adhere to it was that we did not want live shipments from Ireland because it was the only way to provide Irish farmers with an alternative outlet for their product. Either the cattle live to a ripe old age on a preserve like Benjy the homosexual bull, are exported live to be killed or are killed in Ireland to be eaten. These are the three options. If one removes live exports and the fact that the majority of cattle in Ireland will not have a benefactor like the creator of "The Simpsons" to ensure they live to a ripe old age because they happen to be attracted to animals of the same sex, one is reduced to using the processors. The processors have been driving down prices in Ireland, notwithstanding the fact that they can access higher quality markets. I fear the beef forum will not address that issue, but I am willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.

Deputy Ann Phelan

The Deputy is very passionate about this issue and live exports involve another full debate. Today we are concentrating on the quality assurance scheme and the number of farmers signing up to it demonstrates that there is a level of faith in it. The Minister, Deputy Simon Coveney, has worked hard to mediate in the forum on the matters raised by the Deputy. At the beef forum last week agreement was reached on the manner in which specifications would be applied in the future. The agreement provides a platform for improved relations in the sector into the future. I ask the Deputy to keep an eye on what is happening at the forum. There was a consultation process and I assume he made submissions in that regard. I have a funny feeling that we will come back to this matter. I cannot say I know much about Benjy, but I am told he will be very happy where he is. We will leave it at that.

I understand Deputy Paul J. Connaughton has agreed to defer his matter until next Tuesday, 25 November on the understanding the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, has committed to taking it on that day.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Charlie McConalogue)

I understand the fourth matter is also being deferred. Is that correct?

Minister of State at the Department of Social Protection (Deputy Kevin Humphreys)

Yes. Deputies Anthony Lawlor, Martin Heydon and Catherine Murphy have agreed to defer their matter until next Tuesday, 25 November on the understanding that either the Minister for Health or the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, has committed to taking it on that day.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Charlie McConalogue)

Is that agreed?

Deputy Anthony Lawlor

That is agreeable to us.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Charlie McConalogue)

The matter is deferred.

School Meals Programme

Deputy Sean Fleming

I welcome the opportunity to raise this important issue. I also welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Kevin Humphreys, who is taking it on behalf of the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton.

The motion is straightforward and concerns the need for the Minister for Social Protection to make a statement on the funding of the school meals project at Scoil Bhríde, Knockmay, Portlaoise, County Laois. People might assume that because it is a school meals programme, it is within the remit of the Department of Education and Skills, but it is actually a social protection payment, which is why we are dealing with the Department of Social Protection. Some people may not understand why that is the case, but it is. I do not mind where the funding comes from as long as it goes to the pupils in the school.

Deputy Kevin Humphreys

No one does.

Deputy Sean Fleming

I asked two parliamentary questions on the issue, on 25 June and 2 July 2014, respectively. I received answers at the time which were unsatisfactory, which is why I have sought to raise the matter as a Topical Issue. The school involved is Scoil Bhríde, Portlaoise, Roll No. 19747M. It is the largest primary school in County Laois, with 757 pupils at the time I spoke to the principal, Ms Muriel Wall-Coughlan, about the matter during the course of the summer. It is a disadvantaged school in the DEIS 1 category. It received funding under the school meals scheme of €15,000 for its 757 pupils, which represented an average payment per pupil of €19.01. Total payments under the scheme this year amount to €37 million and I welcome the additional €2 million which will be provided next year. I spotted this on budget day. The €37 million is divided among approximately 1,600 schools, giving an average payment of €23,000 per school. The fund benefits approximately 205,000 children, with an average payment of €180.49 per child, which is nine times higher than the payment per pupil in Scoil Bhríde in Portlaoise. That is why I am raising the issue today.

An additional €2 million was allocated to the scheme in 2013 to provide for an additional 100 new schools which were being brought into the scheme. It was decided that each school would receive an average payment of €20,000 each. This benefited 9,700 students and pupils, with an average payment of €206 per pupil, which is ten times higher than the payment per pupil in Scoil Bhríde.

While the funding provided for school meals is welcome, certain schools, including Scoil Bhríde, receive a low level of funding under the school meals programme because they entered the scheme earlier than other schools. Schools that enter the scheme now receive payments per pupil that are up to ten times higher than those paid to schools already in the system. This inequity must be addressed. Scoil Bhríde has applied to have its funding increased from €15,000 to €194,000 on the basis that it is a DEIS 1 school. The average payment for a DEIS 1 school is €150,000, yet Scoil Bhríde receives one tenth of the average. The position is extremely inequitable.

Last July I tabled a parliamentary question seeking a breakdown of payments per pupil under the school meals programme across the school system. I asked how many schools were receiving payments of between €10 and €20 per pupil, between €30 and €40 per pupil and so forth. In his reply the Minister indicated that statistics for average payments per pupil under the school meals programme were not maintained by the Department. Schools receive a form of block grant based on old enrolment figures and must make do with the amount they receive, even if the number of pupils in the school has doubled since the original allocation was made.

I ask that Scoil Bhríde's application for additional funding be given favourable treatment. Furthermore, the inequity in the system, whereby schools that have been in the programme for a long time receive low levels of funding in comparison with new entrants, must be addressed. I hope the Minister of State will take my points on board.

Deputy Kevin Humphreys

I thank the Deputy for providing details on Scoil Bhríde. To provide some background, the school meals programme provides funding towards the provision of food services for some 1,600 schools and organisations. Almost 207,000 children benefit through two schemes, the first of which is the statutory urban school meals scheme operated by local authorities and part-financed by the Department. The second, the scheme to which the Deputy refers, is the school meals local projects scheme through which funding is provided directly for participating schools and local and voluntary community groups which run their own school meal projects.

The school meals programme is an important component of policies to encourage school attendance and extra-educational achievement by children, especially those from the most disadvantaged backgrounds. As the Deputy will agree, breakfast clubs encourage children to arrive at school on time. I am firmly of the view that funding the provision of food services in schools guarantees ongoing positive returns on a public investment in the health and educational performance of future generations.

In recognition of the benefits the scheme provides and despite severe pressure on the social protection budget, the Government allocated an additional €2 million for the school meals programme in 2013, providing a total allocation of €37 million. This amount was increased in budget 2015 by a further €2 million, bringing the total to €39 million for 2015. This additional funding will be used to increase payments to existing schools which are part of the Department of Education and Skill's initiative for disadvantaged schools, Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools, or DEIS, as it is also known. DEIS is the Department's main policy instrument to address educational disadvantage. There will be a particular focus on the provision of breakfast clubs which provide positive outcomes for vulnerable children in terms of their school attendance, punctuality and energy levels.

The school referred to by the Deputy, Scoil Bhríde, has been in receipt of funding under the scheme since 2007 and applied for a significant increase in both pupil numbers availing of the scheme and funding for the current academic year. An increase in the level of payments to this school will be considered as part of the overall allocation of the additional €2 million that will be available in 2015.

I was not aware of some of the facts outlined by the Deputy who may wish to meet me next week to discuss them in detail. I note the support provided for Scoil Bhríde originally was for approximately 70 children, whereas enrolments at the school stand at 797. An additional €2 million has been provided for the school meals programme in 2015. The Deputy has indicated that Scoil Bhríde is being discriminated against by virtue of entering the scheme earlier than other schools. I invite him to discuss with me any structural problem that arises with the scheme.

Deputy Sean Fleming

I welcome the opportunity to meet the Minister of State to discuss this matter. I will provide him with the information I have received at that point.

The purpose of the school meals scheme is to help children to get to school. Many but by no means all of the children in Knockmay are from low income families and do not receive a breakfast. In some homes the children are not provided with dinner or tea either. We must look after the younger generation because children cannot learn if they are hungry. One must fill their tummies before one tries to fill their brains.

Scoil Bhríde receives funding to provide lunch for two children in each class of 30 pupils. This means that the principal or someone acting on the principal's behalf must choose the two children in each class who will benefit from the scheme. It is awful that we have been reduced to this. There are historical reasons for the discrepancy in funding.

The reason I have so much information on this issue is that, in addition to submitting parliamentary questions, I sent a detailed letter outlining the position to the Secretary General of the Department of Social Protection in August. I received a detailed reply, including some statistics, from an official in the Department's Sligo office. I was grateful to receive all of the information available in the Department on the issue, notwithstanding the fact that it does maintain information on funding broken down per pupil. I am fortunate to have this information and I am sure the Minister of State would be able to obtain it. I will provide him with copies of the documentation I have received.

The essential point is that there is a structural flaw in the system. The official indicated that if the funding provided for Scoil Bhríde were to be increased to the average figure, other schools in receipt of funding in excess of it could have their allocations cut. It would be difficult to give that news to the schools in question. Fairness and equity are necessary, however, and schools should receive funding close to the average, not ten times higher than the funding provided for other schools. Scoil Bhríde receives one tenth of the average payment and I am sure there are schools that receive payments far in excess of it possibly by ten times.

It should be noted that Scoil Bhríde is a DEIS 1 school and that many of the pupils come from families on low incomes. Let us try to feed these children in order that they can be educated a little better. I look forward to meeting the Minister of State next week to discuss the issue.

Deputy Kevin Humphreys

The Department of Social Protection always operates in an open and transparent manner and furnishes Deputies with the information they request. It is heartening that the Deputy has confirmed this in respect of the information provided for him by the Department.

The Government has been able to protect the funding provided for the school meals programme. In 2009, funding for the scheme stood at €35 million. This figure was increased to €37 million in 2007 and €39 million in 2015. As the Deputy indicated, it is important that this additional funding be distributed in an open and transparent manner. He will be aware from his time on the Government side of the House that while it is great to give something, it is much harder to take it away. The envelope of funding for 2015 is €39 million. I would like it to be increased and believe it will increase as the economy grows. I will discuss the issue with the Deputy. My officials and I will ensure the additional funding will be distributed in a fair and transparent manner. I will be more than happy to arrange a meeting with the Deputy to take a closer look at the matter.

Sitting suspended at 2.10 p.m. and resumed at 3 p.m.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 19 Nov 2014