I welcome Mr. Seamus Healy, assistant secretary, Mr. Brendan Gleeson, assistant principal, and Mr. John Melville, senior veterinary officer, from the Department of Agriculture and Food. Before I ask Mr. Healy to commence his presentation, I draw to the attention of the witnesses that while members of this committee have absolute privilege, this does not extend to them. Members are reminded of long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I invite Mr. Healy to make his presentation.
Transport of Animals: Presentation.
I thank the committee for offering us this opportunity to speak about several issues relating to the live export trade and, in particular, issues raised by the exporters group. I will begin by referring to the Commission's proposal on animal transport which has attracted much coverage of late and which, regrettably, was not adopted at the April Council of Agriculture Ministers.
Members of the committee may recall that when I was here in October I detailed the Minister's position on various aspects of the Commission's proposal. While he welcomed in principle any proposal to improve the conditions for animals being transported, he recognised that there were several aspects of the Commission's proposal, which we could not accept because of the significant adverse effect on the economics of the live trade from Ireland.
As we said then, not all member states share Ireland's view of the importance of or necessity for long distance transport of animals or the live export trade. Throughout the first months of this year our focus throughout the negotiations in our capacity as President of the Council was to try to get an agreement on a compromise, which would be acceptable to a majority of member states and would result in a real improvement in conditions for animals being transported, while permitting the trade from Ireland and elsewhere to continue. During this time, we kept in touch with all the major stakeholders, the farming bodies, live exporters, transporters and welfare organisations. Following intense negotiations with other member states and with the assistance of the Commission and the Council secretariat, a compromise proposal was presented to the Agriculture Council in April. This compromise addressed all the major Irish concerns, which we detailed to the committee in October. It provided for real welfare improvements in terms of tracking vehicles, training, enforcement and veterinary control as well as addressing the major issues of travel, stocking density and staging posts.
Unfortunately, it was not possible to reconcile the sometimes polarised views of member states on the proposal and agreement was not reached. Therefore, the existing rules on the welfare of animals and the various other aspects must rest until another day. In a paper we circulated earlier we mentioned that an abridged version of the compromise had been circulated for discussion by the member states' chief veterinary officers. In the course of discussion no progress was reported and, accordingly, that abridged version of the proposal will not be proceeded with in the immediate future. The existing rules on transport and travel generally will continue to apply.
The exporters group referred to export assembly centres. These are premises at which animals are gathered prior to exportation to facilitate or to check identification, to allow for veterinary and welfare checks required under EU law and to permit veterinary officials to provide official certification for exports. They are regulated under Council Directive 97/12 and that has been transposed into national legislation under the European Communities (Assembly Centres) Regulations 2000 — SI No. 257 of 2000. These lay down various requirements for animal health and welfare. Among the requirements included in the Council directive is that assembly centres must be under the supervision of a veterinary official.
When the Minister adopted the regulations in 2000 there were 15 approved premises acting as assembly centres for the purposes of exporting livestock from the island, although not all were operating. In addition, several mart premises operated as assembly centres for the purposes of exports to Northern Ireland.
Focusing on assembly centres for European and third country exports, the Department embarked on a series of inspections and made recommendations for remedial works required to bring them up to the standard required by EU law in the course of the past two years. To avoid any disruption to live exports, a considerable period of grace was permitted to allow such premises to carry out the necessary works. Despite what was said, details of the requirements for assembly centres were provided and would have been made available to the assembly centres. Many of the assembly centres on our approved list upgraded their premises to the required standard. Others had already ceased operating long before that and several were not prepared to undertake the necessary works.
As matters stand, we have eight assembly centres approved in Dundalk, Sandyford in Dublin, Trim, Mullingar, Kilmallock, Waterford, Cork and Enniscorthy. The work at these premises was carried out without any grant assistance and, from a national perspective, there is no evidence that the volume of live exports is in any way restricted as a result of the number of approved assembly centres. In addition to the eight already approved, a further premises is being inspected and is likely to be approved soon and several other applications are on our books.
Applications for the approval of new assembly centres are considered on the basis of animal health and welfare criteria and of the capacity of the local district veterinary office to provide the required service without impinging on or compromising the discharge of other functions. These include issues such as TB and brucellosis eradication, dealing with BSE and other class A diseases, supervision at meat plants, welfare and other duties. In all walks of life there is a question of prioritisation of resource utilisation and the Department must consider such issues on the basis of the extent to which the national interest will best be served by a particular allocation of resources. In so far as this aspect is concerned, there is no evidence that the level of live exports is in any way limited by the number of assembly centres available for exporters.
Throughput of assembly centres was also raised by the Irish Cattle Exporters Association in the context of one specific premises. The marketability of livestock on EU or third country markets has depended on, and will continue to depend on, among other things, the quality and integrity of our official veterinary certification service and the quality and hygiene standards of our export premises. Such premises are subject to ongoing scrutiny by the EU Commission's food and veterinary office and other bodies from the perspective of physical facilities and operations.
Where the volume of animals moving through a particular assembly centre has the potential to compromise the manner in which such a facility is being operated, or results in lower hygiene or welfare standards, it remains open to the Department, at any stage, to place a limit on throughput, consistent with the proper functioning of the premises. One of the criticisms made was that the throughput in the facility at Sandyford was reduced. However, this was to ensure a proper service and the maintenance of standards.
The Minister for Agriculture and Food and the Department see live exports as an essential part of the agricultural sector and vital to the economic well-being of the livestock sector. The Department's function is to facilitate and regulate this trade by ensuring that Ireland maintains its high animal health status and by preserving the quality and integrity of its veterinary certification services. It also facilitates the trade by ensuring that the highest veterinary and animal welfare standards are maintained and that sea going vessels, transport vehicles and assembly centres are approved in a manner which ensures that the long-term future of the trade is not compromised by any failure to meet the necessary animal health and welfare standards.
The Department will continue to make its services available for these purposes, taking a broad view of the conditions necessary to ensure that live exports can continue in a manner which is economically viable. I hope that this brief presentation has been of assistance to the committee. I will deal with any questions Members have.
I thank the Chair for arranging this meeting with the officials from the Department of Agriculture and Food. Although the issue of live exports has moved on, the location of assembly centres was raised. As there appears to be a push for one in the vicinity of Athlone, can the Department's officials confirm where the ninth centre will be located? Is it true that there is no demand for a centre and that it would be of no assistance to have one located there?
I thank the officials for bringing us up to date on this matter. In the negotiations, some of the concerns included the unloading of animals and the risk of animal disease. It appears to be a major sticking point, but is it possible to find a way of segregating the animals? Ireland's position is unique in that it must rely on seafaring vessels for transporting animals. Teagasc has done considerable research on this with substantial data to back up the Irish position in negotiations. Is there other research to support the Irish argument?
It is a relief for those involved in the live export trade that the status quo has been maintained. There were enormous concerns about changes that were proposed. Those who pursued an agenda for change did not have a full understanding of the safety regulations for the transport of animals. The existing system is the proper and safest way from an animal point of view. Will the officials give us an update on the staging posts, which were part of the negotiations?
I welcome the officials and acknowledge their stand on the issue of cattle exports. Six weeks ago, the committee heard a presentation from cattle exporters from the west. Their main concern was that cattle had to be taken from Sligo to Dublin to be checked before being brought by lorry to Rosslare. If an animal is found to be sick in Dublin, the exporters must arrange its transport back to Sligo. Of the eight assembly centres, not one is situated in the west, yet between 60,000 and 70,000 cattle are exported from there each year. It would make more sense if an assembly centre was located in Connacht for western exporters to have their cattle checked there. A Connacht assembly centre would allow for a direct journey from the west to Rosslare, which would be less stressful for cattle. As it only takes one vet to check 100 cattle in a short time, testing of cattle is not rocket science. If exporters' yards are up to EU regulatory standards, it would take little for the animals to be checked by the Department in the yard and taken directly to Rosslare.
It is important that a staging post is located in the west as soon as possible. It is ridiculous sending cattle from the west to Rosslare or Waterford via Dublin. I compliment the Department and the Minister on the manner in which they handled the issue. I hope it will be resolved while Ireland holds the EU Presidency before the Danish term.
I thank Mr. Healy for his presentation. I welcome the prospect of the directive being put in abeyance and the status quo being maintained because it is vital to the national interest. I support the Connacht Members on the need for an assembly centre in the west. I hope Mr. Healy will refer to it in his response because exporters from the west made a strong case for it. Will Mr. Healy tell us more about the general operation of these assembly centres? How long does it take to get approval for an assembly centre from the point where an application is made until it is eventually approved? Are the centres independently operated and owned or are they operated by the exporters?
I and other committee members became aware some months ago of exporters dealing with young calves encountering particular problems in Enniscorthy. There were issues about the export of young calves, feeding facilities, onloading and offloading at that location, along with the need to bring feedstuffs, milk and so on, to the assembly centre there. Mr. Healy might advise us if there are particularly difficulties there.
I join the other committee members in welcoming the delegation and I thank its members for attending. We are all disappointed that agreement was not reached on the export of live cattle, staging posts and so on. We all know the importance of the live trade from this State and we are heavily dependent on it, particularly to keep cattle prices steady. We suffered in the past at the hands of the processors when very few cattle were being exported.
Senator Scanlon noted that the biggest concern of the exporters was not just buying cattle in the west, but in the south, perhaps in Castleisland or Mallow or wherever, and having to transport them to an assembly point in Dublin and from there to Rosslare. That does not make sense and that was the gripe those people had on the day.
Trim is mentioned among the assembly points. I do not spend much time in Trim — the Minister looks after that area — but I never heard of an assembly centre there. Is it a private centre? Is it in the mart or where is it located? I know that one is being sought in my area, at Ceannaross, for which planning permission, unfortunately, has not yet been received. The Ceannaross mart is the only one left in the area beyond Blessington. All the other marts have closed and it would be a very suitable area for an assembly centre. Could Mr. Healy tell me where the centre is in Trim?
Regarding animal welfare, one might have an assembly point in Mullingar, with the animals then moved on to Rosslare. The cattle are checked in Mullingar and approval is given. Is there any further screening or monitoring as the animals are loaded in Rosslare or is that considered necessary? If an animal is injured or becomes ill between Mullingar, for example, and Rosslare, what are the issues or options involved?
Regarding grant assistance, most of the agricultural industry receives grants for construction works to assist with any progressive developments. Why has this particular assistance never been available?
When we were last here, everyone was in agreement on the way forward regarding the Commission's proposal. For good or ill, we are now at the stage where there is no such agreement and the status quo will continue. It is unlikely that between now and the end of the EU Presidency it will be possible to progress that proposal or the compromise that the Minister put to the Council in April. An attempt was made to push some elements through which would have improved controls and supervision, but I understand that at this morning’s meeting of the chief veterinary officers in Brussels, there was no agreement and there was a qualified majority against doing anything with the proposal at present. We put a great deal of work into pushing an acceptable compromise through during our Presidency, at all levels from working group right up to the Minister. Unfortunately, agreement was not reached and we are left with the status quo.
Regarding unloading and staging posts, the compromise that came before Ministers provided for unloading as one possible provision. There was also provision for not unloading in certain circumstances. There was a clear provision for unloading with various stringent conditions relating to hygiene and the putting in place of safeguards to prevent disease transmission and so on. In effect, this was a staging post provision, although not termed as such, but there would have been provision for unloading points. As I said, that did not get agreement.
The real difficulty relates to the polarised views on travel times. Several of the northern member states said that there should be a strict limit of eight hours on animals being transported for slaughter. At the other extreme, some of the southern member states did not want any limit. It was not possible to bridge the gap. That is where the divergence of views arose. As we interpreted it, there was not much difficulty on other aspects, such as unloading, under the conditions that we have provided for in the compromise. The real differences were on whether there should be severe limits on transporting animals or none at all.
Deputy Upton asked what happens if cattle are cleared at Mullingar and go on to Rosslare. There is a spot checking system at Rosslare. The clearance certification work is done at the assembly centre, whether in Mullingar or elsewhere, but spot checks are also carried out in a systematic manner on all aspects of the transport. That is as much as we are required to do.
Deputy Timmins asked where the ninth centre was located. He will be glad to know it is in a county with which he is familiar, namely Wicklow, in premises that have been on the books for some time. Those premises are currently being inspected and we hope they will meet the necessary requirements. I understand the premises are of a high standard. We will wait and see.
Regarding concerns about locations of centres, if we were starting from scratch we would go about selecting assembly centres in a slightly different way, by putting advertisements in the newspaper stating that we need assembly centres at various locations. That is not the way it happened. There are assembly centres in place for many years. The eight already approved are on the books.
My understanding is that we have no application from the west for an assembly centre, or no formal application. Clearly, we would look at assembly centres, but on the basis I noted earlier because there is a resource requirement. Given current resources we would have to make a decision on whether we could have people travelling from the DVO and it does not just involve a single vet. A number of people are required to certify a load of calves or weanlings. We would have to make a decision on whether that could be done or whether some other work regarding TB, brucellosis, BSE, scrapie or whatever would be left aside for that particular day.
If we get an application from the west, we would be prepared to look at it, based on the requirements of the directive and staffing resources. As to how long it takes to deal with an application, that would depend on the particular circumstances of the case. Requirements are spelt out in an EU directive and in national legislation. Until such time as the premises are up to standard, it could not be approved. The question of whether we would approve premises depends on the resources available to supervise them.
The current assembly centres are a mix of privately owned and mart type operations. The assembly centre in Trim, at New Haggard, is privately owned. I can give the Chairman more details on that if required.
As regards grant assistance, I dealt with that to some extent in my presentation. The eight assembly centres and some of the applicant centres have already invested considerable funds in upgrading their facilities without any grant aid. No obvious grant regime comes to mind to facilitate aid for assembly centres. There is a marketing and processing scheme, but that is largely intended for firms involved in marketing and processing. Any funding to be provided would be at the expense of something else. We have never provided funding for assembly centres, including those that have spent considerable moneys on upgrading their facilities.
The exporters made the point that meat export plants were being grant aided. They are not and have not been for many years. I am not sure if there were any other questions.
I asked about exporters who have their own licensed yards from which to export cattle. They must be of a certain standard, I am sure, to allow them to export cattle from these yards. Would they have much work to do to upgrade a yard to an assembly centre? How many vets attend a yard on a particular day when cattle are brought in to be checked for export? Is it one, two, three or four? How many would be required? Are the centres at Trim and Mullingar operating currently?
As regards people from the west and south having to bring cattle to Dublin, that was a major source of complaint among the people who appeared before the committee. I believe this was because more vets were available in Dublin compared to some of the other assembly centres. Is that correct?
The difficulty arose because they had to reduce their numbers, which would have caused another problem for people, probably from the west again.
Yes, that is right.
The assembly centre in Mullingar is privately owned. It is operating and I understand it is exporting significant numbers. As to the numbers of staff required, there is always a vet, but the number of agricultural and technical officers present would depend on the throughput on a particular day. Depending on the numbers to be dealt with, there could be between two and four. It is not just a question of how long it takes to clear the workload. The travel time, both to and from the office, must be taken into consideration. It is a reasonably labour intensive activity, given that records and passports have to be checked as well as the animals themselves.
As to the improvements required to get them up to assembly centres standard, that would vary, depending on the state of the dealer premises. While minimum standards are prescribed in the legislation, some premises would exceed that and may not be far off the standard required for assembly centre status. I am not sure whether the Senator has any particular premises in mind. We would not necessarily have information centrally on standards. Dealer premises are supervised from district veterinary office, DVO, level.
On the question of transporting cattle from the west — this point came through from the transcript of the meeting — there are eight assembly centres and there will be a further one. In theory, exporters from the west can use any of the assembly centres. They do not have to come to Dublin. They have made it clear, however, that they would prefer to go to Dublin rather than the mart at Enniscorthy. One of the people at the meeting made that clear. I understand from where they are coming. We will certainly look at any application for an assembly centre from the west or the midlands. In the final analysis we will have to decide whether we have the resources to operate an assembly centre to the standard required by the EU because we are subject to regular inspections by the food and veterinary office, FVO, which is also located in the Senator's county.
As regards the assembly centres for Cork and Kerry, many cattle — certainly this year — are exported via Waterford on a dedicated vessel, not on ro-ro ferries. In recent weeks there have been regular shipments on dedicated cattle vessels. Many of them would go straight to Waterford.
I believe it was the calves, weanlings mostly, that were coming to Dublin, if I recall correctly.
Nobody else has any questions. I thank Mr. Healy and his officials for attending and contributing to an informed debate. Any time the committee seeks the Department's assistance, officials are always willing to make themselves available and we are grateful.
The joint committee went into private session at 3.50 p.m. and adjourned at 3.55 p.m. until Wednesday, 2 June 2004.