JOINT COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD debate -
Thursday, 10 Dec 2009

Electronic Identification of Sheep: Discussion with IFA.

Chairman

I welcome Mr. Padraig Walshe, president of the IFA, Mr. Henry Burns, national sheep chairman, Mr. Colm O'Donnell, national sheep vice chairman and Mr. Kevin Kinsella, director of livestock. Before we commence, I draw attention to the fact that while members of the committee have absolute privilege, the same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Because of other commitments, we hope to conclude the meeting by 10.20 a.m. I thank Mr. Walshe for coming to what will probably be his last appearance before the committee. I thank him for his co-operation during numerous visits in the course of his presidency and I wish him very well in whatever post he takes up. There has been talk about the possibility of his going to Europe, though not as an MEP or anything like that. It has been a great pleasure working with him and the committee had a very good working relationship with him.

Mr. Padraig Walshe

I thank the Chairman for his kind comments. I thank all members of the committee for their support over the years. The committee has played a very important role in the various issues that have arisen, no more so than in the campaign over Brazilian beef when the committee highlighted the issue before it concluded a couple of years ago. I thank the committee for allowing me the privilege of addressing it on a regular basis to keep in touch with all the relevant issues. It represents parliamentary procedure at its best. I apologise for missing the last meeting, which was due to circumstances beyond my control.

I am accompanied by the chairman of our sheep committee, Mr. Henry Burns, Mr. Colm O'Donnell, national sheep vice chairman from Sligo and Mr. Kevin Kinsella, our director of livestock. As well as beef and dairy, the sheep sector is a hugely important farming enterprise, involving 30,000 producers across all counties. There is a significant concentration in mountain and hill areas, where it is often the only option for agricultural enterprise.

There are several unique and positive characteristics to the industry. The output value is €230 million, which includes an export element of approximately €166 million. Total production is 58,000 tonnes, with 42,000 of that being exported, mostly to France but also to the UK. Nine major meat plants throughout the country process lambs for export and several small abattoirs service the local butcher trade.

Consumption on the domestic market accounts for approximately 30% of total output or approximately 19,500 tonnes. As well as the production of top quality lamb, the sheep sector plays a very important role in protecting the environment and biodiversity in hill and mountain areas. The big problem we face is the impact and imposition of compulsory electronic identification, EID, which is due to be introduced on sheep from next year. It will have a major negative impact on the sheep sector. We believe it will drive thousands of farmers out of sheep production and there will be no improvement in the market for the consumer or traceability. If there was some benefit to be seen it would be difficult for us to be here arguing against it.

In economic terms it will cost the sheep sector approximately €50 million. That is based on an output loss of 20% or €40 million and EID costs of approximately €10 million per annum, as projected by the European Union. The sheep sector cannot afford this level of loss. With EID tags set to cost between €2 and €2.50 per sheep the cost is equivalent to charging a cattle farmer over €30 to tag an animal. This is totally unacceptable. Committee members will understand the sheer lunacy of imposing this cost on the sector. Apart from the cost it will impose impossible additional bureaucracy, red tape and work on producers and other stakeholders in the sector. Mr. Burns will deal with this in detail.

EID will inflict major damage on mart sales and live exports. It will close down that very important competition in the lamb trade and destroy the store lamb trade and breeding sheep sales. EID offers no benefits to producers, processors, livestock marts or consumers over the current system of sheep identification which meets all requirements on traceability, movement control and animal health control. Against that background we ask this committee to support the IFA in requesting a voluntary option on EID. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has repeatedly said that he is opposed to compulsory EID and favours the voluntary option. We must turn this into a reality at EU level. We have been told that the decision was made there a long time ago but we continue to apply pressure at that level. It does not make any sense. Right is right no matter when or how the decision was made. It must be turned into a voluntary option to avoid decimating the sheep sector.

The major problem in the move by the Commission and the Department to impose EID on the sheep sector is that the technology, particularly the readers for the electronic tags, is not sufficiently developed to operate successfully. A recent Commission study found that the level of inaccuracies in reading EID tags runs at between 5% and 45%. The Commission has also admitted that farmers will have to carry the cost of these inaccuracies by way of penalties under the single farm payment. In practice this means that if an electronic reader incorrectly reads EID tags by 10% farmers will lose at least 20% of their single farm payment or most likely their entire payment. This is unacceptable and another good reason for a voluntary option for EID.

Sheep farmers find it impossible to understand why the Commission is attempting to impose compulsory EID on them while allowing imports equivalent to 16 million lambs from New Zealand every year and from other non-EU countries where there is no ID system. The EU wishes to impose EID on Irish and European sheep farmers while turning a blind eye to imports with no tagging and traceability whatsoever. This is similar to the Brazilian beef problem we experienced a few years ago in the resolution of which this committee played an important role.

The imposition of compulsory EID on the Irish sheep sector is totally unfair, impractical and unworkable. It will impose major additional costs and bureaucracy on farmers. It is unnecessary because we have an effective individual sheep tagging system. The IFA urges this committee to back its case and request the Minister to return to Brussels and secure a voluntary EID system in countries such as Ireland where an effective individual sheep identification system already exists.

I will hand over to Mr. Burns who is a sheep farmer and has first-hand knowledge of the problems this system will cause.

Mr. Harry Burns

I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to address the joint committee again. I am finishing my term as chairman of the National Sheep Association and I want to thank the committee for pressing the sheep agenda, particularly in respect of the €18 million unused CAP funds and the hill payment. It might not be as much as we like but I appreciate the committee's help in advancing that case. Hopefully it is the sign of a better future for sheep farming.

I will deal with what EID means for the farmer, industry, factory and the mart industry. There is no shred of evidence that this was a better system for the consumer, the factory, the farmer and everybody involved. We are straightforward about this. We have taken our problem to Brussels. The Commission has agreed that the readers would be only 95% accurate. This is crucial.

I will give an example of what this will mean for a farmer. Rolling out a new system involves more than just the electronic tag. It involves individual tagging from birth. Each sheep will have an individual number from birth. That is very complex. Every day in Ballinrobe, Tullow, Blessington, Macroom and all over the country, farmers buy 50 ewe lambs in batches of ten from five different farmers. Up to 12 months of age those lambs do not have to be electronically tagged. That is being flagged as a solution to the problem but it is not. They must be brought home.

These animals will carry a 12 digit manual number. The farmer will have to bring in the lambs from five flocks and read each animal individually. He will have to write down a total of 600 numbers and send them to Mullinahone, or to Cormac in Tuam, wherever the tag supplier is based. He must do that because the external number on the electronic tag must be identical to the tag in the lamb's ear. Writing down those numbers correctly will be a mammoth task. If everything goes right, the tags will return in a fortnight. The farmer must then select the lambs from the flock and match up each tag. There is great potential for inaccuracy, mistakes and a big cross-compliance issue for farmers and sheep traceability. It begins to undermine the fundamentals of traceability in sheep farming before even bringing in the readers.

The existing system started after the outbreak of foot and mouth disease and was refined because it was not working as it started. It was partly a trial. It was refined to a batch system in which the farmer tags on exit and there is a paper trail which most farmers can complete accurately and get by the cross-compliance levels. A farmer must be almost 100% right to pass the single farm inspection.

I asked the man in charge of this issue in Brussels about cross-compliance. If a farmer goes to the mart and only 95% of the tags on his sheep are read, then the dispatch docket will be 100% wrong. Another way to put it is that it can be as low 5% inaccurate. In fact, the readers can be as much as 45% inaccurate.

There is a major issue of credibility for everyone involved, namely, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, sheep farmers and the industry in general. We cannot allow a system that might undermine our credibility in export markets to come into operation. Other countries can do what they like. As Mr. Walshe stated, if something is wrong then we must highlight that fact. I reiterate that 16 million lambs are imported from New Zealand and not one of them is tagged. It is a case of double standards. The cost per sheep will be €2.50. At present, sheep are worth approximately €75 each. As Mr. Walshe stated, it is equivalent to spending €30 to tag a bovine.

There has been a positive development in sheep trade this year. In the past two months, almost 50,000 sheep were exported live. For the first time in ten years, sheep farmers are considering the trade in something of a positive light. Electronic tagging will kill that positive attitude. Those who purchase sheep at market will be obliged to bring them home, put electronic tags on them and have these read. People are making some money from the live export of sheep at present, but it would not be sufficient to cover the costs involved.

I met the EU Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mariann Fischer Boel, who is soon to leave office but who understands the practical difficulties involved. A complication has arisen in that the EU Commissioner for Health has responsibility for this matter. However, Commissioner Fischer Boel told me that Ireland, Scotland and Wales will have major problems with the system due to the extensive nature of sheep production in each of the three jurisdictions. She also informed me that the solution for Ireland would be to seek a derogation and indicated that there are difficulties with the system.

The EU has stated that the problems can be ironed out as we proceed. However, the system cannot be made perfect because the technology relating to it is flawed. If the technology comes up to spec in two or three years' time, we should reconsider the position. We are in a recession and we must be extremely careful. The cost-benefit analysis carried out by the EU indicates that farmers will pay 98% of the costs involved. No one has shown me how this will benefit anyone. There is no benefit. A farmer who currently spends 30 cent per sheep in respect of tagging, would be obliged to pay €2.50 per sheep under this proposed new system.

Many marts might be obliged to stop selling sheep because the equipment required to read the new tags costs €15,000. A large number of such marts, which are vital in the context of competition, are just about surviving at present.

The Minister has consistently stated that a voluntary system is required. I encourage members to support our stance in respect of this matter. As far as I am concerned, this is not over. New information is coming to light all the time. I understand the matter may be referred back to the European Parliament in the new year. We must be careful, particularly in view of the fact that our sheep industry has been halved in recent years. I hesitate to use the term "green shoots". However, such shoots are beginning to appear. This system, which is similar to the weedkiller Roundup, will kill them.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Burns, with whom it has been a pleasure to work. He has represented the sheep farmers of Ireland in an excellent fashion in recent years.

Deputy Michael Creed

I welcome our guests and thank them for their presentation. I also thank them for their endeavours on behalf of the sheep sector and farmers in general during their respective periods in office. I wish them well in the future.

It is important to place this matter in context. There was a collapse in ewe breeding numbers during the past decade. However, as Mr. Burns pointed out, there are tentative signs of recovery. The proposed new system will be impossible to operate. We depend on exports and we require traceability. The latter already exists. I am concerned that superimposing a second layer of traceability — the technology relating to which is questionable, to say the least — will have the net effect of collapsing the system that is already in place. Given that the industry requires an export market, the nightmare scenario is that neither EID nor the existing traceability system will hold sway. As a result, a disaster will be foisted on the sector. This disaster will have nothing to do with the market relating to sheepmeat but will rather be caused by bureaucracy gone mad.

The single farm payment accounts for 40% of the difficulties experienced by sheep farmers. The introduction of this proposed new system will lead to a doubling of that figure. The Department and the Minister are engaging in doublespeak. It is similar to a "good cop, bad cop" scenario. One would be obliged to ask what the committee can do about the matter at this stage. I propose that members adopt a unified approach and that the committee should write to the Minister to outline its total and absolute refusal to accept this proposal. We should also request that not just the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food but the Department of Health and Children — because this is a DG Sanco proposal — and the Government indicate at the highest level that we will not accept this proposed new system and that we will require a derogation.

This matter provides a lesson in how not to do business. The seeds of this problem were sown just after the foot and mouth disease crisis that originated in the UK. We are now reaping the whirlwind as a result of the fact that the UK did not have a tagging system in place. We have such a system and it works.

I am not sure I can add anything further. I appreciate the briefing on this matter which the IFA previously provided. What is involved strikes me as lunacy. I raised this matter with the Minister in the form of a priority question last week. However, I got no change in that regard from him or his Department. As Mr. Burns stated, the introduction of this proposed new system has the capacity to put the industry out of business. The matter is that serious. The system will not work, it is as simple as that.

The committee has an opportunity to speak as one on this matter and I hope it will do so. I propose, therefore, that we communicate directly with the Ministers for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Health and Children and the Taoiseach and inform them that this system will put the sheep industry out of business.

Chairman

Is Deputy Creed's proposal agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Seán Sherlock

I join previous speakers in wishing Mr. Walshe well in his future endeavours and I congratulate him on his very good tenure as president of the IFA. Mr. Walshe enjoyed the respect of those he represents but he also enjoys the respect of people outside the sector. When the dioxin scare occurred last Christmas, he showed his true mettle. Many people outside the sector are of the view that his response to that major crisis was measured and positive.

I am sure Mr. Burns will correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that complete traceability applies in respect of the national sheep identification system. I am of the opinion that the necessity to electronically tag animals means we have seen the advent of a surreal level of bureaucracy. It is complete and utter madness. When it comes to the traceability of animals, Ireland is way ahead of every other country in the European Union and, arguably, in the world. I do not understand why we would impose a new system on producers. Given that the existing system is working properly, there is no need for a new one.

Mr. Burns stated that the matter is with the European Parliament. Did the concept of introducing a new system emerge on foot of a Commission proposal? If the answer is "Yes", will the European Parliament vote on that proposal? Will the matter be dealt with under the new co-decision procedure as it relates to agriculture? If it does come under that procedure, then Irish MEPs will have a significant say in how the proposal will proceed. Some people have stated that it is a done deal. I know I can speak for Alan Kelly, MEP, in stating that this proposal will be opposed if it is returned to the European Parliament or that the derogation that is being called for will be supported. I say this on the basis that a common-sense approach must be adopted. This new system is completely unnecessary.

I take on board what Mr. Burns stated. The committee should adopt a strong position on the matter. I will be communicating with our political representatives in Brussels in respect of it. If there is scope for a derogation, I hope there will be cross-party support for it. I am amazed that the EU Commission would seek to impose such a measure when the sector in this country is beginning to emerge from the trough it is in. We must do all we can to try to support the case being made.

Deputy P. J. Sheehan

I join other members in wishing Mr. Padraig Walshe well. I have known Mr. Walshe for the past ten years and I can say that he has championed the cause of farmers in this country. Those ten years passed quickly. Mr. Walshe was faced with many crises, which he overcame. He gave great service to the people and has set a precedent for the incoming president of the IFA, who will be kept on his toes.

The proposal we are discussing is the silliest suggestion to ever emanate from the European Union. Red tape bureaucracy seems to be the keynote of policy in Europe. The sooner common sense prevails at European level, the better it will be for agriculture in Ireland. Why change the system which obtains in this country and which has worked so well? The system here should provide the blueprint for that which should obtain throughout the remainder of the EU. I do not see a need for electronic tagging. If technological developments continue along their current route, the next step will be the creation of electronic men and women. The people in Brussels who are contemplating the introduction of a system of electronic tagging for sheep are obviously wired to the moon.

Mr. Burns highlighted, in no uncertain fashion, the double standards that apply in respect of imports. It is impossible for sheep farmers to understand why the EU Commission is seeking to impose a compulsory system for electronically tagging sheep when it is also allowing imports of meat — equivalent to 16 million lambs — from New Zealand and other non-EU countries in which such systems do not obtain. Surely this is a blatant infringement of the rights of Irish sheep farmers, who are doing their best to ensure that there is no double-dealing as far as sheep are concerned.

I congratulate the president of the IFA for outlining in detail the serious impediments that exist in respect of this proposed new system. We will be obliged to insist that the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food press Ireland's case for a derogation from this system. As far as I can see, the system is fraught with errors. As Deputy Creed stated, we already have enough difficulties as regards single farm payments, area aid, roads running through commonages, etc. I contacted the Department in Portlaoise yesterday in respect of 18 cases involving red tape bureaucracy. The time has come for common sense to prevail.

The committee must ensure that the Minister, to the best of his ability, fights Ireland's case in Brussels in respect of a derogation. I have no doubt that he will do so, particularly as he is sympathetic to the points outlined by Mr. Walshe and Mr. Burns in the document presented to the committee. I hope that, like me, every other member will insist that the Minister should present a strong case on behalf of farmers in this country in order that this madcap solution being put forward in Europe in respect of the Irish sheep industry will be derailed.

Deputy Andrew Doyle

I also wish Mr. Walshe and Mr. Burns well with whatever it is they do next. I am sure they will not stray too far from the front line. I congratulate them on the work they have done.

I support the decision to write to the Ministers for Health and Children and Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, and the Taoiseach. Sheep farmers are almost being treated like criminals. We have a system in place whereby sheep can be traced but for some reason this system is not trusted. An attempt is being made to put in place a traceability system involving electronic identification. If we were to attempt to introduce electronic tagging in respect of people considered a risk to society, it would be considered a derogation of human rights. The situation is ridiculous, particularly in view of the fact that we are afraid to introduce this type of technology in areas where it should be introduced.

We have been treated to lectures in respect of carbon capture, carbon-friendly food production, etc. The method of sheep production used in this country is probably one of the most natural ways in which to produce a healthy food in harmony with the environment. I am proud to state that I am a sheep farmer from County Wicklow. In that context, those of us involved in the industry in County Wicklow try to work with the environment in which we live. It has been a tradition that sheep are driven down off the hills and are finished on the lowlands that are found along the coast and on the Kildare side of the county by being fed with grain grown in the county. This method of production has been successful.

Unfortunately, we do not have a sufficient number of local abattoirs — this was not always the case — to allow us to have a proper indigenous sheep production sector in the county. However, that is a matter for another day.

This proposal will drive people out of the industry. I predict that the OPW will have to advertise for people to put sheep on the Wicklow hills to sustain its ecology if this measure goes ahead. Nobody who is a mountain farmer can contemplate a system like this. I have discussed with Mr.Burns how one accounts for mortalities in an environment like this. It is said that one does not need a reader, but one does. If one is to put 100 sheep onto the mountain for the summer and take back 96, one must establish which four are missing. There are other practical issues if this proposal was to get off the ground.

We are trying to put sheep into a category equivalent to murderers and rapists by trying to track them in the way we are doing. The system will not work, there is no cost benefit and the sector will diminish rapidly. There is hope for stabilising the numbers at present levels. If this system comes in that confidence will be lost. This is the first time there has been confidence in the market and lambs were making €3.90 per kilo this week. This is the first time there has been confidence in the market and all of a sudden we are faced with the introduction of this regime in 20 days.

I would not normally advocate militancy but I think we should resist this proposal. We should call people's bluff on single farm payments. It is not acceptable. The British administration has accepted a 10% to 20% default read and that is counted as acceptable. We have 100% traceability in our system. Any efforts that are made to resist this should be supported.

Chairman

Before I call Deputy McGrath, is it agreed that Deputy Aylward takes the Chair? Agreed.

Deputy Bobby Aylward took the Chair.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

I add my good wishes and congratulations to Mr. Padraig Walshe and Mr. Henry Burns. I thank them for their hard work. It has not been easy in agriculture in the past number of years, particularly this year. The climate conditions have been awful.

I agree with the previous speakers. I have experience of working with mountain sheep and as Deputy Sheehan said, this proposal is off the wall. This is high tech to the extreme and it cannot be contemplated. It must be nipped in the bud. Apart from the expense, the time and energy, it would not be possible for hill farmers to round up sheep and bring them in to count them individually. Mountain sheep farmers suffer losses on a regular basis and it is not only the fox that takes them. We should be combatting fraud by "two legged foxes". Instead of legislating to drive them out of business, we should try to maintain and support this important historic industry in rural communities.

We must put an end to this madness.

Senator John Carty

I wish Mr. Padraig Walshe and Mr. Henry Burns well. I agree with the sentiments expressed by members. Can Mr. Burns outline the benefit of voluntary tagging if everybody was not tagging?

Mr. Padraig Walshe

If the French and the Spanish want to do it, let them do it.

Senator John Carty

I was missing that point.

Mr. Henry Burns

The voluntary part is that we would volunteer not to do it.

Senator John Carty

What is the position in France? We export a good deal of lamb. Most of the lamb from my part of the country goes to France. Is France in favour of tagging?

Deputy Noel Treacy

I apologise for being late. This is my third meeting this morning and I am on my way to another. May I express sympathy to Deputy Brady and his wife on their bereavement this week.

I welcome Padraig Walshe and his colleagues and I know he is winding down in this job. I am not sure whether Mr. Burns is also winding down, but I wish them well in the future and on the European scene.

I have long experience in the sheep industry having been a producer. More particularly I spent 15 years in the livestock marketing sector, dealing with sheep six days a week, and probably selling a couple of thousand a day, or at least on one day of the week. I come from a province that produces and has continuously produced one third of the sheep population of the country. When one takes account of the lifespan of a lamb, it is a bit daft to be going down this road. I can understand adult sheep having to be tagged in a particular way. We could pursue the voluntary option and the Minister is amenable to that. We need to put an alternative option that suits us and take this proposal off the agenda. It is a challenge and by and large the political system supports the Minister's voluntary option which the IFA and farming bodies are seeking.

We must persuade the Council of Ministers, the Commission and the Parliament to have a change of attitude. We have to ensure that we are able to persuade our parliamentarians in Europe to drive an agenda that will give us a voluntary option. At official level, the Commission needs to review this situation. At its negotiating level in Europe, and Mr. White in his new position in Europe, the IFA will use all avenues to try to bring the EU around to the idea of Ireland having the right to decide what is best for it. It will take a mighty effort because it is on the agenda for a long time. It is a challenging situation and taking into account the short life of a lamb, I see no value in it.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bobby Aylward)

I wish to add my voice. I made representations at local level in County Kilkenny. I also went to the Minister but he told me his hands were tied in that it was a European Commission decision and that he was trying to water down the decision. We should lobby and go back to the Minister and the MEPs as we have a proposal that we can agree on. I hope we can get another option. We have a system of traceability that works well. I do not think that electronic tagging is the right road to take.

Mr. Colm O’Donnell

It is good that there is all-party agreement for the proposal from Deputy Creed. Mr. Burns has outlined the perspective of the hill farmers, so I will not repeat that. This proposal has major financial implications and more importantly health issues arise. A sheep is worth between €70 to €75 but a sheep from the hills is worth about €50. The same costs must be incurred. We are totally dependent on the store lamb and breeding sheep in our annual sales. If the proposed system is introduced, we will lose our customer base for store lambs and the breeding flock, because they will not take on this extra layer of bureaucracy. We will be badly affected economically.

On a health issue, the ears of hill sheep are not suitable for the insertion of an extra tag. I have one of the trial farms with Teagasc and I had to put electronic tags on my sheep. When it came to weighing our sheep again before putting them out with the rams, 20 ewes out of 200, 12%, had lost these electronic tags. The problem is that they pull directly out of the ear so there is a large cut in the ear. That ear is rendered useless so that another tag cannot be put on it. There is a huge health issue here. If the EU Commissioner for Health is proposing electronic tagging, surely there is a health aspect for the sheep. If those sheep are not treated with antibiotics, given their nomadic existence on hills, they will die from infection on those hills. I would be very much against going down the road of electronic tagging from a health perspective, not to mention the economic issues.

Acting Chairman

Is there an exemption whereby sheep up to 12 months old do not have to be tagged?

Mr. Padraig Walshe

If I may——

Acting Chairman

Before the president responds I want to call Deputy Scanlon.

Deputy Eamon Scanlon

I apologise for being late as I was at another meeting. Whatever is agreed here we will all support it. Mr. O'Donnell is a professional farmer and I know how he performs as a farmer. In view of the health concerns for sheep, did he say that 12%——

Mr. Colm O’Donnell

A box of 25 tags was lost on 200 ewes in one season. They had either fallen out or had been ripped out while grazing the vast amounts of heather on the hills at present. It has got out of proportion.

Deputy Eamon Scanlon

Quite honestly, tagging is not working.

Acting Chairman

Can the matter be pursued as a health issue, given that the EU Commissioner for Health is imposing it?

Mr. Colm O’Donnell

It is a welfare issue.

Mr. Padraig Walshe

I thank members for their kind comments. Even though Deputy Sheehan referred to ten years, I am only president for the past four. It seems as if I am in the post for a much longer period because I appeared before the committee as chairman of the dairy section of the IFA. I am delighted to appear before the committee to discuss these issues on a regular basis.

This issue makes much sense on health grounds. I was due to meet the new EU Commissioner for Health next week on this issue but that meeting may be deferred until after Christmas. I would appreciate if the committee would have a word with our new Irish Commissioner and get her to take an interest in it from the point of view of pushing the case, because a decision will be made by DG SANCO as Mr. Henry Burns said.

Deputy Sherlock referred to dioxins in Irish pork. This proved that the traceability system at farm level fell down when it got to the factory. It went no further. We have perfect traceability at farm level in respect of sheep. This proposal will not address the fact that it is not carried through to the supermarket shelf. Mr. Burns made a point earlier that people need to realise the practicality of electronic tagging. Let us take the example of the low-land farm which he mentioned. The farmer goes to the mart, an activity with which Deputy Treacy is familiar, and buys 50 store lambs with 12 digit tags in place on their ears, a total of 600 digits. I defy any member of this committee to put all those digits on paper without making a mistake, and send them to Mullinahone, Tuam or wherever to get the electronic tag. I used to register calves with nine-digit tags regularly before I got into a computerised system. It is just impossible not to make mistakes. Let us consider the practicality of 50 lambs in a yard with one person calling out the numbers to someone else. There are going to be mistakes. When the farmer receives the electronic tags, for which he needs a reader, he has to match them with the old tag. The practicality of trying to do this on the mountain where it is not easy to gather the sheep is unworkable, as outlined by Mr. O'Donnell. We will continue to push that case.

I believe this issue has been pushed by vested interests who developed the technology, had not got a use for it and lobbied, in France and particularly in Spain, where much of the sheep flock is milking sheep which are indoors. This is a totally different system of sheep and lamb production than in Ireland or the UK. As Mr. Kinsella said the animals are indoors, many are milking, and have a longer lifespan than the more mature animals. It is just not practical for our system of sheep farming.

I know the Minister will say he has been fighting this issue and that the decision, unfortunately, was made three years ago. When this decision was being made three or four years ago, Mr. Burns, Mr. Kinsella and all our various representatives at European level were highlighting the problems, as were our Scottish colleagues. However, there was no interest from most other European countries at that time. I know now from my involvement that the Germans and many other countries are kicking up because electronic tagging is coming close to implementation and they are beginning to see the problems and the impracticality of it. Perhaps the issue could be raised again.

What is right is right and what was right yesterday is still right today. If it was wrong yesterday it is still wrong today. Unfortunately, this decision was made three or four years ago. It was so far down the road at the time that people just did not think seriously enough about it. We have to raise it on the agenda again and get a practical solution. If the Spanish wish to go ahead let them but do not force us to go down the same road because it will not work here. Mr. O'Donnell has given the practical example. I did not realise the tag loss rate was quite so high but that was a Teagasc trial done on his farm.

Members of the committee are all farming people and know that if the animal's ear gets torn on the hills and infection sets in, that is final. There is also an animal welfare issue at stake. We will push the issue and it is important that the committee would support us in doing so. We have to use every possible angle to do that. I suggest that contact with the new Commissioner at EU level might be useful.

Mr. Henry Burns

I cannot say much more than that. The Chairman asked if there was an exemption in the case of sheep up to 12 months old. The 12 months issue is being put forward as a solution. It is not a solution because according to the example I gave of the farmer buying store lambs or the breeding ewes, he or she still has the complication that it will interfere with the industry. Everything to do with this regulation is flawed and the equipment to be used is flawed. As our president said, two wrongs will not make a right. This does not even work in theory but it works in an office. The trials that have been done have messed up in many ways. As the president said, vested interests have driven it over the line. When it comes into force the committee, having listened to farmers in their areas, know what will happen on the ground, they know it will not work.If the Department embraced this, the farmer pays all the costs. Investments will have to be made. I hesitate to ask what happened in regard to electronic voting? Where is that today? That is not a political point but it is rather like electronic voting, it may never be used.

This is an attempt to impose a Europe-wide trial of electronic tagging for every sheep with the farmer incurring all the costs. The companies involved want this trial to be implemented by the Commission. The Minister has been consistently in favour of voluntary identification but we need to box smart in regard to this issue. The Minister grasps that fact and knows that we have to point out the differences in our system from the systems in countries that are implementing compulsory identification. If he does that, many other countries will come on board. The practicalities of rolling out the plan are now apparent and the problems are coming to light. The smart thing for Ireland to do would be to push it out for a few years. Either it will work very well in a couple of years' time or it will be like e-voting and will be put into the bin. Either way we will not waste a huge amount of farmers' money by developing an imperfect system which will undermine traceability.

Acting Chairman

Is the possibility of a co-decision by the European Parliament still alive or is it too late?

Mr. Padraig Walshe

I had an experience of the European Parliament last week and, while the Acting Chairman's brother has been very helpful to us in respect of the sheep industry, I have to say I am not looking forward to it.

Mr. Henry Burns

I mentioned the European Parliament because some people are trying to move the matter in its direction but that is not where the solution lies. The solution is within the Minister's grasp. Some people are shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted but the Minister has the power to act. He will get all the support he needs from us and from people in Germany and other countries.

Mr. Padraig Walshe

This scheme was developed by vested interests in the shape of the industrial concerns who developed the technology and had to find a way of ensuring it was used. They have achieved that but we have to convince DG SANCO of the practical problems of implementing it to avoid a disaster such as we have experienced previously.

Mr. Henry Burns

We must be very careful. As Senator Carty said, we are exporters and do not want to be exposed to a system that will not produce traceability. We do not want to throw a good traceability system into the bin and take on something that is not accurate.

Mr. Colm O’Donnell

We said that some countries embraced the initiative, particularly Spain. Spain has a particular problem with brucellosis in sheep and is helping monitor the problem by electronic identification, EID. However, the Spanish have admitted that EID does not give extra traceability. In this context, it is important that our Minister emphasises the voluntary aspect.

Acting Chairman

A unanimous, cross-party decision has been taken to write to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, the Minister for Health and Children, the Taoiseach and the proposed new EU Commissioner, Ms Máire Geoghegan-Quinn. We will individually lobby the Minister to go back to Brussels on the issue.

I thank the witnesses for coming before the committee. I wish Mr. Walshe and Mr. Burns the very best. They have done their job very well in the past number of years in representing farmers. I know they will not go away but will keep banging on doors in farmers' interests.

The meeting will now adjourn until next Wednesday, when Teagasc will be in attendance.

The joint committee adjourned at 10.45 a.m. until 11.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 16 December 2009.