Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 30 Nov 1955

Vol. 45 No. 9

Agricultural Produce (Eggs) Bill, 1955—Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

In accordance with the provisions of the Agricultural Produce (Eggs) Act, 1939, every egg and every package of eggs consigned from a registered egg wholesaler's premises must be marked with the marks prescribed by the regulations made under that Act. The marks at present prescribed for the shells of fresh eggs are the country of origin mark and code mark. The marks prescribed for packages containing eggs consigned for export are the grade mark; the nationality mark, that is, the words "Produce of the Republic of Ireland"; the transport mark—"Eggs —This side up"; the exporter's identification number, the quantity mark and the date of export mark. Each of these marks serves a useful purpose from the point of view of the efficient marketing of our eggs and has not, I am satisfied, militated in the past against the sale of our eggs abroad. Recently, however, inquiries for unstamped eggs have been received by some of our exporters from countries in which we have been trying to find an outlet for our surplus poultry products, while importers in some of our markets on the Continent have stated that Irish eggs would be more readily saleable on those markets if the date of export mark did not appear on the boxes.

In view of the intense competition which our eggs are meeting on the export markets, it seems to me essential that any obstacles which hinder, even in the slightest degree, the sale of our eggs on those markets should, where possible, be removed. The Bill before you is intended to do that.

I would like to make it clear that the exportation of eggs, unstamped, would not increase the possibility of the eggs not being up to the required standard of quality. Eggs in commercial quantities may be exported only by a registered egg wholesaler who is also licensed to export. Every egg packed for export must be tested for freshness and must be clean and properly graded. The eggs consigned for export are examined by my Department's inspectors at the ports. These inspectors would be aware of the cases where exemptions from the stamping of the eggs, etc., had been granted and would examine the eggs all the more carefully in such cases.

The obligation to mark every egg and every package of eggs offered for sale or for export still stands and will be unaffected by anything in this Bill.

What is sought in this Bill is merely the power to exempt exporters from the obligation to stamp eggs and to mark egg cases. It is not my intention, however, to grant such exemptions automatically; every application will be carefully examined and exemption will be granted only where I am satisfied that that course is in the best interests of our export trade in eggs and that the exporter is complying with the requirements of the importing country.

I take it that the House will approve of this Bill mainly because the Minister and his Department have made the case that some benefit will be conferred on a certain section of our export trade through its enactment. It is, however, a matter for consideration whether the exemptions which it is proposed to give under the Bill may not, in certain cases, be availed of in order to evade the operations of the egg production Acts of the past, which rendered the marking of eggs and packages of eggs obligatory.

One is inclined to ask when and where does the Bill begin to take effect. If a dealer is buying eggs from a producer, can he refrain from marking the eggs on the ground that he will be exempted by this Bill? If he is a dealer who is exporting a certain quantity of his eggs to the Continent and a certain quantity to Britain, or if he is selling a certain quantity on the home market, can he evade his obligations in regard to the British or the home market under this Bill? When dealing with a matter in regard to which safeguards will need to be operated, I do not think it is easy in a short Bill of this kind to embody safeguards. I suppose we have to rely upon the Minister's Department to see that nothing is done that will be detrimental to the egg trade in general, in order merely to capture what may perhaps be only a small outlet for some of our surplus eggs.

I think there is something peculiar about the mentality of people who do not like to see the age of the egg recorded on its shell, or on the packet in which it is contained. It may be that the people on the Continent who deal in eggs are a little bit, shall we say, broad-minded in regard to their freshness or otherwise. However, if they want eggs unstamped, I suppose we have to give them to them. It is a matter on which tastes differ widely. I know a number of people who would be rather inclined to regard an unstamped egg as being fresher than one that is stamped. I know that here, in the city, there is a certain demand for unstamped eggs, particularly when people are aware of the place of origin of the eggs or when they can secure eggs direct from the producers. That is understandable. No hen will put a number on the egg when she is laying it, or after laying it. The assumption is that, once an egg is stamped or branded, it is at least a little older than it really is.

In my view, it is a pity the whole business of the marketing of eggs should be in such a haphazard position, so to speak, that it is necessary to stamp eggs for any portion of the market. It is a pity we could not have all our producers combined in one big co-operative marketing society, so that they would direct the eggs as quickly as possible from the farm to the ultimate consumer, without any delay at any sector of the market. When a number of people have to handle a product of this kind, there is always a danger that somebody along the line will endeavour to hold up the product in order to take advantage of improving markets. I am told by those in the trade that there is a tendency for eggs to be a little less fresh during the period when markets are rising. I suppose that is human nature. If the producers were all combined in one big co-operative organisation—I think it would require to be so big as to embrace all—they could ensure that the eggs would reach the consumer in the shortest possible time and would be concerned to ensure that the eggs reach the consumer in the best possible condition.

I suppose it is true to say, although I do not know whether statistics have been prepared on this matter, that less than one hen in a million lays a bad egg. Nevertheless, consumers do occasionally meet with eggs which are not quite good and they are sometimes inclined to blame the hen. We could avoid that, I think, and it can only be avoided by some system of nationalised co-operative marketing.

It is interesting to note that this Bill is concerned to find a market for Irish eggs on the Continent. I think some of the continental countries are interested in unmarked eggs. I seem to recollect that at one time the Minister used to make a lot of capital out of the fact that another Government here was seeking alternative markets for eggs. I think he created a certain amount of amusement when describing the actions and the activities of officials of the Department of Agriculture as they travelled to the Continent looking for alternative markets. It seems, however, as if those elusive markets were there all the time. The Minister is now endeavouring to ensure in this Bill that they will be availed of.

I seem to recollect also that at one time the Minister talked very loudly about drowning the British people with eggs. Are we to take it from this Bill that the drowning process has been completed and that there is now an overflow to the Continent, or is it that the British have, by some means, erected a dam that has stemmed the flood and diverted it to other countries? Whatever the reason may be, it appears that there is a market in countries other than Britain, a market that can be availed of. Of course, the trouble for most people at the present time is that the hens are not laying sufficient eggs during the periods when they are scarce. I presume this Bill is intended to come into operation when there is a very heavy supply on our markets and perhaps also on the markets in Britain. Any measure of that kind must be welcomed by this House.

I should like to direct the Minister's attention to the fact that during the past year the number of poultry here decreased by 71,000. That is rather an indication that the poultry industry is not progressing. I suggest that measures should be adopted to deal with that matter. In this case, I think the Minister and his Department must take the initiative in so organising the poultry industry that it will be co-operatively run, so far as marketing is concerned. One thing is certain in regard to this matter. In some cases, I am not too optimistic or too enthusiastic about co-operation, but when you are dealing with a product such as the egg, which is almost as near as possible to being perfect, I think it is something which could be handled by a co-operative society of producers, and handled efficiently, provided the right help and guidance were given to them by the Minister and his Department and provided the matter were approached in a businesslike and official way.

I am afraid I am not satisfied at all as to the need for this Bill. As I read it and understand it, in accordance with what the Minister has told us, it is for the purpose of enabling the Minister to allow some of our exporters to evade the present provisions of the Agricultural Produce (Eggs) Act, 1939. I notice that, under that Act, the penalty for contravening these provisions is £20 fine for the first offence, and, after that, £50 fine, or six months in jail, or both. I take it that there was a reason for these provisions. The Minister has told us what they were: the marking on the egg of the code mark and the mark of nationality and the marking on the package of the nationality, transport stamp, quantity, etc., and date. He told us that some foreign importers find this date mark a little bit of a worry to them. What was the purpose of asking for the date? It is quite clear that the purpose was so that anybody buying the package subsequently would know, comparatively speaking, the freshness of the egg. We are now asked by some importers, in countries unnamed, to omit the giving of this valuable information, because they find it awkward —because they find they can sell the eggs more readily if the date mark is not clearly stated on the package.

I would contend that the reputation of Irish eggs in any market depends — arising largely out of this kind of legislation — upon their reputation of being always fresh. The date mark and the code mark and the nationality mark are a guarantee, when you see them, that you are getting fresh eggs. There are rare exceptions, but that is the reputation that has been built up. Now, apparently, that will no longer be the method obtaining, because we are making it easier for people in other countries to market our eggs at a greater age. They need not necessarily mention that they are our eggs, but they can easily market them without any reference to date at all.

What is the need at home for the code marking of eggs? The answer is that it guarantees freshness, guarantees the recent laying of the eggs. That is the home need for the date and the code mark, and I am quite sure the Minister would not be willing to dispense with them. I suggest that the purpose of this Bill is to make it easier for some unnamed foreign importer to swindle his own public with Irish eggs. I would disapprove of the principle of helping that to be done more easily, even though it does not affect our own nationals or our own exporters. The exporters will still export the same quality of eggs.

The Minister assured us that in each case where an application is made to him, he will have the matter examined very carefully and that it will be only with the greatest reluctance that he will allow exemptions from these conditions. The nature of his examination will be to ensure that when the eggs leave Ireland, they will be fresh, but he is not ensuring that these eggs will not be marketed anywhere else in a stale condition.

Our primary consideration on this Bill should be our duty to the ultimate consumer. I would say that I do not care a curse about the middleman of some continental country who finds it easier to control, stock, and get rid of the eggs at certain inflated prices if we do not reveal the date. I would be strongly against this Bill.

Debate adjourned.
Business suspended at 6 p.m. and resumed at 7 p.m.
Top
Share