Vol. 88 No. 7
I move:
That Seanad Éireann approves the following Regulations in draft:
Pigs and Bacon Act, 1935 (Part II) (No. 6) Regulations, 1978, and Agricultural Produce (Fresh Meat) Act, 1930 (Exporters' Licences) (Fees) Regulations, 1978
copies of which were laid in draft before the Seanad on the 14th day of February, 1978.
These regulations would increase the fees payable in respect of cattle, sheep and pigs presented for veterinary inspection under the Fresh Meat Acts and the Pigs and Bacon Acts. The present rates of fees are quite inadequate to meet the cost of the veterinary inspection service provided by my Department and it is necessary that they be brought more into line with that cost. It is proposed to raise the fee for cattle from 45p to £1 per head and that for sheep from 8p to 17p per head. In the case of pigs the increase would be from 12p to 25p per head. I propose to bring the increases into effect on 6 March 1978.
The cost of providing the veterinary inspection service at meat export plants has increased steadily over the years. This is attributable to increased salaries, inflation, and the need to provide a more intensive system of veterinary control at factories in accordance with EEC rules. The cost has risen steeply in the past few years and the position is that the receipts meet less than half of the cost of the service.
In 1977 receipts from fees amounted to £700,000 while the cost of the service was in excess of £2 million. The new rates of fees are expected to bring in £1.6 million in a calendar year. When they are viewed in the context of the present-day values of livestock the rates of fees are very modest. Without veterinary control and certification we could have no meat export trade.
The proposed increases have been cleared by the National Prices Commission. These fees do not apply to abattoirs catering for the home market only, which are under local authority supervision.
I sympathise with the necessity to increase fees of this nature. I am concerned at the moment because even though the price of stock has risen very high it is no good to a farmer unless he can still make a profit. If there has not been a sufficient increase for him to see his profit then this, in effect, can erode that type of profit.
I agree and sympathise with the necessity to keep fees like this in line with the increased cost which the Department and the economy must suffer, but I am a little bit concerned that certainly at EEC level the emphasis is on restraint in price increases for agricultural produce. I am concerned that there have been several acts committed in this country in the course of the past few months that have had the effect of taking large sums of money out of farmers' pockets, like the abolition of the abatement on rates and the removal of the subsidy on phosphorous manures. I am concerned that this trend should stop because I think this is a time when farmers need to be encouraged more than ever to increase production on their land. They are going through a stage where they cannot expect to get the increased prices that they have been getting over the past few years but it is important for the economy generally and particularly for the agricultural economy that there would be increased production and we should try to maintain the margin of profit that exists. My party in the Seanad will not oppose this in the sense that we know and sympathise with the necessity for it, but I think that I would speak for many of the farming community when I ask at least for a break for the moment in the removal of subsidies and increases in taxes like this.
I approve of the regulation. I think it is an updating of veterinary fees. While we are on veterinary fees, may I take this opportunity of congratulating the Minister for Agriculture in again gaining the confidence of our veterinary association in regard to the eradication of diseases. It was important to gain the goodwill of the association and I want to compliment the Minister. Our programmes for bovine TB and brucellosis eradication are going to continue in an accelerated fashion because this is an EEC regulation and we must have a disease-free animal herd here by at least 1979 or 1980.
In connection with the fees, I would like to bring to the notice of the Seanad that in the Irish livestock exporters trade an Irish livestock exporter at this point has to have three examinations of his breeding heifers before they are exported to Britain or indeed to the EEC. That costs veterinary fees to the extent of £1 to £1.50 because the exporter must arrange a veterinary TB examination, a brucellosis examination and a pregnancy examination for the animals. This cost is not being pased on to the farming community. For that reason I would hope that this increase, which is modest and is necessary to meet inflation, would not be passed on to the farming community by the fresh meat exporters and by the factories throughout the country. As I said, the livestock exporter must bear this cost himself when he is getting certificates for exportation of his breeding heifers and for bullocks exported through the port of Dublin he has to have a bovine TB test which costs in the region of £1. That also has not been passed back to the farming community. That is the only reservation I have in this. I welcome the regulation for the increase. I think it is necessary, provided it does not go back to the producer.
I thank Senator Molony and Senator O'Toole for their contributions and their observations on the proposal and their obvious recognition of the reality and good sense in the context of modern cattle prices and of the reasonableness of the charge now being made under this legislation.
I know that Senator Molony spoke a bit with his tongue in his cheek when he spoke of certain other things that have taken place in the agricultural economy in recent months. He was a bit selective as one would understand and possibly even forgive, but he did omit to say that in the same context as the removal of the £4 million phosphate subsidy there was an increase in the price of reactor cattle that will cost an extra £7,500,000. As well as that there is the introduction of the beef classification scheme. In the later part of last year there was the restoration of the sheep export subsidy and later still the opening up of the French market so that it is not quite correct to say that the farming economy has been damaged in any way.
In the general context of the financing of agriculture, even if I had twice the amount of money that is now being made available to me by the Dáil, I am not sure that I would devote any part of it to the subsidisation of veterinary inspection fees because there are areas within the agricultural sector that require greater investment and require it to a bigger extent. I think that both Senators who spoke on this measure recognise that and I am grateful to them.
If the House would agree could we have a 20-minute recess?
Business suspended at 6.10 p.m. and resumed at 6.30 p.m.
