Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 19 Jul 1979

Vol. 92 No. 15

Milk (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, 1979: Second and Subsequent Stages.

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

In the White Paper on National Development the Government indicated their intention of revising the fees charged for dairy inspection services provided by the Department of Agriculture in order to meet the growing cost of such services. The Bill is to give effect to this.

No new principle is involved in the Bill. The fee at present charged for dairy inspection services was fixed by the Dairy Produce (Amendment) Act of 1941 and has not been increased since, despite the fact that the cost of the inspection services has increased very significantly in the meantime. The current fee brings in only about £14,000 per annum in revenue against an estimated cost of the inspection service in 1979 of about £900,000. As indicated in the White Paper the Government consider that a continuation of this situation whereby the shortfall in financing the service is met by the general taxpayer is undesirable and should be corrected.

As butter is now only one of a number of dairy products manufactured in this country, the fee on butter fixed in 1941 is to be abolished and replaced by a comprehensive fee on all milk sold for manufacturing purposes. The inspection services provided by the Department cover all dairy products manufactured for the home or export trade. The Bill will also apply to milk sold for the liquid trade in respect of which my Department also provide an inspection service.

The Bill provides that the fee will be payable by the first purchaser of the milk so there is no possibility of the fee being payable more than once on any particular lot of milk. Thus for example under section 2 butter factories will not be liable. The immediate reason is that they do not purchase milk. But the basic reason is that the butter they blend will have been made at a creamery from milk on which the fee will have been charged. Viewed in this light butter factories will be in no different position from any dairy produce manufacturers who take in milk on which the fee has previously been charged at other premises.

Likewise farmers with highest grade licences are exempt even though the Department provide an inspection service for them. Such licensees account for only a very small fraction of the total milk processed and in any event about half their annual production is bought by pasteurisers who will pay the fee on it.

Among other sections of the Bill are those providing for the keeping of records, section 4, recovery of fees, section 5, inspection of records by officers of the Minister, section 6, and cancellation, revocation or suspension of registrations or licences in case of refusal to pay the fee, section 7.

As to the rate of fee being provided for at section 3 (1), one-tenth of a penny per gallon can only be described as a very modest imposition. In terms of the current milk prices it represents less than 0.2 per cent of the price paid for manufacturing milk and even less for milk purchased for the liquid milk trade. I commend this Bill to the House.

The only objection we have to the Bill is the increase in the cost of the inspection service to almost £1 million. This represents to us additional taxation on the farming community because it is the farmers who are going to pay for it out of their milk. In view of all the taxation proposals that have been recently put forward by the Government, one would say it is about time to stop. All these proposals are named in the Bill we discussed this morning. In a short period of a few weeks this amount of taxation has now been imposed on farmers without any consultation one might say with the farming organisations. I can understand the extra cost of the inspection service because of the changes and development in that industry over the past 10 or 15 years. Being one of the executives in the industry who got caught up in the amalgamation of a small society into a big society, and taking my position in that large society, I know the development of the industry.

I also know many of the dairy produce inspectors and they are a credit to the Department of Agriculture. They carry out their duties with respect and by that they get more co-operation in the industry. The Department should look at the personnel they are now employing, and take into consideration what is being paid to management within the industry in comparison with the salaries paid to their own people. It is my opinion that certain grades of managers within the industry who were paid substantially less than the Department officials, have over a period of five or six years got advances in pay so as to give them substantially more than the Department inspectors. It is about time the Department looked at that aspect of the matter, because if they do not they will not get the type of personnel they have been obtaining from the universities. There are many more outlets for those people where they can probably get more satisfaction and definitely higher salaries. If the Department want to retain people of this standard or increase their numbers, then they must pay them, and it is time the Department or the inspectors sat down with the Minister for Finance if he is the appropriate person and discussed their salaries with him. There is a case to be made for increased salaries.

My main opposition to the Bill is the increase in the cost of up to £1 million imposed by it. Naturally it will be the farmers who will have to pay that. We have already heard this morning of the other levies that are being imposed on farmers. All those levies will reduce any profit that has been made by farmers, especially those farmers who are in milk and have to work seven days a week, all through the summer and have very little time to enjoy themselves. The increase in the price of milk now is settled. For the future, I can see more of the type of increases in milk prices that have pertained over the past four or five years.

Could we have an indication as to what the Seanad intend to do regarding a lunchbreak?

We will conclude this Bill before we rise.

We are not strenuously opposed to the Bill but we are not in favour of the type of levies being put on the agricultural industry which will have to be paid by the farmer. The farmers are already burdened enough with the type of legislation that is now going through and the 2 per cent co-responsibility levy. All of those will erode the profits farmers make from farming. That is the only objection we have to the Bill but I appeal to the Department to look after the inspectors.

The introduction of this Bill at this stage is unwise because it is another addition to a long list of levies and taxation being imposed on the farming community at a time when farming prices are tapering off and when, in real terms, there is a decrease in farmers' incomes. It comes at a time when the farmer has to face increasing costs and when increased importation of New Zealand butter into Britain is likely to increase further the difficulties confronting the farming organisations and milk producers. For that reason it is unwelcome, not so much for the amount of levy imposed under it but because of the fact that it is an addition to a whole series of levies and withdrawal of subsidies the combined effect of which will be to make farming more unprofitable. This will drive more and more people out of milk production, which would be a serious blow to the economy.

I thank Senators Butler and O'Brien for their contributions to the Bill. I realise that any measure of this nature which imposes further taxation on farmers or, indeed on any other section of the community, is not welcome. It will be appreciated by all sides of the House that this is a very small measure. The increase asked for is very small. Perhaps the mistake made over the years was that this has not been increased since 1941 when it was first introduced. The fee being charged at present brings in £14,000 whereas the overall cost for the inspection to the Exchequer amounts to about £900,000. The Government consider that a continuation of this situation whereby the shortfall in financing the service is met by the taxpayer is undesirable and should be corrected. For that reason it is necessary to bring in this measure, which is a very small imposition on the industry for the type of service that is being provided.

Question put and agreed to.
Agreed to take remaining Stages today.
Bill put through Committee, reported without amendment, received for final consideration and passed.
Business suspended at 1.10 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Top
Share