Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 Nov 1987

Vol. 117 No. 12

International Carriage of Perishable Foodstuffs Bill, 1987: Second and Subsequent Stages.

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

Táimse ag iarraidh ar an Seanad glacadh leis an mBille seo chun go mbeadh sé ar chumas an Stáit seo glacadh go foirmiúil le dhá Chomhaontaithe maidir le hiom-par feola, táirgí déiríochta, éisc agus earraí bia meatacha eile ar talamh ó aon tír go haon tír eile san limistéar ollmhór idir Tuaisceart na hEorpa, láimh leis an gCiorcal Artach, agus cósta na hAifrice Thuaidh. 'Sé sainchuspóir na gComhaontaithe sin ná cuidiú le fás agus borradh i dtrádáil idirnáisiúnta bia — má chomhlíontár na caighdeáin iompair agus trealaimh atá leagtha síos 'sna Comhaontaithe ní chuirfear aon bhac ar iompar idirnáisiúnta de'n chineál sin.

Cuireadh téacs na gComhaontaithe faoi bhráid Tithe an Oireachtais agus tá glactha leis an téacs ag Dáil Éireann go foirmiúil tré Rún speisialta a ritheadh faoi Airteagal Fiche Naoi de'n Bhunreacht.

This Bill provides the necessary framework for implementing ATP — the Agreement on the International Carriage of Perishable Foodstuffs and on the Special Equipment to be Used for such Carriage — and a multilateral agreement under Article Seven of ATP concerning carriage to and from Italy, in the seven months, April to October, each year in vehicles with side walls of a thickness not less than 45 millimetres. The text of both agreements was laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas on 15 October 1987 and Dáil Éireann formally approved their terms as required by Article 29.5 of the Constitution because they would involve a charge on public funds through their implementation and enforcement.

The Bill enables the Minister for Tourism and Transport to make regulations from time to time to apply the detailed technical requirements of the agreements as regards standards for transport equipment and operating conditions for the international carriage of perishable foodstuffs, as such requirements are developing in line with developments in food and equipment technologies. Such regulations will be devised in close consultation with the other Departments and other interests concerned and will be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas which will have power — under section 14 of the Bill — to annul the regulations if they should consider it necessary to do so.

The Bill also makes appropriate provision for enforcement, as specifically required by the agreements and as was recommended by the Transport Consultative Commission in its 1981 report on Road Freight Haulage.

Neither the Bill nor the regulations to be made under it are intended to increase costs for Irish hauliers or producers. No disruption of proper export activity should arise from enforcement activity under the Bill. I can assure the Seanad that enforcement activity will be cost-effective and I will be making every effort, in consultation with the other enforcement agencies concerned, to avail as far as possible of existing inspection arrangements in relation to perishable foodstuffs.

Thus, the Bill may be summarised as providing the necessary legal basis for the examination or testing of transport equipment for compliance with ATP requirements and any special further requirements of any multilateral agreement under Article Seven of ATP, and for the certification of equipment complying with those requirements, and for effective enforcement. The comprehensive Explanatory and Financial Memorandum gives a detailed commentary on the provisions of the Bill as well as the general background to it.

As regards accession to ATP, Article Eleven of ATP provides that accession by a state to ATP will not take place until one year has elapsed after that state has deposited its instrument of accession with the United Nations, which is the parent body of the Economic Commission for Europe which launched ATP and is charged with its monitoring and development. Enactment of the Bill is all that remains to be done now to enable Ireland to deposit its instrument of accession, since the terms of the agreement and of the Bill have already been approved by Dáil Éireann.

Ireland must first become an ATP contracting state before it can accede to the multilateral agreement concerning carriage in thin-walled vehicles to and from Italy which came into force on 18 June 1987. The terms of that agreement have also been approved by Dáil Éireann and the Bill is so framed as to enable Ireland to implement the detailed requirements of that agreement, and any other muti-lateral agreement which may arise under ATP, as well as the detailed requirements of ATP itself.

Early Seanad approval of the Bill and its enactment would, therefore, enable Ireland to accede to both ATP and the Italian Multilateral Agreement in just a year from now.

In the meantime Ireland will continue present administrative arrangements for implementing both agreements, but will be making the necessary preparations to have any required revised arrangements ready for putting in place at latest when Ireland's accession to ATP and the multilateral agreement takes effect. My intention is to have the necessary regulations made as soon as possible under the Bill when enacted, and well in advance of their operative date, so that all concerned will be fully aware of the statutory requirements and have sufficient time to prepare for compliance therewith. The Bill enables such regulations to be made as required — they would only come into force on the day on which the Bill as a whole would become operative in consequence of a ministerial order under section 1 of the Bill.

While I am, indeed, pleased to inform the House that, so far, no problems have been encountered under the present administrative arrangements and that no problems are envisaged pending Ireland's accession to the agreements — hopefully in a year's time — I must caution against any complacency in the matter by either hauliers or producers. Without legislation Irish certificates of compliance are potentially open to challenge by any one of the other 20 European states which are ATP contracting states, with consequential risk of hauliers being delayed or refused entry at international frontiers. It is clearly in the national interest that the necessary legislation be in place at the earliest possible date. Ireland, Greece and Portugal are the only EC states which have not yet acceded to ATP. I understand that both Greece and Portugal are now moving towards accession and, therefore, Ireland should not delay its accession. More importantly, accession will enable Ireland to be fully involved in monitoring the operation of ATP by the other ATP contracting states and in developing ATP.

As I mentioned in my opening remarks, ATP is designed to increase international trade in perishable foodstuffs by freeing international carriage from local requirements where that carriage is subject to, and is in conformity with, ATP requirements. The House and all others concerned must note, therefore, that carriage which is not within the scope of ATP may be subject to special local requirements, perhaps more stringent than ATP ones. In other words, ATP-type requirements, or more stringent ones, may be imposed by ATP contracting states for domestic policy reasons on international or other carriage of perishable foodstuffs into or through their territories where the carriage is, strictly speaking, outside the scope of ATP itself — for example, carriage of foodstuffs within one state only after a sea journey of 150 kilometres or more from another state; international carriage by containers without transloading of the foodstuffs before or after a sea journey of 150 kilometres or more between states.

My message to hauliers is that they should be fully aware of any such local requirements for carriage outside ATP if they are not to be unnecessarily delayed at frontiers or refused entry, with consequential severe cost penalties, including, perhaps, loss of export business.

This brings me to the vital economic policy objective of the Bill, namely, to give a timely fillip to the maintenance of high standards in the carriage of Irish perishable foodstuffs and help to sustain and enhance the reputation of Irish foodstuffs in foreign markets.

Our exports must be maximised in order to regenerate the national economy by providing worthwhile new employment opportunities for our people. Not only do we need to safeguard our existing exports of perishable foodstuffs, already exceeding £1,000 million a year, but we need to increase them substantially. That will only be possible if all concerned endeavour to ensure that foodstuffs reach the market place in the top condition and time which the customers require. Obviously, there must be no shortfall in quality of foodstuffs at loading but from then on the quality of the carriage arrangements is crucial, especially for long international journeys. If Irish hauliers maintain their equipment to the best standards they can help to maximise exports and secure new international business, as well as serving the home market, where quality is no less important.

Having received complaints about the off-condition of Irish perishable foodstuffs on arrival in export markets, particularly meat, the Transport Consulative Commission, in its 1981 report on Road Freight Haulage, recommended that the State should accede to ATP as soon as possible and effectively enforce it in order to ensure that Irish refrigerated vehicles are maintained to internationally acceptable standards and that they are not delayed or refused admission at frontiers. It is earnestly to be hoped that Irish international hauliers have fully taken the Commission's message to heart, a message which a few months ago the Minister had the opportunity to reconvey to many of them at the annual general meeting of a representative body of theirs.

The Bill, providing as it does for the implementation of ATP by the State, serves as a reminder to hauliers to operate to acceptable standards internationally — and indeed nationally — and I, therefore, commend it to the House.

We are certainly not going to delay this Bill. The Minister has stressed the urgency of putting it through. Indeed, he has indicated that we are one of the last countries to accede to the ATP. It is of extreme importance, however, that the greatest of care is taken to ensure that as a result there are no added costs to hauliers. The Minister has indicated to us that there will not be a cost to hauliers but there has been no indication that there has been any consultation with the hauliers or their representative body. I would like to think that the Minister or his Department has had some consultation with them.

There is no doubt that we are living in a world today when our competitors are only too ready to point out any suggestion of any irregularities. Indeed, they can so feed the media that, even though it is only a suggestion, it is then taken as something positive. We cannot afford to run this risk.

In stressing those two points, I am certainly not going to delay the proceedings here today. I hope we can get Second Stage completed today. I do not know if it is the Minister's intention to take other Stages today; it is not indicated on the Order Paper. I see it is the Minister's intention. I will not delay the proceedings here. However, I hope the Minister will give some indication of what discussions they have had with the hauliers in regard to making the necessary arrangements and, if there have not been any discussions to date, that there will be in the very near future.

I will be brief in welcoming the International Carriage of Perishable Foodstuffs Bill. The agreement to which this legislation refers was reached as far back as 1976 and now operates, as we have heard the Minister outlining here today, in over 20 European countries, including nine of the EC states. Regrettably, Ireland is one of three EC states which has failed so far to formally associate itself with the agreement. I am very glad that today we are putting that right, after the Bill has already gone through the Dáil.

It is very important that Ireland as a quality exporter of foods, should ensure in all aspects of our exports that foodstuffs are produced to the highest possible quality and are maintained and kept at those highest possible standards — internationally as well as at home — when they reach their destination.

One interesting fact that emerges from the material supplied to us on this matter, which it is worth drawing some attention to, is that in the administrative arrangements which operate to date we have included some arrangements for private testing. I believe that is entirely worthwhile. When this legislation is passed I hope private testing will be continued and expanded, because we all accept that this is no time for imposing additional administrative burdens on the State. This is the first instance I have heard of where testing arrangements are made on the basis of private and State co-operation. It is a laudable precedent.

The ATP was devised with the aim of increasing international trade in perishable goods. That is why the agreement is important to us here today. It is vital for Ireland because we need to be able to show that we are at the top of the market in all our operations. It is also vital that we should use this agreement to our advantage. We should not only ensure that all temperature controlled vehicles in use and registered in the Irish State are taking Irish goods abroad of the highest quality, but we should more actively police the operations of the non-Irish registered vehicles within the State. We should also police the return of these vehicles with a view to ensuring that they are not used as a means of dumping excess products from other countries on the Irish market.

Enforcement of the law in this area is important and, therefore, the legislative arrangements in this Bill are very important. Sadly, when you try to operate on an administrative or voluntary basis, you will find there will always be a rogue operator. It only takes one rogue operator to destroy the reputation that has been built up at great cost to the majority of those concerned. The rigours of the law being implemented in this legislation should apply to all trading in this area. I note that the legislation and the agreement itself do not apply to long sea journeys. They apply to sea journeys of up to 150 kilometres and therefore to sea journeys between ourselves and our nearest neighbours.

This draws to my attention the fact that this is a particular area of transport where we are deficient. We will soon be discussing important legislation in both Houses which will deal with Irish shipping in general. It is extraordinary that we, as an island nation in the food export market, do not have a single refrigerated vessel on the Irish register. Perhaps this legislation and the legislation which we will be discussing will cover this in the future.

Like Senator McMahon, I do not wish to detain the House in putting through this Bill. As the Minister has stated, it will not be enacted for 12 months after the Bill has been passed by both Houses.

There are one or two other points in the Minister's contribution to which I would like to refer. One is his message to the hauliers that they should be fully aware of any local requirements for carriage outside the ATP. If they are not to be unnecessarily delayed at frontiers or to be refused entry, there should be an advertising campaign to the hauliers to highlight this and to ensure that they are fully aware of the requirements that will be necessary. As the Minister quite correctly pointed out, we have exports from this island of ours of £1,000 million, and possibly in the foreseeable future will have a percentage increase of 20 per cent to 25 per cent on that. We all know how important exports are to the economy and how industry depends on exports to provide jobs for the future. The whole thrust of Government policies, no matter what Government are in power, bears a relation to this Bill. Therefore, I welcome it and commend it to be finalised here today.

My intervention will be very brief on this, because it is a Bill which Senators on all sides of the House can support without any great difficulty. The overall objectives are ones to which we would all subscribe. I have only one point to make about this Bill, that is, that it is very similar to a great deal of legislation which we, in both Houses and as a Parliament, have been enacting over the past number of years. We pass legislation which seeks to attain desirable objectives but we have very little within the Bill which will enforce the main provisions of the Bill.

In the other House, when this Bill was being debated, the speeches were wide-ranging, dealing with quality of foods, dangers of radiation, dangers to certain foods within the vehicles in which they were being carried, dumping, road hauliers and so forth. But the one point in that debate which was not answered by the Minister then — and I hope it will be possible to have it answered today — was on the question of enforcement.

In concluding his speech on Second Stage of this Bill in the Dáil, the Minister said:

The detailed arrangements for enforcing the Bill have yet to be decided. The intention is to avail in so far as possible of the existing inspection arrangements in relation to foodstuffs and complying to the transport law. The Department of Tourism and Transport would be the agent with the other enforcement agencies with that in mind.

What surprised me is that today in his speech the Minister is fairly bland on what he has to say about enforcement. The Bill also makes appropriate provision for enforcement but it does not actually specify what way it will be enforced. I realise that it will be 12 months before this Bill comes into effect and I also accept that there will be consultation between the various enforcement agencies; but it should have been possible — and perhaps it will be possible today — for the Minister to give us some indication about the way in which this enforcement will take place. As I say, we are a great country for drawing up legislation, but we tend to fall down very much in terms of enforcement. If the Minister could tell me today what progress has been made in working out the details of enforcement, I would be a bit happier; or, indeed, if it has not been done, perhaps he will give an undertaking to come back to us before the Bill comes into effect to let us know what the arrangements are. Otherwise, I have no difficulty in supporting this Bill.

First, I would like to thank Members for their contributions and co-operation in ensuring the speedy passage of this legislation through the Seanad.

In relation to the question raised by Senator McMahon, it is proposed to take all Stages of this Bill now. He also raised the question of consultations with the road haulage organisations and so on, and I can confirm to him that consultations have taken place on an ongoing basis since 1978. The Senator also raised the question of extra cost, and I want to reiterate what I said in my opening address: there will not be any additional cost to hauliers arising out of this matter. Senator Cassidy raised the question of testing. Testing, as he outlined, will continue in both the public and private sector.

Senator Manning referred to enforcement. I acknowledge that in the Dáil debate on this matter the Minister was questioned about enforcement along the lines the Senator outlined, and the Senator asked what were the ongoing developments from that. Since the matter was raised in the Dáil, the Minister for Tourism and Transport has written to the Department of Agriculture and Food and to the Department of Health in regard to the enforcement of these regulations. I hope the Senator is satisfied that that matter of enforcement is being pursued. I believe it is essential and I accept the point the Senator is making.

If we are not clear on enforcement, it will be a toothless Bill.

That is right. That is acknowledged. Any legislation must have an element of enforcement in it. We accept the Senator's point and we agree with it. This is being worked on to ensure that enforcement procedures are in place.

Senator Cassidy raised a point about long sea haulage and short sea haulage. This ATP Agreement is mainly about road and rail but, of course, it can apply — and I have indicated that — to intermediate short journeys of 150 kilometres involved in transport between countries. A short sea journey is regarded as part and parcel of road and rail transport.

Basically, these were the questions raised by Senators. The only thing I would add, in relation to Senator Manning's question about enforcement, is that there is no wish by anybody to duplicate enforcement. That is why other Departments involved in the enforcement of the standards to ensure the quality of these goods during carriage have been contacted to ensure that these goods reach their destinations in good condition. That is why there has to be liaison between the Departments involved, Agriculture and Food and Health — Health because of the point made by the Senator about contamination and so on from outside influences — to ensure that enforcement is in place, because the legislation on its own would not be sufficient without this element of enforcement. I compliment Senator Manning on raising that point, because it is a vital one. We accept without any reservation that enforcement has to be part and parcel of this legislation, and it will be there within the 12 months until we become fully integrated members of ATP. The necessary regulations to include enforcement will be in place by then.

I accept the Minister's assurances, but would he not agree that it would be preferable if the enforcement procedures had been worked out before the Bill was brought into the House?

That point is valid. Its validity stems from the fact — and this point was made by Senator Cassidy — that 20 other countries have already acceded to ATP. One could ask the question: what have we been doing that we have not been on a par with those countries? We have lagged behind. But now we are getting in there. We have almost 12 months to ensure that enforcement will be included by the time we become part of the ATP. We have that much time to ensure that enforcement procedures are part and parcel of the legislation.

Question put and agreed to.
Bill put through Committee, reported without amendment, received for final consideration and passed.
Top
Share