Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 15 Feb 1990

Vol. 123 No. 18

Bord Glas Bill, 1989: Second Stage (Resumed).

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

I welcome the Minister's statement that he will be flexible. The Minister's approach is right and proper because this Bill will have far-reaching effects on the agricultural industry and, for that reason, flexibility is very important. I realise a review of agriculture and of the farm income area is a difficult subject on which to have perfect legislation and I am sure we will have to continue to update legislation in the light of the changing situation in Europe. I want to congratulate and compliment Deputy Kirk for his consistent interest. Even before he was Minister, when he was a TD, he wrote papers and showed a very serious interest in the development of horticulture and tillage. Unfortunately for far too long we lacked people with ground experience.

I am very pleased that the Minister, Deputy Kirk is sitting here. I remember very clearly going to his house during my Seanad election campaign and I met him out in a field on a tractor. It is great to have someone who has "hands on" experience steering this Bill through the Seanad today. I appreciate very much the Ministers down-to-earth attitude and I am sure we will have an even better knowledge and a better grasp of the subject when this Bill goes through the Seanad. I appreciate the many difficulties and all the different areas that have to be covered. It is a difficult task. The setting up of the interim board in 1987 was a proper decision because it has given the Minister time to examine in a serious way any difficulties that might arise. I think that procedure was proper.

Potatoes, glasshouses, mushrooms and vegetables are all growth areas with potential for jobs. They need support and recognition and the fact that we are now competing with every country in Europe means we must give the maximum support to those involved in the horticulture scene. It has got to be fully developed; expertise, advice and financial aid must be updated and I think we have the right Minister here to do that.

First, I will deal with a subject which is fairly near to my heart, the potato industry which certainly has had a long history of difficulties. I sympathise with the Minister because he has had to take over and help out an industry that has been run down for years through bad management. For the past 20 years the potato industry has been largely managed from Merrion Square by a Civil Service structure that was far removed from the difficulties experienced on a farm. I believe the Potato Marketing Board and the Potato Marketing Company are largely responsible for having allowed the potato industry to fail. They administered the potato business from Merrion Square and they were out of touch completely with the world scene and developments in marketing. While their intentions were good and they were hoping to achieve reconition, unfortunately they presided over the total failure of this country to participate in any serious way in the marketing of potatoes.

The present Minister, Deputy Kirk, cannot be blamed for the failures in the past in the potato industry because the structures were very complicated. The Department of Agriculture were involved in the setting up of the Potato Marketing Board. That was a clumsy vehicle that never worked. After the setting up of the board which evolved into the Potato Marketing Company, that company set about trying to develop export markets. I claim it never did this successfully.

It is tragic for those of us who are interested in the potato business to look at the world scene where the Irish potato producers have declined while, at the same time, the world market has increased. In the past 15 years the market in Europe was able to expand from 857,000 tonnes of seed potatoes in 1970 to 1,082,000 tonnes in 1985. That expansion of the industry has taken place mainly in Holland, France and Scotland. The Dutch, in the years from 1970 to 1985, doubled the tonnage of seed potatoes they exported. In that very same period the production of seed potatoes in Ireland declined to the point when it was hardly worthwhile providing the structures of support, including the potato inspectors whose salary was paid by the Department of Agriculture. The tonnage declined to the point where one small boat would take all the potatoes the country produced. I speak with some knowledge and experience because that production was in my home county of Donegal.

That is the situation the Minister in charge of horticulture has taken over. It can only improve and it behoves all of us to give the maximum support to him in the hope that he will turn around an industry that was very valuable to this country. Many farm families were sustained and maintained from the production of seed and ware potatoes and when the seed industry declined, automatically the ware industry declined also because they were related and dependent on each other.

Many housewives will say they are buying imported potatoes because Irish potatoes are not graded properly. This is a cry from people who do not know the history on the ground and how difficult it has been. The small producer on the hillside farm has not had the support he should have had. We were supporting institutions in Merrion Square. On the dearest patch in this country we were supporting the best office the country could provide, with a staff of about 16, with cleaners and with tea trollies coming around at 10 o'clock. If you were to inspect the office at Merrion Square you would think it was in charge of a flourishing industry but if you paid a visit to a small farm anywhere in Ireland you would find that the farmer had very few facilities and no storage space at all. These are the root causes of the potato industry failing. We have had a serious decline, to the point where the industry is nearly lost.

The Minister must not make the mistake that has been made in the past of picking out a few large firms and supporting them at the expense of the producer. In Holland and in other countries where the production of potatoes is very successful farm prices are looked at very closely. Every producer must have proper accommodation. We must show the same care and give the same support for our producers. We must inspect his land, farm, implements, storage and facilities on the ground. If there is financial support it must be given to the farmer — the producer. All the other support we give is important but it is secondary. There is no point — and we did this for years in the meat industry — in supporting the processor. The person who needs support is the producer. The conditions have got to be right on the ground. If there is grant support it has got to be given to those on the ground. There is no point in allowing the industry to develop and, at the same time, not taking very good care of what is happening on the farm.

The Minister, Deputy Kirk, has enough experience to know that the support must be given direct to the farmer. I strongly urge him not to give substantial financial support to co-operatives because if he does that he will build up the co-ops and grading stations and marketing centres but they will have nothing to market and nothing to grade if the farmers are neglected. I strongly urge the Minister that primary attention should be given to farmers. I hope I am getting through to the Minister. I believe that he is in a position to know best.

I would also like to refer to the special difficulties we have in the glasshouse industry. Much the same story can be told about this industry because ten, 15 or 20 years ago we were developing the glasshouse industry throughout the country. Tomatoes were grown in those glasshouses, because we recognised that the Irish tomato has a special flavour and probably is the best tomato produced anywhere in Europe. At the time many of those glasshouses were heated by oil and the Suez crisis and the subsequent steep increase in oil prices left us with the problem that many of our producers and glasshouse owners had to go out of business. At this stage the Dutch took over because they had glasshouses heated by natural gas. They were importing the natural gas through a pipe grid from the Soviet Union. The steep increase in the price of oil and the fact that the Dutch had a competitive edge resulted in the collapse of our glass industry.

The provision or our own natural gas from Kinsale to Dundalk gives us an opportunity for a major development of the glasshouse industry.

There has been a completely turnaround and a new start is being made. If cheap energy is not provided for glasshouses and we cannot compete, we will not be able to stay in business. There is no point in the Department supporting the provision of glasshouses when it is evident that the industry is dependent on dear sources of energy. The Department will have to put down clear markers in regard to how glasshouses will be heated. If because of cheap energy they can compete with other European countries those glasshouses will survive. It would be a major mistake to support the provision of glasshouses unless it can be clearly established that cheap energy will be available to heat them.

With regard to the recent substantial development of the mushroom industry, I would like to compliment the Minister here, because he saw the niche in the market for the development of that industry. An Bord Glas have supported mushroom development in a positive and serious manner. Anything less would not have succeeded. It is nice to see the clusters of mushroom houses in rural areas. These are great developments and they will help to sustain small rural farms.

I urge the Minister to introduce tight supervision because mushrooms are prone to disease. Any breakdown in supervision will result in collapse and economic failure. I strongly urge the Minister to ensure he has the right personnel frequently calling for a number of years until the industry is established on a sound footing. Every month somebody should inspect the inside of those mushroom houses to see that they are being well maintained and that there is no disease. We must ensure that the people who have committed themselves to this industry and have received support are maintaining their mushroom houses in a way that will give the industry a good name and ensure that the Irish mushroom development will be a success story.

The fruit and vegetable industry is wide open for development. One could talk about fruit or vegetable development for a long time. We have not been successful in any major way in growing fruit. I know that, with our climate and being disease free, we could grow substantial tonnage of fruit and we could save on import if the right approach was made. We can grow plums, strawberries, raspberries or other fruit instead of importing thousands of tonnes every year. We have the right climate to grow our own fruit and vegetables. All that is needed is the supervision and the support on the ground.

The Department have to come to grips with this question of fruit production. They must be careful not to go into it on a big scale but to allow the industry to develop in a supervised way to the point where those involved in growing fruit recognise that there is only one way to survive financially, that is, to manage the business in a professional manner to compete with Europe, and to compete with other countries that are allowed free access to our markets. We have the climate and we have suitable land. Whether it is a question of shelter belts or other protection the grower needs, it is essential that the Department draw up conditions and provide assistance to the point where there is a reasonable chance that those involved in growing fruit will survive.

The same comments can be made in respect of vegetables. There is no other place in Europe we are aware of that can produce vegetables any better than they can be produced here at home. They might produce earlier cauliflower in Brittany and France and earlier lettuce under glass in Holland, but we here in Ireland have the perfect climate and soil for the production of vegetables. We are only scratching at the potential for development of the horticultural industry. There are thousands of jobs available. When one matches that with the tonnage coming into this country one becomes depressed. When will we ever come to grips with one of our greatest potential industries? I give strong support to the Minister of State in the formation of An Bord Glas. That puts down the framework for a new start in the whole development of vegetables, and fruit.

We have to start to educate people in horticulture. I encourage the new board to start in the schools, especially secondary schools. Every secondary school in the country should have a plot of ground. Whether or not they are involved in agriculture in a serious way, every secondary school and vocational school, should take an acre of land two miles down the road or have it within the confines of the school and should give an opportunity to their students to become involved in experimental work on horticulture. Every secondary school should have a glasshouse and should engage in the growing of early flowers and lettuce. The possibility of earning a good living at home should be brought home to every student. I strongly urge the Minister to look at the possibility of encouraging schools to have their own plot of ground where young people can be afforded the opportunity to grow and test crops. This will give them the opportunity of seeing what can be produced at home which is equal to the best we import.

I accompanied the Minister last year when he visited the Department's farm at Topp's in Raphoe. There is the opportunity of breeding plants there. Care and considerations for the proper breeding of plants and disease-free plants is basic. The Minister has made an important contribution to the breeding of plants. I encourage him to expand activities at Topp's farm in Raphoe. This should be supported and brought into the overall development plans of An Bord Glas. This will pay off very substantially.

It is not much of a contribution to criticise everything that is done or has not been done. It is better to make a more positive contribution. There have not been enough opportunities on the small rural farms in Ireland in the past few years. When the former president of the EC visited the country he indicated that his first priority was the retention and support of the small rural farm in Ireland and other countries. That was a welcome recognition. Unfortunately we have not had support on the ground for the small farm and we had reached the point when tillage had almost disappeared.

Barley production has practically ceased because it is no longer a profitable crop. The reason for this decline is largely because we are importing offal and animal feed from Third World countries. There is very little control over this. When one highlights the imports of Third World countries into Europe, which is making life difficult for farmers in this country, one is always told that it is a counter-balance to something else, that Europe will export its beef and so on and we have to allow certain quotas. Farmers who are involved in growing barley in County Donegal find that they have reached the stage when it is not profitable any longer largely because the offal is coming in from the other end of the world. Millers have to buy the cheapest imports. Boats of offal arrive daily in Belfast and Derry. Huge lorries of grain and offal arrive daily in County Donegal. The small farmer who has to rotate crops is no longer able to grow barely and make a profit. He cannot break even. This is a tragic situation. The answer appears to be beyond An Bord Glas and the Minister of State. This is a European problem. There is no point in offering help to small farmers if, at the same time, imports are being allowed to put them out of business. The money to support them in the first instance is being wasted.

We have got to recognise the advantages and educate our young people to be aware of them. We have a clean and a green island despite the fact that there is a lot of talk about pollution and smog. Our island is cleaner and greener than any other part of Europe or the world. That is not an exaggeration. We have the best climate, suitable and disease-free to produce all the different vegetables, the grain, and the grass, the cheapest feeding for animals. We have the best opportunity of anybody in Europe and we can survive any competition if our people are encouraged to believe in themselves and are committed to earning a living on the farm. Help has to be offered to stabilise development and to encourage people to believe there are many opportunities on this island.

Whether you have tillage, sheep, milk or whatever, the question of land use is a big factor. We have thousands of acres of land underdeveloped and under-used. Everywhere you go you see mass tracts of land that are not properly used. I would like to encourage the Department and An Bord Glas in particular to examine land that is not productive. Notice should be taken whether land is being held to accumulate value or whether it is held as an investment. The land has to produce to the maximum for the people of this country. If we channel our resources right we can do this.

Every time I get an opportunity I say that we have got to get away from sending loads of dole money down the country whether it is to Mayo or Donegal and sending the Army down to guard that money every week. People who are sick and in need of assistance should be helped but to continue to send money every week to good healthy young men is the wrong way to help people to believe in themselves. I strongly urge An Bord Glas to do a survey of how well we are using our land. It is basic and important. If land use is examined and we had a register showing how much land is not in production we would be surprised.

I encourage the Minister to examine alternative crops. Have we reached the stage where we cannot be competitive in any area in Europe. I mention, in particular, the growing of flax of which I have some basic knowledge. If the French can grow 66,000 acres and get nearly £9 million of EC subsidy, there is something wrong if we are not growing flax because we have a tradition of growing it. Irish linen was famous on the world scene. Years ago when there was little development on the land this country could have produced first-class linen grown from Irish flax. There are 11 spinning mills in the North of Ireland today producing Irish linen, some of it from Russian flax and none of it from Irish-grown flax. I ask the Minister to look at the possibility of providing some assistance to re-establish the flax industry on a commercial basis. We have the tradition, the knowledge and the climate. There are no fools in the industry in France and if they are growing 66,000 acres, it is about time we had a look at the potential for developing that industry here. I ask the Minister to examine carefully the possibility of alternative crops and one of those alternative crops is the growing of flax. This would help to establish a better economy on some of our farms.

I urge the Minister, when he is involved in setting up An Bord Glas, to look for people among the 11 members plus one member who are not tied to any category. He should not try to appease the IFA or any section of the community but should look for the best people he can get to develop this most important basic industry. That is where the Minister will succeed. I have no doubt about it. He will succeed by getting committed people, not intellectuals who are very able, not the Tony O'Reilly's of this world. If he gets people who have a pair of wellington boots on them rather than having a degree he will have a better chance of succeeding. I am not suggesting that the Minister does not look for practical and good business experience; I am suggesting that he looks for the best people he can get without saying that he has to take three from the IFA and four from somewhere else and he has to appease another section of the community. There must be no strings attached to the people who are selected to manage our most important industry. I urge the Minister to ensure that a percentage of the board of directors of An Bord Glas have practical experience of horticulture or agriculture. They must be committed to promote the development of land and tillage.

I attended a seminar in the Spa Hotel two years ago and I took a careful note of the different interests at that conference. Of 17 speakers at the conference 14 spoke about milk and milk quotas, calves and subsidies. The whole trend of that agricultural conference was about milk, how you measure the fats in milk, how you get prices, etc. I thought as I came away from the conference that although it was useful and the people at it were serious there was a major gap in so far as those who had no milk quotas were not considered at all. The formation of An Bord Glas will be a Government decision. I appeal publicly to the Minister to make very sure that part of the board is comprised of people who have a basic sound knowledge of tillage and horticulture, who will see that the tillage side of farming in Ireland is not neglected, forgotten or written off. If the structure of An Bord Glas membership is right, that problem will automatically solve itself.

The Minister has an onerous task. Very few Ministers involved in the Government have as big a task as he has. His decisions are very important at this stage, for the future of the industry. All I can do is to offer my total support. There will be a helpful approach from all the people involved in agriculture throughout the country because at the present time we are at the crossroads. The structures now being put in place are vital for the future of an important industry and I would choose no man other than the Minister and that is not an idle compliment I am paying him. Having good knowledge of agriculture and coming from a good agricultural background, he is the right Minister to set up the board, to pilot the development plans An Bord Glas will have to undertake.

At present, there are a number of inspectors throughout the country who are not very busy unfortunately. I am not being critical but I am bringing to notice the fact that the Department have a number of inspectors who are under-utilised. I hope that in the restructuring of An Bord Glas all of those people will be involved. It is discouraging for the staff themselves. I will say no more about that. It must be recognised that everybody involved in agriculture, from the Minister down, has to pull their weight if this very important industry is to succeed.

I wish the Minister success. I have great confidence in his ability to implement the new measures. The structures will give a new approach to agriculture and horticulture. The Minister has the confidence of the people involved in the industry. Certainly he has my confidence and good wishes with the new Bill.

I dtús baire ba mhaith liom fáiltiú roimh an mBille seo. Is Bille an-tábhachtach é. Is í aidhm an Bhille socrú a dhéanamh chun comhlacht a bhunú ar a dtabharfar Bord Glas. Taitníonn an teideal sin, Bord Glas, liom féin, ach, nuair a bheidh an tAire ag freagairt ag deireadh na díospóireachta, b'fhéidir go dtabharfaidh sé brí nó míniú an teidil, Bord Glas, don Teach agus go n-inseoidh sé dúinn cén fáth gur ceapadh an teideal seo don chomhlacht nua.

I welcome the opportunity to make a contribution to the debate on this Bill. At the outset I would like to compliment the Minister with responsibility for horticulture, Deputy Kirk, on the progress which has been made since 1987 in the horticultural area and also on bringing forward this important Bill. His appointment and the establishment in 1987 of Bord Glas on an interim non-statutory basis have led to a considerably increased awareness of the potential of the horticultural industry and the contribution which it can make and, indeed, which it is already making to job creation and import substitution.

For years, there has been a growing recognition of the fact that we were importing millions of pounds worth of fruit and vegetables which should, and could be, home produced. Were it not for the initiative that was taken by the incoming Fianna Fáil Government in 1987 to deal with this situation, there is little doubt that Irish horticulture would have continued to decline and the advent of the Single Market in 1993 would unequestionably sound the death-knell for the industry. Thankfully, the situation which obtained when the Minister was appointed has been turned around. Much development has already taken place in the industry. The interim Bord Glas have prepared a five year plan for the development of horticulture; a comprehensive examination of all sectors of the industry has been carried out and targets relating to increased output, recovery of domestic market share, job creation and export potential have been set down.

This Bill now proposes to give effect to the Government's decision to establish An Bord Glas as an independent statutory body which will have responsibility for developing all aspects of the horticultural industry with a view to meeting the targets contained in the plan. If I were asked to identify what has been the greatest achievement to date of the Minister and of the interim Bord Glas, I would say it is that they have given hope to the horticulture industry and the people involved in it. This restoration of confidence is essential if Irish horticulture is to respond effectively to the changes and challenges of the 1990s.

The commodity teams which were established by the interim board to examine the industry and to make recommendations to assist it in the preparation of its five year development programme did a very thorough job. The targets are ambitious but realistic and I am satisfied that if the plan drawn up by the board is properly implemented over a five year period, it can be achieved. The plan aims in that five year period to increase our producer share of the home market for horticultural products from 45 per cent to 60 per cent. The value of this increased market share would be, we are told, in the region of £31 million. In addition, the board envisages an increase in the annual value of horticultural exports from £27 million to £43 million. In employment terms, the net result of these increases will be the creation of 1,800 full-time and 1,500 part-time jobs. In arriving at these projections the board, we are told, took into account seasonal factors and also the fact that certain imported products cannot be produced in our climate.

Ineffective marketing was identified as having been a major constraint in the past on the development of the industry and this situation was further compounded by the fact that each sector of the industry had its own unique problems. Quality, grading, presentation and awareness of consumer requirements were not as good as they should have been in the case of most produce and lack of continuity of supply also created difficulties. Some of these are areas in which much improvement has already taken place over the last few years.

A major element of the policy of the Minister and the interim board has been the promotion of organised production and marketing through the development of producer groups. An increasing number of growers at last realise that they can no longer compete effectively as individuals. By becoming involved in producer groups and selling produce on a joint basis, individual growers are in a much stronger position to profit from selling in greater quantity and on a continuous basis to major outlets. The fact that aid is available over a five year period towards the cost of formation and operation of producer groups should be a major incentive to the formation of such groups.

It should be obvious to everyone who is involved in the industry that by coming together in producer groups owners are in a better position to meet present-day market requirements for produce in greater quantity, of better quality and on a continuous basis. This would improve competitiveness against imports and give the grower a better opportunity of improving the return for his produce. In addition, growers working together in a group can give their produce a brand name under which they can establish their own reputation for quality and reliability. Changing consumer demand and the growth and importance of the supermarket means that horticultural produce must be of the highest quality and available on an ongoing basis. A producer group is in a much better position than an individual to ensure that quality and presentation are consistent, that supermarkets can get the quality they require and that there is continuity of supply.

One of the main tasks of the new board will be to achieve a situation where all growers will be members of producer groups. Another major advantage of belonging to a producer group is, of course, the fact that in the case of certain produce such a group can participate in market intervention arrangements on behalf of its members. For example, I understand that apples, tomatoes and cauliflowers can be withdrawn from the market at European Community expense for the purpose of stabilising prices.

It is regrettable that at the moment the position is that only approximately 20 per cent of home-produced fruit and vegetables is sold through recognised producer groups when the situation in some other European countries is that almost all the fruit and vegetable production is marketed through such groups. As long as we continue to have producers growing crops without any plan as to how and where the crop will be marketed, we will have gluts, shortages and an unstable market. In a situation where there is now free trade in horticultural produce within the European Community and Irish consumers are becoming more aware and more quality conscious, Irish growers must pay increasing attention to quality if they are to achieve greater domestic market share.

Of all sectors of the horticultural industry the greatest success story in recent years has been in the mushroom sector. The vast bulk of the output is exported. During the 1980s Irish mushrooms have gained an image and a reputation second to none. Every aspect of the industry has seen a huge expansion. In addition to the increased numbers involved at production level, many new jobs have been created in marketing, composting, transport and generally in servicing the industry. A firm foothold has been gained in the lucrative multiple markets in the UK.

The most remarkable thing about the industry is that practically all the people who became involved in mushroom production during the 1980s started competely from scratch. The undoubted skills which they now possess were acquired mainly through attendance at courses on mushroom production organised principally by Teagasc. Many of the people who are now top-class growers did not even know what the inside of a mushroom tunnel looked like when they embarked on these courses and, as I have already mentioned, as the number of growers increased there has been a corresponding expansion of the other activities associated with the industry, namely, in the manufacture of compost, in marketing and generally servicing the industry. County Roscommon is a county which has benefited significantly from the expansion of the mushroom industry.

Just 12 months ago we had the honour of having the Minister, Deputy Kirk, in Strokestown to officially open a new pack house and distribution centre for Western Mushrooms. At that time, approximately 20 growers were supplying their produce to Western Mushrooms and the company were exporting between two and three container loads of mushrooms each week to the UK market. The Minister will be pleased to learn that today 50 growers are supplying the produce of approximately 400 tunnels to Western Mushrooms. Another fridge has been installed and seven full container loads of top grade mushrooms are now leaving Strokestown for the UK each week. Six full-time jobs exist in the pack house and between three and four drivers are employed on a full-time basis each week. That is a total of nine to ten jobs, which is significant in that area. In cash terms, the monthly value of the produce exported is approximately £250,000 or in excess of £3 million per year. In job terms in the area the 50 growers represent 50 families and the number of part-time jobs involved is in the region of 350 to 400. As I said, our county has benefited significantly from the expansion that has taken place in the mushroom industry.

I am sure the Minister realised, however, that the mushroom industry is going through a difficult patch at the moment. A combination of factors has contributed to this situation; the poor sterling exchange rate, falling prices and the traditional post-Christmas slump in the market have combined to put pressure on the industry. In addition, I understand a couple of the major UK producers have pulled back their prices to the 35p to 40p per pound bracket. While the quality of their product is not comparable to that of Irish mushrooms, such a sharp reduction in price levels to that of Irish mushrooms, such a sharp reduction in price levels is putting pressure on the market and creating problems for Irish exports. However, because of the strength of the industry and the competitive advantages of Irish mushrooms, I am confident that these difficulties will be overcome and that the industry will continue to expand in the years ahead.

It is important that An Bord Glas should monitor the development of the mushroom industry carefully over the years ahead and I welcome the fact that the board will have the right of consultation in this and in other areas of the horticultural industry. Nothing can be left to chance if the present 8 per cent market share which Irish suppliers hold at present in the UK market for mushrooms is to be increased to the 16 per cent market share which is the target set in the development plan and which is well on the way to being achieved at the moment.

The point has also been made that there is considerable potential for expansion in the hardy nursery stock and amenity horticultural sector. One of the great advantages we have in this area is the fact that our climate is so suitable for the growing of trees and shrubs. Yet, I understand that huge quantities of trees and shrubs are being imported at present. In view of the massive road building and road improvement schemes which are underway and which will be carried out over the next few years, it is vital for the board to take steps to ensure that trees and shrubs which will be planted along these roadways will be home produced.

In addition to the road development programme, there is also a considerable amount of open space and park development taking place all the time and as nursery stock cannot be produced overnight the board should endeavour to obtain from local authorities estimates of their projected requirements of nursery stock over the next number of years. This is an area in which local authorities should be officially requested to provide the maximum possible co-operation to An Bord Glas. It is also encouraging to note that the hardy nursery stock sector is making every effort to gain a foothold in the UK and other export markets where there must be tremendous scope for securing outlets for a wide variety of plants. Last year I was requested to arrange a meeting with the Minister for certain individuals who were engaged in the production of hardy nursery stock. The Minister and his officials met the individuals concerned. The problems which they wished to discuss were in relation to the export of plants.

I must say the meeting which took place was very helpful and constructive and it certainly was very informative as far as I was concerned in that the Minister outlined the position and the developing situation in relation to plant health regulations. He also stressed the desirability of a co-ordinated export strategy which would be achieved through nurseries grouping together so that there would be co-operation in securing outlets and providing them with a full range of plants. Certainly such a strategy appears to make a lot of sense and I am pleased to note that the Minister stated that An Bord Glas, together with Córas Tráchtála and the IDA, are working with the people in the hardy nursery stock sector to achieve a more co-ordinated and developed approach to export marketing. If these efforts are successful, then the target of 400 new jobs in this sector and an increase in output of £7 million over the next five years should become a reality.

The Bill assigns a consultative role to the board in the area of higher education curricula for horticulture. If the full potential of the industry for job creation is to be achieved the board should have a role in conjunction with Teagasc and also possibly FÁS in the provision of all training courses for horticulture. There should be access for young people, and in particular young people engaged in agriculture, in the small farming areas to training courses in every sector of the horticultural industry. As I mentioned earlier, many of our most successful mushroom growers are people who started from scratch and who knew nothing at all about mushroom growing until they attended a Teagasc training course. I see no reason why it should not be possible to provide similar training courses for every other sector. Such courses would have an important role to play in the promotion of producer groups.

The Minister dealt in some detail with the area of organic farming and referred to the special unit which is being set up in the Department to promote the development of organic farming. I welcome the establishment of this unit because, as the Minister stated, there is a growing demand for horticultural produce and, indeed, for all agricultural produce which is produced without the use of chemicals, pesticides, artificial fertilisers or other synthetic agents. Because of consumer demand, organic farming is increasing and a certain amount of organic produce is now available in most supermarkets. Many restaurants also are specialising in organic food. It would appear a growing number of consumers are prepared to pay substantially higher prices for organic produce.

I welcome the fact that the board, through the special unit to which the Minister referred, will give positive support and encouragement to the expansion of organic production. I welcome this for a number of reasons. First, the demand for such produce will continue to increase. Secondly, Ireland's international reputation as a producer of high quality, healthy, wholesome food will benefit and will be enhanced. Thirdly, our tourist industry will have much to gain from the underpinning of our image as a country in which the air, water and food are clean, fresh, wholesome and pure.

Another factor which should help the fruit and vegetable industry is the increasing emphasis which is being placed on healthy eating. There are very few people today who are not convinced there is a significant link between diet an health. Every book or magazine or newspaper article which purports to recommend healthy eating habits emphasises the importance of including fresh fruit and vegetables in any diet. The number of people who claim to be vegetarians also seems to be increasing and it is suggested there is a much lower death rate among vegetarians from cardiac-related illnesses and certain cancers. Whether or not this is the case may be a matter of some debate, but the important fact is that many people believe it is so and more and more people are becoming more and more diet conscious. This is an area in which the board should liaise with the Department of Health in order to promote healthier eating habits and to emphasise the vital place which fresh fruit and vegetables have in a balanced diet particularly in view of the fact that the relationship between diet and coronary heart disease is pretty well established.

I have complimented the Minister and the interim board on what has been achieved to date. Before concluding I should like to pay tribute to the chief executive of the board, Mr. O'Donnell, for his dedication and commitment and for his hard work on behalf of the board. Because of the expansion which has taken place in mushroom growing in County Roscommon, our county development team, of which I am a member, have over the past couple of years discussed on many occasions the potential of mushroom production and other sectors of the horticultural industry for job creation in the county. With this in mind, we invited the chief executive of An Bord Glas to attend one of our meetings to make a presentation on the development of the horticultural industry with particular reference to the sectors which he considered might be of interest to County Roscommon.

Mr. O'Donnell very kindly accepted our invitation and he gave us a wide-ranging and informative briefing. I must say the team members were most impressed with his comprehensive and indepth understanding of every aspect of horticulture and his own personal commitment to the development of a long-term commercially viable horticultural industry. I would just like to put that on the record and to thank Mr. O'Donnell once again for having accepted our invitation and for the presentation which he gave.

As I said at the outset, I welcome the Bill. The new board will have a major role to play in the development of Irish horticulture over the decade that lies ahead. Much remains to be done in the areas of production, processing and marketing so that the full potential of the industry for job creation, import substitution and increased exports can be realised. My sincere hope is that the Minister and the new board will be very successful in achieving their objectives and that they will have the full support and co-operation of everyone involved in the industry. Cuirim fáilte roimh an mBille.

I would like to congratulate the Minister of State, Deputy Kirk, for introducing this legislation and to take this opportunity of welcoming him to the House today.

Horticulture is a vast sector that will not reach its full potential quickly despite the best efforts and best intentions of An Bord Glas. I hope An Bord Glas, working very closely with the IDA, SFADCo, the Department of Agriculture and, of course, Teagasc, will go a long distance down the road, not alone in solving our problems with regard to the importation of vegetables, fruits and so on, but that they would also provide a very important vehicle for the export side of the business.

I know that certain vegetables and particularly, fruits, such as citrus fruits, cannot be produced here but I estimate that at least £100 million worth of fruit and vegetables which are currently being imported could be produced here. That is a very sizeable sum which would make a very significant impact on our entire balance of payments. It would also help enormously the whole area of unemployment which has been talked about on a number of occasions recently in this House.

I note from the Minister's remarks on the introduction of the Bill that he envisages that the effort by An Bord Glas in the whole area of seed potato production would create over a four or five year period something in the order of 1,800 jobs on a full-time basis and perhaps about 1,600 jobs on a part-time basis. That would be satisfactory, but I hope that perhaps these figures could be exceeded. Successive Governments and others involved in the whole industry have nothing to be proud of with regard to the level of imports of fruit, vegetables, potatoes and other such products. We are currently importing around 55,000 tonnes of potatoes that we could produce at home, about 57,000 tonnes of tomatoes, about 10,000 tonnes of onions and about 20,000 tonnes of carrots. In addition, we are importing many other products which we could produce here. Of course, as I said earlier, there are some products which we cannot produce here but nevertheless the potential is enormous. I am quite certain that there is determination on the part of the Minister and all of us concerned to make this a successful venture.

We have talked about diversification in the realm of farming and frankly this is one very vital area of diversification. As was said earlier here this morning, perhaps a lot of emphasis in the past, in the farming context, has been put on the production of milk, beef, cereals, beet and the traditional lines. We know, unfortunately, that problems have arisen with a lot of these traditional lines of farming and this has had a serious effect on income return to farmers. For that reason all avenues and alternatives must be explored. I am satisfied that An Bord Glas, while it has responsibility for only a small portion of the areas of agriculture to which I have referred, will do a great job in filling a big void in the future.

We must have efficient people to manage and operate this industry. This whole venture will depend particularly on management skills for its success and the production of results. No stone must be left unturned in ensuring that persons of the highest degree of skills are engaged at the top level of the industry. Very competent people should be employed in the operation of An Bord Glas and their related activities.

Of course there has to be a very close link between the producer and An Bord Glas. I totally subscribe to the idea of producer groups, co-operative societies or whatever, that it might be appropriate for group production rather than having haphazard, isolated production of commodities of whatever type. Quality does not need to be mentioned because it is obvious that it is of paramount importance, particularly in the whole area of fruit, vegetables, potatoes and so on. We must make certain in the future that we have quality products and also something we have lacked very much, continuity of supply. I believe that, if we address ourselves earnestly to the question of production of top equality products and ensure that there are no gaps in our production cycle, we will reach the sort of goal that is necessary to ensure that any horticultural programme succeeds.

Unfortunately, in the past, ventures were undertaken in this country, particularly in north County Dublin, where large amounts of fruit and vegetables were produced to supply this city; but, unfortunately, for whatever reasons, after many varied attempts at processing and marketing that whole system has not succeeded in the way it ought to have done. A co-operative society was formed which did good work in marketing but, in spite of the fact that this is an area where ideal conditions prevail and which is ideally located for the production of fruit and vegetables, with a market on its doorstep, things did not go as well as they ought to have done. North County Dublin, together with all the other parts of the country, must — and I am certain they will — play their part in ensuring that An Bord Glas is a success in the future.

We have an ideal climate and ideal soil for the production of many of the crops which have been referred to. It behoves us to set about establishing the correct management. I recognise that there are some products which we just cannot produce but I would see this venture, in the first instance, wiping out £100 million of our imports bill. In addition, as time goes by I believe there should certainly be a very significant export dimension to An Bord Glas and their activities. In net terms one could be talking about several hundred million pounds. That would have a magnificent effect both on employment and the balance of payments. These areas are the barometers which measure the success or otherwise of particular projects.

Going back to the question of quality, I am very strongly of the view that we must carry out correct market research and make sure that we produce precisely what the consumer wants. As regards the home market, we must produce and present a quality product in a manner that the housewife in Dublin, Limerick, Galway, Cork or wherever, wants. As regards exports we must do likewise. We must establish quite clearly the requirement, taste and presentation demanded and required by the housewife in Paris, London or anywhere else. Unfortunately and I have stated this in the House before — we have never established quite clearly not alone in the food producing area but in other areas too what exactly the consumer wants. We have tended to produce a particular commodity or product, be it in the food area or the non-food area, and then with a great dynamic approach tried to sell it. It is a compliment to the people selling their products that they have succeded so well without this kind of research into the demands or requirements of their customers. I believe we could do much better if we addressed ourselves significantly to that area.

Mushrooms have been referred to. There is no doubt that in the last 12 months, and even longer there has been a very significant advance in the mushroom industry and that is something of which those involved in the production, processing and marketing of mushrooms can be justifably proud.

Indirect reference was made to the nursery area — sowing small trees, shrubs and so on. I believe that in the context of tourism there is vast potential for producing a great number of products to meet the demand for the development of parklands and other areas that are part and parcel of developing our country. Having regard to the suitability of our climate and, our developed skills in the production of nursery stock, hopefully we will develop a significant export market in that area.

We must be very conscious of the fact that we are dealing with perishable and non-perishable products. Obviously we are dealing with products that we can produce here as well as products we have to import. Taking all these factors into account, I am confident that we can in time — not overnight — produce something in the order of £200 million or £300 million worth of products, in net terms, by way of replacing current imports and establishing a significant export market in nursery stock and other products.

I have referred to potatoes already. This is an area where there is vast potential. The whole area of seed potatoes offers tremendous potential and we have the climate, the soil and skills to produce that product. There are many matters to which I could refer but I am aware that there are a number of other speakers anxious to contribute.

I will conclude with a few remarks. First, I would say to the Minister of State, for the benefit of the Government, that this programme must not be underfinanced. The necessary finance must be made available. In my view and in the view of our party, it would be a good investment in the long term to get this right in the beginning, even at a cost. Otherwise no amount of correction will rectify the matter. Secondly, it is vital that we have the maximum degree of group activity from the growers so that products are produced on an very organised basis. Thirdly — and this has not been referred to while I was in the House this morning — it is essential that contractual production be entered into. It is only in this way that An Bord Glas or any similar organisation can operate to the maximum degree of efficiency.

It gives me great pleasure to speak on this Bill for two basic reasons. The first is that the Bill is almost tailor made for a significant number of my constitutents in north County Dublin, in my view a group of horticultural experts who deserve the highest praise for their progressive outlook and attitudes as well as for their willingness at all times to meet the challenges and changes of the horticultural industry, at the equally important levels of technical skill and market response.

The Minister will remember in the early eighties coming to north County Dublin with the then Leader of our own party, Deputy Haughey, now Taoiseach, and meeting the growers in Lusk and Rush who made the point at the time that one of the most important factors for the industry was the appointment, on the return of a Fianna Fáil Government, of a Minister of State with a specific role in horticulture. At that time the Minister of State, Deputy Séamus Kirk, was appointed spokesperson for the industry and produced a policy document which, in my view, on looking back on it, has stood the test of time. Times have moved on and progress has been made and is now to be consolidated in this Bill. This Bill represents for the horticultural industry a giant leap forward, a mechanism for harnessing the potential of the field and garden produce market both at home and abroad.

Let me now advert to my second reason for my already expressed pleasure in speaking on this Bill. I do so safe in the knowledge that I speak not alone as a Member of this House representing, as I have already said, one of Ireland's foremost horticultural regions but also as a person who has first hand knowledge of this important sector of the wider agricultural industry through my own involvement as a farmer and in the retailing of produce.

I have first hand experience of trading in the Dublin market in the early hours of the morning. I have listened first hand to the trials and difficulties and indeed sometimes hardships that is the lot of the people who keep our shops and our tables stocked with the finest produce.

The Bill, in its stated purpose, is designed to give effect to the Government decision to establish an independent statutory body to develop all aspects of horticulture. An important aim is to increase output and thus achieve twin aims of recovering domestic market share and providing increased tonnage so that the ongoing demands and, one would hope, ever increasing demand for our produce abroad would be met.

With regard to the matter of increased production, one must pay tribute to Teagasc, Eolas and other bodies involved in research. The excellence of our research in the horticultural domain is reflected in the wider range of glasshouse crops, in the diversity of approach in the matter of horticultural husbandry and in the increased cropping ratios and yields as well as the cost-effective techniques that have come into being as a result of dedicated and clever research.

New methods and the introduction of new species require up-dated technologies for their implementation. New technologies are only feasible and practical if they are cost effective. A heavy cost for horticultural producers is of course the heating of large areas under glass. Oil, with its fluctuating price and the maintenance demands that are a dominant feature of oil burning systems, has long been an inhibiting factor in the horticultural development.

I am very pleased, therefore, to put on record here today the very wise decision of a Fianna Fáil Government to reverse an earlier decision of a previous administration in relation to the location of the national gas pipeline. It was scheduled to take a route through Ashbourne, County Meath, until Fianna Fáil made a strategic change which rerouted it through the north County Dublin horticultural belt. It has been a long-standing Fianna Fáil policy to give the benefit of this natural resource to a wider community and especially the rural community. More than 40 growers in the Rush area have taken to replacing oil with natural gas. This area is covered with about 90 acres of glass. I am assured by these growers that they are well satisfied with their decision. There are lower costs all round and increased production and cropping options as well as less emphasis on maintenance, like even for instance the constant checking to ensure full tanks and then the ordering of supplies with the worry of on-time deliveries. It is a combination of major and minor factors which have made these growers of my personal acquaintance so well pleased with their natural gas systems. This of course is one aspect of the horticultural business to which I would like to see An Bord Glass giving specific attention, that is, the energy question.

As you may be aware, at the Kinsealy Research Centre on-going research into wind power has been in progress for several years. I would like to see An Bord Glas expand this activity and, bearing in mind that seaboard areas are generally climatically suitable for horticulture, give some thought to experimenting with wave power. Kinsealy Research Centre would be a good place to base such research, given its nearness to the Fingal coast and its situation in the horticultural farmlands.

Again, I would use a concrete example of how good energy systems help both the industry and the economy generally. Early tomato crops mean more people at work and less imported produce at what used to be the low point in native produce production. Great opportunities for increased employment exist in the horticultural industry. With efficient heating systems and well designed glass-houses, coupled with the ever developing techniques for new crops, new croping targets, crop rotation, crop innovation and extended cropping seasons, there is great scope for increased employment. This is possible at the level of primary production and in the following stages of processing and marketing with all the skills that it entails. It is my view that if we get our growers fully committed to adopting and pursuing the opportunities opening up daily through the research at Teagasc stations like Kinsealy etc. we can harness this great job creation potential at a relatively low cost per job created.

Irish growers have to be complimented for their ever-ready response to take on the challenge of increased production when they are assured of the backing and support of specialists. In this regard I must not neglect to point out that very important measure taken by the interim board in setting up the new grant scheme for greenhouses which came into effect from 1 August 1989. This scheme came about as a result of a recommendation in the five year development plan published by An Bord Glas in November 1988. The Minister with responsibility for Horticulture, Deputy Séamus Kirk, pointed out at that time that the scheme would apply to both food and non-food crop production. The Minister was right in providing that, as part of the grant scheme, the applicants should be part and parcel of producer groups and also of the marketing strategy and this is to be welcomed.

The Minister in his address pointed out that the grant scheme could lead to an increase in tomato production of 6,500 tonnes. This of course requires a great emphasis and a new positive approach to marketing. Every grower must be trained to recognise the fact that marketing is not a desk concept; it is not an advertiser's speciality, nor does it start and end with clever sales techniques. It starts when the seed is selected. It starts with a conscious decision to match the selected variety with the current consumer demand. There is no point in having tonnes of cos or other types of lettuce if the retail sector is demanding iceberg. Attention to detail from the tiny seed stage to the sales point is absolutely essential.

An Bord Glas should and are possibly intending to look at extending market awareness among the growers. Maybe the appointment of a marketing adviser in each region would help. Maybe a course for growers on the techniques of winning market share and making fast responses to market change would be useful. At any rate, An Bord Glas, with their capacity for overview, have the potential to meet all these issues and demands. Closely allied to marketing there are other important issues.

As a former proprietor of a retail business which traded exclusively in horticultural produce and to a lesser degree in dairy and meat products, I have two letters indelibly printed on my mind and they are QC — quality control. Ask any person engaged in the marketing, wholesaling or retailing of food products what has been the most significant attitudinal change in consumer demand and I will be greatly surprised if the reply is other than an ever-increasing interest in the quality of food. An Bord Glas, with their central role, will be in a unique, new situation, able to moderate and mediate the various services and agencies that together make for good standardised production with quality control in a pivotal place in public consciousness.

The Members of this House will remember the beef hormone controversy, the ever-bubbling food additives controversy, the salmonella in eggs controvery etc. All these issues are indicative of the growing public awareness of food quality and its impact on both individual and community health. If one looks to the horticultural sector, specific and equally important and serious public perceptions are in evidence. Because of modern marketing and merchandising approaches coupled with the fact that the origin of foods being from the sales point means that what is generally called shelf life had to be a major consideration. Methods of prolonging shelf life are becoming increasingly important to producers as better yields and extended seasons coupled with longer transport times mean greater volumes of perishable produce must be kept in top condition as long as possible.

Irradiation is one way of tackling this problem. However, irradiation, despite a great deal of research into its possibly undesirable health aspects, has not been proved conclusively to be either wholly good, as some suggest, or wholly bad. It is an important technique. It is not an issue that we can ignore, nor is it a field of research that we should fail to explore.

Then again, there is the anti-pesticide lobby. They are having little difficulty in raising public fears on the alleged detrimental effects of some pesticides on health. There is the green lobby that takes the view that pesticides are environmentally destructive. Food technologists and environmental ecologists have widely varying views on these issues. They are not matters that can be left too long at issue as inconclusive findings or variances in publicly-expressed views on the part of experts lead to heightening of public fear. It must be the avowed aim of the horticultural sector to give the consumer public a wholesome and acceptable vision of our fruits and vegetables. We have to engage in research and we have to engage in public relations so as to keep our consumers on both the home and foreign markets happy with the cleanness and greenness of Irish produce.

Again, I would refer to section 9 and say that there should be a large slice of the third level curriculum devoted to this matter. I am well aware of the Minister's concern on these issues and I would ask him to make them a priority issue for the new Bord Glas.

Turning for a moment to non-food production, I would urge An Bord Glas to take a special interest in hardy nursery stock. This is an area with great potential. As chairperson of the Fingal Committee of Dublin County Council, I am aware of the excellent pioneering work of the council's parks department seeking to make themselves self-sufficient in this regard and providing their own basic tree replacement and expansion stock.

It may not be generally realised the Dublin County Council parks department can source 60 per cent of trees and shrubs for their open spaces, parklands and the linear planting of motorways from Irish stock. Bearing in mind that it stood at only 30 per cent a few years ago, one has to acknowledge this significant progress. There is still great potential there.

With regard to landscaping, particularly that being done on new motorways, it should be encouraged as it reinforces the clean green image for both natives and tourists alike. Dublin County Council recently outlined to Irish nursery stock growers the problems they have in meeting their requirements. If you multiply their needs by that of every other local authority and take account of planned future development it is possible to see great potential for hardy nursery stock. I believe that Ireland with it's ideal climate and soil could become Europe's premier source of hardy nursery stock, Europe's power house of quality trees and shrubs. From my research on this it appears that while there is plenty of manpower, there may be a lack of skills in the growing of hardy nursery stock. The Minister may consider some sort of course that would help to fill that vacuum and also encourage our present growers to take on board the market that is there and not take the soft option of importing from Holland and elsewhere.

By it's very nature, An Bord Glas implies close links between the various agencies such as an Bord Glas itself, Teagasc, Córas Tráchtála and the IDA. I would ask the Minister to ensure that these links be established at the earliest moment so that co-operation of the most productive kind quickly becomes a tradition and central feature of the horticultural process. As I am addressing the Minister I would also like to convey a desire expressed to me by my horticultural constituents in Dublin North that beaucratic procedures should be cut to the minimum.

Section 9 of the Bill assigns a consultative role to the board in the formulation of State investment policy and higher education curricula for horticulture. I have long held the view that at all levels of education we should afford significant interest bodies the opportunity and guaranteed right to involve themselves in formulating the curriculum content and shape of courses related to their specialism. Education must be a leading force in developing the industry. It must be responsive to the expressed needs of the producers and have an eye at least a decade ahead of their competitors.

It has been said that academics are the best people to plan course content whatever the discipline. It has been said that in education and training the corresponding agencies abhor co-operation. May I give the lie to that and say that at the level of the community great things can be accomplished. May I go further and briefly outline that in our own town of Malahide we have a course which has been running for six years. At a time when all the agencies were separated it brought together a community council, AFT as it was then, AnCO as it was, and Dublin County Council in a training course for young people in horticulture. The local community saw that within its own town there was the Kinsealy Centre and, the expertise was there and by bringing in one or two other agencies we were able to put this course together. Many of the young students from the course now have flourishing businesses in horticulture.

I would like to make another point on how schemes such as that can respond. Recently the nursery stock and garden landscapers made a comment about the lack of any garden design content in all the courses that are available at the moment. We have responded quickly to that and have added it to the course and the young people now will have that as part of their curriculum.

There are several speakers who wish to contribute so I will just refer briefly to the mushroom sector. It should be emphasised there can be achievements in the industry which is now foremost in the country in its expertise, marketing and job creation. While there may be some difficulties in the industry due to outside circumstances such as sterling and other issues, it is fantastic that we have such a successful mushroom industry at the moment.

This Bill shows the Government's intent to intensify and difersify horticultural production to the benefit and advantage of the horticultural growers, their employees and the rural community in general. It is another clear signal that no stone will be left unturned to ensure that the economy continues to grow and that imports of produce continue to decline.

An Bord Glas is an instrument to marshall all the forces that separately provide important services to the industry but which collectively have the potential to change the face of horticulture in a beneficial way. Advisory services, educational providers, marketing strategists, biological researchers, and all the other elements can be integrated under the aegis of the board. Forward planning in all the important areas concerned will be the hallmark of the future. We must be market leaders in an international framework, not net importers in a domestic squabble. The current role of Ireland with it's term of EC Presidency is indicative of the changing face of Europe. The changes in eastern Europe may, and possibly will, have a very real impact on our role as a producer nation of highest quality foods. We can meet the challenge if we plan, educate, research and strive or we can be overrun by others if we fail to realise the potential that is inherent in the strategy that underpins the Bill.

The industry which the Minister represents has a major role to play in the future economic welfare of this country. I congratulate the Minister on bringing forth this legislation.

I would like to thank Senator Wright for a very comprehensive explanation of the Bill and an equally comprehensive tour of his own constituency in the process. I am sorry I do not have either the same problems, involvement or indeed knowledge of this particular subject as have many of the other Senators. I have no expertise in this particular area but I have an instinctive suspicion of any Bill which receives such unanimous all-party support in this House as this particular Bill has obtained. I have an instinctive suspicion also of any Bill which increases State interference in any industry in this State.

Those who are in favour of the Bill have said very articulately, and in some cases very convincingly, that the reason for this Bill is that the horticultural industry needs organisation and advisers, but I suggest that behind the great approval for this Bill is the smell of money for nothing. There is power in this Bill to vote money to give what are now euphemistically called grants-in-aid to various industries. The Minister in his introductory speech said:

The board and the Government have also recognised the special difficulties facing the glasshouse sector.

Accordingly, special aid for this sector was introduced last year in the form of a new capital grant scheme of 25 per cent and an increase from 15 per cent to 35 per cent for grants under the farm improvement programme.

I find it difficult to understand why these sort of grants should be given to the glasshouse industry or to any particular industry by the Government. I am an unapologetic believer in private enterprise. It it inconsistent of the Government at a time when privatisation is becoming more fashionable and is being looked at with a less prejudiced eye by many Governments, including this one, to introduce a Bill of this sort which is obviously going to enable the Government to give grants at will to the horticultural industry; grants-in-aid or what they call support or capital grant schemes do not put a great deal of intense pressure on those who receive them. They seem to be once-off payments which do not put pressure on those who receive them to produce dividends. It would appear to be against the trend of present thinking, especially in terms of the thinking of Irish Life and other State industries now, to introduce a Bill which, as I understand it, gives unlimited powers to the Government to pump money into this industry willy-nilly.

I am casting no aspersions on the Government, and people should not be too sensitive about this, in saying that the temptation, when these sort of powers are given to Ministers of all parties, to distribute grants of this sort to these industries in specific constituencies, is too great in certain cases to be resisted. It is wrong in principle that powers should be given to Ministers to allow grants to industries which are politically sensitive at election time. It would be far more sensible if the horticultural industry was left to fight its own battles, and certainly financially to fight its own battles. I cannot understand, and I never have been able to understand, why the Government should be giving money to industries that cannot get it elsewhere, why the Government should be giving money to particular projects when the banks have refused it. This is really the kernel of this Bill.

There are many good things in the Minister's speech. There are a lot of good things in the Bill about getting producers together, about encouraging industry in certain areas. That is absolutely fine although I cannot understand why the producers have not done it themselves if it is a good idea. I cannot understand why the industry should get grants from the Government if the banks will not give money to them. The reason the banks will not give it to them is quite simple; it is because the banks regard it as too risky, or the banks do not regard it as getting a proper return. It is time the Government stopped regarding themselves as a charity for ailing industries.

It is no good the Minister, or other Ministers supporting the same principle, coming before us and saying: "This is going to create X number of jobs" and giving us figures about the number of jobs which have already been produced. The jobs in themselves are absolutely no use unless the industry in which those jobs are created is set up on a very sound footing. Private enterprise will do that better than the Government because we have too many cases of semi-State bodies or ailing industries being supported by the Government and collapsing afterwards. We have had many embarrassing cases of that happening and the Government having to pump more and more and more money into those industries where a bad commercial decision but a good political decision has been made in the first place.

That is why I am suspicious of this Bill. That is why I think this Bill has been so uncritically accepted by the Opposition because the Bill is short-term good news. It is about creating jobs and it is about giving money away and it is very difficult for any political party to oppose that or even to criticise that, especially if it means the speaker's own constituency will benefit. It is one of the advantages of being an Independent Member of the Seanad in that if one does not have ambitions for the Dáil one does not have to suffer from these pressures and one does not have the sort of constituency pressures of other Members of this House, and I say that in the full understanding of the pressures under which other Members of this House suffer. It might have been helpful if, when we are getting Bills of this sort which envisage giving money to industries, those particular industries, before they are given money and before the Minister votes the money, as he can do under this Bill, are forced to provide projections which are scrutinised, not by themselves but by independent auditors and by independent consultants. In that way at least the money which is being granted will stand the scrutiny of commercial pressures and will remove the suspicion of political pressures.

I would ask the Minister when replying to consider the possibility that when money is granted under this Bill, and he has unlimited powers under this Bill to grant money, that it be subject to commercial scrutiny at all times from people who are not beholden to the board or to the Government. If that were the case, and it should apply to the borrowings of the company also, perhaps there would be a case for giving money to the company when it required it.

I would like now to turn to the powers the Minister has in the Bill to give directions to the board. It is a general point but it seems to me that the boards of these bodies leave a lot to be desired, not only in their appointments — which I will come to — but in their powers themselves. Section 26 of the Bill empowers the Minister to give directions to the board concerning its activities and general policies. This may be a general provision, and I think I have seen it in several other Bills, but it gives the Minister full powers to tell the board to do exactly what he wants at any time. What we are to have here is not a semi-State body with independent powers but a body which is completely appointed by the Minister and a body which then, having been appointed by the Minister, has to accept all possible instructions from him. What greater temptation could there be for political exploitation of a semi-State body?

It would have been far more sensible and far less open to any such accusations if the board were appointed for a period of time, which it is, but a member of the board can be dismissed by the Minister at any time. Therefore, it is at the pleasure of the Minister. In other words, everything the board do is subject to Government approval and direction and the semblance of independence is actually a false and deceptive one. This is a general provision which applies to nearly all semi-State bodies at the moment. It is something which the Government should look at. I know Ministers are loath to limit their powers in any way at any stage but if these bodies are to carry some credibility of independence it would be far better for them and for the bodies involved if they were given this independence without such restrictive checks because in reality they have absolutely no independence at all. They can do what they like as long as the Minister does not stop them. If the Minister wants to stop them, he can stop them. If he wants them to do something else, they have to do that.

Finally, I find the composition of An Bord Glas very difficult to understand and the reasons why it is appointed in this way. Five members of the board are to be appointed on the basis of their knowledge of or expertise in horticulture. That seems quite a reasonable criterion to use for those who are being appointed to a horticulture board. Apparently, the other five will not be appointed on that basis and I do not understand why. The remaining five will be appointed by the Minister following consultation with the horticultural industries he considers appropriate. That is rather flowery verbiage to mean that the Minister can appoint whoever the hell he liked to the board in both cases. The Taoiseach, Deputy Haughey, is undoubtedly an expert gardener. The Minister, according to section 3 of the Bill, can consult with the Taoiseach — God forbid it — on the appointment of a board like this because the Taoiseach is a good gardener; between them they might come up with five board members because the Taoiseach is a good gardener. That is exactly what is in the Bill. I do not believe that the first five will necessarily be appointed on horticultural merit but the bottom five can be appointed without any horticultural merit at all. All the Minister has to do is consult with somebody who knows something about horticulture. I would like to inform the Minister that I am also a very good gardener. The Minister might, when he is making these appointments, not just ask the Taoiseach, but he might come and talk to me as well. After those consultations I am sure we will come up with five very interesting members of the board.

I am making a serious point here. It is that the appointment of members of the boards of these bodies should be taken out of the political arena. We have seen far too many appointments of a political nature to semi-State bodies recently being made. I am not going to name anybody but there has been a trend in recent times to make outrageous and nakedly political appointments to boards of this sort. They are not made on merit; they are made for political favours which have been done at elections and that cannot possibly be justified. Some of these appointments are disguised by the veneer of a vague knowledge of the particular subjects. The primary loyalty of those appointed is to the Government party that is in power. This does not apply solely to Fianna Fáil. Fianna Fáil are great practitioners of political patronage on semi-State bodies and recently have been showing dangerous signs of going beserk in that area. But it applies equally to the Fine Gael Party and Labour Party Coalition when in power.

For some reason the board members of these particular bodies are regarded as fair game in terms of political patronage. It is time that that stopped. It is time the Minister gave up the powers conferred on him in nearly every Bill of this sort to appoint his cronies to boards of semi-State and State bodies and instead have them referred to an independent body which would make the appointments on a non-party basis. I can understand the temptation to do this. I can understand the reasons it is done. The answer always offered is that the other side does it so why should we not do likewise. That is simply not good enough. I will be watching the appointments made to this particular board by the Minister, especially the bottom five. It seems that the distinction is outrageous. The distinction is quite simple — five have got to know something about the subject they have been appointed on and the other five do not have to know anything about it.

I would like to know why the distinction is made by the Minister. It would be better if this clause in the Bill had been left out and that it was stated quite clearly that the Minister can appoint the ten people of his choice.

To put in this slight veil of respectability about the first five and to say the other five can be political hacks is giving the game away. Otherwise, I believe the intention of the Bill is a very worthy one. I hope it will not become a source of Government spending for political reasons and that it will benefit the horticultural industry.

May I say for the guidance of the House that it is not appropriate to make reference to what any Member of either House does in his private capacity, be it gardening or painting a house. Secondly, it is not appropriate to use the term "cronies".

As usual, Senator Ross was at his flippant best. He likes to come in on Bills like this and make a short, snappy, punchy little contribution looking for the usual headlines, making outrageous statements and then leaving the Chamber. Before he leaves I would like to reply very briefly to him before I get down to the few comments I have to make on the Bill itself. Obviously, any board the Minister sets up will consist of knowledgeable people who will have the important work of the board in hand — in this case to develop all aspects of the horticultural industry — and as long as they are doing that they will have a free hand and the Minister will not in any way examine their position. Obviously, if it is seen they are not doing that then the Minister surely has the right to intervene and bring them in for discussion. Senator Ross suggested that the unfortunate grower in Connemara, Mayo or West-meath should not get a grant for an industry that is creating jobs, but I presume he would regard it as OK that people who are many miles from the shores of Ireland can set up industries and get grants to create jobs. This is a fact of life. In the Programme for National Recovery the progress report by the Central Review Committee makes the following point on horticulture:

Some 350 full-time jobs and 300 part-time jobs are estimated to have been created in horticulture in 1988. The bulk of these were in the mushroom industry. It is estimated that 400 full-time and 300 part-time jobs were created in horticulture in 1989.

That is success. It must be a source of pride to the Minister with responsibility for Horticulture, Deputy Seamus Kirk. I would like to congratulate the Minister warmly for his great interest and work in this vital area of the overall agriculture scene and wish him well in continuance of this successful work in the years ahead.

May I go now, please?

Certainly. I am glad the Senator waited. The aim of the Bill is to set up a new statutory board with responsibility to develop all aspects of the horticultural industry. The horticulture industry has been like a rudderless ship. It is moving slowly onwards not knowing exactly where it is going.

The industry needs revitalising and development. The Government recognised this some years back when they appointed a Minister for Horticulture, Deputy Séamus Kirk. His interest in his work is clearly revealed in this document I referred to earlier. Special emphasis on this important sector in the years ahead will prove very successful and will be of huge benefit to the economy. The revitalisation of the industry should, with proper planning and proper approach, reduce imports, increase exports and, as it is an intensive employer of labour, it should create many jobs. The proof of that is in what I said earlier.

I am quite certain that the way forward is as outlined in the Bill. The formation of the board will lead to increased profits for the people in the industry and will contribute to all aspects of improving the full potential of this industry. We are an agricultural country. I must confess, as an urban dweller, that I find it alarming that many farmers with farms of 100 acres or more will not till even one half acre of their land. I am not suggesting that we have compulsory tillage but farmers should be encouraged to sow more vegetables and fruit if only for their own families' use. Hopefully, this will happen as a result of the passage of this Bill.

We have the spectacle at the moment of farmers' wives trotting around the supermarkets possibly buying imported vegetables. When you examine the problem you have to say that it is a scandal that we, an agricultural country, should import vegetables to the value of £1,000 million, most of which we ought to be able to produce at home. Exports of horticulture amount to less than 25 per cent of the total value of imports whereas, in the overall agriculture and food sector, exports amount to more than two and a half times the value of imports. There is a great imbalance which is doing very little for the balance of payments.

A very important aspect of the work of the board will be liaison with the other State bodies, particularly Teagasc. There is a specific reference to this in section 8 of the Bill. A strong link is necessary between the board and Teagasc as well as with other areas of importance such as the IDA, An Córas Tráchtála and the Department. In regard to the educational aspect of the industry — perhaps the Minister will make a note of it and I am sure the board will be made aware of it in time — the adult education programme of the many VECs throughout the country should be urged to take on appropriate education of people who have an interest in becoming growers. This would be of benefit to the industry in the years ahead. This is something that might be examined. As a member of a VEC I know that some of the adult education programmes — such as golf and badminton training — have been of very little relevance to the work of these committees, but here is a classic example where a VEC adult education programme would be very appropriate.

While I have referred to Teagasc, education and the other bodies, there is another important group who should be contacted on a regular basis, that is the consumers and the consumers association. There is need to educate the consumer. If you look at the present position you will find that the housewife will go into her local supermarket and buy carrots at 30p per pound or £4.20 per stone and the local greengrocer or the local stall will sell the same carrots at £1 per stone. The same supermarket will buy mushrooms from the grower for 70p per pound and sell them for £1.60 per pound while the greengrocer will sell them at £1 per pound or less.

The grower will wait 45 days for his money from the supermarket — I believe the supermarkets are now looking for an extension of that credit period to something like 70 days — while the greengrocer pays before he leaves the shop. A stone of potatoes is at least twice the price in the supermarket compared to the price charged by the local traditional greengrocer. Another ploy in the supermarkets is that for one week of the 52 they will mark up two or three vegetables which will be sold off for half price or less, but for the other 51 weeks exorbitant prices apply. The moral of that story is that there should be education for the consumer so that they will buy their fruit and vegetables from the greengrocer and get good value. In regard to the fruit and vegetable industry the supermarkets are ripping off the consumers. We must all be concerned about this.

The grower is also losing out. Six years ago you paid £11.50 for a four stone bag of Scotch records while today the price is £4.75. A stone of carrots today costs £1.25 while ten years ago it cost £2.50. I am talking about the very best carrots. The moral of this story is that the growers seem to be working harder to sell more but get less profit. All these areas have to be addressed, and hopefully, the board will examine them.

Last July and August we travelled the length and breadth of Ireland seeking votes in the Seanad election campaign. A very notable feature of the trip for me was the number of new mushroom units all over the country— I reckon there must be 1,000 mushroom units at present. In 1988, 350 full-time jobs and 300 part-time jobs were created in horticulture and the bulk were in the mushroom industry. I am not surprised by this because the smallest unit will give employment to perhaps five or six people, and one or two of them may be permanent and the rest temporary. The mushroom growers have got their act together. They had a good promotion during 1989 when they sent out good leaflets of menus and the uses for mushrooms. The knowledge that 80 per cent of their produce is exported must be seen as a very successful aspect of the whole horticulture industry. They have displaced the Dutch on quality and general presentation in Britain.

While this is a success story and hopefully that will continue, there are problems. One of these problems is Sterling versus the Punt and the other is transport which is slow and expensive. This is an area where I hope the board will help mushroom growers in the future and that it will also help them with the larger European market as it expands. This is an important aspect of the industry. Last year we had £100 million worth of mushrooms exported which by any standards is excellent.

I remember many years ago my late father and others renting a plot of land to grow vegetables. It still operates. If you go down along the canal in Dublin you will see rented plots of land where people sow their vegetables. A local authority which owned maybe two acres of land would divide it into little parcels of maybe 20 yards by 20 yards or something like that and rent them to a group of 8, 10 or 12 people who would grow lettuce, carrots and onions for their families. I would like to think that many people today would do likewise if the land were available. There are many patches of land owned by local authorities or semi-State bodies where this could be done successfully.

All dieticians strongly recommend fruit and vegetables in people's diet. The diet and health aspects are very important selling points in the promotion or marketing of these products. Many people for various reasons have chosen vegetarian diets, and this is a growing development in recent years. Some teenagers will not eat meat. The fruit and vegetable growers should be pleased about that. We can be very proud of this Bill. I again congratulate the Minister on bringing forward this legislation which will be very important for the national economy and the creation of jobs, and for the future of the horticultural industry in the years ahead.

I would like to compliment the Minister on bringing this Bill before the House. I think there will be general agreement that our achievements in horticulture over the years, could have been much greater. There are, of course, exceptions. The mushroom industry, in particular, is a resounding success. Apart from mushrooms, there has not been much evidence of success in the horticultural industry.

Efforts have been made over the years by various Ministers to try to improve the position. In 1986, Fianna Fáil, then in Opposition, published a blueprint for the co-ordinated and effective direction of our horticulture. That document was a most creditable endeavour to improve the industry. It had as an essential idea, the setting up of a body, An Bord Glas, to take the development work in hand.

The framework for An Bord Glas as set out in the Bill is very satisfactory. I am glad to see that there is provision for close liaison between An Bord Glas and the various other bodies, in particular Teagasc, closely concerned with horticulture. There will indeed have to be very close co-operation between all the bodies involved, as producers are entitled to expect a full range of help from the State in regard to research, advice investment, marketing and so on. In turn, of course, where the State makes a maximum effort to improve a sector, it is reasonable to expect the producers, as the beneficiaries, to row in with the State effort.

We need more than anything else better co-operation between producers with regard to horticulture. We already have it in regard to mushrooms, but the lack of producer co-operation is more evident in horticulture than in any other sector. The potato sector is an obvious scene for co-operation by producers because at the moment it is a shambles. To the best of my knowledge, potato producers make little attempt to develop co-ordinated marketing of their products, except in some cases for early potatoes.

This is very evident at the start of the season when we see a lot of television advertising. It is tragic that Ireland, with its long tradition in the production of excellent potatoes should have to depend from time to time on very large imports of potatoes. Potato producers should know very well by now that if Irish potatoes are not up to standard, there is a ready supply available from other producing countries. If An Bord Glas succeed in organising the potato industry, they will be doing very good work.

There are many improvements possible in potato production, covering sowing, attention to the growing crop and harvesting. I would like to see An Bord Glas, Teagasc, the Irish Farmers Association and other interested groups getting together to increase awareness among potato producers of what needs to be done in order to make their crop more profitable to them, and to the country. I take the opportunity, therefore, to commend an Bord Glas for producing a first-class video on potato production. Copies are being made available to the potato people, who now have very useful information aid at their disposal.

The Department of Agriculture and Food have not been remiss in relation to the potato sector. Following representations they made to the EC Commission, a regulation has been enacted which enables community aid to be given to potato producer groups in Ireland. This is a very positive step towards organising the commodity. Under the regulation, valuable financial aid is available towards the cost of setting up and running a producer group. This regulation affords a great opportunity to address more forcibly the question of marketing, one of the great problems of the Irish potato trade.

The purpose of the Bord Glas Bill before us today is mainly to reduce imports, increase exports and as a result, increase much needed jobs in horticulture. We may not all agree on the best methods for performing this task but there is agreement on the need to develop the horticultural industry.

There is tremendous potential in this Bill. We need only look at the way European consumers are moving in relation to their perception of food, especially with the pending EC Directives. I have no doubt that An Bord Glas will be able to take full advantage of all the expertise available to assist them make horticulture more efficient.

I congratulate the interim board and the Minister of State, on the document, "A Programme for the Development of Horticulture". This excellent document came about as a result of a very detailed examination of the industry by the interim board. The main task of the new board will be to implement the many recommendations already made. I welcome the statement of the Minister that the new board will have broadly the same responsibilities as the interim board, that is, the development of all aspects of horticulture.

I know the Minister of State is very committed to his task, I wish him every success, I hope that when we discuss horticulture in a few years, we will see this Bill as a great success story. The Minister and the board have a lot of work to do. I have no doubt that they are both committed and the greater the success of this board, the better for our balance of payments by the elimination of many imports.

I would also like to welcome the Bill and to congratulate the Minister of State for bringing this excellent measure before us. It will do a lot of good for the horticultural industry, an industry that was probably neglected for many years, as a number of speakers have outlined already. Our vegetable production is a long way behind that of other developed countries that go in for extensive horticultural production.

We have as good a climate and potential to develop our horticultural industry as these other countries. Many farmers — Senator Fallon touched on this earlier — could be encouraged to grow more vegetables. Our mushroom industry has taken off. It is a typical example of the progress that can be made when there is a commitment to a certain product.

Teagasc by voluntary redundancies have cut back a lot on staff. In County Monaghan we have been very badly hit by voluntary redundancies. We had 13 advisers four years ago, now we have four. I ask the Minister to look favourably at that situation.

In connection with the mushroom industry, there is a 25 per cent grant for the building of these houses but there is no grant for the installation of a new cooling system. This is a very good system and it has increased production greatly over the last few years since it was introduced. It is of very great importance to the mushroom growers, especially in the summer months when houses are normally closed owing to the very hot weather. The new cooling system has a great advantage for those growers as they can produce their product during the summer.

I do not wish to detain the House because all I wanted to say has already been said by a number of speakers. There have been some fine contributions. Once again I would like to congratulate the Minister on bringing the Bill before us. He has done a wonderful job. I thank him very much and wish him well.

At the outset I should take the opportunity of thanking Senators for the very constructive and worthwhile contributions they made during the debate on the Bill. While there has not been absolute unanimity on it, there has been a general acceptance that the Bill is very worthwhile and that it is addressing an area of underdevelopment in the sphere of agriculture that needed to be addressed for some time.

The underlying sentiments which were expressed clearly indicate that the measures which we are proposing under the Bill and the role which we envisage for the new board will develop the horticultural industry. It is fair to say that what has been said coincides very closely with my views on the matter.

I have a little longer than half an hour perhaps to wind up and Senators will understand that if I cannot go into any great detail on some of the points I will endeavour to touch on as many as possible of the relevant points which have been raised in the course of the debate. We will have time — hopefully, next week — when we move on to the Committee and remaining Stages, to go into more detail on them. I am not taking them in any particular order but a number of points were raised today.

Ba mhaith liom freagra a thabhairt ar an gceist a chuir an Seanadóir Mullooly orm mar gheall ar an dteideal, An Bord Glas. He raised the question of the origin of the title of the new board. The name Bord Glas stems from our desire that the new organisation should have an Irish name. We decided that the name, whatever it would be, would have to meet a number of requirements, namely, that it echo the concept of vegetables as denoted by the Irish word glasraí, that it evoke the notion of green in colour, that it be brief and easily pronounced. Senators will agree that the word "glas" meets all these requirements pre-eminently and, if I may say so, even felicitously.

It is of course important to appreciate that "glas" is not meant to be the dictionary word but is naturally inspired by it — in other words, it is not meant to be taken literally. However, I am sure Senators will agree that the word now has clear connotations of the whole sphere of horticulture and is already well established in the public mind as such.

Senator Shane Ross in his contribution a short time ago dealt with aspects of the Bill from perhaps a slightly different perspective from that of the other Members of the House. His interpretation of the Bill is not right. The Bill has no power in regard to grant giving. Section 5 clearly underlines that.

Two points need to be made. Bord Glas is a development board for the horticultural industry. The development trust above all else will be about encouraging better markets. Grants are a separate matter. Bord Glas is not in the grant business. Agriculture in general gets grants from the Government under the various national and EC schemes. Bord Glas is not in the business of giving money away. Irish horticulture has up to now suffered from the lack of a well structured development programme. The development plans and projections set out in the development programme at the end of 1988 illustrate that the board will have a clearly defined role and clearly defined aims and objectives to pursue.

Grants from Government have to be matched with very serious investment by private people involved. At all times grants must be given with the normal parliamentary control of Government expenditure. Grants must be included in the Estimates for, as in this case, the Department of Agriculture and Food and, of course, in due course, have to be approved by Dáil Éireann.

With regard to Senator Raftery's contribution, he poses the question: could Teagasc not do the work that is proposed for Bord Glas? If we turn back the pages we will discover that under ACOT and AFT — ACOT, of course, in its advisory role — despite its best efforts, unfortunately the industry did not realise its full potential. It was from that situation that the whole concept and idea for Bord Glas has its origins. It is clear that there was and is a need for the provision of a catalyst to effect change within the industry. We certainly envisage Bord Glas being a catalyst for the horticultural industry.

Senator John Dardis raised the point of the relationship between Teagasc and Bord Glas. In section 4 of the Bill, which I am sure we will have an opportunity to debate in more detail on Committee Stage, the phraseology used is "to develop, to promote, to facilitate, encourage, co-ordinate and assist the production and marketing and consumption of horticultural produce." The terminology used clearly reflects the thrust of what we are about in this legislation. Section 8 confers a crucial additional function on the board. It provides for the involvement of the board in the formulation and approval of the annual horticultural programme of activities of Teagasc. The Government decided on this approach rather than go for the complete separation of the horticultural activities from the board of Teagasc. We will have an annual consultative role in the programme for Teagasc. I would like to say at this stage, having had the interim board in operation since March 1987, that the working relationship which has existed between the interim Bord Glas and the board of Teagasc has been very satisfactory. I look forward to an even closer relationship in the immediate years ahead.

As I said briefly earlier, the main task of An Bord Glas will be to promote better marketing. In all the comments that we have, inside this House and outside it, we invariably come back to the deficiency which exists in the marketing end of the industry. There is a deficiency regarding the presentation of our produce. We must realise that we are dealing with an ever more discerning consumer. If the product is not presented in the right way, if the quality of the product is not right, it is so easy for them to tell the supermarket personnel or the retail outlet, "we need the Dutch or the imported product in a particular line". That has been the difficulty for us. That is the reason we have had in many respects the level of imports. There are other considerations also. It is over-simplification to say that the problem is in marketing, even though marketing is the primary problem. There may be economic considerations in regard to production.

The major activity for the Bord Glas staff will be the promotion of the producer group concept. There has been the producer group concept in the fruit and vegetable sector for some years and while we would like to see a much greater percentage of producers directly involved with producer groups, nonetheless there is a growing awareness of their importance. I realise there are growers who have very satisfactory arrangements with wholesalers in Dublin or in other places around the country. There are very satisfactory arrangements between wholesaler and producer as to supply of produce. We are quite prepared to recognise the importance of that arrangement but in general terms I must say that more producers will have to involve themselves with producer groups. Various grant schemes have been introduced and one of the conditions for payment of grant aid is that the applicants will become members of producers groups. That is very desirable indeed.

I am glad to say that in recent times we have succeeded in getting the producer group regulation extended to the potato sector. As I am sure many Members of the House will know, we have offered to the IFA to part finance the appointment of a marketing co-ordinator and recruitment of the individual for that job is at a very advanced stage. We are looking forward to the announcement of his appointment in the not too distant future. If we can combine the appointment of the marketing co-ordinator with the availability of quite generous grant-aid under the producer group regulation for potatoes, we can begin to effect quickly the changes that are so sorely needed for the potato industry.

In the day-to-day workings there will be a very close working relationship with Teagasc, for instance, in the organisation of seminars and conferences for producers. We will be doing that and have been doing it jointly with Teagasc. We will be endeavouring to build up a more cohesive working relationship between the multiplies, the supermarket outlets and the retail outlets. If we can succeed in eliminating the "them and us" mentality which tends to pervade the sector in certain instances, it will be a very worthwhile job. The supermarkets and the multiples must realise that the producers have a vital role to play and, vice versa, the producers must realise the importance of the multiples and the multiple outlets, that they are the people, as it were, at the coal face where the consumers decide whether product A or product B will be purchased on any day of the week. As I said earlier, over the past two and a half years the working relationship with Teagasc and Bord Glas has been very satisfactory and we are looking forward to that relationship continuing.

Complaints about monopolies in the fruit and vegetable sector have been mentioned and two points need to be made in this regard. First, An Bord Glas is a development board; it is not being given functions in regard to dealing with complaints of this kind. There is another Government body in existence, the Fair Trade Commission, and it is to that body that complaints about this problem should be directed. That body is under the direct control of the Department of Industry and Commerce. Anybody who has any misgivings in this regard should not feel reluctant to lodge a complaint and to have it processed by the Fair Trade Commission. It would be very unsatisfactory that an individual or organisation should feel badly done by because one or two groupings are in a dominant position in the industry. The legislative provision is there to cater for that under the Fair Trade Commission. I am bearing in mind that this is something that has been raised at recent meetings I have had with the IFA. I said to them and I repeat it in the House, that provision is there to deal with complaints under the Fair Trade Commission and if there is an individual or collective problem I am saying to them to refer it directly to the Fair Trade Commission to have it considered by them.

During the debate on Second Stage, and indeed on Committee Stage, in the Dáil there was some focus on the legislative provision we are making for the collection of a levy perhaps at a later date. There is nothing new, or innovative about it. There is a levy in place for such State boards as CBF and it has been working quite satisfactorily. At this point we have not decided when the levy will be introduced. It is a question that when the legislation is going through the Houses of the Oireachtas it is necessary and desirable that we would make provision for it. At least one Senator, perhaps two Senators asked whether the levy would be charged on imported produce. The direct answer to that is, yes, it will be imposed on imported produce. I simply cannot say at this stage when or what way the levy will be charged but when we have the statutory Bord Glas in place we will be listening very closely to their advice in the matter, and it is reasonable to assume we would be guided by that advice. The levy when brought into operation should be charged on all produce marketed in the country, both home produced and imported. Not to charge a levy in this way would be discriminatory against the home producer and it would be reasonable to anticipate that we would have considerable difficulties with it if we were to confine the levy to home produce.

On the matter of the appointment of the board members, I have always felt about the appointment of persons to State boards that it is absolutely desirable that we have persons of quality on such boards. We need persons, whether they are representing the primary production end or the retail, wholesale or multiple end, who know what they are about on a daily basis, who have a proven track record in that sphere and who can at board level articulate the needs of the sector they represent. I am not suggesting they should see their role merely as representing that sector. They must take a much broader view of the needs of the industry. For far too long we have operated on the premise in this country that a person is appointed to a board simply to represent the interests of the people he is there to represent.

We must face the reality in these competitive days that there must be an integrated approach to the development of any industry. There is an interdependence within industries that unfortunately has not been fully appreciated but I think appreciation of that fact is growing. For that reason, it is absolutely desirable to get the right people for board management, people who are successful in their spheres, who can articulate at board meetings the needs of the total industry, who have a genuine and deep-rooted concern for the development and progress of the sector they represent.

I have had representations from various organisations. We are quite prepared to invite and have invited some to submit names for consideration for appointment to the board. We will be doing that. It is not a matter of approaching it with a closed mind. So far as the board is concerned, we want to get the chemistry right to ensure success in what is at the end of the day a difficult industry to get off the ground. There are particular problems. We are in a very competitive situation. The Dutch can export produce to this country and make life very difficult for our primary producers. It is important that the programme and the chemistry are right to ensure that over the period of the programme we attain the targets and the objectives which we have set outselves.

When the Oireachtas sets up a body like An Bord Glas and provides that it may be funded out of public moneys, it is wrong that a Minister should have to accept names for board members put to him by organisations merely as representatives of that organisation rather than as individuals who can represent, as I said earlier, the total need of the industry. The Minister who makes the appointments naturally will be accountable and answerable for those who have been appointed to the board and who at the end of the day will be responsible for spending taxpayers' money. If the board are being funded in part by levies collected from sections of an industry, then I can see a good argument why a proportion of board members should come from the industry. These members should be found on the basis of an election but the people paying the levy have not the right to vote in the matter of their appointment.

Senator McGowan mentioned flax growing. While it certainly does not fall within the scope of this Bill, I have taken note of what Senator McGowan has said and we will be conveying it to the relevant section.

I have referred briefly to the development of the organic unit in the Department of Agriculture and Food. As Senators are aware, it has been decided to establish an organic unit within the ambit of the Department of Agriculture and Food to look at this sector. There is no doubt that market demand for organically produced food is growing. I am not suggesting to the House for one moment that we see a huge slice of the market requirement for food in this country being sourced in the organic area. I do not think that will be the case. It is fair to say that if the marketplace vibes show we need organically produced food in greater volume, we should endeavour to supply it. I fully realise that without the premium which apparently it can command at the present time, the economics of this production could well be doubtful. The realities are that if people are prepared to rearrange their domestic finance, their domestic budget, in such a way as to spend more money on food because they are more satisfied about its origin, so be it, and if the market niche for it is growing we should endeavour to cater for it. The indications are that across Europe and at an increasing rate here as well, people wish to have organically produced food. Having said all that, I fully realise that the conventional method of production will be for a long time the principal source of our food needs.

I am glad to tell the House that I have long held the view, as representing a Border constituency that, as a very small country of five million people, within the agricultural industry we should do all we can to promote better and closer working relationships North and South. On a recent visit to look at some of the research facilities which they have in the North, I had the opportunity of meeting the Parliamentary Under Secretary at the Northern Ireland Office, Peter Bottomly. We had an exchange of views. Subsequently we invited him on a visit here to discuss areas of mutual and common interest. He gladly accepted that invitation. We had him in on Friday of last week and as a result of that meeting we have agreed to establish a working group comprised of members from our own Department, including the research end, and their counterparts in the North to focus on such areas as seed potatoes and perhaps mushrooms.

I would see them principally considering the possibilities of closer cooperation in research, particularly in regard to seed potatoes. We have spent a volume of resources on varietal development. It is a very long term job. The conventional way of developing new varieties takes years. Perhaps the biotechnological method which is to a degree in an embryonic state, would provide a shortening of the period for varietal development. If there are possibilities for a joint venture or greater utilisation of resources on the island as a whole, we should explore them. Our seed potato industry has declined seriously in recent years, the volume of exports has declined. The same applies in the North. Their seed potato industry has declined quite seriously in recent years. There is a common interest to do the things and effect the changes needed to put the seed potato industry on to a more developmental footing.

I would like to pay a tribute to the work which has been done by the interim Bord Glas since it was set up some two and a half years ago. I referred earlier to the development plan for horticulture brought forward by the interim board That plan will be a very important guideline for the new Bord Glas. Putting together that plan was a major job. It involved not only the interim board but also seven different commodity teams, each team made up of experts in each product or a small group of products. In all some 80 experts were involved. As well as the very important work of producing the plan, the interim Bord Glas involved themselves in a large number of activities mainly directed at improving marketing. The products involved included potatoes, tomatoes, onions, soft fruit and mushrooms for the domestic market. This work will also serve as a guideline for the new board. The interim board did not have large numbers of staff. It had to depend for the most part on staff made available from the Department of Agriculture and Food. As soon as they are established, the new board will quickly begin to recruit their own staff and I would expect them to be in full operation in a fairly short time.

It is not, of course, for me to tell the new board how many staff it should employ. I would say to them, first, to make sure that the staff taken on are of sufficient experience, calibre and quality to do the by no means easy job which lies ahead. They will also, I would expect, have due regard to cost and take as their guideline that quality rather than numbers is the important thing.

To meet the situation in which Irish horticulture found itself in the years after accession to the European Community and since then, special action on the lines I am now proposing is needed. We must put an end to the very unsatisfactory situation where we are on the one hand importing products which could well be produced at home and, on the other, not making full use of our export possibilities. The new Bord Glas have an important task before them. They will serve as a single motivating force acting on everybody connected with the horticulture industry, not forgetting as I said before the important role of the home producer.

I thank sincerely all the Members for their worthwhile and valuable contributions to the Bill. The contributions were of a very high standard indeed, and reflect the depth of knowledge which exists with the various spokespeople in this House on the needs of the agricultural/horticultural industry. We are looking forward, hopefully next week, to dealing with the Committee and remaining Stages of the Bill where we will have an opportunity to get down to the more specific aspects of some of the provisions contained in it.

Question put and agreed to.
Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 21 February 1990.
Sitting suspended at 1.50 p.m. and resumed at 2 p.m.
Top
Share