Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 12 Jun 1996

Vol. 147 No. 15

An Bord Bia (Amendment) Bill, 1996: Second Stage.

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

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry (Mr. Deenihan)

This is a simple and straightforward Bill. Its purpose is to increase the membership of An Bord Bia and each of its two subsidiary boards by one, and to provide for the filling of these additional places by consumers' representatives. The problems currently being experienced in the beef sector have brought home to us, as never before, just how consumer perceptions and concerns can impact on our food industry and what an important component of the industry the consumer dimension is. That is a dimension of which An Bord Bia is well aware.

As a promotion and market development agency An Bord Bia does not have any statutory functions in relation to food safety. That is as it should be. Food safety is a regulatory function which should be exercised by the regulatory authorities. This does not mean that the board is not conscious of or concerned about consumer requirements and fears, quite the contrary. As required by the legislation under which it was established — An Bord Bia Act, 1994 — the members of the board and its two subsidiary boards are all persons with knowledge and experience of consumer requirements. Anybody who doubts this has only to look at the membership lists for the board and its subsidiaries. These include the chairmen and top executives of some of our most prominient food companies, whose success is due in no small measure to the attention which they give to the needs and requirements of their consumer customers.

The effect of that influence can be seen very clearly in the board's five year development strategy published last year. The basic tenet of that strategy is to build stronger and better linkages between the industry and the market-place. The current BSE crisis is a clear example of that strategy in operation. In conjunction with my Department, the board has worked tirelessly, both at home and abroad, to allay the fears and concerns of consumers. The aim of this Bill is not, therefore, to rectify any deficiencies in the board's structures and operating procedures but to reinforce the very strong consumer dimension which it already has.

An Board Bia has been in existence for just over 18 months and during that time it has notched up an impressive list of achievements. Within six months of its inception it published its five year market development strategy. That strategy was devised following a period of intensive research and a comprehensive consultation process involving all sectors of the industry, including consumers. It sets out in detail how the board will carry out its statutory remit to promote, develop and assist the marketing of Irish food and how it will fulfil the task assigned to it under the national development strategy for the food industry of implementing the marketing and promotion measure of the Structural Fund sub-programme for the industry. The implementation of that strategy is now well under way. Two company grant schemes have been put in place and the board has undertaken a comprehensive range of promotion and marketing activities.

The board's probably most important undertaking to date is taking place as we speak, which is the Horizons food and drink exhibition and conference at the RDS. The exhibition is the largest ever single display of Irish food and drink and has attracted 600 buyers from 30 countries, something of which to be proud. I advise Senators to visit the RDS where they would all be very welcome. There is an absence of politicians there at the moment for various reasons. Senators, such as Senator Rory Kiely who is very interested in food, should visit this impressive exhibition.

As I have already indicated, the Bill is short and uncomplicated. Section 1 is a short definition section. Sections 2, 3 and 4 provide that the membership of the board and each of its subsidiary boards shall be increased by one, that one member of each board shall be appointed on the nomination of organisations which the Minister considers to be representative of consumers, and for certain minor consequential changes resulting from these amendments.

Section 5 is a saver provision inserted on the advice of the Attorney General's Office to safeguard the position of persons who have already been appointed to the board and subsidiary boards. Section 6 provides for the Short Title and collective citation and construction of the Bill.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. R. Kiely

I thank the Minister of State for his invitation to the RDS which I accept. This is the third An Bord Bia Bill since 1994. This Bill is an inadequate and belated response to a crisis in the Irish food industry by a Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry who set out to systematically ignore consumers. From his first day in office the Minister, Deputy Yates, wedded himself to a producer agenda and the legitimate interests of consumers and processors alike were ignored. The Minister's agenda was a political one based on the simple calculation that it was among farmers that votes could be recovered for Fine Gael. Processors were numerically insignificant while consumers were too disparate and disorganised a group to count. The Minister's Road to Damascus conversion at the food fair yesterday is welcome, if it is genuine. It is, however, belated.

The occurrence of such a ludicrous situation which makes it necessary to bring forward legislation at this point in the life of An Bord Bia to allow for representatives of consumer groups underlines the futility of the policy that has prevailed to date. The only moves made to date by the Minister, Deputy Yates, in relation to An Bord Bia have been to strengthen farmer representation on the board by appointing, as of right, the presidents of the IFA and ICMSA. The Minister felt so strongly about the necessity to do this that he introduced amending legislation in 1995. He was not prepared, however, to countenance the representatives of consumers being recognised at all, let alone being treated on an equal footing. The background to the introduction of this Bill is a series of sorely missed opportunities. An Bord Bia (Amendment) Bill, 1996, is a desperate measure from a desperate Minister in desperate circumstances.

Mr. Deenihan

They do not look too desperate at the Horizons exhibition.

Mr. R. Kiely

Putting a token consumer representative on An Bord Bia will not materially affect consumer confidence. The ineffectualness of the step being proposed is underlined by its isolation. Since the House of Commons announcement on the BSE crisis on 20 March there has been absolutely no concerted political response from this Government.

Fianna Fáil has worked to keep the political spotlight on the crisis. Besides numerous occasions on which the matter has been raised in the Seanad, there have also been three separate debates on the issue in the Dáil. In proper reflection of the importance of this issue to the entire economy, no issue other than Northern Ireland has received such sustained attention from my party in recent times. Two of the three Dáil debates were held in Fianna Fáil Private Members' time, while the third was held in response to persistent demands from Fianna Fáil. There was also a Seanad Adjournment debate on the issue and one during Fianna Fáil's Private Members' time. We are looking forward to the full debate on agriculture promised by the Leader of the House before the end of the session.

Fianna Fáil has, from the start of the BSE crisis, advocated a concerted political campaign for Ministers to support the beef industry. There is a good story to tell about Irish beef to our consumers at home and abroad. The tragedy for our beef industry is that this positive message has not been communicated. Ironically, and in spite of the commanding position held by farmers in the board rooms of the agri-business sector, farmers have been the first and worst affected victims of this crisis. Consumers at home and across our markets were not persuaded by assurances from bodies from which they were largely excluded. In our crucial Middle East markets this loss of confidence was exacerbated by the complete failure of any Minister to make a personal pitch for Irish beef.

The position of our beef industry was further undermined by our explicable lack of a system of total traceability, which means our competitors have been able to undermine our position in the marketplace. Fianna Fáil has repeatedly called for such a system to be put in place. The Minister is quoted in the newspapers this morning as saying that a system "might" be in place in two years time. The Minister has been in Government for 17 months and his response, although welcome, is belated.

The ludicrousness of the current situation is well illustrated by Operation Matador on the Border, which was put in place in an attempt to ring fence the Southern herd from their cousins in the Six Counties. The Garda has estimated the cost of the operation at £400,000 per week, which puts the annual cost of the operation at over £20 million. In response to questions from the Fianna Fáil spokesperson on Agriculture, Deputy Cowen, last week the Minister, Deputy Yates, conceded an annual cost of £16 million. I am sure the Garda would be delighted to hear about the £4 million savings to be made in its operations. The real issue is that a computer system to allow for the total traceability of all animals which would be compatible with the existing system in Northern Ireland could, in the Minister's own estimate, be put in place for between £10 million and £14 million. This estimate was given by the Minister to the Dáil Committee reviewing his Department's Estimates last week.

When the Minister, Deputy Yates, announced his proposal yesterday to install a system for traceability, he had whittled the cost down to a firm £12 million. I would like to know where the missing millions have gone. I also want to know if this £12 million is coming out of the existing budget, if extra money will be provided by the Government or if farmers will have to eventually pick up the costs in some form. It is an indictment of this Government that no system for traceability of stock is in place 17 months after the Minister came into office. The plan he announced yesterday is one that "might" be in place within two years.

Operation Matador is a gross waste of Garda time. If the Minister is serious about restoring consumer confidence, a comprehensive system for the traceability of all stock must be put in place sooner rather than later. Put the gardaí back on the beat to deal with drugs, drug dealers and murders. We cannot afford to have our gardaí standing behind ditches on the Border waiting for Daisy and her pals to come south. The present operation is a shameful waste of resources. It is time, over three months after the House of Commons announcement, to move on from the stop gap and theatrical measures that both this Bill and Operation Matador represent.

From the beginning, Fianna Fáil has put forward a cogent political programme to deal with the BSE crisis. On the issue of consumer confidence, which this Bill is supposed to address, Fianna Fáil wants an independent agency set up that has the duty to guarantee the integrity of the food chain at all points. It is feasible that veterinary inspection functions of the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry, the environmental health officers and some or all of the functions of the Drugs Advisory Board might be included in such a body. It is lamentable that far from proposing the fundamental reforms that are necessary, the Minister has confined himself to the window dressing allowed for in this Bill.

There must be a sustained campaign by Ministers in our main markets. The refusal by Government Ministers to make a personal pitch for Irish beef in third countries allowed the bottom to fall out of Irish beef sales without a hand being lifted. To date, no Government Minister has visited Libya, Egypt or Saudi Arabia — our most important third country markets.

Ireland, the most severely affected of all EU countries, has to date failed to have its urgent concerns addressed at EU level. On the eve of Ireland assuming the EU Presidency, and three months after the House of Commons announcement, the Minister has failed to build support for Ireland's position. The £57 million on offer is totally unsatisfactory. While the Minister complains publicly about the deal, he has not delivered anything better. The lack of progress on the issue can be measured by the inability of the Taoiseach to achieve a united position with Chancellor Kohl on the matter during his recent visit to Germany. Ireland must get its problems addressed at EU level.

There must be total traceability of all cattle. The Minister is wasting scarce Garda resources on a short term fire brigade measure while a value for money, long term alternative is being ignored. Only total traceability can underpin the integrity of the national herd in the long term.

Teagasc, the body charged with working with farmers to achieve higher efficiency and standards, must be given the personnel to allow it fulfil its mandate. Teagasc has been starved of resources by this Minister. The "new blood" promised has not been delivered.

Mr. Belton

Thirty jobs.

Mr. R. Kiely

Many Teagasc advisers are doing office work instead of being out with the farmers——

Mr. Belton

That is not true.

Mr. R. Kiely

——on the ground advising them on the production and quality of their beef. It is ironic that when the BSE crisis is at its height, Teagasc has had to let go its only research scientist working on organic farming. This scientist, based at Johnstown Castle, operated a research programme into the production of organic beef. Although production of organic beef cannot keep pace with demand, Teagasc did not have the resources available to them to keep the research programme going.

Fianna Fáil will vote for this Bill because we believe that Irish agri-business must be consumer driven. The token consumer representative that this Bill allows for is better than nothing, if only just.

Let there be no doubt, that three months after the BSE announcement in the House of Commons, this Bill is a pathetic response to the crisis. It is a step the Minister himself strongly resisted in fairer weather. The BSE crisis requires a concerted political response from the Government as a whole. Sadly, there is no sign of that.

Mr. Belton

I am glad to have the opportunity to speak on this Bill. I am also delighted to hear the subject of Teagasc being introduced. I thank the Minister for reappointing two persons on contract to the advisory service in Longford. This matter caused concern because of the embargo. I am happy the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, the Minister for Finance and the board of Teagasc have reintroduced these contracts. The advisory service in County Longford has one more adviser than three years ago. We were criticised left, right and centre because of socalled decimation. The whole Teagasc advisory service was decimated in 1988. That was called good government. The Members of the Opposition know that. I am surprised to hear criticism coming from that source when their own Minister for Finance decimated the service and nobody was put in their place.

I welcome this Bill. It is a development which has been called for by consumers in the past year. The Minister has shown his foresight and interest in all aspects of food in this country. The worst thing we could do, and it has happened again today, is blame the Government for BSE. That is the policy now. Fianna Fail should have responsibility. This is the second, if not the primary national industry. The more we talk about it, the more we talk it down. Fianna Fail should ensure they speak with responsibility because the eyes of our customers across the world are watching this House. They should be careful of what they say. One can understand the temptation to lash the Minister of the day — that is politics. It is important that, as a major food producing nation, the right image is conveyed abroad. We have the right image and we can only do damage to ourselves.

I welcome the Bill. The Minister has put a consumer representative on the board. An Bord Bia, as mentioned by the Minister of State, has put on an exhibition in the RDS this week which proves what we have to offer. I congratulate the Minister and the Minister of State for doing a fine job in difficult circumstances.

Mr. McGowan

I welcome the Bill in general terms and I welcome the Minister of State to the House. We may have a slagging match about what was not done, but I am positive about the Bill. It can pass very quickly as there are not a lot of speakers here. We have had a general political barter.

The purpose of the Bill is to cover the important marketing area of the food industry. The Bill is not comprehensive. It is a short measure and there are still serious gaps. There is no representation from the fish processing industry. There is a civil servant from the Department representing fish processors. If we did not have fish processors in Donegal, the Irish fish industry would not exist. The factory ships would take our fish and there would be no benefit to the Irish people who need the fishing industry.

There is a European policy to review rural towns and villages. Is the Minister serious? How can Europe achieve its objective in building up rural towns and villages, especially fishing villages, if the industry is not protected? The Minister should be realistic and take politics out of this; he should be courageous enough to appoint somebody to represent the fish processors. It is not too late. This is not written in stone. It is an attempt to do something that is long overdue and very necessary. I do not understand how any Minister or departmental officials can leave out the fish processors. I am angry that they have been excluded because they have played a major role. They have gone abroad, marketed their products, added value and employed people. Go to Killybegs or any other town with a major fish processing industry, and look at the number of people who are employed there.

The average number in Europe per fisherman out at sea is six and a half persons employed on shore; our average is one and a half persons per fisherman. There is a serious gap and the Minister should recognise this. This Bill does not help those involved in the fish processing industry. The Minister's I Q is high enough to know that this is not a political barter. I say this with sincerity and commitment. The Minister should take it on board. There is no loss of face in recognising that a mistake has been made. I appeal to the Minister to reconsider that aspect.

I have experience of the Foyle Fisheries Commission. We have two civil servants from Belfast and two civil servants from Dublin as four commissioners managing the Foyle Fisheries Commission but nobody from the industry. The little man with the net says, forget about them all. It is patriotic to push and challenge. We are preaching this but nobody will listen. We are out of touch. The Minister should recognise that however good the person — and the person in charge of the Foyle Fisheries Commission is a civil servant and a very able person — he is not acceptable to the people on the ground.

Whether it is the teachers' organisation, the nurses' organisation or any organisation it will have to be seen to have representation and an input from those it represents.

The Foyle Fisheries Commission was a joint operation between North and South. It has largely failed because successive governments — not this Minister of State or the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry — have failed to recognise that the industry must be given the opportunity to participate. I appeal to the Minister to look at this again.

Every morning I listen to 7 o'clock news which covers the whole of Europe. Ireland is included with Britain every time we discuss the beef crisis.

Mr. Belton

That is right.

Mr. McGowan

Unfortunately, when the British threaten the Europeans and the Europeans insist on a ban, we are put into the same category as Britain and all the countries which imposed a ban on British beef automatically included Irish beef. The Minister is scurrying around Europe in an attempt to get them to accept a few tons of beef. In reality, there is a ban on Irish beef in most countries at the moment and there is no serious attempt being made to get that ban lifted.

We have been very unsuccessful in projecting the clean image of Irish beef across the world. Whether the British succeed in their fight with Europe, it does not concern us as we still have to represent our producers. The British are forgetting that they could force the Europeans to lift the ban but the housewife who goes in to buy a few pounds of beef will not buy. It is the consumer who has the answer and is the decision maker. Britain can force Europe to partially or entirely lift the ban but the European consumers will not buy British beef. We are perceived to be in the same category.

Irish beef is not being promoted in France or any other country at the moment. They are being nice and diplomatic when the matter comes up for discussion but it is going nowhere. I have asked on numerous occasions for clarity in a statement about taking cows out. I am not drifting into a discussion on the beef problem. I have asked on numerous occasions that we be courageous enough to say we will take out all the cows that have served their useful lives producing milk for ten or whatever number of years and that have been dosed heavily. I ask for that because we need to convince the consumer. This Bill is about marketing and perception. We have to hope that it will do what is intended.

As far as the beef industry is concerned, we must be positive. We must make sure all our cattle are disease free, unlike Britain who say they will take out some of the older animals. That will convince nobody. What does "some of the older animals" mean? It means nothing. The consumer is fairly well informed these days. Let us have enough courage to say that all the cows need to be taken out of the food chain to restore public confidence in the beef industry.

Last night I had a meal with six people. It was a bit of a joke to ask if one was eating beef. This is not good enough; people looked at each other and said they would eat fish. There is not a positive attitude towards the beef business, which is the backbone of the small farmers. We pontificate about keeping families on the land but we do not have a positive attitude.

I hope I have made my point about having a representative of the fish processing industry on the board. My second appeal is to restore public confidence in the beef industry. The Minister is just running around Europe, shaking hands and saying everybody believes Irish beef is free of disease, but nothing has been done on the ground to convince the people. We need to adopt a positive approach to this industry which is the backbone of this country. It was not always well managed by the beef magnates but they sought markets when it was a risk taking business and when the risk of not getting paid was high. It was so lucrative that the big beef barons ran a cartel. However, the average producer recognises that the beef industry is of paramount importance to Ireland. Beef producers must go out and sell and recognise that they must put their house in order.

This Bill is too short. It does not represent the entire food industry. It is an attempt to recognise that there is a problem and that there must be more emphasis on producing quality control, selling and marketing. Those people in the industry whose livelihoods depend on it should be part of the structure. This Bill is more of a political gesture than a serious attempt to involve them. I welcome the Bill for what it contains, but it is a miserable attempt to do a job that is long overdue.

Mr. Townsend

The recent BSE scare has probably brought home the fact that we cannot take for granted Ireland's green image upon which we have relied for so long. We have not capitalised sufficiently on our justifiable reputation as a producer of top quality wholesome food. Apart from the success of Kerrygold butter, we have very few branded products which can command top prices and which can retain market share in times of difficulty. The Kerrygold brand has resulted in this country now selling more butter in Germany than in England and Ireland combined. This is some achievement, but we need to do the same for more Irish products.

I support the merging of An Bord Tráchtála and CBF and the livestock commission into An Bord Bia, which now has a pivotal role to play in promoting Irish food both at home and abroad. The fundamental job at present, especially with regard to beef, is to convince the consumer of the whole-someness and purity of Irish beef. This can only be done with some kind of credible quality assurance scheme, with definite traceability of the raw material in place. To date, our attempts to establish such a scheme have not been adequate. We must involve all State agencies in a co-ordinated and credible way. An Bord Bia should lead the industry in establishing and developing a scheme which would ensure that raw materials which form part of the food chain are of the highest possible standards. Such a development would benefit the producer, the processor and all those involved in the marketing of food in the domestic and export markets. The consumer demands such assurances. I am pleased to see that An Bord Bia has produced guidelines for such a scheme and I hope they can be implemented without delay.

While I support the board's policy in introducing tactical genetic branding and Irish identification where relevant, I wonder if this is enough. Increasingly, many foods in Europe are sold under their own labels. However, branding of Irish food, especially beef, could be very profitable if the requisite promotion and advertising capital were made available.

However, the reduction of £3 million in the allocation to An Bord Bia in the Estimates suggest that this will not happen from central funds. However, there must be scope for the industry, involving producer and processor, to provide funding through sales levies. I urge the Government to match any contributions made in that way pound for pound. While a considerable amount of beef is exported to third country markets, the branding debate will not get the attention it deserves. Germany is well underway to having such a scheme. We must not ignore this important area.

The recent visit by An Bord Bia to China, where a number of Irish companies were exposed to the rapidly expanding Asian food ingredient market, is an example of forward thinking and the support which Irish food companies require. Similarly, the report by An Bord Bia on the marketing of Irish lamb is important. It concluded that British lamb is outselling the Irish product at higher prices. This kind of information, properly used in key national strategies, could pinpoint the successful way forward for Irish food products.

This country has an ambitious developing plan for the food industry, involving a total investment of £640 million to the end of 1999. An Bord Bia will have a pivotal role to play in this plan with the industry. In this regard, I welcome the Horizons food promotion fare currently underway in the RDS. This is the biggest ever single promotion of Irish food and drink at which many of the key food buyers from abroad have been targeted by the board. It is steps like this which will eventually succeed in portraying Ireland as a producer of the highest quality food and drink products, a reputation which we richly deserve.

Beef is of the utmost importance to the economy. It is not enough to have farmers or the industry certifying the product. The consumer must also certify it before we can make progress. This is a good Bill and has may support.

Mr. Fitzgerald

While I welcome the Minister of State to the House as a man from my own county, this does not mean that I have the same welcome or enthusiasm for what brings him here today. An Bord Bia was established only 17 or 18 months ago, yet already the Minister proposes that membership of the board be increased by one to include somebody from the consumers' interests. However, as all present members of the board are consumers, I do not understand why he wishes to include one specifically. Is it because he wishes to include somebody from the Fine Gael Party or the Labour Party? I hope not. I hope the person appointed by the Minister will be good, responsible and respected.

I do not have problems with the Bill, but I have a problem with the make up of the board. There is a food fair in the RDS this week. An Bord Bia has a huge stand at the fair, but An Bord Iascaigh Mhara has a stand in an isolated corner trying to sell fish. How can this waste of money continue? I am primarily interested in the fishing business, but I also have an interest in the beef industry.

Not long ago the Government appointed the Assistant Secretary of the Department of the Marine to a position. I have no problem with the Assistant Secretary. However, I have a huge problem with the fact that the Minister could not find somebody from the fishing industry to represent the fish processors of Ireland on An Bord Bia. We owe them that much. I was critical privately to a Minister from my own party with regard to the same point. We have forgotten a fishing industry which is worth £300 million and gives employment to about 16,000 people.

In light of the difficulties in Europe with beef and BSE, An Bord Bia should be doing more. They should be out in Europe every day hammering home that there is nothing wrong with our beef and that it is the best beef. They should be countering what Australia is doing. The Australians are spreading rumours all over Europe in order to get their own beef into Europe because it is far cheaper.

I ask the Minister to appoint a fish processor to the board. A man who knows the business is needed rather than a front. There are boards all over the country covering all walks of life which are full of people who know nothing about what they are representing. If the board is concerned with farming why not appoint a farmer and let him say what he has to say? Why not appoint a fisherman rather than somebody from the Department of the Marine, the same Department which destroyed the fishing industry and has done nothing for it? I have to be very strong on this point because my reason for speaking is to stress that we must look after fishermen. I appeal to the Minister to consider appointing somebody from the fish processing industry when he is increasing the membership of the board.

The Government is doing very little about the beef problem in Europe. It is clear from the length of the Minister's speech that there is little he can say about An Bord Bia. Has it produced its first report yet? I searched for it in the Library yesterday but failed to get it. If the board has been in existence for 18 months, it must have a report. I would be glad to see that report. I am not saying it has not been published but I asked for it in the Library on two occasions yesterday and they had not located it up to late last night.

Generally, I do not have any great problem with the Bill. I am critical of the addition of one person specifically for consumers. As I said, everybody on the board is a consumer. I am a consumer and the Minister is a consumer; we are all consumers. Who specifically will be on the board? Why not spell it out in time and say Mr. X will be on the board? I think that all the Minister is doing is making way for some one of his own supporters; or maybe it is one of Deputy De Rossa's supporters.

Mr. Deenihan

It might be a Kerry person.

Mr. Fitzgerald

I would be delighted if it was.

Mr. Reynolds

We are not taking on all the bad habits of the Senator's party just because we are in Government.

Mr. Fitzgerald

The Minister of State knows that my criticisms are not in any way personal. The Deputy is here as the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry and not as the great Kerry footballer, Jimmy Deenihan. When the Minister of State was playing football he was well able to take care of himself and I am sure he will be well able to answer my questions this morning.

Mr. Reynolds

It was interesting to listen to Senator Fitzgerald as well as an education. It is great to broaden the mind every so often.

I welcome the Bill. It is important legislation, even though it is simple. In light of BSE, mad cow disease and the problem pertaining to the beef industry, it is important that the consumer is represented on this board. An Bord Bia was established 18 months ago. Every new board or semi-State body takes a while to become active.

An Bord Bia has an important role to play in the future of our economy. If the BSE scare continues and Irish beef cannot be sold abroad, it will have extreme consequences for the economy of this country. I heard the Taoiseach say that agriculture is 16 times more important to this economy than any other economy in Europe. This highlights the need for export and marketing. Over the last 20 years we have had good products to sell but we have not marketed them properly.

In continental Europe people find it difficult to distinguish between England and Ireland. They seem to think they are the same place in the British Isles. The establishment of An Bord Bia was a step in the right direction, but it will have to focus aggressively on marketing the food industry in continental Europe and all over the world, including northern America. I have no doubt that it has the expertise and support of the Government.

I compliment the Minister of State, Deputy Deenihan, the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry and An Bord Bia for organising Horizons, the food fair in the RDS, which runs over the next three days. It is the largest ever such exhibition brought to this country and has attracted buyers with over £1 billion to spend on food. It is a huge opportunity and represents the type of activity in which An Board Bia should be involved.

I have no doubts about the appointment to the board of an extra member to represent consumers. Senator Fitzgerald said that we are all consumers, but I assume that this person will be from one of the consumer organisations or bodies. It is extremely important to regain consumer confidence in Irish food and to be able to sell a quality product all over the world. I have no doubt that over the next number of years, through the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry and An Bord Bia, this will be done satisfactorily and successfully.

Mr. Dardis

I welcome the Minister of State and the Bill. I am pleased to see that the amendment put forward by the Progressive Democrats to the original Bill in 1994 that one ordinary member shall be appointed to represent the views and interests of consumers has finally been accepted. We seem to have an annual An Bord Bia Bill. We had Bills in 1994 and 1995 and now we have one in 1996. I look forward with eager anticipation, assuming that we are all here, to the Bill that will come to us in 1997. It will probably address the concerns which Senator Fitzgerald raised.

We also moved an amendment to the Bill in 1994 on the Bord Iascaigh Mhara aspect. I moved that on the establishment day those functions of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara which relate to the export marketing of fish and fish products shall stand transferred to the board. At that time the Minister of State, Deputy O'Shea, said that they were not in a position to give An Bord Bia the marketing functions of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara. A review was being conducted and he said that when it was complete, and with the consent of the Minister for the Marine, those functions could be given. What progress has been made? Perhaps I have laid the groundwork for the An Bord Bia Bill, 1997, which we look forward to.

Mr. Fitzgerald

That was on 5 March 1994.

Mr. Dardis

I assume it will be easy for the Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy De Rossa, to identify the few suitable Democratic Left supporters in County Kerry to make one suitable for membership of the board.

It is unfortunate that the genesis of this amendment Bill derives from the BSE crisis and that it took that incident to drive home to us a fact which we should have known and to which we paid lip service, that is, that the consumer rules. The consumer decides what products to buy in a well supplied food market. It has taken this unfortunate incident to drive home and to underline that point. We have come from a background of intervention where the market would clear everything if there was oversupply and where things were being dealt with on a commodity basis. It has taken this huge shock to the system to convince producers — I am one — and those in marketing that it is the consumer who counts.

The point has been made that all members of the board are consumers, which is true. That point was made when discussing the original Bill and it was changed to say that people with a knowledge of consumer requirements would be appointed to the board. I would have gone a step further by saying that it should be a representative of an organisation. I note the Bill does not say it should be a consumer, but a consumer to be appointed on the nomination of an organisation which the Minister considers to be representative of consumers, which is reasonable. After all, we amended the Bill to ensure that farming organisations would have adequate representation on the board, to which I do not have any objections. I hope we do not get to a point where there is one for everybody in the audience and that the board will become so large as to be unwieldy.

The matter of traceability is something to which we will have to pay more attention. During an earlier debate I alluded to the fact that the Northern Ireland stand at a Spanish food show was very well visited because it had a computer programme on display showing how animals in the North could be traced back to the farm on which they were born. We have a problem in terms of the multiplicity of movements within the lifetime of an animal. Traceability will be at the heart of our efforts to convince consumers that the meat they eat is good and wholesome, which it is. I fully accept the safety of Irish meat, but the problem is that we must convince the consumer. One of the ways in which it can be done is to ensure that traceability exists. I welcome a statement by the Minister in one of this morning's newspapers that he is to introduce measures to allow that traceability to take place and that there will be a computer based system where movement can be traced so we know from where animals are coming. I know better butchers and outlets are already doing this so consumers can be assured that they know from where animals come and how they have been fed, which is an important point.

An Bord Bia has a difficult job in the present circumstances and it must be given support, financial and otherwise, by the Government to fulfil its remit and to market Irish beef on international markets. It is unfortunate that once we cross the Channel to mainland Europe that the majority of consumers and, I suspect, buyers on wholesale markets regard British and Irish beef as one. The "Newsnight" programme on BBC quoted an article from the German newspaper, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, which stated that all beef from the British Isles should be banned and should not be sold in Germany. Even an eminent German newspaper was unable to make a distinction between Irish and British beef. An Bord Bia faces a difficult marketing task, one which I hope it will be able to do well.

Several speakers mentioned the research backup behind the meat industry, not only the producer. Teagasc is not being given the resources it requires to fully exercise its remit in this area. When we debated some of these matters in the past, the Minister mentioned various fora, including the one for TB and An Bord Glas. While I have been quite critical of the proliferation of fora, the Government should establish a forum comprising the interests in the industry, including producers, meat factories, butchers, wholesalers and consumers. A coherent strategy should be devised by that forum to bring us forward. I am worried that a lot of what we have been doing in response to the BSE crisis has been on an ad hoc and an immediate response basis. I am worried about what will happen in the autumn when a glut of cattle will come on the market. How will we clear those cattle? How will producers be able to buy cattle with any confidence to fill sheds for the winter? That is something to which I have referred before when we debated the BSE crisis, and the Minister is aware of it. A coherent strategy across the industry needs to be devised to deal with this problem. A plan of action which is a little more forward looking than that at present is needed.

I welcome the fair which is taking place at present, which is a step in the right direction. Those responsible for it are to be congratulated. It is the right way to go about getting large buyers to come here, to see Irish grass and how we produce our animals and to convince them that the green image about which we talk is real. On many occasions I have said the perception we assume Europeans have as regards our green image is our perception of what they think, which may not be the reality.

As regards third country markets, I would like to go back to the matter of Libya and Iran and the statement the Minister made in the Dáil a couple of weeks ago when he said he would visit Libya as soon as the necessary arrangements could be put in place. He said he was disappointed the visit had not taken place. What are the necessary arrangements which must be put in place? We need to re-establish those markets.

According to the explanatory memorandum, section 5 contains a saver in relation to persons already appointed as members of the board or of a subsidiary board under section 16 of the Principal Act. I do not understand the need for this section. Am I to assume from the insertion of this section that there is a question mark over the status of appointments to the board to date and that we now must introduce a section to regularise their position?

I am unclear why that section is needed or required and about its background, other than telling us that it shall not affect the appointment under the Principal Act. Has somebody been appointed under the Principal Act who should not have been, whose status is not quite legal or correct and must we now put an insertion into the Bill to regularise it? I need an answer to that before I can unequivocally support this Bill. However, I very much welcome the appointment of a representative from a consumers' interest body to the board. While I welcome the Bill, I have that caveat on section 5 and I would like an explanation of that.

Ms O'Sullivan

I welcome this Bill and the fact that there will be a consumer interest on the board of An Bord Bia. It is important that we set up structures and patterns of communication between the producer, consumer and processor. There is such a changing pattern of eating habits and of the production and processing of food that unless we are on top or ahead of that market, we will not be able to maintain our position of being an excellent producer and marketer of food. In that regard, Senator McGowan is right in saying that the Bill is as much about marketing as anything else. This is a changing and competitive market, particularly for our exports, and we should do whatever we can to ensure we are getting our message across. I welcome the Horizons exhibition and I hope we will have the opportunity to visit it and to see the Irish food on offer.

One only has to go into a supermarket and see the changing variety of foods on the shelves to recognise the enormity of the challenge to our food industry. New food products, such as sauces and frozen foods, are constantly coming onto the market and there is an internationalisation of eating habits which did not exist many years ago. In the past Irish people ate certain kinds of food while other countries did the same. We did not have the crossover that exists now. We could now as easily be eating food that originated in Mexico.

While that makes matters more difficult in some ways, it also provides us with many opportunities. There are great opportunities for providing value added jobs in our food industry. Since we are primarily an agricultural country and produce excellent raw materials, it is important we bring that value added aspect into our food industry so we can create jobs for people in developing the raw material into a product that can be sold to the consumer. It is important to have continuous support in research, product development, education and training for producers, farmers and others further along the line. Denmark is a model that many people look to as being a country which has been able to develop a series of value added industries from its agriculture base. The Horizons exhibition is an aspect of that.

Food centres — there is one on the outskirts of Limerick — provide a support structure for our food industry and give the kind of backup that small individual processors might not be able to provide, such as in research, marketing and assisting people working in the industry to respond to the constant demands for diversification. An Opposition Senator referred to organic production. Many new products, such as venison, are being developed and are providing us with new opportunities to create jobs.

It is essential that we produce most of these raw materials at home, although we will have to import others — we cannot grow some products in this country. We still import raw materials that could be grown in this country in the making of food products like pizzas.

While Teagasc has primary responsibility for training and education, there is also the question of training professionals in courses like food science, human nutrition and biotechnology. All these areas are being developed in our third level institutions. The points for entering these third level courses for leaving certificate students have increased dramatically in the last few years, which indicates there are jobs available for people who are trained and expert in this area. It is essential that the third level institutions ensure they provide enough places for these courses. It will be essential to have experts who can work with the industry in developing value added products.

The beef crisis was not of our making but our response to it is crucial. Senator Quinn knows a lot about consumerism. He said that when he talked to French, Germans and other Europeans about beef, he was told that it was not a question of not buying Irish beef but that they preferred to buy their own. The major obstacle we must cross is that each country is inclined to put up walls of protection. It is a major battle that we must fight aggressively. Marketing is crucial aspect of this issue. I welcome this legislation because it indicates the progress needed in constant feedback between the producer and consumer.

Mr. D'Arcy

This is important legislation and we are heading in the right direction. The food industry is still our single most important industry and will remain so for a considerable period of time. The only other industry that may come anywhere near it is the tourist industry in around ten years' time.

We produce approximately £9 billion, between the export trade and the home market, of produce from the land and the food and drink sectors. The amount of import content is so low that it is physically impossible to analyse it and state its benefits to the economy in comparison with other areas. The figure is somewhere between 5 and 8 per cent — nobody has ever contradicted that. Although many commentators have said they are higher, I do not believe this to be the case.

Farmers must be described as key players in the food industry. They provide the raw materials which must meet the requirements of processors on quality, cost and time of delivery. The commercial partnership between farmers and processors must be fostered, as should be the partnership between farmers and consumers. I very much welcome the Minister's inclusion of consumer representation on the board of An Bord Bia. Consumers are important and this has been borne out in our current problems in the beef industry.

We should never lose the opportunity to express our views in respect of the beef industry. The butchers and supermarkets, since the problems in respect of the beef industry arose in March, have failed miserably to decrease their prices in line with what they pay for the raw material. The top chains are charging approximately £1 a pound up to £6 a pound for beef on supermarket shelves. This is sad because the price paid to farmers has reduced from approximately £1.08 to £1.10 a pound last year to 90p and less this year. This is an approximate reduction of 20 per cent, but there is no sign of it in the prices in supermarkets or butchers' shops.

I studied the prices in one of the largest supermarkets last weekend and I spoke to consumers there. It would be unfair to name the outlet because one should study all the supermarkets to draw a comparison. Women with large families told me they thought that when the price paid to farmers was reduced by 20 per cent, there would be a corresponding 20 per cent reduction in the prices on supermarket shelves. However, the opposite has happened and one lady told me she thought the price had increased by 2 or 3 per cent in the past six weeks. This is unbelievable.

My wife buys all the meat for our household and I asked her about the prices. She said she was not sure, but the lady to whom I spoke in the supermarket said she shops every week and she thinks the price of meat has increased by up to 3 per cent in the last six weeks. Supermarkets are buying meat from processors at a considerably cheaper price and I call on them to bring their prices into line with what they are paying to producers. The poorest section of the community should be given a chance to buy beef. No meat compares to beef in terms of its iron and nutrient content; the importance of beef to women and children is well known. The issue of price should be examined and I call on the supermarkets to reduce their prices and bring them into line with what they are paying to producers.

The problems in the beef industry are not exclusive to Ireland or Europe. As I said on the last occasion, it affects the world. The EU should get together with other beef producing countries, including Argentina, Canada, America, New Zealand and Australia, and start a worldwide advertising campaign to inform consumers about the benefits of beef. As another contributor said, I hate to think what will happen at the end of the year.

Mr. Dardis

We should try to get the live shippers and the factories to agree here and then move on to the rest of the world.

Mr. D'Arcy

I will come to that point. The problem is worldwide and I ask the Minister of State to bring to the Minister's attention the need for not just an EU but a worldwide effort to inform people of the benefits of beef. This country can brag that it has the cleanest beef in the world and I pay tribute to Senator O'Kennedy and the previous Government which rightly insisted on immediately depopulating herds if BSE appeared in them. This policy will not be changed, but there will be a serious problem over the next couple of years until the consumption of beef worldwide increases. I ask the Minister of State to bring this point to the Minister's attention.

Research and development are most important. I am a beef and a milk producer and Teagasc's current role is being undermined to some degree. There is undoubtedly a huge void between Teagasc's advice and farmers and I am most disappointed about this aspect. Having spoken to Teagasc advisers, there is something amiss. Are sufficient resources being provided to Teagasc? As consumers become more sophisticated, their demands will grow and if the link between research and development and producers is not maintained and sustained, we will lose out in the long term. The importance of Teagasc advisers having a clear understanding of how producers operate has been proved over the years. However, at present the advisers do not understand how producers are operating, and when the BSE problem arose in the beef industry they were ill equipped to deal with it.

It is disappointing that the volume of live shipments has not increased over the past six weeks. The point was made earlier that it is the middle of June and only two months remain until thousands of weaners and store cattle come onto the market. There is a serious danger of the price collapsing. Consumer confidence is one aspect, but the feeders must also have confidence. If they do not have confidence, they will not buy stock and the price will collapse.

Such a collapse happened in 1973 and 1974. The then Minister, former Deputy Mark Clinton, was one of the best Ministers for Agriculture ever to hold office, but he could do little about it. However, it is certain that if the number of live shipments do not increase over the summer months, there will be a surplus in the market and the price will collapse. I appeal to the Minister of State and the Minister, who is from my county, to ensure every possible step is taken — I do not suggest everything is not being done — in respect of live shipments. The level of stock on hand must be reduced before the autumn when a huge number of animals, particularly in the west — many Wexford farmers buy animals in the west and I have bought animals there — come onto the market. If feeders have no confidence in the price for the remainder of the year, it will collapse. This must be avoided.

I compliment the Minister and I favour support for the consumer. In the past we found to our peril that the consumer representative is an important person on a board because consumers dictate the pace as far as products are concerned. I wish the Minister well and I support the Bill.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry (Mr. Deenihan)

I thank Senators for their contributions and constructive comments. Senator Kiely was most critical of the promotional and marketing campaign carried out by An Bord Bia and the Minister since the BSE crisis became real. However, in fairness to the board and the Minister, much has happened in the past three months. An Bord Bia has developed a comprehensive marketing plan to reinforce the quality and integrity of Irish beef to trade customers and consumers in the home, European and international markets.

To date, the marketing response in the domestic market to the BSE crisis has included consumer advertising campaigns and information leaflets. For example, over 500,000 leaflets were distributed to all multiple supermarket chains and independent butchers. In addition, point of sale materials were issued; approximately 5,000 posters were distributed to multiple supermarket chains, independent butchers and the catering sector. An information line on Irish beef has been established, which is a free 'phone service, for concerned consumers and daily statements have been issued to the national and local media. These were accompanied by a large number of radio interviews at various times, reassuring consumers that beef is safe to eat, and extensive briefing documents were distributed to all retail outlets and the meat trade in general.

Regarding the EU market, I and my colleagues have visited Sweden, Spain, Italy and other countries to reassure our customers that our product is safe to eat. This morning I met people from Sweden whom I met there some months ago. They came out strongly in favour of the Irish product publicly on television at a time when it was very sensitive and when it would have been easier for them not to have done so. They visited a number of farms in Leinster yesterday and came in this morning unannounced to thank me for the information which I had given them when I was in Sweden. They confirmed the information themselves by going out to the farmplace to see where the product was being developed and where the cattle were reared. They visited the abattoirs and meat plants and were happy with what they saw. The Swedish consumer is probably the most discerning in the world. Beef consumption in Sweden is at the same level it was before the BSE crisis because they have confidence in their own product and also the importers have confidence in their source of the product and that includes Ireland. That is a positive message which we should send out to the consumer not only here in Ireland but also on the European market as well.

We have distributed a number of trade briefing documents throughout Europe to our overseas offices in eight languages — German, Spanish, French, Italian, Swedish, Finnish, Dutch. We have had ongoing trade development over the past three months and have established intensive contacts with key retail chains and importers by market based executives to protect current market position and capitalise on opportunities. We have distributed a consumer information leaflet on the facts about Irish beef. We have also had a consumer advertising campaign in each of the markets with the slogan "You can be sure of Irish beef." That has been shown in Italy, Spain, Holland, Germany and Sweden and has been accompanied by press statements and point of sales material. We have provided supplementary veterinary and health certificates and these were developed in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry to further reassure consumers of Irish beef. These certificates are being issued by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry on request in the main European languages. We have live cattle trade briefing documents prepared for circulation to key customers of Irish live cattle.

In conjunction with the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry, An Bord Bia has developed and is implementing a strategic approach to protecting and reopening key international markets. The Government has relied on Government to Government contacts in our key markets. Veterinary officials from the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry have visited these markets and veterinary officials in our key markets have come to Ireland to be briefed by senior Irish veterinary personnel. We have embassy briefings on an ongoing basis as well. An Bord Bia's approach has been to have market visits for trade consultation. They have distributed trade briefing documents and these have been prepared for international markets in Arabic, Russian and other languages. We have an ongoing public relations and media advertising campaign, which will be intensified as the crisis settles down. We have issued press releases in the Gulf States, Egypt and Jordan. The Chief Executive was interviewed by CNN for relay to international markets. Minister Yates made a successful visit to Russia recently, where there are major opportunities for Irish beef. It is more than a slight exaggeration for Senator Kiely to say that An Bord Bia, the Minister and the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry were doing nothing about the problem.

Mr. R. Kiely

I do not exaggerate.

Mr. Deenihan

The work is ongoing and I have been reassured by the meeting I had with the representatives of one of Sweden's big multiples today that we can regain consumer confidence. If we can do it in Sweden, surely we can do it in the rest of Europe. Senator Kiely mentioned also an independent food safety agency. An Bord Bia does not have and should not have safety functions. Existing food safety regulations are being examined by an interdepartmental committee which is chaired by the Department of Finance. We have a food safety advisory board. This is being looked at on an ongoing basis; and with the high standards we have in this country, food safety will remain an important aspect of our industry and rightly so if we are to preserve the integrity of our product.

Senator McGowan, Senator Fitzgerald and Senator Dardis mentioned the involvement of somebody from the fish processing industry on the board of An Bord Bia. The marketing functions of Bord Iascaigh Mhara will now be transferred to An Bord Bia. I would remind Senator Fitzgerald that Bord Iascaigh Mhara has a spectacular display at Horizons. It is by no means hidden away and is one of the best stands out there.

Mr. Fitzgerald

It certainly is hidden away. I could not find it.

Mr. Deenihan

No doubt the Senator will be going out there if he has not been already and he will certainly see it.

Mr. Fitzgerald

I have been out there.

Mr. Deenihan

I will go through the transfer of BIM functions to An Bord Bia. Section 9 of An Bord Bia Act, 1994, provides for the transfer to the board of food marketing functions exercised by other agencies. Any such transfer would be affected by waiving an order made by the Minister with the consent of the Minister with responsibility for the agency from whom functions were being transferred. The Minister has agreed with the Minister for the Marine that the export marketing functions of Bord Iascaigh Mhara are to be transferred to An Bord Bia. The first step in implementing this agreement has been taken with the appointment of the Minister of the Marine's nominee to the board of An Bord Bia in November 1995. The other arrangements necessary to effect the transfer, including the establishment of appropriate structures and linkages between BIM and An Bord Bia, will be completed later in the year.

In the meantime the two boards have a close working relationship. An Bord Iascaigh Mhara is kept fully informed of and participates as appropriate in An Bord Bia's activities and programmes, including in particular its trade fairs and other overseas promotions as well as its financial assistance programmes.

Mr. Fitzgerald

Who was the nominee?

Mr. Deenihan

Fish is represented on An Bord Bia's generic display of Irish food at Horizons, for example, in consultation with BIM and this will be complemented by a sectoral stand organised by BIM on which ten seafood companies will exhibit. BIM participates on An Bord Bia's Irish stand at major international exhibitions such as Alimentaria in Barcelona and SIAL in Paris. Processed seafood companies have exhibited at the Green Week in Berlin and CIBUS in Parma on the Irish stand co-ordinated by An Bord Bia. An Bord Bia is currently in discussion with a number of seafood producers regarding the development of an Irish brand for smoked salmon. It is also in discussion with up to 20 companies regarding their individual export market plans and financial assistance towards implementing these plans. I want to point out to all the Senators that the marketing of fish is a priority of An Bord Bia. When all the functions relating to fish are finally transferred and the board is operating in that regard, it should be successful.

Senator McGowan mentioned the confusion which exists in distinguishing Ireland from Great Britain in international markets. Certainly confusion exists. People on the Continent and in international third markets fail to differentiate between Great Britain and Ireland. They fail to see Ireland as an independent island nation and a major publicity campaign had to be put in place to ensure Ireland has a distinctive image on international markets. An Bord Bia and the Minister are working hard to dispel that notion.

We have had a big media advertising campaign in those countries in their own languages, buyer briefings, numerous diplomatic initiatives, and ministerial and veterinary contacts between our main markets, An Bord Bia and the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry to dispel this notion. We must continuously reinforce this campaign that Ireland has a different and more strict veterinary regime than in Great Britain.

Despite what Opposition Senators said about sealing off the Border to protect our industry, I think that has worked quite effectively and I cannot see how else we could have managed it. To protect Ireland's image abroad, the Department had to do that. One of the questions I was asked at a number of promotions for Irish beef was "What is Ireland doing about its Border with Northern Ireland?" I was happy to say there was surveillance in place and that it was working.

Senator McGowan mentioned branding and, as all Senators will appreciate, this is an expensive route to the market which many companies just cannot afford. However, we are looking at other routes, such as own label, and the food service and ingredient areas. In addition, An Bord Bia's market development strategy deals with the issue of a brand for Ireland and we are working towards that. The objective is to establish a distinctive and unique brand or brands for Ireland over the medium term. However, it is not simply a matter of having a distinctive brand for Ireland because much of Ireland's food is sold under own brand labels in the supermarkets. The supermarkets brand Irish meat as their own and this poses a difficulty. The more the industry can move towards a quality Irish brand for all Ireland's meat, the better.

Senator Fitzgerald made much play about the annual report of An Bord Bia. The 1994 Act requires that the report be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas by 30 June and that requirement will be fulfilled.

Senator Dardis was concerned about the saver. With regard to section 5 of the Bill, under section 14 of the 1994 Act, as amended by the 1995 Act, the ordinary membership of the main board was increased from 11 to 13 by way of an order made by the Minister under that section. The Attorney General's Office has advised that, on the enactment of this Bill, the order under section 14 will automatically be repealed and that, consequently, a doubt could arise as to the legality of the position of the two ordinary members who were appointed on foot of that order. The above saver provision will prevent this from happening. Although it is probably not necessary to do so, the saver is also being extended to cover subsidiary board members. It was on the advice of the Attorney General that the saver was included to protect the members. It may not have been necessary but to ensure the matter is totally above question, it was felt prudent to include it. I hope the Senator will accept that explanation.

With regard to a forum, it is a matter which I will discuss with the Minister and the Secretary of the Department. I established a forum on horticulture some time ago and it is working effectively. I can see the relevance of putting in place a forum such as the one the Senator suggested. Now could be an appropriate time.

I thank the Senators from all sides of the House for their contributions. This Bill simply places a consumer on the board and its subsidiary boards. It does not go beyond that. There may be other questions which could be addressed in 1997 but it is important that a consumer be on the board to represent a recognised consumer group. As Senator D'Arcy said, the consumer decides now so we must reassure not only Irish consumers but European and third country consumers that Irish beef is safe to eat. I am confident that we can do so.

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 19 June 1996.

Sitting suspended at 12.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.