I am interested in Seán Lemass, who was against neutrality. He is rather an interesting person if one investigates what he said on the record.
I will provide a practical example of how the dynamic works between the permanent representatives, the officials and the Government in order to get things done in Europe by co-decision. We have had a huge battle over the veterinary medicines directive, which is part of a pharmaceutical package together with the human medicines directive and regulation on the EU Medicines Evaluation Agency, which is located in London and maintains law and order in this area. I am sorry to say that, yesterday, at COREPER, the Council of Permanent Representatives, we lost our Irish position on veterinary medicines. There will be a vote next Wednesday in Strasbourg but we will not have any success with it.
At European Council level, the Minister for Health and Children is leading this package because human medicines will be the lead directive. Notwithstanding the gallant efforts of our permanent representatives out there and the officials in the Department of Agriculture and Food here, we had very little support to continue with our veterinary regime in this country, which has been superb. The British, who basically have the same regime, supported us. The Dutch and Portuguese said they would support us at the Council of Ministers but did not speak up, while the Swedes traded our support on an environment amendment for backing us on the issue of prescription-only medicines. From 2006 onwards, all veterinary medicines in Ireland will need a prescription. It is a serious animal welfare issue because a ewe would not be worth the cost of calling out a vet plus the prescription and veterinary medicines involved. Therefore, because they cannot afford to do otherwise, farmers will leave such matters until the last minute or will destroy the sick animal themselves since it would not be worth the cost of the treatment involved. There are all sorts of other issues, including iodine for the navel and teat dips, which are simple, routine farm medicines as distinct from antibiotics and steroids which are only available on prescription and will remain so. There is no argument about the latter type of drugs but the routine animal husbandry we all use will have to be obtained on prescription from 2006.
The Department of Agriculture and Food did its best, battling valiantly on this issue in which I was very much involved, but it will now have to change our veterinary culture. Domestic law will have to be changed in this area. We will have to do what the French have done, even though they fought a hard battle against this change. The French have a system whereby the vet makes an annual call and provides a script to farmers who can then do what they like for the year. I do not understand how that can be in the best interests of the food chain, compared to our strictly regulated position whereby a veterinary prescription is only given on case by case basis following a clinical diagnosis. While that procedure should continue, it would effectively bankrupt our farmers. Therefore, we will have to change to the much looser continental system, which is not in the interests of veterinary medicine. To be honest, it is not in the interest of our vets and I doubt they will be pleased with it. The problem will then arise that if the vet gives a prescription and medicines are only available on prescription, does the vet have the monopoly on the supply of the drugs. The view of the pharmacists and the co-operatives, which are now involved in this area, will be that in practice, if not in theory, we are handing over a monopoly on the supply of veterinary medicines to the veterinary practitioners, all of whom have shops. In Denmark, a veterinary practitioner who gives a veterinary prescription is now allowed to have a retail outlet as part of his practice. We are opening up a whole new, difficult cultural area, therefore, and that is not in the best interests of our excellent veterinary practices.
The permanent representative and the Department of Agriculture and Food officials laboured for a year and a half to get the Irish-British position accepted, even by way of derogation. I had long chats with the permanent representative, going back and forth, until very late last night and I regret to say that only yesterday, we lost the battle at COREPER and in the EPP group, which is my group. Mr. Philip Whitehead, who was battling to preserve the Irish-British argument, lost the battle in the Socialist Group. There is a compromise amendment which we reckon will have the numbers to get through plenary next week.
Even though my amendment of two weeks ago on the environment committee was supported by 41 votes for, one against and only six abstentions – that was all of the 60 who were present on that occasion – there was an overwhelming majority to preserve the Irish-British position on prescription only medicines. That issue will go to a vote next week but if the two biggest groups are whipped into voting for this compromise, which does not accept it, and that compromise is accepted, everything below it will fall. It appears that my amendment, which was overwhelmingly supported in the environment, public health and consumer affairs committee, will fall next week.
One might ask why veterinary medicines are dealt with in the environment committee. It is considered a public health-consumer affairs matter, a food chain issue. All the animal disease issues – foot and mouth disease, BSE, veterinary medicines, hormones – are dealt with by the environment committee, not by the committee on agriculture in Europe, which is strange. That is why the agricultural committee has diminished in power, so to speak. Some of the critical issues are decided by the environment committee and it is perhaps the reason, to end where I began, there are no longer any full members who are Irish on the committee on agriculture.
Perhaps I have said enough and I should answer questions. I have been involved in a whole range of other issues. I will mention briefly the legislation, although I will not explain it. I mentioned the water framework directive, but there is also the waste electronic and electrical equipment directive, which is concerned with what happens to our televisions, refrigerators and toasters. The food supplements directive covers the health food area. There is a chemicals policy coming down the track. I have been very involved in the traditional herbal medicines directive. The emissions trading directive will have a major economic impact here and we have hardly woken up to what is going on in that area. I am involved also in the official feed and food controls directive, fisheries in the Irish Box, the Common Agricultural Policy and the consumer credit directive.
On the packaging waste directive, I have been very involved in trying to get Ireland a derogation, along with Spain, Portugal and Greece, to 2010 if not 2011 before we have to comply with the directive. That will have a major impact because we do not have the network or the infrastructure to meet the waste recycling rates met by the rest of Europe. We have to be practical in what we sign up to but if we sign up under environmental and waste legislation, this country has to be fit to deliver. However, we should not sign up just for the sake of a quiet life in Europe. We should sign when we can commit and deliver rather than have 121 different items of European legislation that we have not transposed into Irish law and on which we will be hauled before the European courts. That is not the best way to behave.
I am a member of the SME union, that is the small and medium enterprises union. In fact, I am one of the few women vice-presidents of it. That is the union or the discussion group which keeps an eye on small and medium size enterprises, the largest employers in all our countries, to ensure that the regulations we make do not do major damage when we roll them out. A number of problems have arisen in that particular area. I am the only Irish member of the SME union.
We have no Irish member of EMAC, that is, the economic and monetary affairs committee which handles all the Single Market and competition legislation.