I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Fergus O'Dowd, and apologise for running late. The Minister for Finance was concluding the debate.
Adjournment Matters
Social Welfare Offices
I welcome the Minister of State. I will not go into too much detail on this issue as I have already supplied it to the Minister. In my home town of Bantry, social welfare services are operating out of four buildings in different parts of the town. This is most inconvenient for staff and for users of the services. Where sensitive documents have to be transferred from one part of the town to another, it has to be done either by hiring a taxi or a courier. When I was in the other House between 2002 and 2007, it was proposed that a one-stop shop be established in Bantry for all of these services. I accept that the economic climate has changed, but surely something can be done, perhaps by way a short or medium-term lease or a new build, to resolve the logistical and practical difficulties the public is facing in the greater Bantry area. Unfortunately, in these difficult times, significant numbers of people are obliged to avail of these particular services.
I thank the Senator for bringing this matter before the House and appreciate his brevity in putting forward his case. I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes. I am pleased to have an opportunity to brief the House on the plans by the Department of Social Protection to integrate its services in Bantry, to which end it will be working closely with the Office of Public Works.
The OPW's role in assisting the Department to deliver this programme is to provide appropriate, modern and efficient accommodation that meets the Department's business requirements and allows it to deliver services to customers efficiently and effectively. The new integrated service will be delivered primarily through the new Intreo offices but also by way of consolidating services in a number of towns, such as Bantry, where traditional signing services are provided under contract by a branch office, rather than a local office, and where other services such as community welfare and employment services operate from separate locations. The Department is also examining the role of branch offices with regard to job activation.
The Government has set ambitious targets to deliver the Intreo programme in 63 locations by the end of 2014. Wherever possible, the OPW has been working within the existing portfolio of owned and leased buildings to modify those buildings to meet the requirements of the Department of Social Protection. In some cases, it has been necessary to lease and fit out new accommodation to achieve that target. This programme of works represents a very significant investment in terms of both funding by the Government and the allocation of administrative, architectural and technical resources by the OPW. To date, 43 new Intreo offices have been opened and are fully operational. The Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, attended the official opening by the Taoiseach of a most impressive new office in Castlebar on 21 February and he and his officials and remain firmly focused on delivering the rest of the programme by the end of 2014.
The Minister of State's officials are working with their colleagues in the Department of Social Protection to develop a programme, in so far as it is possible in the short term, to integrate services in towns such as Bantry, where there is a branch office. This will likely result in a multi-annual programme of works for the OPW. There may be contractual issues to address in regard to branch offices, which are a matter for the Minister for Social Protection, as well as other practical accommodation issues to be addressed. It is a feature of the model of integrated services developed by the Department that the public-facing side of operations such as waiting areas, serving hatches, interview rooms and group engagement rooms are significantly larger when compared with traditional local social welfare offices. This is a welcome development, but it creates its own challenges. In some locations, particularly smaller regional towns, the size of existing office accommodation required to deliver the range of consolidated services may not be available at all, or may be in a less central and readily accessible location. Where these larger offices are available, they tend to be in retail or industrial parks on the edge of towns, which can make access for those dependent on public transport more difficult.
Another issue is that there may be several years left to run on existing leased accommodation. In such cases, the OPW and the Department will try to balance the aim of consolidating services with the desire to avoid paying rent on premises that would be vacated prematurely if all services were consolidated in one location. This is particularly relevant where there is no alternative requirement for the accommodation that would be vacated. In circumstances such as these, the strategy may be to deliver services from two locations initially, with a view to further consolidation over a longer period of time. These types of considerations, together with the underlying demand for services in the various towns, will feed into the prioritisation of individual projects within the developing programme.
The consolidation of services in Bantry is likely to be assigned a high priority and, as such, I expect progress to be made there this year. The Senator has outlined the particular circumstances in Bantry, where, in addition to the branch office on Bridge Street which is operated under contract by a third party, the staff of the Department of Social Protection deliver services from four other locations around the town. It is unfortunate, however, that none of the existing OPW-leased properties in Bantry is big enough to support an integrated operation. I am conscious of the Department's desire to consolidate services, as set out in the revised brief of its requirements for Bantry which it forwarded recently to the OPW.
The brief informs the search for and assessment of appropriate accommodation. A search for viable accommodation is under way and officials from the OPW and the Department recently inspected a number of potential properties in Bantry. Initial technical assessments of potentially viable candidate buildings is due to commence shortly. This search process is, however, ongoing; therefore, if the Senator is aware of potentially suitable premises, he should inform the Department or the Minister of their existence.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I am always glad when Ministers or Ministers of State who previously served as Senators return to the House. In that context, I am delighted that the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Tom Hayes, is waiting to take the next matter. When the Cabinet reshuffle occurs in late summer, I hope the Taoiseach will consider both Ministers of State for promotion.
I will tell him the Senator said that.
Any Minister or Minister of State who previously spent time in this illustrious establishment, which was, of course, saved by the people, deserves to be recognised.
I thank the Senator who is also Leas-Chathaoirleach of the House. He is always extremely helpful when I come here.
That is the Minister of State sorted.
Food Labelling
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Hayes, and apologise for the delay which occurred. Like him, I am interested in ensuring the continued integrity of the beef industry. I am also interested in providing assurance to farmers that their efforts and hard work are being rewarded. It is in this light that I raise the matter before the House.
Last year, representatives from the Polish veterinary authorities visited Ireland at the invitation of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. I understand they were invited, but I do not know if that was the case and I stand open to correction by the Minister of State. They came as a result of the horsemeat scandal and on foot of allegations that a certain amount of product had been sourced in Poland. They took that matter very seriously and travelled here to investigate. They visited Silvercrest Foods and requested that various pallets of meat be unloaded in order that they could examine them. They took some photographs of the meat in question - I am sure the Minister of State is familiar with them - and included them in their report, which was recently made public. The photographs to which I refer are extremely disturbing. They suggested some of the meat was old, rotten, dry and either green or brown in colour. As some of the meat was also red, it appeared to the representatives from Poland that horsemeat had been mixed with the meat. This was not done in order to replace beef, which was what we first understood to have happened, but perhaps to cover up the use of what was very poor-quality meat in the first instance. Within the industry this meat is deemed to be category 3 animal by-product. In other words, it is substandard meat.
The veterinary inspectors from Poland observed what I have just outlined between 12 and 15 February 2013. I presume they met and were accompanied by officials from the Department during their visit. Again, I would welcome clarification from the Minister of State on this matter. The issue I have raised relates to the report compiled by the departmental officials who accompanied the Polish veterinary inspectors. I presume those officials would also have been alarmed by what they saw. It has been reported that the Polish veterinary inspectors were given an assurance by the officials who were present that the pallet of meat that was opened for inspection had not been opened previously. In other words, it was disassembled at the behest of our Polish visitors. The pallet had not been defrosted previously and no one knew what it contained until the packaging was removed. The Polish veterinary inspectors are very concerned with regard to what is shown in the photographs they took.
I do not know what happened which allowed the meat in the relevant freezer lorry to deteriorate, as is suggested by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. The Department's version of events is that the meat deteriorated because it had been loaded onto and taken back out of the truck several times, tampered with, drilled into, etc. I am not a specialist in how food is frozen, rather I am a food scientist. However, the specialists have said that if the temperature in the truck was incorrect, all of the meat would have been putrid. They also stated that it ought to have been properly kept in the truck. I am sure there are procedures for detaining meat that is under question. Perhaps the Minister of State knows what are the relevant regulations in this regard. If so, perhaps he might share them with me.
A number of matters of concern arise in respect of this matter. For example, there were 22 pallets in the truck to begin with but there were only eight when the representatives from the Polish authorities carried out their inspection. Where did the other pallets go? We have been given an assurance to the effect that meat from the truck did not enter the food chain, but I am struggling with this. I am extremely concerned that the meat did enter the food chain, particularly as meat from the truck had never been examined until the Polish veterinary inspectors made their visit. In their report, the inspectors state that the labels which were claimed to be Polish had either been reused, photocopied or faked. As far as I understand it, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine has indicated that this is the Polish authorities' problem. I would have thought it was our problem. If labels were faked in our jurisdiction, then perhaps they are our responsibility.
People have expressed their concerns about this matter to me. They want to know if it could happen again and what are the implications for the industry. In the interests of ensuring the integrity of the industry, I would welcome it if the Minister of State could clarify the position.
I thank the Senator for raising this issue. I hope what I am going to say will clarify the position on some of the matters to which she referred.
I know this is a complex issue.
As the Senator will be aware, my Department published a comprehensive report in March 2013 on the detailed investigation into the adulteration of beef products with equine DNA. That investigation was carried out by the Department's veterinary inspectors, the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, FSAI, and the Garda National Bureau of Fraud Investigation. It was initiated as a result of initial findings from a food authenticity survey by the FSAI. The matter was brought to the attention of the EU authorities and information arising from the investigation was shared with the authorities in a number of other member states. The report was clear and unambiguous. The Irish authorities highlighted unacceptable practices along the supply chain, including the presence of horse DNA in meat which was labelled as being of Polish origin. This problem involved long and complex supply chains and was international in nature.
In the context of the references to meat from Silvercrest Foods made in the subsequent report compiled by the Polish chief veterinary officer, it should be understood this material was detained and removed from the food chain once positive DNA samples were received on 25 and 28 January 2013, almost three weeks before the Polish inspectors arrived in Silvercrest on 13 February 2013. During their visit, the Polish inspectors were accompanied by departmental officials and representatives from both Silvercrest and Food Services Poland. The pallets in question, which contained frozen blocks of meat pieces, had already been removed from storage, manipulated and sampled by the Irish authorities on more than one occasion. Such manipulation involved the removal of wrapping and labels, the partial disassembly of pallets and some drilling and sampling of the frozen blocks of meat. This would have lead to deterioration in the quality and appearance of the meat. Once the meat had been detained, there was never a question of it entering the food chain and, therefore, there was no requirement to store it in conditions or to a standard required of food grade material. Seven of these pallets remain under official detention and one has been destroyed.
My Department, the HSE and the FSAI have jurisdiction in relation to labelling and mislabelling issues in Ireland. Rules on the labelling of meat and meat products are laid down in EU legislation. For beef, the current rules require compulsory origin labelling, with place of birth, rearing and slaughter specified. In the context of the European Union Single Market, trade between member states in beef is, of course, permitted but mandatory country-of-origin labelling rules apply. In this regard, audits of imported products are carried out in meat plants approved by my Department.
Such audits include physical identity, labelling and documentary checks and cover products originating both in EU member states and third countries. In addition, labelling and documentary checks form part of the routine checks conducted by officials from my Department.
Checks are also conducted by the local district veterinary offices in smaller meat plants and by the HSE at retail level, working under the aegis of the FSAI which has an overarching supervisory role in relation to labelling matters.
The conclusion of the Polish report indicates that there is a doubt about the participation of Polish companies in potential adulteration of beef with horse meat and that there is no concrete evidence that beef was replaced with horse meat in Polish plants. It does not indicate where mislabelling may have occurred.
My Department is not in a position to comment on the findings of the Polish investigation relating to the origin of the labels on meat labelled as having been supplied from Poland. If mislabelling occurred en route to Ireland, that is a matter for the Polish authorities or the authorities in the jurisdiction or jurisdictions where it occurred in the first instance. When allegations are made in respect of the placing of meat which is mislabelled in the Irish market, my Department investigates the matter thoroughly and takes the appropriate action.
I thank the Minister of State for his response, but I wish to clarify a point. In my question I asked the Minister for the details of the report that was carried out by the relevant authority that accompanied the Polish veterinary inspectors last February, not January as stated in my question. Officials from the Department accompanied the Polish veterinary inspectors to Silvercrest and several other plants. Did the material they brought back form part of the final report that was issued in March 2013?
That is my understanding and I can give the Senator some documentation.
Effectively that was a Polish investigation under the supervision of the Irish officials. I have concerns about the matters that they raised, as they are experts in frozen blocks of material. Their evidence suggests meat trimmings should not look like what they saw during their investigation. Where in our report system do our officials contradict the Polish experts who say no meat should look like what they saw during their investigation? I am trying to get to the bottom of the matter.
I will seek to have it clarified for the Senator.
I would appreciate it very much if the Minister of State could clarify it for me.
The Seanad adjourned at 7.05 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 5 March 2014.