I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. The Bill deals with two matters, firstly, the General Cattle Diseases Fund—an old Fund which we now think it is time to abolish—and secondly, the substitution for the purposes of the Bovine Tuberculosis Eradication Scheme of the word "attested" for the word "accredited", which is the term which has been in use up to the present. These two matters are not directly connected except that they both come under the Diseases of Animals Acts; since they are comparatively simple provisions, however, it was thought well to deal with them in the one Bill.
The General Cattle Diseases Fund was set up under the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, 1878 and was continued by the Diseases of Animals Act, 1894. The purpose of the Fund was to even out the cost to local authorities of dealing with outbreaks of animal disease or, in other words, to prevent the whole cost of dealing with a local outbreak of animal disease from falling on the one local authority. The local authorities then had to deal with a number of animal diseases such as pleuro-pneumonia and cattle plague which have long since been eradicated. Nowadays, their expenditure on Diseases of Animals Acts work is in respect, firstly, of the employment of veterinary inspectors, who are mostly part-time, and, secondly, in respect of sheep dipping.
The Fund is managed by the Department of Agriculture and it is mainly made up from assessments on the rates of a halfpenny in the £1 made at the request of the Minister for Agriculture by all local authorities from time to time, on a county at large basis. Each local authority pays into the Fund on the basis of ½d. in the £1 assessment whenever made and each receives back half of its expenditure under the headings I have mentioned —salaries of veterinary inspectors and sheep dipping. The total expenditure of all local authorities on these items is now at the rate of about £50,000 per year and of this sum about £25,000 is recouped from the Fund to the local authorities, the other £25,000 being met directly from the rates. However, in the process of paying into the Fund and being recouped again from it, many local authorities in recent years get back from the Fund roughly what they pay into it. I felt, therefore, that there was not much sense in maintaining a rather elaborate system of accountancy and procedure where only a comparatively small amount of money is involved—about one-sixteenth of 1% of total local authority revenue expenditure—and the end result is much the same as if the Fund was never there. I would like to stress that the abolition of the Fund will involve no extra cost to local authorities as a whole, but to some individual authorities the cost will be a little more and to others a little less than at present. In no case will it exceed a ld. in the £ and in all but two it will be considerably less than ½d.
The Fund also receives additional revenue from two other sources, namely an insignificant sum from the proceeds of fines imposed for offences against the Diseases of Animals Acts, together with as annual contribution from the Exchequer in respect of compensation for animals slaughtered under the Bovine Tuberculosis Order, 1926, which the local authorities operate.
I should make it clear at this point that this Order covers animals suffering from certain types of clinical tuberculosis and has no connection with the general Scheme for the Eredication of Bovine Tuberculosis. In fact, as eradication under that scheme progresses, the calls on the local authorities for compensation under the 1926 Order will gradually diminish and will ultimately disappear altogether. In the current financial year, expenditure under the Order from the Exchequer is estimated at £37,000 and a further contribution of £2,000, approximately, will be made from the Fund. When the Fund disappears, all expenditure then to be met under the Order will be paid directly from the Exchequer.
The Bill makes provision for keeping the Fund open until 31st March, 1963 and for replenishing it in the meantime to pay outstanding claims. At the present time the Fund is in debt, as there are arrears to be met, but present indications are that about four assessments of one halfpenny in the £ each would be sufficient to pay outstanding demands on the Fund and to keep it going until it is wound up. The Bill provides for total assessments amounting to a maximum of 4d. in the £, altogether, so as to meet any unforeseen contingencies, but the total assessments to be made up to the 31st March, 1963, should not exceed 2d. unless some very exceptional situation arises. With regard to Section 3 of the Bill providing for disposal of any balance in the Fund at 31st March, 1963, I do not think any significant amount is likely to be left in the Fund by that time as assessments will be made only as needed.
As regards the Diseases of Animals (Bovine Tuberculosis) Act, 1957, the amendment proposed is a very simple one providing merely for the alteration of the word "accredited", which appears in the 1957 Act, to the word "attested". I have had strong representations both from farmers' representatives and trade interests that describing Irish cattle as "accredited" instead of "attested" would have an adverse effect on their sale in Britain since British buyers may harbour the suspicion that the difference in nomenclature connotes some difference also in status. In view, therefore, of the representations I have received and because of the necessity to ensure that no obstacle is placed in the way of our cattle export trade, I thought it well that the same description should apply to our attested cattle as to similar cattle in Britain.
I commend the Bill to the House.
