Vol. 285 No. 6
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the steps, if any, that have been taken to end the present dispute between his Department and the veterinary surgeons; if he is aware of the damage which has been done to TB and brucellosis eradication schemes as a result of this dispute; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
2.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the efforts he has made to settle the dispute with the veterinary profession; and if he is aware of the consequences of prolonging the dispute.
3.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he will make a statement on the progress of the brucellosis eradication scheme during 1975.
4.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries when cattle TB testing will be returning to normal; and if he will make a statement on the present position.
5.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries when he proposes to resume tuberculin testing on a national basis; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 5, inclusive, together.
During the present year I had a series of lengthy meetings with the Irish Veterinary Union on the subject of our disease eradication schemes at which representatives of the Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers' Association and the Irish Farmers' Association were also present. There was general agreement on many of the issues discussed but there was total opposition on the part of the union to the proposed employment by my Department of trained lay personnel for the taking of blood samples under the brucellosis eradication scheme. I had proposed this measure basically because I considered it would give speedier, more controlled and therefore better service to herdowners while costing less to the Exchequer. In the course of the discussions with the union I made one concession after another in an effort to secure the union's acceptance of my proposal. I had at the outset decided to introduce the lay blood samplers in the 13 counties in which the brucellosis eradication scheme is in operation. As a compromise, I then indicated that I would confine the lay blood samplers to the six north-western counties of the brucellosis free area where brucellosis has already been eradicated but where control testing must be continued to clear small pockets of infection and to guard against the reintroduction of the disease. When this, too, was rejected by the union my final offer was to confine the lay personnel to the sampling of 50 per cent of the herds in those six north-western counties leaving to the veterinary practitioner the sampling of the other 50 per cent of the herds in the area, that is, the herds that would normally fall to be tested for TB purposes by the veterinary practitioner under the biennial TB testing already in operation there.
The union also objected to the proposed tuberculin testing by veterinary officers of my Department of 50 per cent of the herds in Waterford and Kilkenny where the incidence of TB has not improved in recent years and is now the highest in the country. I am satisfied that a reduction in the level of TB in these countries can only be secured by the type of intervention by the Department's veterinary staff which has in the past proved successful in other problem areas.
Another item which has been under dispute related to biennial TB testing. This is already in operation in seven north-western counties where the low disease incidence warranted that course. For this reason I proposed to extend the area to cover Counties Longford, Louth, Meath and north Galway but, as the union complained of insufficient notice, I agreed to postpone this measure to the beginning of 1976.
I am not aware that damage has been done as a result of the dispute. In fact the concentration during the current year on known reactor herds, on problem herds and on problem areas has proved very successful in reducing or eliminating infection. The incidence of disease in herds generally should not have deteriorated unduly, provided herdowners have continued to exercise good herd management and to comply with my Department's movement and other veterinary regulations.
Unfortunately, I am not in a position to indicate when TB and brucellosis testing will return to normal. This largely depends on the acceptance by the union of what can only be described as a set of very reasonable proposals, based on procedures adopted by other countries which have been more successful than we have in their efforts to eradicate these diseases.
I am still hopeful that the Irish Veterinary Union will appreciate that my proposals have been reduced to the bare minimum and that they will withdraw their objections so that the future of the disease eradication programme and the position of the farming community will not be put at risk.
Am I to take it now that no negotiations or attempted negotiations have taken place since last July?
That is so.
And there are no signs of negotiations?
There are no arrangements for further negotiations.
The Minister said he was not aware of any damage. I defy the Minister to prove that. He knows how important eradication is. Surely the Minister knows damage is being done.
I am advised there is no undue damage being done because we have been concentrating on reactor herds, on herds where lesions have turned up in the factories and in herds adjacent to those herds, and the number of reactor herds has been reduced very substantially in the present year.
Is the Minister aware that farmers who want to sell cattle have to pay to get them tested privately and they are afraid other cattle are not being tested?
The vets are still earning money testing and the Department are saving money because they have not got to pay for the tests. The feeling is that neither side is too worried about fixing the strike. This is what the ordinary farmer thinks. He has to pay all the time.
The veterinary profession this year have already got £1.37 million from the Department. They are earning money from the Department as well.
How much are they earning from the farmers from whom they should not earn?
Very small amounts for testing. They always earned a small amount for testing for farmers in cases where cards were lost or ear tags disappeared. When the identity of the animal could not be decided they had to pay for their own tests. They have to pay only a very limited amount. Cards are being updated by the people in the local office if the herd has had a reasonably good history.
Does the Minister consider it is in the interests of disease eradication to update cards without a test?
It is being done where the history of the herds concerned justifies this procedure. The veterinary section of the Department must get credit for the fact that they always erred on the safe side.
Question No. 6.
I have five very important questions down.
Yes, and I have given the Deputy a lot of latitude.
I do not take sides in this dispute but I have been informed by the veterinary profession that the Minister told them some time ago to plan a five years practice and assured them there would be testing for brucellosis for five years.
As I said previously to the Deputy, we had discussions lasting for four half days about the middle of the year. We agreed on procedures which we considered would be very much better than the existing ones over the whole range of disease eradication. We got stuck completely on the proposal to introduce lay technicians for blood sampling. That is all that went wrong.
Would the Minister state if one of the concessions offered was that the lay personnel would work under the supervision of the vets? Is the Minister prepared to grant the supervision of the scheme to the vets?
Such a concession was not sought.
If it were sought would the Minister grant it?
I was prepared to listen to any proposal put forward. That was not one of the proposals put forward. They simply do not want lay technicians. Their attitude was that the effect of this would be to reduce the income of veterinary surgeons.
The Minister is aware that the vets are concerned that cattle medicines should not pass into the hands of laymen.
This is a very routine job. It is amazing the way it can be done. Blood samples can be taken from human beings without doctors taking them. We are all aware of this.
Under the supervision of doctors.
Arising out of the Minister's analogy with blood tests being taken from human beings, are there certain qualifications which the lay technicians to whom he refers would be required to have for the purpose of taking tests from animals? The second part of the question is: is it a fact that we will require to be brucellosis free for EEC purposes by 1978? If that is so, could the Minister say what effect a continuing strike will have?
The lay blood samplers will be trained by the veterinary surgeons. They eliminated tuberculosis entirely on the basis of lay technicians in Northern Ireland and did quite a good job. They also have them in the UK. It is quite right to say we are supposed to be clear of these diseases by 1978 but these things are negotiable.
Could the Minister give us any hope that negotiations will resume? Can we tell the farmers there is some hope this dispute will be resolved?
I hope that the veterinary profession will see the senselessness of the path they are following.
Question No. 6.
