asked the Minister for Agriculture if he has any plans to tighten up the law or practice under which his Department deal with abuses, such as the switching of tags, of the brucellosis and TB eradication schemes.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Eradication Schemes Abuses.
16.
The answer is "Yes". Many of the abuses to which the Deputy is referring arises from delays in identification and disposal of reactors. My aim is to have every reactor ear-punched as soon as it is identified as such. I have also recently announced that no grants will be paid where reactors are not delivered to registered meat factories within 30 days of identification. Furthermore, no grant will be paid on any reactor where it comes to my Department's notice that it was not transported direct from farm to factory.
Apart from the above, my Department will continue in their efforts, at home and abroad, to secure a better system of cattle identification. If any defects are found in existing legislation relating to disease eradication I can assure the Deputy that these will be rectified.
Will the requirement relating to ear-punching which the Minister said it is proposed to introduce require legislation?
The Minister seems to have answered that question.
Does the Minister think he can do it without legislation?
I think so.
Is the Minister satisfied with the level of fines which can be imposed under the present maximum fines provision in the Diseases of Animals Act? Is he aware that, in many cases, it is hardly worth while going to court about some of the serious abuses because the maximum fines are so low? Would he consider whether it would be desirable to increase the fines which may be imposed for abuses which are damaging the farming community as a whole?
This is being considered seriously by the Department. I understand that at the moment the maximum fine is £100. If there are any loopholes in the existing legislation every effort will be made to plug them as fast as possible.
Am I correct in thinking the Minister indicated there is no commitment to introduce new legislation?
If it is found necessary.
When will the Minister know whether it is necessary?
An examination is taking place at the moment. It is a matter of grave importance and I do not think there will be any undue delay.
Question No. 17.
Is the Minister aware——
I have called the next question.
It is very important matter.
It has been dealt with adequately by supplementaries.
It is costing the country millions and millions of pounds.
May I ask a supplementary question?
If you make it short, without innuendoes.
Is the Minister aware that it is possible to switch tags from one heifer to another or from one beast to another? Has he any plans to stop this?
I am aware of several things which are happening in this trade.
I asked a specific question.
The answer to that might be coming up in a later question from Deputy Bruton. We are aware of the switching of tags and all that goes with it. That is being carefully monitored by the Department. I hope, as in other areas, something positive will be found to counteract anything that is going on.
Has the Minister any plans?
Has the Minister plans for new tags?
Is the Minister aware that, under the new scheme, reactors have to be sent to the factory one month after they have been classed as reactors, but in some cases the factory cannot take them within a month with the result that farmers are being discriminated against and are suffering a loss so far as levies are concerned? Therefore, will the Minister consider giving sympathetic consideration in such cases? There have been some such instances in my constituency.
This is a separate question.
I would not agree. It is very relevant since mention has been made of the one-month delay so far as reactors are concerned.
I am sure that any case in which there is hardship will be dealt with sympathetically.
17.
asked the Minister for Agriculture the steps he proposes to take to eliminate loopholes being discovered in the law relating to disease eradication and the movement of cattle in and out of infected herds.
18.
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he has plans to amend section 48 of the Diseases of Animals or the Bovine Tuberculosis (Attestation of State) Order, 1965.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 17 and 18 together.
The existence of loopholes in the law referred to has not been established. This legislation is at present being examined by the law officers and by my Department. When that examination has been completed a decision will be taken as to whether the legislation should be amended.
Having regard to the challenge to the law in this respect in the District Court at Birr recently and to the fact that as a result of that challenge the enforcability of the law is in question, how long will it be before the law officers report on the matter and let us know whether the present law can be enforced?
Despite the decision of the court referred to it is possible to enforce the law. Convictions have been secured since then in six cases while one case has been adjourned. Therefore, although some district justices may interpret the law in different ways it is still possible to secure convictions. But if the existing legislation needs amending every effort will be made to amend it.
Can the Minister say whether it is the intention to take this case to a higher court in order to establish the position finally and definitely?
That is the way it should be dealt with.
At the time of that decision the Attorney General did not recommend taking the case to a higher court.
Why?
Is that not leaving the position even weaker?
I do not think so. Again, this is one of the matters being considered, and if there are found to be loopholes in the legislation it will be amended accordingly.
Some months have elapsed since the case referred to was heard. What is all the consideration about? The law is either adequate or inadequate. Surely it is possible to establish the situation, especially since the matter concerned is very serious in that people can move cattle all over the place and while it would appear that the person in mind, who is well known, cannot be nailed.
Maybe he is a good subscriber.
Would the Minister not agree that if the State were confident of winning the case they would have taken it to a higher court, and would their failure to do this not suggest unsure ground? Surely legislation should be introduced immediately to clear up the matter and not leaving it hanging in mid-air. The situation is that we are neither introducing the apparently necessary legislation nor pursuing the case.
The case was heard in November last. That is not very long ago.
It is a good while ago.
Since then the barrister representing the Minister has presented a detailed report to the law officers of the Department and they are considering that report. I cannot say what line of action will be taken in regard to it.
I expect the law officers could act much quicker if they wished.
19.
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he proposes to make changes in the organisation of the disease eradication schemes as suggested recently by the Irish Veterinary Union; and if any discussions have yet taken place between his Department and the union in relation to the union's proposals.
The Irish Veterinary Union have not recently made any suggestion to me about the reorganisation of the disease eradication schemes. However, I have seen newspaper reports outlining changes in the schemes that have been suggested by the president of the union, and I would like right away to say that I welcome any constructive suggestion aimed at improving our disease eradication measures. All suggestions will be carefully examined. I also understand from the newspaper reports that the president's suggestions are being submitted to the Animal Health Council. No doubt when the council examine them they will let me have their views.
Would the Minister not agree that one of the most important changes so far as disease eradication is concerned would be in relation to the transportation of animals to the factories? Under the old system only one lorry was used to transport any one lot of cattle, but under the present system a farmer, if he lives near a factory, can transport his cattle to that factory. The lorry he uses may not be disinfected properly and next day he can use the same lorry to bring cattle to the mart.
The Deputy is making a long statement.
I regret that but I am merely trying to explain the situation.
It is the Deputy's function at Question Time to ask questions but not to give information.
20.
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he proposes to introduce further restrictions on the movement of animals for disease eradication purposes; and if so, if he will give details.
Plans to accelerate the eradication of bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis are at an advanced stage of preparation in my Department. Implementation of the plans will, in certain circumstances, involve further restrictions on the movement of animals. Details of these restrictions will be announced at the appropriate time.
Is the Minister aware that EEC aid is available for the purpose of disease eradication if we can show that we are introducing a programme that is faster and more intense than that presently in operation? Are there proposals to avail of this aid? For instance, have the Government in mind, in relation to accelerating the programme, the inclusion of any other county in the clearance area?
The Department have submitted proposals to the EEC Commission. This is necessary in order to qualify for Community aid. Additional controls which may be necessary have been outlined. One of the items under consideration is the inclusion of other clearance areas in the southern counties.
Is that contained in the proposals?
It is one of the proposals.
Which extra counties is it proposed to include? If the EEC have been given this proposal surely the House should be told also which counties are involved.
Some of the additional controls presently under consideration are more supervision of movement to and from restricted herds—that relates to TB—the keeping of movement records by herd owners, the imposing of greater control in regard to the movement of breeding stock into restricted areas from the 12 southern counties, and statutory control prohibiting the sale of animals in respect of which there was a positive test in the 12 southern counties.
21.
andMr. Mannion asked the Minister for Agriculture if the employment of lay technicians on the brucellosis eradication scheme has been satisfactory; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
From the information available to me the work so far carried out by the lay samples under the Brucellosis Eradication Scheme has been satisfactory. The task of monitoring the work is one of the functions assigned to the Advisory Council on Animal Health and Disease Eradication which will no doubt report to me on this subject in due course.
Can the Minister say whether the work carried out by the Department has been more successful than that carried out by the Veterinary Union?
The Department are satisfied with the performance to date of the lay samplers but I am not presuming to pass judgement on the work of either group. As I have said we are satisfied with the work and the output of the lay samplers.
Are there plans for the employment of more lay technicians for this work?
The agreement with the Veterinary Union was for a three-year trial period. When that period has elapsed we shall consider the extension or otherwise of the scheme.
Is the Minister stating to the House that all those in employment last year are working again this year?
Yes, I understand that is the position there.
22.
asked the Minister for Agriculture the plans he has for the reduction of brucellosis infestation in the 12 southern counties.
Plans for the acceleration of brucellosis eradication in the country as a whole, including the present 12 county pre-intensive scheme area, are at present at an advanced stage of preparation in my Department. I would expect to be in a position to give details of the plans shortly.
Is the Minister aware that this is a very serious matter in view of the report in the Farmers' Journal which showed the average incidence of brucellosis in pre-intensive scheme area marts was 28 per cent, and would he state if he has any proposal to follow up herds where there has been shown to be an incidence and to accelerate the voluntary scheme to a much greater extent than has been the case so far?
At the moment, as I have said, various ways are being considered by the Department to reduce the level of infection in the southern counties prior to the introduction of compulsory measures, and these will form part of a comprehensive plan to eradicate the disease throughout the State. Some of the ways under consideration are: reduction of the time in which reactors are allowed to be removed for slaughter under the pre-intensive scheme; immediate punching of reactors; control of sales at marts. Also, the extension of the present vaccination scheme. These are a few of the ideas that are under consideration at the present time.
Could the Minister say what additional controls at marts are being considered?
An approach is to be made to mart authorities to confine a proportion of their sales, say, two out of every three, to animals with a clear brucellosis status. That is one of the recommendations that have been made.
When may we expect a decision on these recommendations?
My information is that this will be decided very shortly.
Within a month?
I would not like to specify.
23.
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will outline any proposals which exist in countries to whom this country exports cattle or beef products to restrict Irish exports on the grounds of disease.
The ending of the transition Treaty has meant that in so far as our trade with United Kingdom is concerned the provisions of the Community Directive on intra-Community Trade in livestock apply with greater severity than formerly. Details of revised testing requirements for bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis which will apply to imports into Britain of cattle from this country with effect from 1 June 1978 were announced by my Department on 31 March last. I am not aware of any proposals to change the existing import rules in other countries to which we export cattle or beef.
Would the Minister have any information as to the approximate proportion of our existing exports of live cattle to the United Kingdom which will be impossible as a result of this change in the law as of 1 June?
I am afraid I would not have that information.
Would the Minister not agree that if this change is being made, the Government's first duty should be to find out the extent to which it affects the Irish trade and that he should have that information?
There is nothing in the question about that. If the Deputy puts down a separate question we will certainly get the information for him.
I do not know what the Minister's supplementary brief would be for if not to supply information so obviously arising from the question.