asked the Minister for Agriculture if he is satisfied with the rate at which the undesirable "cattle on the hoof" export trade is being replaced by the more economically sound, in national terms, processed meat trade in the Republic; and the plans, if any, for expediting this trend.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Cattle Export Trade.
5.
The underlying trend since we joined the Community shows an expansion in the numbers of cattle being slaughtered at export premises, coupled with a decline in live exports. This trend is to be welcomed, particularly in view of the employment provided at meat factories, and it is my aim to encourage it in so far as this is possible under Community regulations. It will be appreciated, however, that the continuance of some exports of live cattle helps to maintain balance and competition in the industry and thus ensures better returns to producers.
Could the Minister give any idea if it is possible to quantify the amount of money saved and the amount we continue to lose by the extension of the dead meat trade in recent years?
That is a separate question.
Is it possible to say how much is saved and how much is lost by killing an individual beast here or exporting it on the hoof?
What must be borne in mind here is that a considerable number of cattle of a kind which would not be suitable for slaughter here—cattle of the third or fourth quality—are exported. We want to build a reputation for first quality prime meat of all descriptions. In that respect a modicum of live exports is tolerable. Since the Deputy did not ask for it I cannot give him a detailed breakdown of just how much net loss to the country there is in the export of a live beast. If he wants that information I would be glad to get it for him.
While, as the Minister said, that trend is welcome, surely he is aware that our farmers want competition, free trade to sell their cattle either on the hoof or to the marts? Is he further aware that the farmers do not want a monopoly? Unfortunately when the meat factories had a monopoly in 1974 they fleeced the farmers and in some cases gave them a price as low as 6p per pound for beef. The Minister must be aware that the best thing to do would be to encourage the production of more cattle to kill in the factories and at the same time to supply the demand to England for store cattle.
I adverted to the need for a balance in the export of live and slaughtered cattle. I am also aware of the possibility of a monopoly situation growing. There are two important considerations to be balanced and the Deputy would be well advised to bear them in mind. One very important point is the employment content available in the slaughter of meat rather than its live export and the full processing of slaughtered cattle. At the moment we are only partly processing cattle. We recently removed obstacles to the further processing of cattle that have existed for some years and militated against further processing.
May I ask a question?
We have had only six questions in 25 minutes. The Deputy may ask a question if he does so briefly.
That I will try to do. I would ask the Minister whether our meat factories are suffering from any financial or other inhibitions which leave them less competitive and not able to pay higher prices either because of financial inducements in the Six Counties or in Britain or because of any operations of the EEC? Are there any such obstacles preventing better prices in our factories?
There are two. One is our remoteness from the central marketing area, and we can do nothing about that. The other is the quality of our cattle, and we can do a great deal about that. That is not to say that the quality of our cattle is not on the whole reasonably good, but it could be a great deal better. On the matter of trade between the North and ourselves, while the employment premium in the North may have compensated to some extent the farmers there and kept the Northern meat factories in business, it merely compensated for the far more advantageous price we get here for our cattle.