Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 17 Jul 1979

Vol. 315 No. 16

Córas Beostoic agus Feola Bill, 1979; Report and Final Stages.

Mr. Bruton

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 3, line 28, after "animals" to insert "goats, horseflesh".

This amendment relates to a matter that arose on Committee Stage. In accordance with the Bill as drafted the CBF will be responsible for the promotion of the consumption at home, and more particularly abroad, of Irish beef, mutton and lamb. I am proposing that they would have responsibility also for the promotion abroad of Irish-produced goat flesh and goat products which include very valuable skins that are used for furnishings.

In the relevant EEC directive, sheep meat is defined as including goat flesh also. In specifically excluding goats we are doing something that is not common practice in the Community. The production of both goat flesh and horse flesh is very small in Ireland, but I know of one very small farm in my constituency where the prime form of production is that of pedigree goats that are very valuable both in terms of milk and of skin. Some statutory agency should have responsibility for assisting these two industries. It might not be necessary for the CBF to take any action in this area in the immediate future, but if the amendment were accepted we would be ensuring that at least if somebody engaged in either of these areas of production were to approach the board for help at some time the board would be in a position to provide that help, whereas if the Bill remains as drafted the board would have to say: "Sorry. We believe you have a good project. We believe that if you got help you would be able to do a good job and earn foreign exchange for the country but, under the Act, `livestock' is defined as meaning bovine animals and sheep and we can do nothing for you." To provide against that situation, if for no other reason, the amendment should be accepted.

Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Gibbons)

I do not think this amendment is necessary. I am not aware of there being any dramatic export trade in goat flesh or in horse flesh. Such horse flesh as has been exported in the past decade came, in the main, from what remained of our draught horse stock which, for better or worse, is very severely run down now. I do not think the Bill would be improved in any way by the additions recommended by Deputy Bruton. It is not my intention to accept the amendments.

Mr. Bruton

I am sorry the Minister has not seen his way to accept the amendments. Time will tell whether or not these amendments were necessary. I would not be at all surprised if, at some time in the future, some Minister or somebody in the CBF may regret that these amendments were not accepted.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Bruton

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 5, to delete lines 31 to 36 and substitute the following:

"(3) Where an order under this section is proposed to be made, a draft of the Order shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas and the order shall not be made until a resolution approving of the draft has been passed by each such House.".

This amendment is concerned with the situation where the Minister can assign new functions to the CBF. Under the section in the Bill as it stands, it is possible for the Minister to give the CBF any new functions he thinks appropriate simply by a regulation which does not need the explicit approval of this House.

Where new functions are being given to a State Agency, it should be necessary for the Minister to obtain the explicit approval of the House. The section says the only functions he may add are those he considers "to be incidental to or consequential on the functions assigned to the Board by this Act." It is simply a question of what the Minister considers to be incidental to or consequential on the functions assigned to the board.

It is quite possible for the Minister to adopt, for his own purposes and to give himself power, a very liberal interpretation as to what is consequential on the existing functions. It is quite possible for him under section 5 to add functions to the CBF which are quite unforeseen now. Where the Minister is taking power to give new functions to a board, in other words to undo or to add to the work being done in this Bill, he should have to get the approval of the House by means of the order he is making to give them those new functions being put to a vote in the House. That is the purpose of the amendment.

Mr. Gibbons

If this provision were not adopted as it is in the Bill, it would not be possible for the Minister, if he saw fit, to recommend to the CBF that they should give aid and assistance to the export of goats which Deputy Bruton was looking for in the earlier amendment he proposed.

I do not like the notion that the CBF should be hog-tied over what essentially must be trivial. On Committee Stage Deputy Bruton thought the Minister for Agriculture was taking very wide powers. This is not the case. I do not think he should need to in order to implement useful changes in the functioning of the CBF without undermining their statutory purpose. He should be able to do this without reference back to the Dáil. To adopt Deputy Bruton's amendment would be to hog-tie oneself unnecessarily to a cumbersome Dáil process over what would be a rather minor matter for the tactical benefit of the CBF and for the improvement of their operations. If the Minister should attempt anything else, he would have to face the political risks. The Minister is and will continue to be a political person, and all his actions as Minister must get the sanction, if necessary, of the voters.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Bruton

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 9, between lines 19 and 20, to insert the following:

"21. —No member of the Board or member of a committee of the Board shall have access to information which is or could be, in the opinion of the chief officer, of immediate commercial use in trade or business unless——

(a) it is being made simultaneously available generally or

(b) it is being made simultaneously available to all other members of the Board or committee of the Board either at or in association with a meeting of the Board or committee of the Board, as the case may be.".

The purpose of this amendment is to prevent the chairman or a member of the board from making use of his position, and the access to information he has by virtue of being on the board, to gain information which gives him an advantage over his trading competitors in Ireland.

An amendment of this sort is more necessary in the case of a board like the CBF than it is in the case of other boards. One of the essential functions of the CBF is obtaining and passing on useful marketing information about openings for trade in respect of particular types of meat in particular parts of the globe. If we have a situation, as we will have, that people who are directly involved financially in the meat trade are members of the board, and by virtue of being members of the board they can get this information which is coming to the board at public expense, and if members of the board, being in the milk trade, or being in the meat trade, and being therefore financially interested in that trade, are able by being members of the board to get that information in advance of other Irish people in the same trade, and use it, that would be a serious abuse amounting almost to corruption.

It is essential that no person should have any advantage over anybody else in so far as his own personal dealings are concerned by being a member of this board. It must be clearly the case that members of the board cannot make use of their position to give them an advantage which nobody else in the trade has. The amendment provides that information which is of immediate commercial use in trade or business should only be made available to members of the board (1) where it is being made simultaneously available to anyone else who wishes to obtain it, in other words, any member of the trade ringing up the CBF could get that information at exactly the same time the member of the CBF can get it, or alternatively, where for one reason or another—and I have no doubt there will be cases where this will be so—the information cannot at that time be made generally available.

If it is being made available to one member of the board it must be made available to all members of the board at the same time. This ensures that, in the event of a member of the board who is interested in the trade getting this information, other members of the board who are not interested in the trade and who, perhaps, represent the public interest, will get that information. Therefore, it will not be possible for people by back door methods to get information of immediate commercial use to themselves which other people are not able to get in the same trade. In the absence of this provision there will be problems of support for the board by people who are not members of it. They will feel that members of their trade who are members of the board are getting advantages. In my view that would be an unsatisfactory situation. The amendment was introduced to ensure that full support would be given to the board and its operations by all people in the trade.

An amendment of this sort should be incorporated in any Bill which is providing for an agency like CBF. I hope the Minister will understand that, in moving the amendment, I am making a point which is generally applicable to other boards as well as to CBF, and that he will accept it.

Mr. Gibbons

Let us consider what Deputy Bruton's amendment proposes. It proposes that, by statute, we erect barriers against possible dishonourable conduct on the part of members of the board. The board consists of seven members nominated by the farming organisations and the other organisations who, I am certain, would not appoint dishonourable people to the board. The other members are the three nominations of the Minister, including one civil servant. The Minister, whoever he is, must be responsible for these people.

The purpose of the board is to do business. All business is based on trust. If we set them up to advance the sales of our livestock and meat abroad and simultaneously tell them that we do not trust them, that we are going to hedge them with regulations to guard against dishonourable acts, we would not get the kind of board we want. I will not accept the amendment.

Mr. Bruton

The Minister has not denied that membership of the board puts people in the position of obtaining information which could be used to their advantage and he has not denied the possibility of this happening. It is essential that the House provide a safeguard against the abuse of such a position by members of a board. It is in no sense a reflection on the community. It is in no sense a suggestion that the majority of people are criminals because we have laws against criminal offences. Those laws are there to deal with the minority who commit criminal offences. Therefore, putting a provision in a Bill which might deal with a minority of cases where there would be an abuse of trust is in no sense a reflection on the board or on most members of boards of State companies. The fact that there is a law against murder does not suggest that everybody is inclined to commit murder.

There should be statutory guarantees against possible corruption in public bodies being financed by the State. I do not believe that one needs to apologise to anyone, potential board members or anyone else, for having statutory guarantees against corruption. If a case of corruption were to arise there would be a clamour from both sides of the House for the introduction of legislation to prevent it. The best time to take action is before such an event occurs. Prevention is far better than cure and I believe that this amendment would prevent corruption. We should look at it in that context and we should take action now rather than waiting until something goes wrong.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Mr. Bruton

I move amendment No. 4:

In page 9, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following:

"22. —(1) All contracts for the supply of goods, provision of services or carrying out of works entered into by the Board shall be awarded on the basis of open public tender except where another procedure is approved by the Minister.

(2) In any case where the Minister approves the entering into of a contract other than on the basis of open public tender he shall lay before the Dáil and publish in Irish Oifigiúil within fourteen days thereafter a statement indicating the fact that he has done so and the reasons for so doing.”.

Amendment No. 4 is concerned with the placing of contracts for the supply of goods, the provision of services and the carrying out of works by the board. If the State wants to obtain a supply of goods, or to ask that services be provided for reward, or to have works carried out, it must go through specific procedures. It must advertise and invite interested parties to tender. It is not possible for the State to give out work of a valuable nature on the basis of favouritism. Similar specific requirements should exist in the case of the carrying out of works or the provision of goods to CBF. Similar safeguards should exist in relation to the abuse of public funds where they are administered by an autonomous body like CBF.

At present it would be conceivable for only one person to be invited to carry out work for the board. No other person might be given the opportunity of even offering to carry out the work in question. One person might be invited to do the work for justifiable reasons. The persons involved might think that they were doing the right thing in giving the work to one man instead of asking anyone else. If the work was not properly done, or if the man defaulted and the Exchequer had to pay a large sum of money, the question would be asked why some other contractor had not been given the opportunity of offering his services. The acceptance of this amendment would be proof against such a happening because it would not be possible for one person to get a job without others being given an opportunity to tender.

I believe that the amendment would protect the board against criticism of their actions. It does not provide for all work to be distributed solely on the basis of public tender because a job may need to be done quickly and too much time would elapse if public tender procedure was adopted. In that case it is possible for the Minister to give his approval for derogating from the public tender procedure and requiring that the fact of his doing so be published after the event so that there is no need for any delay where delay would cost money. I believe that the amendment is sufficiently well drafted to meet all possible cases where speed would be necessary and therefore that as a valuable protection against suspicion of actions by the board in awarding contracts to one person as against another the amendment should be accepted.

Mr. Gibbons

The arguments that Deputy Bruton advanced are very similar to the arguments on amendment No. 3. I am well aware of original sin and the inclination to evil. That is human nature; we learned about it at school in the catechism which existed at that time. Allowing that we are all aware of these feelings to which humanity is susceptible, we must also have some faith. The very setting up of any Government board is in itself an act of faith. We hope they will do the job that they are doing. We have confidence that they will do the job they are being asked to do. This amendment impairs the trust that one is putting in one's selected people for whose performance one initially, as the political person, must bear responsibility.

I do not think that the procedures advocated by Deputy Bruton will insulate members of the board from their common humanity any better than the Bill as it now stands. I reckon that we will get a better approach with less Gestapo measures incorporated in the legislation setting up the board. Having picked the board and the representative bodies in the trade having sent their members in, they should be told that they are more or less on their own within the statute. We are saying in effect that we trust them. We are not saying that we are a crowd of fools and that we expect to be codded, but I do not think we will achieve our objective by having an unnecessarily elaborate process for getting jobs done quickly. Possibly errors may be made but there is no reason why fewer errors will be made with the elaborate processes Deputy Bruton proposes. We have to support the people that we select and be responsible for their results.

Mr. Bruton

The amendment is so drafted that it does not prevent speedy decisions being made where it is deemed necessary by the board and the Minister agrees that it is necessary to get the job done without going through the tender procedure. There is a process contained in the amendment whereby this may be done quickly. All that is necessary is that the fact that it is being done be published subsequently. That meets the main objection of the Minister to the amendment which I put forward. I believe the amendment would be a valuable protection because it would ensure not only that justice would be done but that it would be seen to be done and that anybody that had criticisms about contracts awarded by the board could be told that they themselves had the opportunity to tender and did not do so and that there is no point in complaining now about how the job was done. If the matter is left as it is it is possible for the board to pick one person and others in the trade, if they complain afterwards, would be in a position to do so saying truthfully that they were not given a chance of tendering. I believe that that would not be a satisfactory situation to allow to exist and that the amendment should have been accepted by the Minister.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Bill received for final consideration and passed.