asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food (a) the total number of cases of fraud involving EC grants or finances for meat plants, which have been investigated by his Department since 1980, (b) the number of cases where evidence of fraud was found, and in respect of (b), (1) the names of the plants involved and (2) the number of cases and the plants in respect of which prosecutions were initiated.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Meat Plant Fraud.
6.
Ongoing supervision of EC funded beef operations is carried out by staff of my Department and of the Revenue Commissioners at meat export plants, cold stores and at points of export. Where in the course of such supervision cases of suspected fraud come to light, it is standard practice to refer such cases to the Garda authorities for definitive investigation of fraudulent practice.
The strictest application of this practice is essential to the maintenance and, indeed, enhancement of the positive reputation which this country enjoys with the Commission of the European Communities and the Council of Ministers. This reputation has been gained by diligent supervisory and regulatory work undertaken by the staff of my Department in an area which is not readily discernible by the public at large. I want it to be clearly understood that it is my intention to protect and vindicate our reputation in the national interest.
In the period since 1980 there have been seven cases referred to the Garda involving EC funded operations at meat plants. So far a prosecution has been initiated by the Director of Public Prosecutions in one of these cases and that prosecution was successful. It was taken against the manager of the particular meat plant in his personal capacity.
It would be improper for me to identify the plants involved in the other six cases referred to the Garda.
Does the Minister agree that very few cases have been referred to the Garda for full investigation and because of the fact that there has been only one prosecution to date does he agree that that indicates that there is a major problem with regard to policing, considering the admitted extent of fraud in the area of EC grants and regulations and that there is need for a crisis re-evaluation of procedures?
When the Deputy refers to the admitted extent I am not sure what he is referring to. There are six cases and that is the admitted extent. We are in constant consultation with the EC authorities and the commissioner responsible acknowledged that the supervision and regulation we conduct in my Department are the best. We intend to maintain those standards. The six cases are matters for the Garda and we supply all the information. The Deputy will appreciate I cannot comment beyond that at this stage. I assure the House that where there are seen to be breaches of regulations we are immediately in touch with the Commission on the basis of fullest possible disclosure.
Is the Minister aware that a member of the Court of Auditors of the European Communities in evidence to the Committee on Public Accounts of Dáil Éireann said that member countries are very reluctant to report fraud to the Community? Will the Minister assure the House that he will impress on the Council of Ministers the need for all countries to report fraud so that it can be tackled? Will he assure the House that he and his Department will ensure that the Court of auditors are assisted on a Community-wide basis in cutting out all fraud?
Whatever about other member states, we only have responsibility for Ireland. Our standards are of the highest. We have a lot of reasons apart from legal obligation and public morality for complying with regulations. If our standards are accepted by the Commission we will not have constant checks, wasteful bureaucratic checks by the European Commission. That is why it is so important that we maintain these standards. I take the Deputy's point after that but it is not for me to introduce the regulations.
Is the Minister aware of the widespread importation of wheat to this country without paying the MCAs and that this is widely known to the milling industry and to his own Department?
That is a totally different matter.
Will the Minister comment with regard to the level of political interference in the work of his agricultural officers and customs men in attempting to investigate suspected breaches of EC regulations? Have the Department ever investigated the question of the use of grading and intervention stocks and their abuse? Have his Department ever been involved in investigation of the substitution of prime intervention beef with cow and bull beef which is eventually then transported to Third World destinations——
The Deputy has some experience in court practice and he knows that one of the greatest travesties of justice is to indulge in major slander. I will take each of the Deputy's points. First, there is no question of political interference at any level and if the Deputy——
I will give the Minister instances.
——has any evidence of it he can give it to me. The Deputy has never done that. I insist that all my colleagues in the Department would guard against anything of that nature. If the Deputy has any indication of political interference he should let us know the details.
Consult your officers first.
You might consult us first before making that sort of public slander which is a disgrace from a professional legal person.
It is a fact and it is time the Department faced up to it.
Are you suggesting that I or any of my colleagues — because we are the ones politically responsible — have interferred politically?
If that is what has the Minister up on his high horse, I want to——
(Interruptions.)
Order, please. We cannot debate this matter today.
If the Deputy lets me have the information I will try to deal with any irregularities that are uncovered in relation to the use of stamps or whatever else. Irregularities are notified to the Commission and they are perfectly satisfied with our standards and procedures for notification.