Vol. 378 No. 4
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if he will outline the new arrangements for the implementation of an aggressive drive to eradicate bovine tuberculosis, which was promised in the Programme for National Recovery; if the promised discussions with farming bodies and other interested bodies have been held; the outcome of any such discussions; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
35.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the management structures and procedures which will be in place by 1 April 1988 when the 1988 round of bovine tuberculosis testing will commence.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 22 and 35 together.
On 25 September last I issued my proposals to all farm organisations and the veterinary profession and outlined the programme personally to them. At the request of the IFA I agreed to allow them time to enter into discussions with the veterinary profession.
The IFA response to the September proposals was made on 22 December and their fresh proposals were discussed in detail with them on 11 January and in broader terms on 16 February. The veterinary bodies, the Irish Veterinary Association and the Irish Veterinary Union, presented, on 25 January, a joint memorandum broadly welcoming the Minister's proposals and raising a number of questions.
There has been a generally favourable reaction by the organisations concerned to my proposals for changes in the bovine TB scheme. The new arrangements for the scheme are at an advanced stage of preparation and I expect to be in a position to indicate the various elements involved within the next few weeks.
The Minister's reply has been a little evasive. I am particularly interested in the management structures. The original proposal which I made in my draft policy document in June last year and which I understood the Minister was taking on board, was that there would be a management board on which there would be a strong farmer representation, to which they are entitled because they have contributed £22 million. Will the Minister confirm to the House that the procedures he has in mind to be put into effect this year will involve a management board, not an advisory board, with a strong farmer input.
I have never suggested that what would be involved would be advisory. I want to assure the Deputy that that is the farthest notion from my mind. We are talking about an executive agency that will have an executive effect and that is my intention.
——and a management board?
Let me say — and I do not think the Deputy listened, because I was anxious to ensure agreement amongst the parties concerned — at the specific request of the farming organisations I left the proposals with them for discussion with the veterinary associations where they remained from September until just before Christmas. I hope the Deputy will appreciate that as soon as I returned after Christmas I advanced these as quickly as possible. Incidentally, I should say that no agreement was reached between the farming and veterinary associations. Of course, if agreement was always forthcoming we could all move very quickly. I want to assure the Deputy that what I am doing is following the line he suggested and what we had proposed. I did acknowledge that farmers are making a major contribution — in fact two-thirds — by way of levy contributions to the cost of the TB eradication scheme.
Just one simple point——
I am anxious to dispose of the remaining two questions in the names of Deputies O'Keeffe and Stagg before the prescribed time limit. We have five minutes to deal with two questions.
I have seen the Minister's September proposals though he did not send them to me as I had sent my draft proposal to him in June last. Have I now a clear commitment from the Minister that the management structures which will be over the executive office will have a strong farmer input?
Of course it will. It was never necessary to give that commitment in response to the Deputy; that has always been my position.
