asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the way in which it is proposed to secure savings of 45 per cent in the expenses incurred by Córas Beostoic agus Feola without damaging the services provided by that organisation to the beef industry.
44.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Córas Beostoic agus Feola Funding.
43.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the reason he restored funding to CBF this year, subsequent to the publishing of this year's Book of Estimates.
63.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if he will consider restoring the grant-in-aid allocation in full to Córas Beostoic agus Feola in view of the Government's stated commitment to the market driven, added value food industry.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 43, 44 and 63 together.
In fixing the 1988 departmental Estimates CBF were allocated a grant-in-aid of £515,000. This amount was subsequently increased to take account of the transfer of responsibility for pigmeat promotion from CTT to CBF.
CBF derive the major share of their income from statutory levies which were increased in August 1988. As a result CBF's total income for 1989 inclusive of the £0.5 million grant-in-aid from the Exchequer will reach an estimated £3.9 million compared with some £3.4 million for 1988. The question of cost reductions, increases in other sources of income and the provision of services to the meat industry are, of course, matters for consideration by CBF but I am confident that, having regard to the overall resources available to them, the organisation will be able to continue and expand the very valuable services they provide for the meat industry.
Did the Minister give assurances to CBF this year, while negotiations to increase this year's Estimates were going on, that the costs of the overheads and administration of their building would be borne by the Estimates, and all levies collected on animals would be directly used for marketing?
No. I never gave such assurances. It would not be my practice.
There is understanding that the Minister did so during the negotiations that arrived at the increase in the virtual doubling of this year's Estimate.
That is not correct.
If the Estimate provided for this year, which is a 45 per cent decrease on the outturn of last year, is inadequate to do one of the most vital export marketing jobs this country has, can we expect that extra moneys will be forthcoming next year?
First, CBF have done a remarkable job and I find we are both very much in tune in our line of policy. Secondly, it is a choice between whether the people who benefit most directly, namely the farmers and processors, should pay appropriately for what CBF are doing, or the taxpayers generally who do not get the same direct benefit but who benefit indirectly. I am glad to say that the focus of our policy has been that those who benefit directly, as distinct from the general taxpayer, are the people best qualified and best able to pay, and with farm incomes as they are now I think that is reasonable.
I do not dispute the general policy as enunciated by the Minister, but the big difficulty with CBF and all the marketing and export bodies in this country is that being an island we have an added handicap, an added disadvantage against our continental competitors. I am asking the Minister to reconsider the enormous cut, virtually 50 per cent, in the Estimate next year to CBF. Looking towards 1992 and the importance of establishing our livestock and meat products on supermarket shelves in Europe, now is not the time to cut back and put CBF at any handicap relative to our continental competitors. In the long term I accept the Minister's philosophy but right now I think we are doing irrevocable damage with 1992 and the opportunities it presents on the market.
Let me put the "enormous cut" in focus. The amount we are talking about here is £400,000 cut——
45 per cent.
——the Deputy called it an enormous cut. This is out of a total transfer of funds through my Department of £1.2 billion. We should get this thing in focus. It is not an enormous cut.
Relatively, in CBF's situation, it is enormous.
CBF's total budget now will be increased by £0.5 million over last year as I have said. I have also said, in relation to what the Deputy regards as a disadvantage of being an island, that I am very glad that, with my colleagues here, I have focused so much on the advantages that has for us in the market penetration, that our farmers with the support of CBF and others are now getting top prices in Europe and in the world for their products. That is the way we intend it to stay.
There are added distribution and marketing costs. Being an island environmentally clear, we have advantages, but we should not confuse the two issues. The Minister should insist that the money is forthcoming to restore to CBF next year sufficient moneys to do the job we all want them to do and that they are capable of doing particularly with 1992 around the corner.