Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 26 Mar 1996

Vol. 463 No. 3

Written Answers. - Veterinary Inspection Fees.

Brian Cowen

Ceist:

379 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry if an agreement exists between his Department and the Irish Meat Processors' Association regarding the payment of veterinary inspection fees; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6333/96]

Brian Cowen

Ceist:

380 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the terms, date and duration of any agreement that exists between his Department and the Irish Meat Processors' Association in relation to veterinary inspection fees; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6334/96]

Brian Cowen

Ceist:

381 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry if he accepted moneys in partial payment of an agreement between his Department and the Irish Meat Processors' Association; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6335/96]

Brian Cowen

Ceist:

382 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the current status of existing agreements between his Department and the Irish Meat Processors' Association in view of the new arrangements made for veterinary inspection fees in meat factories; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6336/96]

Brian Cowen

Ceist:

383 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry if Ernst and Young have completed their report on veterinary inspection fees in meat factories; if he will publish this report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6339/96]

Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry (Mr. Yates)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 379, 380, 381, 382, and 383 together.

Following the judgment of the High Court of 14 December 1994, which upheld the legality of certain veterinary fees, agreement was reached between my Department and the Irish Meat Processors' Association on an amended system for the recovery of the cost of the meat inspection service. The main terms of the agreement were: (i) the EU standard charges for the supervision of slaughtering and cutting would be imposed; (ii) an overtime charge of £10-person-hour would be imposed in respect of supervision undertaken outside of the hours 7.30 a.m.-6.30 p.m. on weekdays and at weekends or public holidays; (iii) a charge of £7.50-person-hour would be imposed in respect of supervision on cold stores attached to slaughter-cutting plants; (iv) all of the arrears of the veterinary inspection fees, subject to a percentage reduction in respect of the overtime element which had built up during the period of the dispute over the implementation of S.I. 177 of 1992 would be paid in three equal instalments during 1995, 1996 and 1997; (v) the Department agreed to engage a consultancy firm to (a) isolate the costs related to market control within the overall cost of the meat inspection service and (b) make recommendations for the more efficient delivery of the service; and (vi) the IMPA agreed to withdraw their Supreme Court appeal of the High Court judgment.

This agreement took effect from 13 March 1995 but it did not involve any time limit.

My Department has received payment of moneys in respect of the arrears referred to at (iv) above.

With regard to the status of this agreement, I am prepared to continue with those aspects not affected by the new arrangements for the recovery of the costs of the meat inspection service which I announced on 12 March. I should point out that the Irish Meat Processors Association have not fully complied with the terms of the agreement in that they have not withdrawn their Supreme Court appeal of the December 1994 High Court judgment. I am satisfied that the new arrangements are fully consistent with the EU Directive 93/118/EC on the recovery of meat inspection costs.

The consultancy report by Ernst and Young on the meat inspection service has not yet been completed. It is my intention to publish this report when it is finalised.