Vol. 552 No. 2
8 Mr. Shatter asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development if the practice of price tiering, now engaged in by grain purchasers, is permissible under the rules of the EU Common Agricultural Policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11982/02]
There are no rules under the Common Agricultural Policy regarding pricing arrangements, including the setting of prices, for cereals on the free market. This is a private matter for negotiation between the farmer and the purchaser of cereals. The main elements of the common regime in cereals relate to market support through intervention, export refunds and import duties, as appropriate, and direct aid to producers. Trade in cereals is subject to the legislation governing competition in the same manner as other commercial activity.
Is the Minister of State aware that at least four of our major food processors are engaged in this practice of price tiering? What it means is that they pay different prices to different suppliers, depending on whether those suppliers buy their seeds, fertilisers and agri-chemicals from the eventual purchaser of the grain. Is the Minister not worried that at least four of our major food processors are now engaged in this practice? Is he aware that in some cases the final grain buyers are telling producers that if they do not buy their seeds, fertilisers and agri-chemicals from them, they can find another customer for the grain? Does he not agree that this is a grossly unfair, anti-competitive practice which should be outlawed under EU law?
The grain trade does not consult or notify the Department about price arrangements for grain purchases from farmers. That is a matter for negotiation between the farmer and the buyer. The IFA would also be strongly involved in that. Glanbia recently told its farmer suppliers that from this year a premium price will be paid to farmers who contract to purchase inputs from the co-operative to the value of €50 for each tonne of grain purchased. A lower price will be paid to farmers who do not enter into those contracts. It is understood that Dairygold will operate a similar system. This has given rise to complaints from farmers that they will be forced to pay prices for their inputs which may not be competitive and that they may have to buy more inputs than they need. We understand there are also complaints from other suppliers of inputs because of the business they will lose.
There are no rules in the Common Agricultural Policy for the regulation of grain purchasing and trading on the free market.
Does the Minister not agree that the practice he has described can certainly require farmers to buy inputs at uncompetitive prices? By using that phrase he has accepted that this tiering is an anti-competitive practice organised by monopoly buyers to secure more advantage from weak sellers. It is, therefore, uncompetitive, exploitative and contrary to the intention of EU competition law. The Government's refusal to accept the Fine Gael amendment to the recent competition Bill is just another example of how little it cares about the position of farmers in the context of competition in the market.
Deputy Dukes does not mean that last statement.
I do.
It is just due to the pre-election period.
I do. The Government refused an amendment that would have explicitly enshrined in Irish law a provision that dates from the Treaty of Rome.
We are concerned that these practices occur but there are no regulations in the European Union to deal with them.
It is in the Treaty of Rome.
There is great strength to be found in groups coming together, as smaller co-operatives have done. Groups of farmers who produce grain can come together and provide their own storage. The Department has given substantial grants to a number of areas this year for storage of grain to ensure farmers can be independent in that way. They can hold their grain over a long period and they can come together in different groups. I am aware of individual farmers who have come together and formed strong groups. They are in a better position to negotiate because they not only have the quality but also the quantity to supply.
The Minister's last comment, if it were not for the context, would encourage me. Will he explain how his comments and his praise of farmers grouping in this way sit with the declarations of the Competition Authority early last year in the case of milk producers in Donegal and later in the case of beet producers in Carlow and other counties to the effect that there was a serious legal doubt over the ability of farmers to organise to negotiate prices? Will there be a rethink of the mistaken attitude taken by the Government to the application of competition law to agriculture?
I said I am aware that groups have come together and negotiated, with their own storage in place.
Are you aware that your Competition Authority has told them they are under threat?
It is not my Competition Authority, it is the country's. It belongs to the people of Ireland. It is in their interest.
We will proceed to Question No. 9.
What is the position regarding the Private Notice Question which was to be taken at 7 p.m.?
I have no information. The Members have assembled in the Chamber in the belief that there is to be a curtailment of Question Time this afternoon to 45 minutes. Unfortunately, I have no instruction at present but it is being inquired into.
We have not agreed a curtailment of Question Time.
I am reluctant to disturb Question Time but the Order of Business adopted this morning provided that Question Time would begin at 6.15 p.m. and would be interrupted after 45 minutes to take a Private Notice Question which was accepted by the Ceann Comhairle. This Private Notice Question deals with the Middle East conflict and the massacre at Jenin. It would be appalling if we did not have an opportunity to take this item, particularly when there is a European summit next Monday in Valencia which has the opportunity to address an issue that this country is closely watching. We are talking about a massacre and the European Union being seen to stand back and witness events that are truly appalling. I want this matter discussed in the House and I insist on the Order of Business being implemented.
This was agreed on the Order of Business. I am sorry I did not have that information to hand earlier.
Will the half hour allocated to this matter be complied with?
Yes.
Do I take it that this interruption of normal Question Time means the conclusion of Question Time?
Yes.
