Denis Naughten
Ceist:9 Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the mechanisms he is putting in place to improve the traceability of meat consumed here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13942/03]
Other Questions. - Food Safety Standards.
With regard to beef, EU labelling regulations introduced in 2000 require operators involved in the marketing of beef to label their product with a reference code to enable the beef to be traced back to the animal or group of animals from which it was derived; the approval number of the slaughterhouse and the country in which it is located; the approval number of the de-boning hall and the country in which it is located; and an indication of the origin of the animal from which the beef was derived. For the purpose of these regulations, marketing means all aspects of beef production and marketing up to and including retails sale.
These labelling requirements, which are compulsory in all member states, apply to the marketing of beef within the Community, regardless of whether that beef was produced within the Community or in a third country. Where beef is imported into the Community from a third country and not all the above details are available, that beef must, at a minimum, be labelled as "Origin: non-EC" along with an indication of the third country in which slaughter took place.
Last year we established an expert group to examine the whole issue of food labelling, including beef and also other meats where EU labelling requirements are not as extensive. In its report, which it presented to us in December 2002, the food labelling group made a number of recommendations relating to the labelling of "origin" as follows: information on the origin of fresh, chilled and frozen sheep meat pigmeat and poultry meat sold in retail outlets, prepackaged or otherwise, should be declared; information on the origin of the primary meat protein source – beef, sheep meat pigmeat and poultry meat – sold in the food service sector should be provided to the consumer; consumer research should be carried out to establish, first, how origin should be defined in respect of fresh, chilled and frozen sheep meat pigmeat and poultry meat sold in retail outlets and, second, how origin should be defined in respect of the primary meat protein source – beef, sheep meat pigmeat or poultry meat – sold in the food service sector and, third, the usefulness and effectiveness of the beef labelling regulations from a consumer perspective; and only where an imported food product undergoes substantial transformation in the importing country can the name of the importing country be given as the country of origin on the label or at the point of sale or consumption. To this effect, "substantial transformation" should be clearly defined and harmonised across all EU member states.
We have established an inter-agency committee to progress the recommendations contained in this report. The committee comprises of representatives of all Departments involved in food labelling, the Food Safety Authority of Ireland and the Food Safety Promotion Board.
I thank the Minister of State. Will he agree there is concern among farmers that a great deal of non-EU beef is coming into this country? Can the Minister assure me that such concern is not well-founded and that all the beef is legitimately coming in from the EU? Can he confirm also that the concern expressed by farmers about beef coming in from non-EU countries is not justified? What is the position in that regard? If I buy beef in a factory that is of non-EU origin, can I be assured that the country of origin will be clearly identified? Can the Minister assure Irish consumers and farmers that non-EU products coming into this country are subject to the same production methods as those in the EU? Without going into detail, we often hear that animals are treated badly during the production process. Will the Minister indicate if that is the case? Do these countries have a production system for exports and another for the home market? I would like the Minister to put the issue to bed once and for all and tell us whether our concerns are well-founded.
From all the information available to us from the Department of Agriculture and Food, including to the Minister, those concerns are not well-founded. The Minister, Deputy Walsh, has raised those concerns at Council of Ministers meetings, in the Commission and with Commissioner Byrne and Commissioner Fischler. In the reply to the next question I will give the statistical data on imports into this country which I hope will ease people's minds in that regard. We have been assured by the European Commission, in discussions we have had and documentation exchanged, that all the countries supplying the European Union are subject to the same rigorous inspection tests by inspectors within the European Commission vis-à-vis production processes, systems standards, etc., as is the case here. That issue has been raised continuously by the Minister on behalf of this country at various Council and Commission meetings and we are satisfied with the assurances given in that regard.
We must understand also that we are part of a global trade network. We export 90% of our beef but we are also subject to WTO agreements, based on which we must import a certain percentage of beef. The amount imported gives us a huge leverage not only in exporting food and beef products but also in getting other products into the greater global marketplace. If we did not have that agreement we could not do our business. There is a condition that WTO beef and food coming in here goes to the catering industry predominantly, which gives us stability in the markets.
I encountered a lady recently who had purchased a lasagne in the constituency of the Minister of State, Deputy Aylward. There was a wrapper around it indicating it had been produced by a certain meat company here but when she brought it home she discovered from a mark on the tin foil that it was a pork product produced in Belgium. What plans, if any, does the Minister of State have to ensure that when consumers buy products with, say, Treacy's Meats, Ballinasloe or whatever on them, that is what they are getting as opposed to a product from Brussels or elsewhere?
I was going to be complimentary and say to the Minister that the report of the food labelling group is very useful but I also want to make a point arising from it. The Minister mentioned whether the labelling should be "non-EU" or the actual country of origin. There is disagreement between the consumer and the trade groups on this issue. The trade groups want only non-EU products but the consumer groups are interested in having the country of origin indicated. Which of those options does the Minister believe is more suitable?
I would be guided by the professional people. In my current responsibility my job is to drive the Irish food industry as best I can, which I will do abroad this weekend, as I did last week.
In Japan.
At the end of the day we have to ensure we get the best deal for Ireland. A final conclusion has not been reached on this issue. The best deal for consumers and producers, and for the country as a whole, would be EU product and non-EU product and on that basis we could get the freeflow of product across the different frontiers and into the different markets to the maximum benefit of a primary producer like Ireland.
To go back to Deputy Timmins's point, we set up the labelling group. We have now set up an inter-agency committee to implement the recommendations contained in the group's report. We are waiting on the different agencies to come up with final decisions. If the Deputy gives us details of the exact situation in Kilkenny, I am certain my ministerial colleagues will investigate the matter. We will then find out whether the product packaged by the Irish company originated in another country. If a product is imported into the European Union, it should be clearly marked as non-EU.
The lasagne will be long gone at this stage.
I presume it has been consumed.