Vol. 628 No. 4
6 Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if her attention has been drawn to research here connected with the development of plastic materials and chemical agents from plants like wheat, sunflower, maize or beet; if not, the action she will take to ensure that such research begins as soon as possible; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40547/06]
I am aware that advances in life sciences and industrial biotechnology are breaking new ground in understanding microbial biodiversity and bioprocesses that could lead to valuable bioproduct and biomaterials like plastic materials and chemical agents being produced from agricultural crops. Support for such research which, I believe, should be very much led by industry comes within the remit of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment.
The interest of the Department of Agriculture and Food in this general area lies in the potential for farm production in developing alternative uses for crops. The creation of new markets via non-traditional uses of crops is particularly topical at the moment. To that end the Department of Agriculture and Food has provided considerable research funding via the public good competitive research programme, namely, the research stimulus fund.
Again, I want to thank the Minister of State for his reply. However, it suggests that there is a large gap somewhere in terms of research. I raised the question on the basis of the Minister's indications on the availability of crops and the potential for their development and conversion into a biodegradable product, by comparison with the use and overuse of plastic products which are non-biodegradable and are creating an environmental nuisance.
I hope the Minister of State will agree there is a need for joined-up thinking in the Departments of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and Agriculture and Food regarding the opportunities to co-operate in respect of the production of raw material and its further development into a product that is biodegradable and environmentally friendly. Can the Minister of State indicate whether some discussions could be arranged, or are already taking place with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment as to how this might be activated?
The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment is the lead Department for the European Union's seventh framework programme and from next year, significant funds will be made available from that programme. The Department of Agriculture and Food's role will come under the general theme of food, agriculture and biotechnology. The first call on the framework programme reflects many of the Irish research priorities in non-food crop research. The Department anticipates and is confident there will be successful Irish participation in the seventh framework programme.
As for the areas Deputy Upton correctly identified as having potential, the principal areas funded have included energy production, including bio-fuels, bioethanol and bio-mass production, as well as the use of waste heat. To date, funding under the Department's stimulus research programme has amounted to more than €3.5 million. I refer to bio-mass, miscanthus, willows, bioethanol and the entire field of the alternative use of crops and sustainable agriculture. The Department's stimulus research programme is particularly geared towards assisting such research in third level colleges and within industry. As Members are aware, there is a focus on the question of the need for alternative energy sources in the context of the Government's Green Paper. Moreover, considerable research funding will be devoted to the potential of those particular crops.
While I welcome those developments, I understand the Minister of State mentioned a sum of €3.5 million. I consider such a sum to be an extremely small amount of investment in terms of such research. Is the figure of €3.5 million correct?
It pertains to that particular area, to date.
Yes. This field has enormous development potential and should be promoted. My question pertained in particular to the replacement of plastic materials, in so far as they might be used, for instance, as a food covering material. Some leading supermarkets in the United Kingdom are already working on such research, in which plastic coatings from such biodegradable raw material are used. Will the Department encourage such research in Ireland, as it relates to both the agricultural production and food consumption aspects?
I doubt whether I have sufficient knowledge to comment on a matter that is probably still under development in a laboratory. It is a subject on which I will gladly defer to the Department's inspectorate and to specialists. However, I will not attempt to comment on something that, to my knowledge, has not yet taken life.
Supermarkets in the United Kingdom are already doing so.
To follow Deputy Upton's comments, there is concern within the scientific sector that heretofore, Science Foundation Ireland was more focussed on the high technology end of the spectrum than on developing Ireland's strengths in respect of food production and the growth of crops such as those mentioned by Deputy Upton. Has the Minister of State met representatives of Science Foundation Ireland in this regard? Has he discussed these concerns with it? While its attitude is now changing, can the Minister of State guarantee a greater focus on this subject on the part of Science Foundation Ireland in future?
I met Dr. Fottrell, the chairman of Science Foundation Ireland, in late 2004. It has been exceptionally successful in its work since its establishment in the late 1990s or the early years of this century. The Government is committed to providing substantial resources in the field of food research innovation. I have stated that substantial resources have been committed already in the Department's Estimates and will be provided under the Government's science and technology innovation strategy.
Last August, the International Congress of Meat Science and Technology was held in Ireland. It was hosted by Teagasc and the Department and included participants from more than 50 countries. I spoke to participants from countries such as the United States, Britain and other European counties who were highly knowledgeable about the significant resources Ireland is investing in science and research at present. I refer to the development of the laboratories at Backweston, the additional resources for Teagasc and the assistance to third level institutions at both university and institute of technology level. Moreover, public good research can be conducted by private and public companies in association with the public service and third level institutions. This is how great synergies are being developed with regard to productive research. I am highly confident the considerable resources being devoted to the food sector will pay great dividends for the food industry, the national economy and — as Deputy Upton noted earlier — the emerging health agenda.
7 Mr. Nolan asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the policies she has in place to sustain the dairy, beef and sheep processing sectors; the progress to date; the outlook for the future; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40273/06]
11 Mr. Finneran asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food her plans for investment in the dairy, beef and sheep processing sectors. [40269/06]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 11 together.
In keeping with commitments given in the agri-vision 2015 action plan, in recent months I have announced investment packages totalling €150 million to support the development of the dairy, beef and sheepmeat processing sectors. A total of €100 million is earmarked for the dairy sector, while €50 million is being provided for the beef and sheepmeat sectors. This substantial grant assistance, which should trigger investment in excess of €400 million, is yet another clear indication of the Government's commitment to the continued development of a modern, competitive, innovative and market-focused food industry.
Financial support will be made available towards the cost of the construction and acquisition of buildings, new machinery and equipment and will significantly assist the industry in improving efficiency and competitiveness. I commend the positive response in recent years of the dairy, beef and sheepmeat sectors to the challenges presented in an ever-changing market. This has made a major contribution to the enhanced status and reputation of Irish produce abroad. The Government has striven to lead that progress and to assist stakeholders by adopting pragmatic, if ambitious, policies in supporting the development of the sectors.
The investment schemes will be managed by Enterprise Ireland which will evaluate the suitability of investment projects submitted for grant assistance. I launched the dairy investment fund in September 2006 and the closing date for applications was Thursday, 23 November. The dairy fund will support Annex 1 dairy projects in which the inputs and outputs consist of, at a minimum, 75% Annex 1 products. I was pleased to be informed by Enterprise Ireland that the dairy investment fund was over-subscribed. An evaluation committee comprising representatives from Enterprise Ireland, my Department and other experts will select the projects to be grant aided following a detailed technical and commercial analysis of each project.
While the scheme for the beef and sheepmeat processing sectors was announced as recently as 8 November, there has already been a very positive response from the industry and I expect significant progress to be made fairly quickly. At present I am in consultation with Enterprise Ireland and expect to be in a position to publish the full eligibility criteria and terms and conditions of this scheme in the near future.
I welcome the Minister's reply and the Department's commitment to the agricultural sector and to the dairy, beef and sheepmeat sectors in particular. Genuine concern exists within the farming sector regarding the future of farming in general and that of the dairy sector, which has been so good for Irish agriculture in recent years, in particular. Farmers and farm organisations seek a Government commitment to invest significantly in this sector in order that farmers can encourage members of their families to engage in farming and to avoid issues that might discourage farm families from continuing to farm.
I am also pleased to note the Minister has involved Enterprise Ireland in this sphere of investment because one must consider the bigger picture. Can the Minister predict, post 2013 or 2015, where these three agricultural sectors will be?
It is with some concerns that we have introduced our AgriVision 2015 document. With the background of the world trade talks, competitiveness and many of the pressures within the manufacturing sector, it was decided that we would support primary processing, Annex I, on the basis that we need to encourage and support this export-orientated sector to be competitive and to possess the standards under which they can afford to be competitive. It was under this drive, particularly in the dairy sector, that such an investment has been made.
If we change our product mix, and if we develop the product qualitatively and can deal with a number of opportunities at innovation level, we also will have opportunities to exploit a market which, as Deputy Nolan correctly stated, has been good to Ireland and to Irish farming. If we do not reach a particular level of exports, we will not survive in the future. The methodologies and policies on which we are working to ensure that happens are ones such as the quota exchange that is taking place in the reform of the quota regimes, supporting some of the concerns expressed on the implication of statutory instruments and, most particularly, that the processing sector would get an investment to afford it the opportunity to be competitive, to innovate and to look towards the market and the consumer. The harsh reality is that when the present Common Agricultural Policy reform is changed, Irish farmers and producers must be in a position to move on from some of the existing structures. We provided this significant investment to allow that to happen. Having spoken to a number of company chief executives, I am aware that there are fine projects which will allow us be more competitive and give us more product mix.
I am glad to see that the Minister's backbench colleagues are coming in to support her. It is either that Deputies Upton and Crawford and I are doing a good job or there is a lack of communication within the Fianna Fáil Parliamentary Party — I do not know which is the case.
We all agree on the need for reform within the processing sector in this country and I hope these funds will spur on such reform. The concern I would have in that regard is that clear criteria were not laid down on the structure under which these funds will be distributed. I am afraid this could end up being a lost opportunity. I genuinely hope I am wrong in that regard, but I have concerns about the structure of the dairy fund and I hope clear criteria on the meat processing funds, both in sheepmeat and beef, will be laid down to ensure that the maximum reform possible will take place. What is the current status of the Malone report recommendations on the sheep industry, which is close to my heart, and when will they be implemented?
I sincerely hope Deputy Naughten will be wrong because my view is that the dairy investment fund will create significant opportunities for the sector. At present, Enterprise Ireland deals with Annex I products and manufacturing produce. Primary processing has now moved from Enterprise Ireland. Enterprise Ireland has been targeted at additionality, research and innovation. My view — this fund is being channelled through my Department — is that there is a considerable opportunity within the primary processing sector and that is why it amounts to 75% of Annex I. Our approach is two-pronged. One is straight primary, Annex I. The other involves considerable opportunities within Enterprise Ireland at innovation, research and new product line. These, married together, will provide significant opportunities for the companies.
The criteria were set down. I acknowledge it was a short timeframe, but this must be done in the confines of state aids and that was the issue. We had to get the applications submitted within the existing state aid rules. The changes in state aid could mean that a number of companies would not be eligible and that is why we had to move it.
The criteria for the beef sector and the sheepmeat sector are being dealt with and we hope to have them fairly soon. We have met with the industry on a number of occasions to ascertain its needs and worked with Enterprise Ireland, and will see how we can marry both of those criteria.
There are issues in sheepmeat. We need to take what could be our only, and last, opportunity to develop a sheepmeat sector which will survive and be competitive. The Malone report, as Deputy Naughten will be aware, was launched and I have put together an implementation group. I would hope to receive its outcome quite soon. At present there is much unrealistic talk because people have forgotten that we are in a decoupled system, and a number of Members on all sides of the House are being pressurised to perform miracles on a number of issues. Some of these are well founded and within the confines of the recommendations of the Malone report. Others fall far beyond it. I will be considering that report fairly soon with the chairman with a view to putting together a number of proposals that, hopefully, would support an industry which is extremely important, as Deputy Naughten will be aware from his part of the country.
I welcome the €150 million that the Minister has invested in the dairy, beef and sheep sectors. We all understand the importance of having a modern processing sector because this is an exporting country.
The small processing sector is an area about which I have been extremely concerned. I refer not only to small butchers but also to farmers going into other alternatives. These should be encouraged. There is a cheese factory in my constituency which has gone from strength to strength, and any assistance or help possible should be given to those who want to get involved in alternative types of farming.
I noted that the chief executive of the Irish Dairy Board commented recently that our input in cheese production is far behind that of the rest of Europe. Are there any specific initiatives in that area? Clearly there are many opportunities. We are importing vast amounts of cheese, which surely could be produced locally. These have the potential to be of a high quality. Why is there not much greater investment in the development of the cheese processing industry, where there are opportunities to develop many new varieties?
I agree with Deputy Upton. Mr. Coakley's views are ones we would hope to reflect in this dairy investment scheme, where we are looking at a vision for, and new opportunities within, agriculture. As Deputy Upton will be aware, my view is that in the milk sector there are still opportunities for exploitation of the baseline produce whether in protein, healthy living or looking at new alternatives on the high-tech side or, equally, in cheese production. Mr. Coakley's views have been more than helpful and the dairy investment scheme will reflect a number of those initiatives. From hearsay, quite a number of people are looking at cheese development. Deputy Upton is correct. How is it that an Irish company is the largest producer of cheese in the United States of America? We, in Ireland, should be involved in cheese production.
In answer to Deputy Brady, we have enjoyed much success in the small and artisan food sector. Under the Minister of State, Deputy Brendan Smith, an additional €4 million has been made available to An Bord Bia, which is looking at providing a centre of excellence, particularly supporting artisan and small food producer development and linking with what has happened in Leader and county enterprise boards. There are still niche markets and small opportunities for people in the sector. I note that at any of the awards ceremonies and shows here, in the UK and elsewhere that I have attended recently, many of our excellence awards came from people, particularly in the cheese sector, who are small dairy producers who have innovated to create another type of employment for themselves. Much strength has been gleaned by a number of these companies coming together under Cáis. There are niche opportunities which can provide a suitable income for people linking with the food and tourism strategy in this country.
8 Mr. P. Breen asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the steps she is taking to provide for independent milk testing; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40469/06]
The Department already conducts regular checks on the results of butter fat testing carried out by milk processors. It also checks the calibration of instruments used in milk processing establishments for measuring fat and protein levels in milk collected from producers. The Department also monitors the instruments used in measuring somatic cell levels in milk delivered to processors.
In addition, the Department conducts random administrative checks to ensure the results of butter fat and protein tests are correctly transcribed into the calculation of the milk price paid to the producer. In accordance with the provisions of the partnership agreement, Towards 2016, the Department will extend its monitoring and cross checking of the milk testing regime to include all constituents used for payment purposes and, in consultation with the industry, will ensure transparency in the milk analysis regime.
I thank the Minister of State for her reply but when will we see that happening? That is the key issue. Everyone in the House has met dairy farmers around the country who have raised serious concerns about protein in milk. The results do not seem to tally with what they should be. When will the Minister ensure we will have transparency concerning milk analysis? Many farmers believe such transparency is not currently in place. In specific circumstances where individual farmers have concerns, will the Department make its representatives available to carry out inspections? That would ensure a proper and accurate analysis is being made of the milk supplied. I have heard some stories which give rise to a significant number of questions in this respect. If we are talking about developing the industry and increasing the quality of supply to creameries, it is critically important to put in place a transparent system which everyone can stand over and which will reassure farmers as to the accuracy of its analysis.
As part of the partnership agreement, it has been agreed we will engage with stakeholders with a view to having the appropriate arrangements in place. It will only be a matter of months before they are in place. As regards proper and accurate analysis, most processors now have automated equipment for testing the fat and protein content of milk, as well as the somatic cell levels. Twice yearly, the Department's dairy produce inspectorate checks that this equipment is correctly calibrated. This is done by running special samples obtained from Teagasc at Moorpark, for which the relevant values are already known. These checks are carried out without notice.
As regards the other concerns raised by the Deputy, farmers will have to raise them directly with their co-ops with respect to the ongoing situation.
That is the problem.
As a dairy farmer, it is hard at times to understand how, when checks are carried out on our farms by independent cow testers, there is no comparison between such results and those we receive from the milk tank through the creamery. The sooner this is done the better. May we have an assurance that it will be done within months rather than over a longer period?
Much of the testing is done by automated equipment but, in addition, standard Gerber procedures apply to butter fat testing. The SOPs provide that checks are also made on the accuracy of results from samples already tested by the automated equipment. At least twice a year, therefore, a minimum of ten samples are selected and tested. Some smaller establishments do not have automated equipment and they rely entirely on the Gerber method to determine fat content. In those cases, the inspectorate carries out its own Gerber test, on site, on samples already tested by management. Although the SOP is relatively new, the checking regime has been in operation for a considerable number of years. The validation testing of butter fat levels is already in place but we are talking about extending it to protein so we will have the same level of testing as for butter fat. I note the Deputies' concerns and we will ensure there will be sufficient safeguards concerning the independent validation process, which will be in place in a matter of months.
Is any comparative data available on tests currently carried out in the processing unit and those undertaken by the Department's independent monitoring unit? The Minister of State referred to ten samples being taken annually. More importantly, how do they compare and what discrepancies, if any, exist between them?
I do not have the comparative information to hand but I will be happy to obtain the data for the Deputy is she wishes me to provide her with some statistics in that respect.
I thank the Minister of State.
9 Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the grant aid which will be made available to small farmers to manage rainwater under the nitrates action plan; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40496/06]
A revised farm waste management scheme was launched by my Department on 24 March 2006, as part of the arrangements to enable farmers to meet the additional requirements of the nitrates directive. The principal changes to the scheme include an increase in the standard grant rate from 40% to 60%, with 70% being available in the four zone C counties; an extension of the scheme for the first time to sectors such as horses, deer, goats, pigs and poultry, and mushroom compost; the removal of any minimum income requirements from farming from the scheme so that all small farmers can participate in the scheme; and an increase in the maximum eligible investment from €75,000 to €120,000 per holding.
The technical specifications for farm buildings operated by the Department for the purposes of the scheme require the installation of adequate arrangements for the separation of clean and dirty water as part of the conditions of any new investment. This includes rainwater. In addition, I have added the installation of guttering on existing buildings as a further new eligible item in the terms of the revised scheme.
I thank the Minister for her reply but how will she ensure the guttering item will be in place by 1 January 2007, which is the legal requirement, as she knows? That seems to be the big difficulty. For many small farmers rainwater management will be as big an issue, if not bigger, than slurry management. It is frustrating for farmers because they must pay for water supplies to their farms, while in some circumstances they will also have to pay for the dirty water coming off their farms. Will the Minister issue specifications for the storage of clean water? No such specifications are currently available. Technical advice is available within the Department and scientific advice is available from Teagasc, but no farmer can get specifications for the storage of clean water or rainwater, rather than having to pay for it through a meter.
As the Deputy knows, he is moving on to discuss another subject, which is not under my auspices but comes within the remit of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
No. I am talking about the specifications.
Water metering is a controversial issue but alternatives that could be used by farmers, including rainwater, will be examined in the context of ensuring efficiencies within the farming sector.
With regard to the storage of clear water, the farm waste management scheme dealt specifically with soiled water and slurry. I expanded the scheme to allow for other necessary works to be carried out on the farmyard, following issues that were raised by farmers in all the local meetings I have held with them.
With regard to specifications, at the end of the day, this is a matter between Teagasc and the Department. Both Teagasc and the private planners have available to them all the specifications needed in order to have entitlements under this scheme and they have been forthcoming. We have worked with farmers to ensure that, within the realms of possibility, everything that can be done to support them will be done. As the Deputy knows, that has happened in the context of the rules and regulations provided.
The Deputy is slightly flippant in saying the issue of rainwater will have to be dealt with by 1 January 2007. Issues still have to be finalised concerning the farm waste management scheme. Lest it be said otherwise, my view regarding rainwater is that the majority of farmers are dealing with the issue of clean water as opposed to soiled water. Under the farm waste management scheme the emphasis has been placed on soiled water, waste and slurry.
The Minister mentioned a ceiling of €120,000 including work done recently on some farms. Is there any room for leeway on an upper limit, given the situation in the Cavan-Monaghan constituency, represented by Deputy Brendan Smith and me, for those involved in intensive pig farming as well as dairy farming? Will €120,000 be the maximum or can herd number be accepted in addition to pig number?
I will need to get clarity on the issue of pigs but I do not think there is a limit on the pig installation — it is an overall limit of €120,000. I do not wish to mislead the House so I will have to get the information requested by the Deputy later.
It is not a trick question.
I understand, I simply do not know the answer and must get it for the Deputy.
I wish to return to the questions I asked earlier. Will the Minister ensure storage specifications are made available regarding clean water storage? She is correct that rainwater is not part of the system at the moment, but if it happens to fall on the ground it becomes soiled water and becomes part of the specifications, which we wish to avoid this as much as possible. If the Minister is not prepared to provide grant aid for such storage facilities she should at least provide the specifications so that farmers, if they wish, can build them and ensure they have the capacity to meet requirements.
The vast majority of farmers are unaware that, as the law stands, they must have guttering replaced or installed on existing buildings to manage rainwater and clean water by 1 January. I do not know if the Department of Agriculture and Food will implement this or any other section of the legislation but farmers are concerned because they still do not know the specifications nor the implications of the rules and regulations.
The rainwater and clean water directive was introduced in February 2005.
Why did the Minister not issue the booklets to farmers then?
Every farmer reads the Irish Farmers’ Journal. It cost a fortune to take several pages in the Irish Farmers’ Journal on these issues.
Not all farmers read the Irish Farmers’ Journal; look at the circulation figures.
Rainwater is not part of this issue because it is clean water, not soiled water or slurry.
Until it lands.
On landing, if it mixes with livestock faeces, urine, silage effluent, chemical fertilisers, milking parlour washings, washings from mushroom houses or water used in washing farm equipment, it is considered soiled. Once soiled, there is a regulation and a specification and that is what must happen. Clean water has no specification, soiled water has a specification and slurry has a specification. It is very simple and is available to farmers — the specification is part of the scheme and part of the application form.
We must get legal advice on this.
Legal advice is too expensive.
I made my money in slurry.
I am tempted to say something but I will not.
The information was posted to farmers during the summer.
10 Dr. Upton asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food her view on requiring the reporting of the severity of animal procedures retrospectively here. [40555/06]
I understand that this question relates to scientific experiments on laboratory animals. My Department has no statutory responsibility for this area. The protection of animals used for experimental or other scientific purposes is regulated under EU and national legislation. Statutory responsibility for this legislation falls within the remit of my colleague, the Minister for Health and Children.
The only involvement my Department has had in this area is that, in the past, current and recently retired members of the Department's veterinary staff carried out inspection visits on behalf of the Department of Health and Children.
I thank the Minister for responding to this question and I raise it in the wider context of animal welfare. My problem regarding all questions relating to animal welfare is that they are passed from one Department to another. When I asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government about the issue of feral cats, a real problem in suburban areas, he responded that it was not an important matter and it fell off the end of the list. These are genuine animal welfare queries that must relate to some Department in which there is a person with overall responsibility.
The last year for which we have data is 2002 when 41,000 animals were used in experiments in Ireland without anaesthetics and account must be taken of this. It may be that this represents best practice in the area, but we must examine how such issues can be addressed. Procedures are in place for testing and measuring the severity of adverse effects and I wonder why we do not take a more proactive stance.
My statutory responsibility is for the protection of farmed animals under the Protection of Animals Kept for Farming Purposes Act 1984 and the EU regulation of 2000. The national legislation for experimental or scientific purposes is related respectively under a Council directive and the European Communities Amendment of Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 Regulations 1994. This is the statutory responsibility of the Department of Health and Children.
The Deputy is correct that the issues involved cut across more than one Department. My Department is responsible for many minor animal welfare schemes and we give considerable grant aid to the care of pets. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government oversees dog shelters and so on. The overall issue of cruelty to animals crosses all of these Departments, but I am only responsible for the welfare of farmed animals. There is an animal welfare group covering all animals.
The issue the Deputy has raised is totally unacceptable as standards have been set under the Cruelty to Animals Act and they must be adhered to. If the Deputy wishes to raise the matter with the Minister for Health and Children I am sure she will be happy to deal with it and I will also mention it on the Deputy's behalf.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
