Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 17 May 2012
157 Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he has established an estimate of the financial impact of TB test changes on varying types of dry stock farmers prior to their introduction in January; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24707/12]
Amharc ar fhreagra158 Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he is monitoring the impact of TB test changes on an ongoing basis; if he intends to review the changes in view of their impact on particular farmers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24708/12]
Amharc ar fhreagra163 Deputy Heather Humphreys asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if his attention has been drawn to the fact that under the TB eradication programme movement of contiguous herds is now being automatically restricted to four months test period; in view of the difficulties this restriction will cause farmers with regard to the movement of livestock, if he will consider increasing the time limit to six months; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24769/12]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 157, 158 and 163 together.
As I have explained in reply to recent Parliamentary Questions, the changes to the TB eradication programme which were introduced by my Department earlier this year are designed to improve the effectiveness of the programme by tightening up on overdue testing and preventing the spread of disease from infected herds to clear herds. Thus, greater stress is being laid on ensuring all herds test on time and on reducing movement opportunities for potentially infected cattle so as to provide increased protection for clear herds and export markets.
I want to emphasise that these changes, which were made following a number of consultation meetings with the farming organisations, are based on research which demonstrates that there are increased risks attached to the movement of certain animals. For example, research has shown that standard inconclusive reactors which passed the re-test and moved out of the herd, subsequent to passing the test, were 12 times more likely to be TB positive at the subsequent test or at slaughter compared to all other animals in the herd. For this reason, my Department has decided to limit the movement of these higher risk individual animals from the herd of disclosure for the duration of their lifetime, except to slaughter or, in exceptional cases, to a feedlot.
With regard to contiguous herds, the only change from previous arrangements is that contiguous herds are now being trade restricted, except to slaughter, pending a TB test. Previously, such herds were permitted to sell cattle on the open market prior to carrying out the test and research had shown that this posed a risk to clear herds. Any herd which tests clear will be immediately de-restricted. The trade restriction only applies to those herds which are identified, following an epidemiological investigation by my Department, as being relevant to the breakdown herd and which have not been tested in the previous 4 months. The four months period is not new or arbitrary but is related to the time interval from when an animal may be exposed to infection and the expectation that a test will give a positive result, if the animal is infected. An increase to 6 months would substantially weaken the measure in that a significant number of animals would be permitted to move from high risk herds without a test. Herd owners will be contacted by my Department prior to restriction and only those herds which, on a case by case consideration, are identified as genuinely relevant to the breakdown will be restricted. Furthermore, since the Department pays for contiguous tests within a 10 month timeframe, the new arrangements will not impose any additional testing costs on most farmers.
Regarding the financial impact on farmers, my Department, in introducing these changes, took account of the fact that any additional costs on those farmers on whom restrictions are imposed are more than offset by a reduction in costs on those farmers who are saved a breakdown as a result of the enhanced policy of confining disease to the holding where it is disclosed and imposing restrictions on high risk animals. In addition, it was conscious of the fundamental unfairness of permitting herdowners to sell potentially infected animals to other herdowners who were not aware of the increased risk attached to these animals. The reality is that a farmer who buys an inconclusive reactor or an untested animal from a contiguous herd will have his restricted for four months in the event that any of those animals test TB positive at the next test or at slaughter and his herd will be required to undergo a minimum of two clear tests. This has financial consequences both for the farmer and the Department in terms of restrictions on trade and additional testing costs. Those farmers whose herds are restricted because they are contiguous to a high risk breakdown can minimise any financial impact by arranging to have their herds tested as soon as possible. In the unfortunate event that reactors are disclosed in those herds, my Department provides a number of compensatory measures including compensation for animals removed as reactor, income supplement and hardship grants.
While I am very pleased with the reduction in both the herd and animal incidence of TB in recent years, my Department subjects the TB eradication programme to on-going review with a view to ensuring that there is a robust testing regime in place. The prevention of the spread of disease from infected herds to clear herds is an important factor both in achieving the goal of eradication and in continuing to secure funding from the EU. My Department will continue to review and make changes to various elements of the programme as deemed necessary in light of experience.
