Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will try to respond. The context of use of the word "identified" is the reference in the Bill, "it is not identified in accordance with animal health and welfare regulations", which are quite clear in terms of what identifies an animal in respect of traceability. The real danger is imported animals without identification and the disease risk they pose. The identification systems provide important safeguards and reassurance to customers domestically and internationally and there is no room for doubt. If an animal is untagged and lacks the proper papers, then it is not identified. To change this wording from "not identified" to "not possible to identify" would make it unenforceable. If a sheep has no tags then it is not identified. If the amendment were accepted, the subsection could never be applied as it is always possible to identify it if one can tag it. That does not change the fact that one may not know where it originated or the disease risk it poses. Its disease status remains unverifiable, therefore it presents a real danger to the health status of our country as a whole and the viability of our highly export-orientated agri-food sector. It may also be a threat to public health if it enters the food chain. It is with this concern in mind that unidentified animals are in breach of EU regulations, which require that animals be identified with reference to a register and tags. Furthermore, these EU regulations provide for remedial action if tags are lost.

This has been an issue in some Border counties when we had disease risk. We needed to take action. If animals were abandoned and the tags were removed from their ears, we had to be able to take action. Under the regulations, it is possible to re-tag animals. For example, it may not be common practice but it happens quite a lot that mountain sheep lose tags. We do not want animals that lose their tags in a commonage area or in mountainous areas, having been caught in a hedge or a wall, should be deemed to be not identified. That is dealt with under the regulations for re-tagging. The strong advice is that we need to be legally clear and strong in this area in respect of the powers of the Minister. For the reasons outlined, the current wording is stronger than that proposed by the Deputy.