Martin Browne (Tipperary, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I will ask the same question I asked earlier but I asked it at the wrong time. The claim is that Regulation (EU) 2019/6 precludes availing of the derogation that has been in place here for years. I take issue with that based on legal advice with which we have been issued. Is it not the case that an offer was made in 2011, years before Regulation (EU) 2019/6 existed, to further upskill the recognised persons and the Department turned it down at that stage? Is it not true that the UK approached the Department about replacing the derogation with proper legislation and that was also turned down? That regulation came into effect on 28 January 2019.

Why was there no consultation with the stakeholders ahead of the regulation coming into effect in 2019 because any real public engagement happened afterwards, more or less after the horse had bolted. Is it not true that the Department was intent on relying on the derogation rather than addressing the fundamental reasons the derogation was needed which was that necessary legislation was not in place? This was despite the fact that a significant number of jobs and livelihoods relied upon it. Why was that and why now that the regulation has been signed is the Department suddenly reluctant to use the derogation? Is it because the Department is concerned it will be found that it messed the whole thing up?

In 2005 an identical situation arose that was referred to the Competition Authority, which is now called the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, CCPC, for its view. Its opinion was that creating a situation where vets could be the only prescribers of veterinary medicines would restrict competition, raise transaction costs and restrict consumer choice. Will the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Charlie McConalogue, now instruct the Department to respect that opinion and seek a solution with the stakeholders to avoid the need to re-engage with the CCPC?