Ms Hazel Sheridan:

I thank the Chairman and the members of the committee for inviting myself and my colleague, Ms Louise Byrne, here today, to discuss issues relating to controls at ports on imports from Great Britain and the role of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine in those controls. I am head of the Department’s import controls operations division and Ms Byrne is head of its Brexit and international trade division.

We have just heard a comprehensive statement from Mr. Harrahill that explained the role of Revenue in the controls on imports from Great Britain. The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, the Department of Health and the HSE have responsibility for implementing a set of controls that are separate from customs controls but, at the same time, are dependent on customs processes and procedures. To try to make it easy for businesses to understand that relationship, we describe it as being like a dormer bungalow where a large floor area represents customs controls and in certain areas we have a second storey that represents the controls carried out by our Department and by the HSE.

The controls carried out by Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the HSE are collectively known as sanitary and phytosanitary, SPS, controls. The purpose of these controls is to ensure that live animals, plants and products containing animal or plant material meet the food safety, plant and animal health standards of the European Union. SPS controls are a fundamental component of world trade arrangements because plant and animal diseases, as well as bacteria and viruses that can cause food-borne illnesses, move around the globe in animals, plants and products made therefrom. For example, the outbreak of foot and mouth disease that wreaked such devastation on the farming sector in the UK in 2001 was most likely to have been caused by the feeding of imported food products containing the foot and mouth virus to pigs. In more recent times, we have seen the devastation caused to the European pig industry by the spread of the African swine fever virus and the devastation caused to the European olive oil industry by the spread of xylella.

SPS controls consist of documentary, identity and physical controls. Documentary checks must be carried out on all eligible consignments. In the case of plants and plant products, these controls may, in specific cases, be carried out in advance of arrival at the port. In the case of animals and products containing animal material, controls must be carried out within the port itself. On arrival at the port, certain commodities must undergo identity checks. The frequency of the identity checks is laid down in European legislation. Those checks are carried out on a risk basis for plant products. In the case of live animals and products of animal origin, identity checks must be carried out on 100% of consignments presenting at the border control post.

Identity checks can be of two types. In the event that an official seal has been applied to the truck and its details entered on the health certificate, the identity check will consist of a check of that seal, which is a relatively straightforward and quick check.

If an official seal has not been applied, then the identity check will need to involve unloading the truck to check the boxes themselves or whatever packaging is contained within and, obviously, this will take a bit longer.

Some commodities are also required to undergo physical checks. Physical checks involve checks on temperature or organoleptic tests, such as tests of smell, colour, consistency or taste. In certain cases they may involve sampling for laboratory analysis. Minimum rates for physical checks are laid down in EU legislation. These vary depending on the risk associated with the product, from 1% for low risk products to as high as 100% in the case of live animals.

These EU requirements and controls are now a permanent feature of the flow of agrifood goods between Great Britain and Ireland. Furthermore, since leaving the EU the UK is in a position to set its own import policy, and it is implementing a phased approach to import requirements, including sanitary and phytosanitary controls. Since 1 January 2021, live animals, including equines, hatching eggs, and germinal products, must be pre-notified to UK authorities on its import of products, animals, food, and feed system, IPAFFS, and accompanied by an export health certificate.

On 11 March, the UK Government announced a delay in the phased introduction of additional import controls. These had been scheduled to take place on 1 April and 1 July. They have been delayed until 1 October, 1 January 2022 and 1 March 2022 and, as a result, further Brexit-related challenges to agrifood exports are expected. These controls were always going to apply, regardless of whether a free trade agreement is concluded between the UK and the European Union.

In recent times, there has been much talk of a veterinary agreement between the UK and the EU. It is important to note that such an agreement is unlikely to have an impact on the controls that apply to plants and plant products. Nor is it likely to have an impact on the requirement for documentary and identity checks as already described. What it would potentially impact is the frequency of the physical checks required. At present, the EU has a veterinary equivalence agreement with only three of the many countries it trades with, namely, New Zealand, Canada and Chile. The conclusion of a veterinary agreement with the UK depends on the UK Government agreeing to keep its food safety and animal health rules permanently aligned with EU rules, something which, to date, the it has indicated that it is not prepared to do.

Application of the EU Single Market import requirements to trade from Great Britain has represented a significant challenge, not just for industry but for the various agencies involved. Collectively, Revenue, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, the Department of Health and the HSE have invested significantly in infrastructure, staff and IT systems to ensure that the controls now required could be carried out in the most efficient way possible. While there were teething problems in the early days, and it can sometimes be tempting to focus on individual problems, these have to be set in the overall context of what has been achieved.

What has been achieved has been remarkable. This could not have been done without very close collaboration between all of the State players, and between the State and the private sector. In 2020, the Department carried out approximately 3,500 checks at Dublin Port. In the first 15 weeks of this year, we carried out in excess of 13,000 checks at Dublin Port and 670 at Rosslare Europort. The operation at Dublin Port runs on a 24-7 basis and that in Rosslare runs from 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. The import controls division has dealt with more than 44,000 emails and 8,000 phone calls and the vast majority of consignments on which we have carried out controls have been cleared for release.

All of this is not to be say that the systems which have been put in place to facilitate trade could not be improved further. It is only through application of the controls and the processes set up to manage those controls that issues which could be improved upon can be detected. The Department continues to work very closely with its partners in Revenue and the HSE, as well with individual businesses, to clarify requirements and to identify areas where things could be done better. However, this has to be done in the overall context of complying with the requirements of the European Union. Businesses too have a role to play in making sure they understand their legal obligations and are familiar with the processes that have been set up to facilitate compliance with their legal obligations, by sharing information and by doing what is possible to simplify loads.

I hope this gives members of the committee a good sense of the role and experience of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine in the operation of the new arrangements since 1 January. Ms Byrne and I are happy to answer any questions committee members may have.