Mr. Eddie Punch:

The Deputy mentioned the valuation of animals. There is €97 million for the programme, 17% of which goes to on-farm market valuation. There is a difference between the salvage value, the factory price, and the on-farm market valuation. We have consistently argued that the Department is getting a bad deal in the price it gets from factories. The standard response of the Department is, to put it in colloquial terms, that its hand is in the dog's mouth. That is not good enough. The Department could do a better deal with meat factories. It is the differential.

The second part is that it seems to us an inordinate amount of money wasted on fighting over a few shillings and objecting to the valuations that are put in place by the independent valuers in the first instance. It would be an interesting area for the committee to consider. We are doing that as well. Perhaps the Committee of Public Accounts could also look at these issues. How much of the €28.5 million is spent on arguing the toss over €50 for an animal or arguing about the tiny percentage of animals are high value and of high merit. These things need to be discussed. An arbitration process involves hotels being rented and all that kind of stuff. I am curious and it would be good if we could get to the bottom of it. We have not been able to get to the bottom of it yet. How much is the Department spending on fighting valuations? How much does that cost in terms of mileage and all the costs that go with those inspectors compared with how much is saved? It nearly seems to us that if the Department just accepted the original valuation, it would not end up spending any more money. Slightly more would be spent on the valuation and slightly less on the administration. I think that is worth saying.