Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This was an issue and a concern even prior to my being elected to the House. There have been countless discussions at European level and throughout this House. A very real problem has arisen. We have heard evidence in this committee from a number of very important businesses right across rural communities. In some cases they are the economic drivers of those local communities. They have said the businesses are under threat from what I consider to be an unforeseen outworking of the directive. Therefore, we need to come up with a solution. I accept the bona fides of the Minister when he says he is going to try to find a solution, but I difficulty with what he says because this has been going on for so long. There is essentially one more stage whereby members will have an input into the Bill and after that it will be signed off. It is a big request for trust on the part of the Minister. If nothing else, we can push this to a vote tonight. We could then at least state for the record for all time that this is where people stood on the matter. If I thought that this was genuinely going to be resolved on Report Stage, I would not do that because I recognise that the people who have done most work on this are the Cathaoirleach and some of his colleagues.

I will be upfront in saying that this amendment is as reflective of what they have been saying and what they have been doing behind the scenes and in working with stakeholders to try to find a solution to this. The problem is that, on Report Stage, we can resubmit this amendment but we might never get to it because the Minister could guillotine it. Next thing, there is a final vote and the horses have bolted. I hear what the Minister is saying in respect of deficiencies in the amendment. I have consulted with a number of the stakeholders on this. They have told me that this is the type of language they require in order to address that. If the language can be improved we want to hear that feedback. Essentially, the Minister is asking us to withdraw an amendment that has been endorsed by the people who have said this issue will directly affect them and their communities. In its place there is a potential amendment that the Minister may bring forward which he assures us will be better than this one, with whatever caveats are put in place. To cut to the chase, if the Minister can assure us that this issue will be addressed on Report Stage and if he can promise us that he will not guillotine any debate prior to us discussing this issue, if concerns still arise so that at least we can have a final vote on the on the matter, I will withdraw amendment No. 7. I will do so on the basis that we are working together to solve a problem which we all recognise is not an easy one to solve. We know the Attorney General's advice and that of others has created complications. We know there is a European dimension to this and we know the overarching objective of this legislation. The objective is to reduce the prevalence of antimicrobial, antibiotic and antiparasitic resistance that creates huge challenges for humans as well as animal health into the future.

Considering all of that, I ask the Minister to give an assurance that this issue will be addressed, preferably by an amendment of this nature and that no other sector or stakeholders will be allowed to have to have a de factoveto on that, as Deputy FItzmaurice has said. Furthermore, there should be an opportunity to discuss the amendment, be that the Minister's or this amendment being resubmitted, on Report Stage in the Dáil, prior to any guillotine being applied. In that case, we will withdraw amendment No. 7, Cathaoirleach.