Seán Ryan (Dublin North, Labour)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the Second Stage debate on this Bill. I live in north county Dublin, an area with a great tradition, given its soil and climate, to facilitate the growth of horticultural produce and to meet the demands of the people of the greater Dublin area.

I have grave concerns about this Bill which proposes to amalgamate Bord Glas with Bord Bia. The Minister's contribution on this Bill when compared with what was said during the debate on the establishment of Bord Glas indicates a complete change in attitude by the Department of Agriculture and Food and the Minister. The general functions of the new board shall be to develop, promote, facilitate, encourage, co-ordinate and assist the production, marketing and consumption of horticultural products.

I have spoken to those involved in the horticulture industry and they are mystified and deeply concerned about the implications of the amalgamation. It has been acknowledged that Bord Glas has done an excellent job in difficult times. It does not make sense to amalgamate Bord Glas, which deals with amenity horticulture, with Bord Bia which deals with products such as butter, steak and pizza.

My colleague, Deputy Upton, made an excellent contribution to this debate. I have no doubt that this amalgamation is based on financial considerations. It is a proposal drawn up by the so-called three wise men. The Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Walsh, gives the impression he fights the cause of Irish farmers and horticulturists in the EU. Yet, it appears he was unable to stand up to the three wise men and their recommendations. That does not say much for the Minister and his commitment to Irish farmers and horticulturists.

Horticulture has been, for many years, the Cinderella of the agricultural business. It has been used as a sop. In the context of Bord Glas, there was a belief that the people on the ground felt that progress was being made but there is now a fear in terms of where we are going.

Obesity is very much an issue. It is a complex issue which needs to be addressed through education as well as exercise, but fruit and vegetables have an important role to play in terms of a proper diet. I am talking about high quality products that we can produce here. In the context of the various bodies set up by legislators, we have a role to play in curbing obesity and as we try to meet ongoing demands that issue will have to be addressed.

I asked earlier why we were amalgamating the boards when there is no doubt that there is a whole range of boards and agencies dealing with food. We now have another Bill and more boards are being set up but it will not be in the interests of consumer or growers.

Various contributions were made in regard to labelling. If we are to protect the people on the land, whether those in farming or horticulture, it is vitally important that we try to assist them because they are trying to ensure there is a future for those industries. The labelling aspect has to be addressed and the country of origin must be part and parcel of that process. That is essential to protect home produce and guarantee quality. That is what we are talking about and what we demand. I referred earlier to obesity and it is important in that context that the ingredients contained in food is identified in a more positive way. That area has to be examined.

In the context of Teagasc and the future of those involved in horticulture, the sale of Corduff, in my constituency, was a disaster for farmers and growers. This was a centre for training and education where courses for farmers were made available, but what was done with it? It was decided, solely on the basis of finance, to close the centre despite the fact that it had all the amenities and the potential to be extended — I understand there are another two acres which could have been availed of as part of the overall reorganisation, if that is what one would call it. The growers are now very much inconvenienced and this closure has not been to their benefit. It is proposed that these services will be transferred to Kinsealy. One could say that is only an extra seven miles, but that would be all right if the facilities were available there.

In examining that transfer we also have to consider the sale of the headquarters in Sandymount, and this gets back to what we have been saying about decentralisation and the move to Oakpark, where 90 people out of a staff of 100 have indicated they will not move. Ten out of the 100 are willing to go to Oakpark. After selling Sandymount and Corduff, we now have the problem of where to put the 90 staff from Sandymount. If 90% of the staff are not willing to move from Sandymount to Oakpark, that does not say much for the future of the Government's decentralisation programme.

What did they do then? They had to provide accommodation in Kinsealy for the 90 staff from Sandymount. The area that was used for experimentation on mushrooms is now being utilised to accommodate the staff. Over €100,000 will have to be spent to accommodate the transfer of staff and at the same time we are being told the growers from north Dublin who used to go to Corduff now have to go to Kinsealy. That shows a lack of planning and commitment to the horticulture industry. The work involving experiments on mushrooms now has to be transferred to Belfast at a cost of over €100,000 this year. That is totally unacceptable. It is bad planning. I want a commitment from the Minister that this experimentation work which has been transferred to Belfast will be carried out here.

The situation has changed in regard to small growers, there is no use saying it has not, and it will not get any better. The big supermarkets are dictating what consumers want and what they will demand in the future. There are small growers who would not be in a position to meet those demands but who can supply excellent products. Facilitating small growers to sell their produce direct to consumers at markets should also be examined. Oil prices are still an issue for glasshouse growers. I hope that our EU competitors will be operating by the same guidelines and that there will be no subsidisation for growers in, say, Holland. At the same time, every effort and support should be available to enable traditional suppliers to be in a position to meet market demands in the greater Dublin area and the rest of the country. There should be further development of niche markets in vegetables such as tomatoes and potatoes with a view to exports. The market offers possibilities. Members have raised concerns about the mushroom industry and I too have concerns of other EU competitors undermining the mushroom market which has done well in recent years. On the basis of what has been outlined in this Bill, I am not convinced that the amalgamation of Bord Glas and Bord Bia will be in the interests of consumers and growers.

There is a lack of planning by Teagasc in the closure of some of its offices, which I previously noted with the closure of its Corduff offices. People have deep concerns about the closure plans. There has been a campaign against the proposed closure of the Teagasc station at Ballinamore. It is fine for the Minister for Agriculture and Food to say he has no responsibility for Teagasc. However, the Minister has a responsibility to resolve this issue. There is a perception that Teagasc has turned its back on the most disadvantaged areas in the country. The 2002 grass yields, obtained in a standardised measurement system for different centres, including Ballinamore and Ballyhaise, published in the Irish Farmers' Journal leave no doubt on this issue. Every farmer struggling with soils and climate conditions on high grounds like those in Ballinamore knows this. I received a report from the Leitrim action committee which claims that the Ballyhaise farm yield is near average for the country, which may surprise people who use the Moorepark farmland. Ballyhaise is actually nearer to Sollihead as a farm resource. In the 2002 grass yield table, it even outyielded Sollihead. One must also consider the type of climate and soil in the Ballinamore area. The action committee is not aware of any region research probes in place in Teagasc. The pretence of this has been uncovered and can now be seen as a charade to hoodwink farmers in disadvantaged areas to support dairy level funding. The sad consequence of this failure is that when Teagasc comes to apply new technologies to problem areas, it will have no local knowledge of the very problems these technologies can solve. For example, in areas such as Ballinamore, normal rye grass does not survive long because of early spring frosts.

The case has been made for the retention of Ballinamore's Teagasc station but a decision has already been made. However, the people have also spoken on the implications of the closure of the station. The Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, and the Minister for Agriculture and Food should use their positions to have this issue resolved amicably so as to ensure a united approach to the future of farming rather than having all parties at each other's throats. We have won important battles on Europe but now it is time to be united on this matter. I appeal to the Minister of State to resolve this issue.

See this speech in context