Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)

I wish to share time with Deputies Martin Ferris and Mary Upton.

If Deputies Doyle and Connaughton are selling those calves, they might give me a shout because I am thinking of increasing my herd by 200%.

I speak in support of the Fine Gael motion. Between 2005 and 2006, the agrifood sector accounted for 163,400 jobs, or 8.1% of the working population. Irish agrifood exports accounted for more than €8 billion. As a country we discount the importance of this sector of the economy at our peril. At a time when increased consolidation of the agrifood sector is driving the market, we must not forget the importance of ensuring that consumer interests are maintained. We must also continue to ensure that the protection of consumer health lies at the core of agriculture and food policy.

In recent times, the standards set for Irish farmers in the production of beef and pig meat are not being subscribed to by producers from third countries who have access to Irish and European markets. In essence, Irish farmers are being asked to ensure that their produce is of the highest standard before going to market while their counterparts in countries outside the European Union can compete on an uneven playing field. The regulatory framework is clearly not working in this instance. The EU legislative framework, as it stands, works against the Irish farm family and the competitiveness of Irish agriculture is compromised as a result. More important, the health of the Irish consumer is compromised if there is so much as the slightest doubt about the standard of produce being imported into Irish markets from third countries. Brazilian beef is a case in point. Brazilian producers in many instances produce to the highest standard but there are legitimate concerns about the traceability and production methods of some Brazilian beef which finds its way on to Irish tables.

This motion rightly calls for a regulatory framework to ensure that all operators produce to the highest standard. As a country, we must ensure our competitive advantage in the production of beef. If third country producers are not operating to the same standard as ours and if there is a risk to the Irish and European consumer, the EU Food and Veterinary Office must be given the legislative teeth to expedite a ban or other such mechanism within a reasonable timeframe to address the concerns of Irish farm families and consumers. Government policy on the protection of consumers in so far as it pertains to guarding against health risks in food importation is too weak at present.

On substantial transformation, I realise that responsibility for the enforcement of labelling legislation rests with the Food Safety Authority of Ireland. The issue of substantial transformation, whereby a primary product can enter Ireland, be processed in some way and subsequently be branded as Irish, is governed by EU legislation. However, it is not good enough that the Government would hide behind EU legislation in tackling this problem, nor is it good enough for the Minister to say it can only be amended at EU level. In response to a parliamentary question I tabled on 3 October last, the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Sargent, expressed the following concern:

... this arrangement could, in certain circumstances, be used to mislead the consumers as to the origin of the raw materials used in certain products. I am not satisfied with the current legal position and the Minister has raised our concerns at EU Council level.

If the Minister of State shares my concerns, we need to know how he will address them and what proactive measures he will take to ensure the viability of producers and confidence of consumers, who should be the primary concern. It is not sufficient for him to say: "The concept of substantial transformation needs to be more clearly defined and I will continue to urge the Commission to address this problem."

A weak legislative base on labelling allows consumers to be duped into believing products of the kind in question are of Irish origin. The Government's primary concern must be to protect the health of consumers and ensure the competitiveness of Irish farming. In seeking to be proactive on this matter, we must work with the farming organisations and processors to ensure that the quality assurance mark takes pride of place on every packet leaving the factory floor. A clear marketing strategy, with a strengthening of legislation, is the key to solving this problem.

On 3 October last I asked the Minister if she would amend legislation to ensure that foodstuffs of foreign origin would not be labelled as "produced in Ireland", "processed in Ireland" or "sourced and produced in Ireland". I asked the question to remedy the circumstances whereby consumer and producer interests are not being protected and to ensure that our comparative advantage as a nation would be maintained. I realise the Minister for Health and Children has overall responsibility for the general food labelling legislation and that food labelling is governed by Directive 2000/13/EC.

The Government stated in response to the Commission paper Labelling, Competitiveness, Consumer Information and Better Regulation for the EU, published in 2002, that there is an unsatisfactory practice at play regarding substantive transformation. The Government made certain recommendations in this regard but they have not come to fruition. Why has the Commission not acted on the Irish recommendations to date and why has the Minister not been more proactive on the matter? The Commission is now preparing to forward proposals but I understand this involves a co-decision procedure. We could be back in this House in 12 months still with no resolution to the issue of substantial transformation. I urge the Minister to fast-track the process, where possible.

See this speech in context