Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)

I thank the Labour Party for sharing some of its time with me. While I express my support for this motion, I have one reservation about it, to which I will come in due course.

Like my colleagues in this House, I have raised the issue of food labelling on numerous occasions. This extremely important issue unites food producers, retailers and consumers. Last week, an IFA delegation of pig farmers lobbied Deputies about the need to have clear country of origin labelling. Deputies from all parties went to the Mansion House last Wednesday to hear the concerns of the pig farmers and the IFA in general. The IFA pointed out the damage that is being done to the Irish agriculture industry by the failure to provide for adequate labelling. All the farming organisations — the IFA, the ICMSA and the ICSA — have pointed out that food is being sold in this country without any indication that it is not domestically produced. Processors can do this because they are able to import meat and process it in Ireland without having to state where it originated.

Consumers are buying meat products in the belief that it originated here. Customers in hotels and restaurants across this island who order what they think is Irish beef are being sold Argentinian or Brazilian beef. There is no way for them to tell where the beef originated. Sinn Féin recently introduced a motion at a meeting of Kerry County Council calling for legislation to be introduced to make it a statutory requirement that hotels and restaurants should clearly state the country of origin of all beef they sell. Processors benefit from the status quo because they pay lower prices for imported produce, especially when it comes from outside the European Union. It also helps them to constrict further the prices paid to Irish producers. A system needs to be introduced whereby all produce can be identified by the country from which it came rather than the country in which it was processed. That is the only way to ensure that consumers have the information they need when they want to make a purchase based on whether a product is Irish.

There are wider issues than the economic threat posed by imports to domestic producers. Recent IFA research on the Brazilian beef industry proved that beef production in that country is not subject to the safeguards and regulations which govern beef production in the EU. Those of us who watched the video that was produced by the IFA and given to the Irish media are aware of what the IFA researchers uncovered when they went to Brazil. There are health and safety concerns about the possible detrimental effect of Brazilian beef on those who consume it. Steroids and other growth enhancers which are banned in Ireland are used in Brazil. Animal welfare and consumer safety measures are flouted in Brazil. Strict mechanisms of detecting and controlling diseases like foot and mouth disease are in place in most EU states, but that is not the case in Brazil. There are no guarantees about the quality of beef that is imported from that country. In 2005, there were confirmed outbreaks of foot and mouth disease in the Mato Grosso do Sul region of Brazil, but imports continued. There is no individual traceability in Brazil. When outbreaks of foot and mouth disease take place, the Brazilian authorities do not cull animals as we do. The inoculation system that is used in Brazil helps to spread the disease in effect — it certainly does nothing to contain it.

I am also concerned about the manner in which cattle ranchers in Brazil have waged what amounts to a small-scale war on local people on whose lands they wish to encroach. An American nun, Sr. Dorothy Mae Stang, who was killed in Brazil in February 2005, is one of more than 1,200 people to have been murdered during the ongoing land-grabbing in that country. The big ranchers who force indigenous people from their lands have assumed thousands of acres for their own ends. It has been reported that thousands of people have been forced to work as virtual slaves on ranches, which is an unacceptable price to pay for cheap meat. By allowing such things to happen without any restrictions — we have not put any demands on those who import meat from Brazil to Ireland — we are guilty of facilitating these crimes.

As a Welsh farm leader pointed out recently, if an EU farmer destroys a hedge to make room for cattle he will be heavily fined and could even be jailed. He would certainly lose his entitlements, without having engaged in any of the activities associated with the Brazilian beef industry. The conditions under which Brazilian beef is produced not only pose dangers to consumers but also give Brazilian producers an unfair advantage over EU farmers who have to comply with the rightly stringent regulations which apply across the Union. In every EU member state, there is individual traceability from the time of birth to the time of slaughter. These standards do not apply in Brazil, Argentina and other countries which do not impose such stringent regulations. Steroids and other hormones are used to increase the size and bulk of cattle in such countries. The Government and the European Commission are providing for an uneven playing pitch. Irish producers are at a disadvantage because they are being discriminated against.

It is hard to understand why the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Coughlan, supports the importation of Brazilian beef in light of the evidence that has been presented to her and given that the Brazilian industry represents a significant threat to Irish beef producers. It is puzzling that the Minister is almost unique among her EU counterparts in supporting the European Commission on this issue. She is clearly out of step with many members of her party. I do not know how many IFA, ICMSA and ICSA meetings I have attended at which this issue has been raised. Although backbench Deputies from the Government parties agree with the farming organisations, they are happy to come to this House to support what is happening.

See this speech in context