Michael McNamara (Clare, Labour) | Oireachtas source

It is clear that the Minister of State and I agree on the importance of the quality assurance scheme. Deputy Paul J. Connaughton, who is present, is equally aware of its importance. However, the Minister of State says it is not subject to abuse and that farmers have confidence in it. I cannot agree with him. Mr. Michael Maloney, the Bord Bia official in charge of the scheme, has said we have the best portfolio of high-end accounts in Europe and that these high-end markets require quality assured beef. It is our ticket to supplying these markets and he is absolutely right. Farmers know this and support the scheme for that reason. The Minister of State has said the scheme secures a higher return for Irish beef - a higher return for whom? The core problem is that the higher return for quality assured beef is not making its way back to the farmers. I am very afraid that the cost-neutral price which is to be introduced will be achieved by reducing the base price. One of the few tangible benefits of the beef forum was that there would be an agreed base price. The processors brought in the quality price system, but while it was potentially beneficial, they abused it to drive down prices. Absent action by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, they will abuse the scheme to drive down the base price.

The second thing agreed was that the Department would continue to support and facilitate live exports by inspecting and approving vessels presenting for inspection for the purpose of transporting live animals overseas. This is an issue I have raised many times and the Minister of State and I even raised it together when she was a humble backbencher like me. While I welcome the agreement, I note the bias in the Department against live shipments, an issue which must be addressed. On the very day the agreement was released, my information is that a livestock vessel was refused a licence. The relevant market will now be met by taking the cattle on a roll-on roll-off ferry as far as the south of France where they will board a vessel to cross to north Africa. I admit that Ireland is one of the few countries that produces cattle that must traverse the north Atlantic, but it is not the only one. My information is that the boat that was refused a licence was an American vessel licensed to carry American beef across the north Atlantic. If it is good enough to carry American beef from American producers and shippers who do not want to lose their product or ship, I do not see why we should set such high standards.

I had a meeting with departmental officials before the last Topical Issue debate on this matter. We discussed Ireland's uniqueness in having cattle traverse the north Atlantic. While that might be true, they also told me that it was great that Europe was looking to Ireland because of the high standards we imposed. I agreed that it was great and that we all wanted high standards but asked if it meant that when the high standards were met by other European countries and a common licensing system was introduced, we would adhere to it. The answer was "Oh, no." The reason we would not adhere to it was that we did not want live shipments from Ireland because it was the only way to provide Irish farmers with an alternative outlet for their product. Either the cattle live to a ripe old age on a preserve like Benjy the homosexual bull, are exported live to be killed or are killed in Ireland to be eaten. These are the three options. If one removes live exports and the fact that the majority of cattle in Ireland will not have a benefactor like the creator of "The Simpsons" to ensure they live to a ripe old age because they happen to be attracted to animals of the same sex, one is reduced to using the processors. The processors have been driving down prices in Ireland, notwithstanding the fact that they can access higher quality markets. I fear the beef forum will not address that issue, but I am willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.

See this speech in context