Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Having said that, I agree with many of Senator O'Neill's observations. His involvement in the industry gives him a level of knowledge and expertise which makes his views worthy of attention. This issue is far too serious for party politics. Prior to Senator O'Neill's contribution, the debate was reasoned, measured and constructive. While we might not agree with the Minister on everything, the intent of everybody here is to seek to address what is undoubtedly a serious problem for a significant number of farmers.

The question of who controls the specification is at the nub of this matter and there has been a continuing issue with the multiples in this regard. It is an area that deserves some focus to see how it can be addressed. I accept that the market must be respected, but it has to be done in a way that also respects all stakeholders. Producers are a very important element of that. The Minister indicated that the number of farmers involved directly in the bull beef sector is 65,000, with many others involved in livestock generally. That is a very significant number of people. If an industry employing those numbers had a serious issue, we would be concentrating on it very significantly. That is the level of engagement I urge in this instance.

There are two aspects to the motion that is before us today. What we note and what we condemn are not really the most significant parts. The two main elements are the actions we call for to address these issues. One of these is co-operation with the British authorities and the Northern Ireland Executive to overcome the labelling restrictions that are acting as a barrier. I missed the Minister's response to that point. We all see how effectively the French have been able to use technicalities over the years to protect not just their farming sector but other sectors.

The British market is very important to us. We are almost totally reliant on it at this time because of the significant fall-off in domestic consumption. A previous speaker - it might have been the Minister - noted that 75% of the British market is supported by its own livestock. We try to provide as much as possible of the remainder and, as such, it is of vital importance to the sector here.

There is a slowdown in international demand which is coupled with changing tastes for different types of beef products. To what extent are we endeavouring to track the trends in this regard and who is responsible for that task? I did not get any sense of that from the Minister's speech. This pertains to the issue of a regulator, which I will deal with presently, but whether that is the correct nomination for the type of role we are discussing, I am not sure. Cattle reared in this country and finished in Northern Ireland are disadvantaged within the British market because of that. Is there any way we might develop a different approach which would assist the bull market in that regard? We are always talking about an all-island economy and, to be fair, it is evolving in some areas, particularly in the tourism area. It would be useful to take that approach in this area by seeking some type of preferential treatment within the British market. Perhaps our product could operate pari passu with British beef. After all, whether the beef is reared in Fermanagh, say, or it is reared in Leitrim or Donegal, there really is no difference in the livestock itself. Is there some avenue that could be explored in this regard?

The fall in beef prices has consequences for our export trade and for farmers, but it also has consequences for employment. That is a very significant factor that needs to be homed in on in the context of the high rate of unemployment pertaining in this country. In referring to trends in the market, the Minister seemed to be putting the responsibility on farmers themselves to follow the sudden changes that can take place. Sometimes these changes may not be consumer-driven but rather driven by other vested interests within the food chain, be it the multiples, the processor or whoever else. There seems to be no accountability within that. A small farmer operating in this market and concentrating on what he or she is doing is not in a position to determine what the trends are going to be next year or the year after. As Senator O'Neill said, one might make a decision on gut instinct and it could turn out to be the right one. Equally, however - we have seen this in other areas of agriculture and other industries - where one makes a decision on instinct or even makes what one assumes is an informed decision based on research, it might not prove to be the right one. It is not adequate to pass the responsibility back to farmers in this regard.

The Minister mentioned that the Competition Authority has a role in all of this. We should bear in mind that the authority has had failures in many areas, a very significant one being in respect of the legal profession. The latter is a gigantic cartel, particularly when it comes to barristers. I do not say that lightly.

The Law Library is supposed to have an oversupply of barristers, yet when one looks for a barrister one cannot get one at what one would consider a competitive or reasonable rate. In that regard, the State has been the biggest culprit as it has for many years overpaid members of the legal profession for work that should have commanded much lower rates. I am not sure I would like to rely specifically on that.

Teagasc, an arm of the State, promoted the bull beef sector. What role does the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine have in this area, including on the issue of making predictions? The Minister stated that farmers must plan better. How can they do that? What mechanism or system of supports should be provided? Who should determine what are likely to be the market trends or should farmers be left at the mercy of the market? My party has made a proposal, one which the Minister has dismissed, to establish a beef regulator. While this country's history of regulation is not good, does the Minister have a better suggestion? Should more than 65,000 farmers be left to the vagaries of the market?

I urge the Department to take a more hands-on approach. I acknowledge, as other Senators have done, that the Minister has applied himself well and, unlike some of his colleagues, he has avoided pitfalls. I ask him to take an initiative to assist bull beef farmers. I have not heard anything that will give these farmers comfort that there is a solution on the horizon or that the matter will be addressed. I urge the Minister to take seriously the suggestions we have made. It is fine if others make better suggestions but the Minister should not dismiss Fianna Fáil Party proposals simply on the basis of their origin. I do not fully subscribe to the Minister's view that establishing a regulator would send out all the wrong signals. The new mechanism would not have to be known as a regulator as the Minister is aware of the intent, function and job specification we are seeking to assist the sector. If successful, this mechanism could provide a template for addressing other issues in agriculture. I ask the Minister to examine the proposal constructively.