Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 562: To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his views on the EU suggestion of electronically tagging the sheep flock; the estimated compliance cost of this proposal; the estimated benefits in terms of traceability that will be gleaned from the system; his further views on whether the present system of traceability is adequate to meet the objectives set by the EU; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7786/10]

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My consistent view has been that the introduction of EID of sheep should only have been on a voluntary basis. Unfortunately, there was not sufficient support among other Member States and none from the European Commission for any further rollback in relation to the date for the mandatory introduction of EID or for a voluntary scheme. Under EU rules, therefore EID is now applicable throughout the Union.

I now, have no discretion as regards the date of implementation for electronic identification and there can be no question of deferring its introduction for a further period. In these circumstances, we now must proceed with the introduction of EID this year.

I have secured major concessions in relation to EID in discussions with the European Commission. These concessions include a slaughter derogation, which means that all lambs intended for slaughter, and under 12 months are now permanently exempted from EID. This will result in EID being largely confined to replacement breeding stock that are born after 31 December 2009. This means the vast majority of Irish sheep will be excluded from EID requirements, which will minimise costs for producers.

Furthermore, where lambs identified under the slaughter derogation are subsequently retained for breeding purposes they can then be tagged with an EID device at the second holding. This is a major breakthrough in facilitating existing trade practice in the sector and addresses concerns raised by Irish farming organisations that the new EID system would eliminate the sale of breeding sheep at marts, which would have an adverse effect on competitiveness in the industry.

As a result of these concessions, it is expected that mandatory EID will apply to no more than 18% of the national flock (450,000 – 550,000). Some 70% of flocks are 100 sheep or less and in these cases less than 20 animals will be affected. Farmers will not be required to purchase readers since, as is the case at present, an ear tag will continue to have a number on it that is readable to the human eye so there will be minimal change to current practice. The additional annual cost to the average farmer with a flock of 100 sheep is estimated to be approximately €30 to €40.

Our existing system has up until now provided adequate assurances in terms of animal identification and traceability. Indeed it is partly with that in mind that I have decided to minimise the impact on farmers by confining electronic tagging to mainly breeding sheep. I am striving however to minimise the change to the existing National Sheep Identification System (NSIS). My Department has circulated a technical document outlining the proposed changes to the NSIS to farm organisations and other stakeholders for comments. The stakeholders have been asked to examine this document carefully and engage with DAFF officials so that whatever revisions are made to the existing NSIS best suit Irish conditions and minimise the burden on farmers within the parameters of the new legislation.