Favelas are beset by a multitude of problems: poverty, massive unemployment, hunger, malnutrition, inadequate sewage facilities, high infant mortality, low life expectancy and rampant crime. These are the negative effects of over-urbanization. These slums are at breaking point as more and more people flood in from rural areas. Generally the news is bad. It is nice to see that the Rio state government has introduced this pilot project to provide free wi-fi access for 10,000 residents of Santa Marta. The scheme will be extended in due course.
Showing posts with label Brazil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brazil. Show all posts
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
A Kilkenny hurling supporter's superiority complex
The following is a Kilkenny hurling supporter's view of Waterford hurling. No fear that Lionel Hutz suffers from an inferiority complex. The blaahs (Waterford) are of course usually the subject of much derision on KilkennyCats.com
"I always look at us as being the Brazil of hurling. We keep producing the most skillfull, naturally talented players. We are admired and envied from afar. We can win things with average teams by our own standards because we know how to win. We have more titles than anyone(relax Cork people!!). Whereas the blaahs always remind me a bit of England. They wear white shirts. Their supporters are a bunch of yobs. They last won the big one over 40 years ago(actually longer!!) They seem to think their players are the best around. They lose a lot of semi finals._________________I've argued before every judge in the state...often as a lawyer! Don't worry, Mister Simpson! I saw Matlock in a bar last night. The sound wasn't on, but I think I got the gist of it."
Source:
KilkennyCats.com
Overall the collapse of WTO benefits the Irish economy
The collapse of the WTO talks is on the whole beneficial for the Irish economy. Certainly some Irish manufacturing and service sectors stood to gain from a WTO deal. However its likely benefits were strongly oversold not alone by some big business interests, but also by certain academics and elements in the media.
Irish proponents of the WTO proposals arrogantly dismissed their overall potential negative influences on the Irish economy. Opponents of the WTO proposals were painted as unpatriotic and representative of selfish agricultural interests.
Some big business interests in Ireland claimed to have concern for the poor of the Third World. Of course they were prepared to wrap themselves in a cloak of concern for the poor in an effort to convince a cynical Irish public of the merits of the WTO proposals.
Concessions made by Peter Mandelson at the WTO talks would have put 50,000 farmers out of business and wiped out at least another 50,000 jobs in food processing and services to the agricultural sector in Ireland alone. Agricultural proposals at the WTO would have benefited large ranchers in Australia, Brazil and the US. There were few if any benefits for the poor farmers of the Third World.
The loss in jobs to the Irish economy and devastation of rural Ireland would have far outweighed any potential gains in some industrial and service sectors. Indeed some Irish service jobs are now moving to India-such as Hibernian Insurance. So much for the security of service jobs in the financial sector.
The 100,000 jobs that Ireland stood to lose are based on indigenous natural resources.
We have had too much of the live horse and you will get grass approach-too many half-baked promises. To sacrifice 100,000 jobs would be economic lunacy.
Thankfully Nicolas Sarkozy galvanised opposition to the proposals. Ireland now owes him a huge debt of gratitude.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Mandelson sell out at WTO talks supported by some Irish businessmen and academics
Irish apologists for a sell out quote press releases on farm incomes from Teagasc (The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority). Even in the worst years for Irish farming Teagasc comes out with a positive spin in relation to Irish farming incomes. Teagasc figures tell half the story. Where for instance is there a reference to rocketing costs? Interest rates, electricity, gas and diesel prices have spiralled out of control. Farm maintenance, insurance and building costs are prohibitive. Government/EU imposed regulation hinder agriculture. Many farmers can no longer afford to purchase fertilizers. That is the reality. It is not spin.
Academics such as Alan Matthews seek to explain away the negative effects of any WTO deal. Matthews needs to get out of his academic ivory tower. His livelihood is not on the line. Irish supporters of the putative WTO deal make references to EU farm subsidies. They conveniently omit to state that these subsidies are paid as a quid pro quo for production cuts. And now Mandelson is supporting more EU agricultural production cuts.
The IFA assessment of the loss of 100,000 jobs is correct. Not alone will many thousands of farmers go out of business, but thousands of jobs in food processing and other spin off industries will go. Rural Ireland will become a desert. Those 100,000 jobs exist at present. So why should we should throw them away for half baked promises of service jobs that we may secure in the future on the back of a new WTO agreement. It is time to get real. Mandelson wiped out the sugar beet industry. Dairying, beef, poultry will now go the same way.
Academics such as Matthews and certain business elements are prepared to throw away food security for cheaper food imports that often lack traceability. No mention of the health of consumers. The majority of Third World farmers will gain nothing from the proposed WTO deal. The ranchers in the US, Brazil and Australia will benefit. Meanwhile the US increases its subsidies to a handful of ranchers whilst EU farmers will be put out of business.
There is no guarantee that Ireland will continue to increase its service employment on the back of a revised WTO deal. Much of this-within the next 10 years-will start moving to countries such as India. Also there is a strong likelihood that the 12.5% Corporation Profits Tax will be neutered by the EU. I say hold what jobs we actually have. These farming jobs are based on our natural resources. An Irish failure to veto Mandelson's proposals -as currently constituted -would be the ultimate in political folly. Prior to the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty Brian Cowen promised Padraig Walshe of the IFA that he would use the veto if necessary. It is time for the VETO.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Speech by Fine Gael Agriculture Spokesman, Michael Creed TD, during Private Members' Motion on WTO
Irish farmers and the food processing industry face an appalling vista as Commissioner Peter Mandelson prepares to sacrifice their interests at the WTO talks. Today in Dublin, European Commission President Jose Barroso attempted to obscure the realities with the smugness and arrogance of a man out of touch with reality. Indeed he displayed no small degree of condescension as befits an unelected bureaucrat.Below Michael Creed outlines the stark realities. Make no mistake about it , Irish agriculture teethers on the brink of destruction. Mandelson must be stopped.
Fine Gael Private Member's Motion: WTO Negotiations
Speech by Deputy Michael Creed
Fine Gael Spokesperson on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
"It is difficult to recall a moment in our economic history when so much stands to be lost from the failure of this Government, and indeed its predecessor to defend a vital National Interest. The failure of the Minister for Agriculture, the lead Department in this fiasco to even quantify the consequences of failure is troubling in itself. It is matched only by the "pass the parcel" approach in Government, with the new Taoiseach-designate - Brian Cowen refusing to engage on the matter until his appointment is confirmed. Mr Cowen leaves the Department of Finance in a precarious state, unemployment and inflation on the rise, competitiveness slipping and tax revenues slumped. A word of warning to any "wannabe" Minister for Finance - if the proposals for Agriculture on the World Trade Organisation Agenda by Mr Mandelson become a reality, then the picture will get a lot bleaker. Thousands of jobs at farm gate and in the agri-business sector will be lost and farm incomes will fall significantly. We are most definitely in the last chance saloon and the signs are not encouraging.
Before dealing with the specifics of the motion, there are a few general observations that need to be made to put the debate in context.
(1) Over the course of the last 20 years the E.U. has slipped significantly as a trading block in agricultural commodities. Our share of world imports of virtually all agricultural commodities is increasing far faster than our share of exports. Nowhere is this more evident than in the meat sector where the EU share of trade is down in volume terms from 12% to 9% whilst actual trade in meat doubled over the same period (in volume terms). The latter is no surprise when you consider Chinese consumption per capita grew from 20kg to 50kg between 1980 and 2008. The same is true for the dairy sector with EU share down from 31% to 17%.
What this clearly proves is that the EU and Commissioner Mandelson are systematically exposing its citizens to increased dependence on imports of dubious quality and preventing us from capturing emerging markets, especially in China & India which will be left to those who out manoeuvre and outsmart us in negotiations - the USA, Brazil, Argentina, New Zealand & Australia.
(2) This decline of the EU position has occurred at the same time as the EU cost base for primary producers increased significantly. Reforms of the CAP and other initiatives this period have seen consumer concerns move centre stage with food quality, animal welfare and environmental policy at the core of every farmer's daily life.
(3) It is worth pointing out at this stage that the 2003 CAP reforms were widely believed to be the EU's contribution to the World Trade Deal. The radical changes farmers had to make to meet the reform requirements were the quid pro quo for a WTO deal.
Reality of current offer on WTO table
The reality of the predicament we find ourselves in is that we have now been negotiated into a situation far beyond what was asked of the agricultural sector under CAP reform. Concession after concession has left our beef and dairy industries in peril, our consumers exposed to unacceptable levels of risk and cost hikes and the future viability of the family farm as we know it in jeopardy.
I have asked you Minister to lay the facts before the House, to openly admit to agriculture producers and consumers what kind of impact the current WTO proposals will have on the Irish economy. However, you are either unable or reluctant to divulge to the House any kind of substantial evidence of economic analysis undertaken by your Department to assess the situation.
What we have seen however, are figures, undisputed by you, from those working in the industry and those figures are stark;
- €4bn lost to the economy on an annual basis
- 50,000 job losses in manufacturing and services
- 50,000 farmers put out of business
This is not just an agricultural issue, beef and dairy industries together contribute an estimated €6bn to the economy in terms of goods and services. How is this revenue going to be replaced if the current WTO proposals make their way to the finish line?
Non-trade issues
Apart from the obvious economic carnage in the countryside and the job losses in the food processing & agri-business sector, there are a number of other non-trade issues which have not been taken into account in the current negotiations. Where we are at now in a nutshell is legalising large volumes of imported food from outside the EU that it would be illegal to produce on Irish or EU farms. We are also in one fell swoop undermining the bio-security of the agric-sector and exposing consumers to salmonella, antibiotic resistance, hormone fed meat, avian flu, FMD and a whole host of dangers as yet unknown.
Thanks but no thanks, Minister. Thanks but no thanks, Commissioner Mandelson. This is a time, when the interests of farmers and consumers are at one and a time when that alliance needs political expression which is totally lacking to date.
Non trade issues, including climate change, and food security, should be centre stage at the WTO negotiations. We have received warnings from the IMF, the World Bank and the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the UN in the last few days relating to food security. Food riots, export bans and national inquiries have been introduced to try and maintain local supplies of food but yet this week, Minister, was the first time I heard you speak about food security and its importance in the context of WTO negotiations.
It is your failure, Minister, and that of your Governments that has us where we are now and no amount of bonhomie with farmers can mask that fact. This happened on your watch and whilst you might be preparing for pastures new, many farmers and others are facing annihilation of their livelihoods. Shame on you.
Have you ever bothered to meet Commissioner Mandelson?
Have you thought about the huge challenge ahead to feed the world - a world that is growing by 80 million per annum?
Have you raised with the Commissioner the challenges and consequences of climate change - food miles, CO2 emissions, desertification, increasing consumption, water shortages, record low levels of global food inventories, famine, death?
All of these issues feed into the proper defence of Ireland's and the EU's Common Agricultural Policy from the WTO. Or maybe your understanding of Climate change in this context is taken from Minister Gormley's pronouncements about the twin evils of the "Cow" and the "Car". It certainly looks like this and Minister Gormley could yet have his way as these proposals will decimate the Suckler Cow herd and in one giant leap allow the Government to meet its now legal obligations to reduce the CO2 emissions from agriculture. Somebody on the Government side of the house needs to nail this issue immediately.
Mandelson's WTO Brief
Much has been made by the Minster of the fact that Mr Mandelson is exceeding the brief given to him by the Council of Agricultural Ministers in October of 2005. This raises three questions
1. The 2003 CAP reforms were said to be the EU contribution to a World Trade Deal. Why should EU and Irish farmers have to pay twice for a World Trade Deal?
2. We are now reaching a crisis point in negotiations - what exactly have you done Minister in the last two and a half years to prevent us getting to this point? What have you done to put non-trade issues on the negotiating table?
3. Have you as yet managed to unearth any economic analysis of the consequences of the 2005 brief or is that as hard to come by as figures for the impact of the current proposals?
The answer to the second question is obvious. Nothing has been done. For all your talk about groups of 5, 10, 15, 20, you and your colleagues in the Council of Ministers have not reined in Commissioner Mandelson. That's a political failure - and you can't hide from that!
The consequences for Ireland of 2005 have never been laid before the House by the Minister. I am appalled that the Minister has no homework done on these matters and equally appalled that the Minister finds some sort of high moral ground in the 2005 brief. The 2005 brief mandated Mandelson to offer 50%-60% tariff cuts on Beef, Pigmeat & Poultry tariff cuts of 35%-50%. Butter and SMP 50% tariff cut. That you could find comfort in this sell-out raises questions about your judgement and that you now do nothing when what's on the table is substantially worse than 2005 can lead to only one conclusion. It is blatantly obvious why you have failed to publish a sectoral analysis. You know the consequences and hope to run from the problem in a reshuffle. Shades of Micheal Martin and the nursing home scandal.
Last week when asked whether or not your Department has prepared estimates on the impact of the World Trade deal you replied - and I quote - "We do not have a final analysis completed". How convenient for you Minister. No front page headlines to highlight the extent of the potential damage. No Prime Time Investigates into the death of Irish Agriculture. No public humiliation on radio talk shows.
Fortunately those involved in the industry have taken it upon themselves to assess the effect of Commissioner Mandelson's generosity. Mandelson's proposals will devastate the agri-sector and have a disastrous knock-on effect on associated industries. It is predicted that a 70% tariff cut on beef imports will see prices plummet to €2 per kilo or 70p per pound.
Do you think Minister that Irish farmers can survive on such a price - with the high cost of production in this region? Do you expect businesses to run on a loss? Minister, the future of the Irish beef industry - the fourth largest exporter of beef on the globe, 100,000 jobs, worth €4bn to the Irish economy, and a way of life on family farms from Malin to Mizen - is what is at stake. From the vantage point of this side of the House there appears to be an indifference to the consequences on the Government side at best, or at worst a lack of political will to face the issues concerned. Rumour has it Minister that you are preparing to fly the coop for pastures new. You may run but you will never be allowed to hide if this deal is your legacy to Irish agriculture.
This Government it seems views rural Ireland as the Achilles heel in our economic development. The reality is an estimated 25% of jobs outside of the Pale still depend on agriculture. Will your cabinet colleague Minister Gormley be pleased when we are forced to turn off all the lights, park the tractors and take the trains to the capital? Your Government has ensured infrastructure and employment has been focused on the east coast, while neglecting the rest of the country and you now stand poised to deliver the final nail in the coffin of rural Ireland by consigning 50,000 farmers to the dole queues.
Final Negotiations
And so Minister we are nearing end game in this process. With the possibility of a WTO Ministerial meeting next month - the time for talking is almost past.
You repeatedly say Minister that you are not prepared to accept an 'unbalanced deal' for Irish agriculture, that you are not prepared to allow Irish agriculture to be sacrificed for the sake of a deal going through. This begs the question, what exactly are you prepared to accept? Are you prepared to accept the agreement in its current format? Because if this is the case, that is an unbalanced deal, that is a step too far, Irish agriculture will be sacrificed, and for what? What are we getting in return?
Here is a clear example of how this Government has taken its eye off the ball, focusing on other issues while a vital part of our economy and heritage is slipping away. Surely the Taoiseach, in his final lap of honour should be using his remaining clout at European level to make contact with as many leaders as possible in an effort to call a halt to this deal, which is like a runaway train fast careering in the wrong direction? It is time for you Minister and your Government to show your mettle, to push for unanimity as a prerequisite in order to reject this deal. You have often spoken of a Group of 20 Agriculture Ministers opposed to the deal - you need to now ensure these Ministers are united against these proposals.
One of the objectives of this Private Member's Motion is to compel you and your Government colleagues to do the right thing for Irish agricultural interests. I call on you - to put it on the record of this House - that you will veto this World Trade Deal as it stands. If you refuse to do this Minister I call on you to look the farmers here present in the gallery in the eye and explain to them why you and your Government refuse to stand by them.
Article 39 of the treaty of Rome outlines the aims of the European Union in terms of agriculture. It seeks to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, increase the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture, stabilise markets, and assure food supply and reasonable price. Now Minister - in a year where all EU eyes are upon us - you have a responsibility to protect the rights enshrined in the founding document of the European Community. You jeopardise the commitment to the European project, of those who have been its most ardent advocates, by not showing honest and courageous leadership on this key issue. By saying no to WTO, you can allow the EU to sleep easy in the knowledge that the Reform Treaty will be ratified. You are allowing the waters of the Treaty debate to be muddied by your indecision and evasiveness on this Trade Deal.
Today Minister is an exercise in Parliamentary accountability. You need to be brought out of the comfort zone of Cabinet Governance and lay before this House once and for all where you stand on this World trade deal.
This is essentially about undue risk;
- You are putting the livelihood of primary producers at risk - farmers across the country who have stepped up to the plate so often to meet EU requirements.
- You are putting the food processing industry at risk, which will crumble and collapse in the face of cheap imports.
- You are exposing consumers to the risk of potentially unsafe products from throughout the world
- And finally, you are jeopardising the safe passage of the Reform Treaty.
Minister, you have failed this House by not putting before it the nature and extent of your intentions on this World trade deal. You have a final opportunity to redeem yourself. Take it and accept the motion which I commend to the House. "
Fine Gael Private Member's Motion: WTO Negotiations
Speech by Deputy Michael Creed
Fine Gael Spokesperson on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
"It is difficult to recall a moment in our economic history when so much stands to be lost from the failure of this Government, and indeed its predecessor to defend a vital National Interest. The failure of the Minister for Agriculture, the lead Department in this fiasco to even quantify the consequences of failure is troubling in itself. It is matched only by the "pass the parcel" approach in Government, with the new Taoiseach-designate - Brian Cowen refusing to engage on the matter until his appointment is confirmed. Mr Cowen leaves the Department of Finance in a precarious state, unemployment and inflation on the rise, competitiveness slipping and tax revenues slumped. A word of warning to any "wannabe" Minister for Finance - if the proposals for Agriculture on the World Trade Organisation Agenda by Mr Mandelson become a reality, then the picture will get a lot bleaker. Thousands of jobs at farm gate and in the agri-business sector will be lost and farm incomes will fall significantly. We are most definitely in the last chance saloon and the signs are not encouraging.
Before dealing with the specifics of the motion, there are a few general observations that need to be made to put the debate in context.
(1) Over the course of the last 20 years the E.U. has slipped significantly as a trading block in agricultural commodities. Our share of world imports of virtually all agricultural commodities is increasing far faster than our share of exports. Nowhere is this more evident than in the meat sector where the EU share of trade is down in volume terms from 12% to 9% whilst actual trade in meat doubled over the same period (in volume terms). The latter is no surprise when you consider Chinese consumption per capita grew from 20kg to 50kg between 1980 and 2008. The same is true for the dairy sector with EU share down from 31% to 17%.
What this clearly proves is that the EU and Commissioner Mandelson are systematically exposing its citizens to increased dependence on imports of dubious quality and preventing us from capturing emerging markets, especially in China & India which will be left to those who out manoeuvre and outsmart us in negotiations - the USA, Brazil, Argentina, New Zealand & Australia.
(2) This decline of the EU position has occurred at the same time as the EU cost base for primary producers increased significantly. Reforms of the CAP and other initiatives this period have seen consumer concerns move centre stage with food quality, animal welfare and environmental policy at the core of every farmer's daily life.
(3) It is worth pointing out at this stage that the 2003 CAP reforms were widely believed to be the EU's contribution to the World Trade Deal. The radical changes farmers had to make to meet the reform requirements were the quid pro quo for a WTO deal.
Reality of current offer on WTO table
The reality of the predicament we find ourselves in is that we have now been negotiated into a situation far beyond what was asked of the agricultural sector under CAP reform. Concession after concession has left our beef and dairy industries in peril, our consumers exposed to unacceptable levels of risk and cost hikes and the future viability of the family farm as we know it in jeopardy.
I have asked you Minister to lay the facts before the House, to openly admit to agriculture producers and consumers what kind of impact the current WTO proposals will have on the Irish economy. However, you are either unable or reluctant to divulge to the House any kind of substantial evidence of economic analysis undertaken by your Department to assess the situation.
What we have seen however, are figures, undisputed by you, from those working in the industry and those figures are stark;
- €4bn lost to the economy on an annual basis
- 50,000 job losses in manufacturing and services
- 50,000 farmers put out of business
This is not just an agricultural issue, beef and dairy industries together contribute an estimated €6bn to the economy in terms of goods and services. How is this revenue going to be replaced if the current WTO proposals make their way to the finish line?
Non-trade issues
Apart from the obvious economic carnage in the countryside and the job losses in the food processing & agri-business sector, there are a number of other non-trade issues which have not been taken into account in the current negotiations. Where we are at now in a nutshell is legalising large volumes of imported food from outside the EU that it would be illegal to produce on Irish or EU farms. We are also in one fell swoop undermining the bio-security of the agric-sector and exposing consumers to salmonella, antibiotic resistance, hormone fed meat, avian flu, FMD and a whole host of dangers as yet unknown.
Thanks but no thanks, Minister. Thanks but no thanks, Commissioner Mandelson. This is a time, when the interests of farmers and consumers are at one and a time when that alliance needs political expression which is totally lacking to date.
Non trade issues, including climate change, and food security, should be centre stage at the WTO negotiations. We have received warnings from the IMF, the World Bank and the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the UN in the last few days relating to food security. Food riots, export bans and national inquiries have been introduced to try and maintain local supplies of food but yet this week, Minister, was the first time I heard you speak about food security and its importance in the context of WTO negotiations.
It is your failure, Minister, and that of your Governments that has us where we are now and no amount of bonhomie with farmers can mask that fact. This happened on your watch and whilst you might be preparing for pastures new, many farmers and others are facing annihilation of their livelihoods. Shame on you.
Have you ever bothered to meet Commissioner Mandelson?
Have you thought about the huge challenge ahead to feed the world - a world that is growing by 80 million per annum?
Have you raised with the Commissioner the challenges and consequences of climate change - food miles, CO2 emissions, desertification, increasing consumption, water shortages, record low levels of global food inventories, famine, death?
All of these issues feed into the proper defence of Ireland's and the EU's Common Agricultural Policy from the WTO. Or maybe your understanding of Climate change in this context is taken from Minister Gormley's pronouncements about the twin evils of the "Cow" and the "Car". It certainly looks like this and Minister Gormley could yet have his way as these proposals will decimate the Suckler Cow herd and in one giant leap allow the Government to meet its now legal obligations to reduce the CO2 emissions from agriculture. Somebody on the Government side of the house needs to nail this issue immediately.
Mandelson's WTO Brief
Much has been made by the Minster of the fact that Mr Mandelson is exceeding the brief given to him by the Council of Agricultural Ministers in October of 2005. This raises three questions
1. The 2003 CAP reforms were said to be the EU contribution to a World Trade Deal. Why should EU and Irish farmers have to pay twice for a World Trade Deal?
2. We are now reaching a crisis point in negotiations - what exactly have you done Minister in the last two and a half years to prevent us getting to this point? What have you done to put non-trade issues on the negotiating table?
3. Have you as yet managed to unearth any economic analysis of the consequences of the 2005 brief or is that as hard to come by as figures for the impact of the current proposals?
The answer to the second question is obvious. Nothing has been done. For all your talk about groups of 5, 10, 15, 20, you and your colleagues in the Council of Ministers have not reined in Commissioner Mandelson. That's a political failure - and you can't hide from that!
The consequences for Ireland of 2005 have never been laid before the House by the Minister. I am appalled that the Minister has no homework done on these matters and equally appalled that the Minister finds some sort of high moral ground in the 2005 brief. The 2005 brief mandated Mandelson to offer 50%-60% tariff cuts on Beef, Pigmeat & Poultry tariff cuts of 35%-50%. Butter and SMP 50% tariff cut. That you could find comfort in this sell-out raises questions about your judgement and that you now do nothing when what's on the table is substantially worse than 2005 can lead to only one conclusion. It is blatantly obvious why you have failed to publish a sectoral analysis. You know the consequences and hope to run from the problem in a reshuffle. Shades of Micheal Martin and the nursing home scandal.
Last week when asked whether or not your Department has prepared estimates on the impact of the World Trade deal you replied - and I quote - "We do not have a final analysis completed". How convenient for you Minister. No front page headlines to highlight the extent of the potential damage. No Prime Time Investigates into the death of Irish Agriculture. No public humiliation on radio talk shows.
Fortunately those involved in the industry have taken it upon themselves to assess the effect of Commissioner Mandelson's generosity. Mandelson's proposals will devastate the agri-sector and have a disastrous knock-on effect on associated industries. It is predicted that a 70% tariff cut on beef imports will see prices plummet to €2 per kilo or 70p per pound.
Do you think Minister that Irish farmers can survive on such a price - with the high cost of production in this region? Do you expect businesses to run on a loss? Minister, the future of the Irish beef industry - the fourth largest exporter of beef on the globe, 100,000 jobs, worth €4bn to the Irish economy, and a way of life on family farms from Malin to Mizen - is what is at stake. From the vantage point of this side of the House there appears to be an indifference to the consequences on the Government side at best, or at worst a lack of political will to face the issues concerned. Rumour has it Minister that you are preparing to fly the coop for pastures new. You may run but you will never be allowed to hide if this deal is your legacy to Irish agriculture.
This Government it seems views rural Ireland as the Achilles heel in our economic development. The reality is an estimated 25% of jobs outside of the Pale still depend on agriculture. Will your cabinet colleague Minister Gormley be pleased when we are forced to turn off all the lights, park the tractors and take the trains to the capital? Your Government has ensured infrastructure and employment has been focused on the east coast, while neglecting the rest of the country and you now stand poised to deliver the final nail in the coffin of rural Ireland by consigning 50,000 farmers to the dole queues.
Final Negotiations
And so Minister we are nearing end game in this process. With the possibility of a WTO Ministerial meeting next month - the time for talking is almost past.
You repeatedly say Minister that you are not prepared to accept an 'unbalanced deal' for Irish agriculture, that you are not prepared to allow Irish agriculture to be sacrificed for the sake of a deal going through. This begs the question, what exactly are you prepared to accept? Are you prepared to accept the agreement in its current format? Because if this is the case, that is an unbalanced deal, that is a step too far, Irish agriculture will be sacrificed, and for what? What are we getting in return?
Here is a clear example of how this Government has taken its eye off the ball, focusing on other issues while a vital part of our economy and heritage is slipping away. Surely the Taoiseach, in his final lap of honour should be using his remaining clout at European level to make contact with as many leaders as possible in an effort to call a halt to this deal, which is like a runaway train fast careering in the wrong direction? It is time for you Minister and your Government to show your mettle, to push for unanimity as a prerequisite in order to reject this deal. You have often spoken of a Group of 20 Agriculture Ministers opposed to the deal - you need to now ensure these Ministers are united against these proposals.
One of the objectives of this Private Member's Motion is to compel you and your Government colleagues to do the right thing for Irish agricultural interests. I call on you - to put it on the record of this House - that you will veto this World Trade Deal as it stands. If you refuse to do this Minister I call on you to look the farmers here present in the gallery in the eye and explain to them why you and your Government refuse to stand by them.
Article 39 of the treaty of Rome outlines the aims of the European Union in terms of agriculture. It seeks to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, increase the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture, stabilise markets, and assure food supply and reasonable price. Now Minister - in a year where all EU eyes are upon us - you have a responsibility to protect the rights enshrined in the founding document of the European Community. You jeopardise the commitment to the European project, of those who have been its most ardent advocates, by not showing honest and courageous leadership on this key issue. By saying no to WTO, you can allow the EU to sleep easy in the knowledge that the Reform Treaty will be ratified. You are allowing the waters of the Treaty debate to be muddied by your indecision and evasiveness on this Trade Deal.
Today Minister is an exercise in Parliamentary accountability. You need to be brought out of the comfort zone of Cabinet Governance and lay before this House once and for all where you stand on this World trade deal.
This is essentially about undue risk;
- You are putting the livelihood of primary producers at risk - farmers across the country who have stepped up to the plate so often to meet EU requirements.
- You are putting the food processing industry at risk, which will crumble and collapse in the face of cheap imports.
- You are exposing consumers to the risk of potentially unsafe products from throughout the world
- And finally, you are jeopardising the safe passage of the Reform Treaty.
Minister, you have failed this House by not putting before it the nature and extent of your intentions on this World trade deal. You have a final opportunity to redeem yourself. Take it and accept the motion which I commend to the House. "
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Govt must move strongly to rein in out-of-control Mandelson - Creed
Since EU Commissioner Peter Mandelson assumed the mantle of EU Trade Commissioner he has pursued a policy of liberalisation of world trade at the expense of EU agriculture. EU farmers are hammered by increasingly strict environmental regulations and EU induced red tape.
Meanwhile a halfhearted effort is made to ensure that Brazil adheres to the same conditions imposed on EU farmers. Recently the EU introduced a ban on imports of Brazilian beef on the basis of lack of proper traceability and other irregularities in beef production methods. This was for the optics and was a cynical ploy to give the impression that the EU was really serious about the irregularities in beef production. No sooner was the ban introduced than it was dropped.
The EU appears to have an agenda to wipe out beef and poultry industries in member states to ensure increased access to Brazilian markets for industry. As a quid pro quo Brazil can flood the EU market with cheap meat produced to low standards. To hell with health risks for the consumer. To hell with food security. It is time to remove Mandelson.
The EU is prepared to import beef from Amazonia. It has no scruples about the burning of the rainforests to facilitate an increase in Brazilian beef production. The resulting huge increase in CO2 from the burnings is of no concern to Mandelson. Has he never heard of the Greenhouse Effect? What hypocrisy.
Today FG spokesman Michael Creed issued the following press release. It is highly apposite:
During Dáil Statements on the WTO today (Thursday), Fine Gael Agriculture Spokesperson, Michael Creed TD, called on the Taoiseach and the Minister for Agriculture to rein in EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson, through establishing a special intergovernmental conference if necessary.
"There is a growing frustration at the fact Mr. Mandelson is acting significantly beyond his negotiating brief from the Commission. He should not be allowed to sell out the interests of European agriculture, and Irish beef producers in particular, to get a deal. It is the responsibility of the Taoiseach and the Minister to rein in Mr. Mandelson. If necessary let us have a special intergovernmental conference where a telling message can be sent to the EU Trade Commissioner.
"The issue of Brazilian beef, which is now available here again, arises in this context. If Brazilians want access to European markets then, in the context of the WTO, let us have non-trade issues on the agenda, such as animal health, that will ensure their products are produced to the standard European consumers expect and European producers have to meet.
Meanwhile a halfhearted effort is made to ensure that Brazil adheres to the same conditions imposed on EU farmers. Recently the EU introduced a ban on imports of Brazilian beef on the basis of lack of proper traceability and other irregularities in beef production methods. This was for the optics and was a cynical ploy to give the impression that the EU was really serious about the irregularities in beef production. No sooner was the ban introduced than it was dropped.
The EU appears to have an agenda to wipe out beef and poultry industries in member states to ensure increased access to Brazilian markets for industry. As a quid pro quo Brazil can flood the EU market with cheap meat produced to low standards. To hell with health risks for the consumer. To hell with food security. It is time to remove Mandelson.
The EU is prepared to import beef from Amazonia. It has no scruples about the burning of the rainforests to facilitate an increase in Brazilian beef production. The resulting huge increase in CO2 from the burnings is of no concern to Mandelson. Has he never heard of the Greenhouse Effect? What hypocrisy.
Today FG spokesman Michael Creed issued the following press release. It is highly apposite:
During Dáil Statements on the WTO today (Thursday), Fine Gael Agriculture Spokesperson, Michael Creed TD, called on the Taoiseach and the Minister for Agriculture to rein in EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson, through establishing a special intergovernmental conference if necessary.
"There is a growing frustration at the fact Mr. Mandelson is acting significantly beyond his negotiating brief from the Commission. He should not be allowed to sell out the interests of European agriculture, and Irish beef producers in particular, to get a deal. It is the responsibility of the Taoiseach and the Minister to rein in Mr. Mandelson. If necessary let us have a special intergovernmental conference where a telling message can be sent to the EU Trade Commissioner.
"The issue of Brazilian beef, which is now available here again, arises in this context. If Brazilians want access to European markets then, in the context of the WTO, let us have non-trade issues on the agenda, such as animal health, that will ensure their products are produced to the standard European consumers expect and European producers have to meet.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Threat to consumers and primary producers confirmed by EU report on Brazil - Creed
Fine Gael Agriculture Spokesperson, Michael Creed TD, has said that all the evidence that is needed for an immediate ban on the importation of Brazilian beef is contained in the EU Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) report published today (Wednesday).
"The FVO found:
- The Brazilian State Veterinary Service had no systematic audit system for animal health,
- and no criteria for such an audit established.
- Cold stores in ports dealing with beef destined for Europe were not audited.
- There was a lack of adequate trained staff in the State Veterinary Service.
- Shortcomings that previous FVO investigations had identified had not been addressed.
- The 90-day residence rule on cattle destined for EU was regularly broken.
- Insufficient protection against rodents and insects by food business operators.
- Operation hygiene could not be fully guaranteed.
"Any rational analysis of these finding could only conclude that it is well past time for a ban on Brazilian beef imports. Following the publication of the report the Agriculture Minister can no longer stand over a situation where Irish farmers are subject to a rigorous set of standards while forced to compete with sub-standard and unsafe products from Brazil."
"The FVO found:
- The Brazilian State Veterinary Service had no systematic audit system for animal health,
- and no criteria for such an audit established.
- Cold stores in ports dealing with beef destined for Europe were not audited.
- There was a lack of adequate trained staff in the State Veterinary Service.
- Shortcomings that previous FVO investigations had identified had not been addressed.
- The 90-day residence rule on cattle destined for EU was regularly broken.
- Insufficient protection against rodents and insects by food business operators.
- Operation hygiene could not be fully guaranteed.
"Any rational analysis of these finding could only conclude that it is well past time for a ban on Brazilian beef imports. Following the publication of the report the Agriculture Minister can no longer stand over a situation where Irish farmers are subject to a rigorous set of standards while forced to compete with sub-standard and unsafe products from Brazil."
Monday, October 8, 2007
EU must ban Brazilian beef imports.
According to Farming Life "ANGER at news that the Brazilian government is seeking even more time to get its house in order on traceability has been expressed by Irish Cattle and Sheep Association beef chairman, Robin Smith.
Reports indicate that Brazilian Agriculture Minister, Reinhold Stephanes, is travelling to meet with the European Union this month to seek more time (beyond the end of the year) to conclude the implementation of their traceability system, known as Sisbov. "ICSA cannot believe that any more time can be given to the Brazilians – they are due an FVO inspection on November 5, and either they have things right or they don't. "If, after many years off broken promises on animal traceability, they still can't get it right, then it would be an outrage and highly negligent if the EU bails them out once again,'' said Mr Smith.................
The EU Commission has imposed stringent regulations on traceability for farmers within the community. This is laudable and in the interests of the consumer. Unfortunately the Commission is adopting a different approach to Brazilian Beef imports. Whilst all cattle in Europe must be individually identified from birth, retain two ear tags throughout their life and have all movements recorded on a central computer database Brazil fails to meet this requirement.
In addition the rain forests are cleared with slave labour. According to the Telegraph "In remote areas where Brazil's forest is being hacked out of the way for cattle grazing, David Ismail, a Perthshire farmer found conditions among the homeless labourers and their employers "like the worst scenes in apartheid". He said: "I was shocked when I found how the growth into Europe of Brazilian beef was causing so many problems in Brazil."
His report says that illiterate, landless labourers, housed in shacks, were deprived of medical assistance and sometimes chained to trees. The labourers, mostly from the poor north-east, are brought in to cut down the forest of central Brazil with rough tools and are unpaid, bullied, brutalised and sometimes shot. They are promised high wages, only to find that their board and rations exceed what they are paid.
The workers are described within Brazil as slaves. The Ministry of Labour's Special Anti-Slavery Enforcement Team, set up to hunt down some of the world's last true slaves, managed to release 11,946 of these individuals between 2000 and 2004...."
The EU Commission is complicit in the destruction of the rain forests-a major contributory factor to global warming. It appears to have turned a blind eye to slavery on cattle ranches in Brazil. It does not insist on the same level of traceability for Brazilian farmers as EU farmers. It stands indicted by EU consumers and farmers.
It is concerned with opening up the Brazilian market to European industrialists. As a quid pro quo European agriculture is to be sacrificed on the altar of political and commercial expediency.
Brazilian beef imports must be banned until such time as the same levels of traceability obtain in Brazil as in EU countries.
Reports indicate that Brazilian Agriculture Minister, Reinhold Stephanes, is travelling to meet with the European Union this month to seek more time (beyond the end of the year) to conclude the implementation of their traceability system, known as Sisbov. "ICSA cannot believe that any more time can be given to the Brazilians – they are due an FVO inspection on November 5, and either they have things right or they don't. "If, after many years off broken promises on animal traceability, they still can't get it right, then it would be an outrage and highly negligent if the EU bails them out once again,'' said Mr Smith.................
The EU Commission has imposed stringent regulations on traceability for farmers within the community. This is laudable and in the interests of the consumer. Unfortunately the Commission is adopting a different approach to Brazilian Beef imports. Whilst all cattle in Europe must be individually identified from birth, retain two ear tags throughout their life and have all movements recorded on a central computer database Brazil fails to meet this requirement.
In addition the rain forests are cleared with slave labour. According to the Telegraph "In remote areas where Brazil's forest is being hacked out of the way for cattle grazing, David Ismail, a Perthshire farmer found conditions among the homeless labourers and their employers "like the worst scenes in apartheid". He said: "I was shocked when I found how the growth into Europe of Brazilian beef was causing so many problems in Brazil."
His report says that illiterate, landless labourers, housed in shacks, were deprived of medical assistance and sometimes chained to trees. The labourers, mostly from the poor north-east, are brought in to cut down the forest of central Brazil with rough tools and are unpaid, bullied, brutalised and sometimes shot. They are promised high wages, only to find that their board and rations exceed what they are paid.
The workers are described within Brazil as slaves. The Ministry of Labour's Special Anti-Slavery Enforcement Team, set up to hunt down some of the world's last true slaves, managed to release 11,946 of these individuals between 2000 and 2004...."
The EU Commission is complicit in the destruction of the rain forests-a major contributory factor to global warming. It appears to have turned a blind eye to slavery on cattle ranches in Brazil. It does not insist on the same level of traceability for Brazilian farmers as EU farmers. It stands indicted by EU consumers and farmers.
It is concerned with opening up the Brazilian market to European industrialists. As a quid pro quo European agriculture is to be sacrificed on the altar of political and commercial expediency.
Brazilian beef imports must be banned until such time as the same levels of traceability obtain in Brazil as in EU countries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)