Why should we compensate the pork farmers?

[csirl]

This may seem harsh, but why should the Government be forking out for this?

Ultimately shouldnt the cost come out of the guilty feed manufacturers insurance?

 

[Sherman]

In a way we should pick up the tab. Agriculture, like many other industries in this country, is infected with a dirty, grubby symbiotic relationship with 'the State'. Our alleged representatives in the Department of Agriculture and Government allowed this to happen by systematically refusing to do anything to upset the vested interests in the IFA and rural backbenchers, leading to this disaster. Perish the thought that we would have a system which would genuinely root out non-compliance with Health and Safety rules in our food chain, or which would overly inconvenience the all-powerful rural lobby.

So you see, we really only have ourselves to blame ultimately and should accordingly reap what we have sown.

 

[ubiquitous]

In a way we should pick up the tab. Agriculture, like many other industries in this country, is infected with a dirty, grubby symbiotic relationship with 'the State'. Our alleged representatives in the Department of Agriculture and Government allowed this to happen by systematically refusing to do anything to upset the vested interests in the IFA and rural backbenchers, leading to this disaster. Perish the thought that we would have a system which would genuinely root out non-compliance with Health and Safety rules in our food chain, or which would overly inconvenience the all-powerful rural lobby.

Have you any evidence to back up this conspiracy theory?

 

[rmelly]

In a way we should pick up the tab. Agriculture, like many other industries in this country, is infected with a dirty, grubby symbiotic relationship with 'the State'. Our alleged representatives in the Department of Agriculture and Government allowed this to happen by systematically refusing to do anything to upset the vested interests in the IFA and rural backbenchers, leading to this disaster. Perish the thought that we would have a system which would genuinely root out non-compliance with Health and Safety rules in our food chain, or which would overly inconvenience the all-powerful rural lobby.

So you see, we really only have ourselves to blame ultimately and should accordingly reap what we have sown.

If that is the case, the IFA == the farmers, so not a very compelling argument.

 

[Mpsox]

In a way we should pick up the tab. Agriculture, like many other industries in this country, is infected with a dirty, grubby symbiotic relationship with 'the State'. Our alleged representatives in the Department of Agriculture and Government allowed this to happen by systematically refusing to do anything to upset the vested interests in the IFA and rural backbenchers, leading to this disaster. Perish the thought that we would have a system which would genuinely root out non-compliance with Health and Safety rules in our food chain, or which would overly inconvenience the all-powerful rural lobby.

So you see, we really only have ourselves to blame ultimately and should accordingly reap what we have sown.

So recalling the entire pork and bacon stock in the country and around the world is not rooting out non-compliance with Health and Safety rules and is a systamatic refusal to do anything to upset the vested interests in the IFA and rural backbenchers?

I suppose that means that the farmers protests in recent weeks over the Government signing off on the CAP reforms are another example of the Government refusing to upset the IFA??

 

[jhegarty]

This may seem harsh, but why should the Government be forking out for this?

Ultimately shouldnt the cost come out of the guilty feed manufacturers insurance?

Your own ford cars. You have done everything correctly and safely.

One other car manufacture makes a dogey car that crashes and possibly hurts someone's leg. No one was died , or is seriously injured.

The government overreacts and recalls all cars from sales , and orders them crushed.

Should you pick up the tab , or the government ?

 

[shanegl]

And by the government, you mean the taxpayer.

 

[ubiquitous]

Unfortunately the government errs and the taxpayer pays.

 

[mathepac]

No we should not.

I believe the failure was on the various arms of Government and processes that should have been observed which were missed or ignored. In other words the public servants messed up so they should pay by with-holding bonuses, increments, seniority, pensions and / or by sacking them. This does not exclude the relevant Government Ministers who ultimately are accountable for this massive system’s failure.

As we are dealing with food for human consumption, this is how this particular system should operate, please bear with me.

Tom runs a family farm and breeds pigs. His premises, animal houses, methods of working, machinery, storage facilities, feed-stuffs, cleaning materials, waste disposal / dispersal / recycling processes, live-stock and other produce and his record-keeping are subject to inspection and audit by :

• Department of Agriculture Food & Fisheries
• Health and Safety Authority
• Revenue Commissioners
• Health Services Executive
• Environmental Protection Agency
• The local planning authorities.

Tom gets issued with his annual licence and insurance when all of the above agencies agree that Tom is equipped to run a family farm as a pig-producer.

Dick runs a pig feed factory. His premises, methods of working, storage facilities, raw materials, machinery, cleaning materials, waste disposal / dispersal / recycling processes, products, packaging, staff training and his record-keeping are subject to inspection by the same agencies as in Tom’s case, above.

Dick gets issued with his annual licence and all-risks insurance when all of the above agencies agree that Dick is equipped to run a pig feed factory.

Harriet runs a bakery. Her premises, methods of working, storage facilities, raw materials, machinery, cleaning materials, waste disposal / dispersal / recycling processes, products, packaging, staff training and record-keeping are subject to inspection by the same agencies as in Tom’s case, above.

Harriet gets issued with her annual licence and all-risks insurance when all of the above agencies agree that Harriet is equipped to run a bakery whose primary product is fit for human consumption and whose waste / excess product is fit for use as a raw material for animal food.

Mary runs a meat processing plant. Her premises, methods of working, storage facilities, raw materials, machinery, cleaning materials, waste disposal / dispersal / recycling processes, products, packaging, staff training and record-keeping are subject to inspection by the same agencies as in Tom’s case, above.

Mary gets issued with her annual licence and all-risks insurance when all of the above agencies agree that Mary is equipped to run a meat processing plant whose primary product is fit for human consumption and whose waste / excess product is fit for use as a raw material for animal food, agricultural fertiliser, rendering into soap, glue, etc.

Fred is a pork butcher. His premises, methods of working, storage facilities, machinery, cleaning materials, waste disposal / dispersal / recycling processes, products, packaging, staff training and record-keeping are subject to inspection by the same agencies as in Tom’s case, above.

Fred gets issued with his annual licence and all-risks insurance when all of the above agencies agree that Fred is equipped to run a pork butcher’s whose primary product is fit for human consumption and whose waste / excess product is fit for use as a raw material for animal food, agricultural fertiliser, rendering into soap, glue, etc.

Fred can only sell to a consumer if he has on display in his shop all the current, requisite licences, insurances and certifications. A consumer who buys from Fred if he doesn’t have his licences on display does so at his / her own risk with no recourse.

Fred can only buy from Mary if Mary has all her paper-work up to date. Mary can only buy from Tom if his paper-work is up to date. Tom can only buy from Dick under the same provisos and Dick can only buy from Harriet under identical conditions.

 

[MOB]

It remains to be seen exactly how bad this problem is. But, the problem is to some extent one of the downsides of having food production on an industrial scale. On average, food safety standards are higher (or at the very least more uniform, and better policed) and prices are lower because of the very significant intensification (and consequent economies of scale) in the pigmeat production sector. BUT, when something goes wrong, it can affect the entire sector - as it has now done. We can no longer have a situation where we can say - 'this only affects products made and sold in Carlow' (or wherever) because our pigmeat is all over the world within days of being processed. One manky, diseased beef carcass could likewise make its way into thousands of takeaway burgers (and, for all I know, has done)

I try to avoid industrially-produced meat. I never buy pork and I try to avoid pork products generally (though I candidly admit to losing this battle at home).

I think we need to accept that things do go wrong from time to time, and that an inevitable consequence of large-scale industrial food production is that when things go wrong in the food chain, the resulting problems will also be large scale.

We have traceability systems in place; we have checks and balances. without making little of the current crisis, it seems to me that our system is working, and that it will weather this storm.

 

[mathepac]

It remains to be seen exactly how bad this problem is...

How bad does it have to get?

We have people in meat processors out of work, farmers facing ruin, prcessors closing, exported Irish meat products replaced on shop shelves abroad and the EU washing its hands on the financial front.

...
We have traceability systems in place; we have checks and balances. without making little of the current crisis, it seems to me that our system is working, and that it will weather this storm.

The system is not working as the latest annoucement of similar contaminants showing up in beef prove.

 

[rmelly]

I have plenty of sympathy for the workers affected by this, but I had to laugh at the SIPTU representative complaining about the fact it would take 4 to 6 weeks to get sorted on social welfare - how many other thousands faced the same delays in the last 6 months? Where was SIPTU then?

 

[shanegl]

How bad does it have to get?

We have people in meat processors out of work, farmers facing ruin, prcessors closing, exported Irish meat products replaced on shop shelves abroad and the EU washing its hands on the financial front.

Don't forget the not inconsequential matter of people eating poisoned food for months.

 

[Meathman99]

Surely the pig industry insurers should be taking the hit. Last year when a major builder had problems with pyrite there was no mention of compensation there are a number of court cases taken against the suppliers who will in time presumably make insurance claims. whats the difference?

 

[MOB]

"The system is not working as the latest annoucement of similar contaminants showing up in beef prove."

To me, this shows the system is working. The problem is being properly detected, assessed and (ultimately, I hope) remedied. Of course it is a serious problem for those in the industry; but I think that the industry will come through. It would be far, far worse to find that we had dioxins tainting our meat for the past 10 years, undetected.

There is no "system" which can guarantee that mistakes won't happen. A good system identifies errors and remedies them quickly. Our system is in the process of doing so. This has to happen if our meat products are to regain credibility, and (ultimately) market share.

 

[mathepac]

...
To me, this shows the system is working. The problem is being properly detected, assessed and (ultimately, I hope) remedied. Of course it is a serious problem for those in the industry; but I think that the industry will come through. It would be far, far worse to find that we had dioxins tainting our meat for the past 10 years, undetected...

Although we do not yet have a complete picture of the genesis of the current catastrophe, it now appears that the authorities here were put on alert in September by a Belgian rendering plant who detected elevated levels of dioxins in their raw materials or product - thats three months elapsed time.

For animal by-products to show up in Belgium in September, the pigs would have been born and fed through June, July and August - that's another 3 months elapsed time.

That's potentially 6 months in total during which the problem should have been known to exist, yet we have only seen action on it this last three or four days. What happened in the meantime?

This is nothing short of a complete system failure, with peoples' health and livelihoods at risk.

The testing involved here doesn't date back ten years so please don't let the historical absence of this type of detection lull you into a false sense of security about foodstuffs consumed in the past.

Its a bit like saying that drunk driving wasn't a problem during "the Emergency". There were no breathalysers, supporting legislation or road-side tests either.

...
There is no "system" which can guarantee that mistakes won't happen. A good system identifies errors and remedies them quickly. Our system is in the process of doing so. This has to happen if our meat products are to regain credibility, and (ultimately) market share.

I dispute your point about mistakes and point to those in positions of authority in the state not doing the jobs they are paid to.

The credibility and quality of our meat products and our meat industry have large question marks hanging over them for years (condemned beef exported, export credit insurance misused, infected livestock deliberately imported, use of growth hormones, antibiotics used as growth promoters - ring any bells?). I believe this could be the final nail in the coffin.

 

[csirl]

Your own ford cars. You have done everything correctly and safely.

One other car manufacture makes a dogey car that crashes and possibly hurts someone's leg. No one was died , or is seriously injured.

The government overreacts and recalls all cars from sales , and orders them crushed.

Should you pick up the tab , or the government ?

What happens in this case is that the government (HSA?) orders the recall of all cars made by that manufacturer, but the manufacturer is responsible for the entire costs including repair/replacement and compensation. If the problem couldnt be repaired, the car manufacturer would have to refund all the purchasers and yes, they would even have to pay for all the recalled cars to be crushed.

Food industry should be no different.