Don't count the chicks before they hatch

After tabling a parliamentary resolution and the ensuing debate, Noel Farrugia chose to repeat most of the arguments and false allegations in his article Money Down The Drain (April 28) notwithstanding the fact that he got clear answers in Parliament on all the points raised.

He repeats his arguments about lack of funds and the execution of tests such as BSE (not BSC as stated by Mr Farrugia) and residue levels on local meat produce. These tests are still being done and will continue to be conducted in accordance with the government's financial regulations.

He raises the issue of trained butchers at the civil abattoir. Despite the information that was forwarded to Mr Farrugia he chose to repeat his claims. But the facts are that there are trained butchers in the slaughterline and that no butchers will be needed to run the cutting and deboning plant since the government intends to enter into an agreement for the running of the facility by the local processors.

The opposition spokesman on agriculture repeats once again his assertions about the Border Inspection Posts (BIP). Before entering into any discussions, Mr Farrugia must keep in mind that these are a requisite as a result of Malta's EU membership. They are also the main safeguard of ensuring food quality and safety of produce entering the European internal market from third countries. Is Mr Farrugia in favour of dismantling these facilities and jeopardising the health of Maltese consumers?

The same applies to his allegation about the standard of chicken being served in hospitals. While keeping in mind that the tender was awarded after a competitive and transparent process, all chicken imports have to meet EU food safety requirements.

The truth about the beef imports is that all beef coming into our market meets the EU standards since they are certified either at our or in any other member state BIP before being certified safe for human consumption. Moreover, the aid being forwarded to herdsmen under the Slaughtering Premium and the Beef Special Premium have led to a higher demand for locally produced beef.

Mr Farrugia also offers his services. I would have gladly accepted his offer for help if he declares once and for all what he stands for? Is he following his party line and now accepting EU membership?

I would have gladly accepted Mr Farrugia's offer if he manages to start accepting the reality of EU membership and not sticking to his outdated crusade of depicting all gloom and doom in the agricultural sector. He must have seen for himself the investment being done by farmers when he, together with his leader, went to visit some farmers in Rabat and Nadur in the past days.

I am sure that in both cases Mr Farrugia and his leader were briefed by the farmers about the aid they are receiving to continue to invest more and be able to face up to and maximise the opportunities that come by. Maybe it would have been interesting if the farmers asked Mr Farrugia and his leader what would have happened if Labour's partnership option got the upper hand in the last general election. It would have made an interesting discussion hearing Mr Farrugia and his leader trying to explain the unexplainable.

I have personally repeatedly asked Mr Farrugia to explain to the farmers and herdsmen how Labour would have been able to fork out the millions of liri from its own coffers since none would have been forthcoming from the European Union.

All this while the farmers and herdsmen had to face the challenges and realities of an open market just the same.

Yes, I would have gladly accepted Mr Farrugia's offer for help if it were done in good faith.

Mr Farrugia even goes as far as talking about mistakes and resignations.

Is this what he had in mind when during his tenure as minister he used the funds allocated for potato exports to make up for the gaffe in the failed tomato export experiment?

Or when Mr Farrugia literally counted his chicks before they hatched when he used wrong information to drive home his accusations that there was a drastic drop in chicken production in Malta over the past years. He arrived to this conclusion after comparing the number of eggs imported for hatching in 2003 with the actual number of chicks that were imported in 2004. This led to a discrepancy since around 21 per cent of all eggs imported in 2003, as happens usually, were either damaged or did not hatch, hence the difference.

Or maybe when as the opposition's main spokesman for the sector he hastily issued a press release predicting chaos in the agricultural sector as a result of the introduction of the eco contribution on plastic? This notwithstanding the legal notice that had clearly stated that the agricultural sector is exempted from the measure. Needless to say, until today he has not retracted it or apologised.

In Mr Farrugia's own words "the ministry is spending taxpayers' money on advertisements". Shouldn't he commend the government for starting an intensive campaign aimed at creating awareness among Maltese consumers about the qualities of a locally grown fresh product and local quality wines? All this to ensure that the local produce is sold at competitive prices.

While the opposition moans, the sector is moving forward. In 2004, farmers and herdsmen have shared more than Lm7 million in finances from the European Union and the Maltese government. They know whom they can trust in maintaining promises.

Everyone's help is needed to help such a delicate yet important sector to succeed as we continue in our experience as EU members. It is not helpful to scare off initiative and investment by repeating false claims and allegations. This sector needs confidence and I am sure that, coupled with sound policies and generous aid, our farmers and herdsmen will continue to benefit from today's reality.

Mr Pullicino is Minister of Rural Affairs and the Environment.