Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

No, that is out of order.

As a member of the committee and a farmer that farms in derogation, I would like to make a number of points. Deputy Carthy asked about grant aid. Contractors are an important part of the farm structure. That they are not grant-aided to purchase some of this slurry equipment needs to be looked at. A significant number of farmers will use contractors for the new low emissions slurry spreading. That should be looked at.

I would also ask that the Department give careful consideration to the medium output cow not being penalised such that people would be encouraged to go back to the low output, high solid cow. There are too many downsides to that from a sustainability point of view. I accept that is a decision for farmers individually, but I would like the bands to be examined. I take the point that a significant number of cows fall into the second category, but for the cross-bred cow, in terms of sustainability, there are a lot of issues there. I would not like to see the good friesian cow with a medium output being penalised.

On grant aid for the slurry accommodation that will be brought forward, it was stated that farmers have made a decision to increase numbers, why the Department would grant-aid it and also that the polluter should pay. We all want to see water quality maintained and improved. When we last did a major investment in farm infrastructure, we had a 60% grant rate with a far higher ceiling that we have now under TAMS.

That had a very significant impact on water quality. Water quality improved after it. I ask that there be some consideration. We know the way the cost of building is going at the moment and the ceiling of €80,000 for the TAMS is not realistic. We need a far higher ceiling. I would like consideration to be given to a far higher ceiling than the 60%, for younger farmers who have taken over a farm, for example.

The other thing really bugging me is slurry technology. There is an awful lot of advanced technology with slurry out there at the moment. We have not invested in it at Government level. I have had a number of stakeholders come to me with technology and projects that are not economically viable at present without some kind of grant aid but whose benefit can be huge. We are talking about people who can distil the water from slurry, take away the solid part and give you back a pelleted organic fertiliser. The benefit of this can be huge. We see it operating in Northern Ireland in the intensive pig farms and poultry farms. We have been very neglectful in not having more pilot schemes on the slurry technology that is there. I have had seven or eight entrepreneurs who have the technology approach me but it is not economically viable. The benefit that would be there for everyone is immense.

I regret this technology has not been advanced further before we go into this derogation debate. Everyone is entitled to their opinion here but the derogation is hugely important for our dairy industry, which would be crippled without it. It would have a huge financial impact on a constituency like my own which is hugely dependent on dairy. It is imperative we keep it. I am not going into a blind tunnel. I accept we must recognise we must protect water quality as well and the derogation must come with conditions but it is hugely important it is preserved and that it does not affect our cost of production as well. I make these points as an individual, not as Chairman of the committee but I wanted to make them. I do not mind whether the officials respond or not as it is getting very late. They are just points I would like them to take on board when they are formulating our programme to go to Brussels for acceptance. Is that okay?