Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome our guests. The food and drinks industries are significant players in the national economy. Instead of just agriculture, we must examine the cost of all policies if we are to develop these industries. Energy costs were mentioned as being significant. A 10% saving on a 2% cost is 0.2%. If a cost is 30% and a saving of 10% is made, the overall figure is 3%. Is there an industry average for the cost of raw materials, labour, transport and energy? In broad terms, what percentage does each of these represent as a percentage of the overall cost base? I have long argued that, for resource-based industries such as forestry, agriculture and stone, the cost of transporting a product to the factory and so on tends to be a larger factor than it is for companies making microchips, where the cost of transport is insignificant.

Energy costs were also cited as being significant. What is their order of magnitude in terms of the total input costs? Knowing the figure is always useful.

How much of the final cost is accounted for by the cost of raw materials, that is, what the farmer gets? The committee has been considering an issue that has not been raised at this meeting yet, namely, the purchasing power of multinational multiples, the squeeze they can put on manufacturers and primary suppliers and the effects of same on long-term sustainability. If companies with a large clout in the market are not offering viable prices, does it pose a challenge?

We all agree that price volatility presents a considerable challenge, particularly if we are moving away from a dependence on EU subsidies such as single payments, etc. This is an important issue for the world. I noted the comments on the retention of private storage, which is one bet Mr. Barry has against it.

Mr. Barry stated that direct payments insulate against price volatility, in that one gets a certain amount of money before one starts to gain. For an 80-cow or 90-cow farmer, what is the average direct payment per hectare and what is his or her total direct payment? Various proposals have been made for reshaping CAP. It must support productive farmers. Cattle dealers probably did the best out of the last CAP. Someone who sent a large number of cattle to a factory received a ten-year bonus. My understanding is that dairy farmers did not do as well proportionally. I would be interested in Mr. Barry's comments in this regard.

I will also be interested in knowing the meat people's thoughts on Mr. Barry's comments about mandatory country of origin labelling. There will be conflict. Some industries want labelling because that is their selling point whereas some do not. Does everyone agree on the question or is there an industry dichotomy?

I do not understand where the Commissioner is coming from in terms of the greening component of the proposed CAP. On one level, every farmer must comply with good farming practice. One cannot throw fertiliser around willy-nilly. There is already a greening element. The rural environment protection scheme, REPS, was for super green farmers. Will the new greening element supersede REPS? I do not understand. There will be three levels of greening. For example, standard greening is the good farming practice with which everyone must comply. I would rather see a high standard without a special greening package, but a basic payment for a high standard - good practices, non-pollutants, etc. - would suit Ireland in terms of marketing, sustainability and so on. However, if much of CAP's resources are devoted to greening, what must a farmer do to get the REPS payment? Where does it all fit? This is a valid question, but I do not know the answer to it. Does Mr. Barry have an answer? The average farmer who conforms with good practice should be able to get the full whack of the single payment. There is considerable agreement on this point.

I take it that Mr. Barry's argument is not with combating climate change, but with the way we count the emissions from cows, etc. Genetic work is being done in Australia to try to reduce methane outputs from cows at both ends. Has the Irish Dairy Industries Association, IDIA, proposals on counting emissions in a different way without compromising the need to reduce them? This issue deserves a great deal of scientific analysis.

By virtue of growth, we take in carbon sequestration and so on, although I accept there is a methane issue. In other words, what goes out is a slightly different product than what goes into animals. I have always believed that with the simple mathematics we operate, agriculture was the biggest polluter in terms of methane output and the industry faces strangulation in expansion of the basic industry. We must try to find a way of dealing with the issue and ensuring it does not become a new quota system.