Mr. John Comer:

While all schemes have merits in their own right, we would like to see an enhanced budget. We believe that the cuts to the agriculture sector have been disproportionate, in particular in 2011 when the cuts were 14% versus 5% to 6%. I believe the ICBF that the suckler cow scheme is important to them in terms of data collection. One wonders if people would supply the required data to the ICBF if they had no incentive, in terms of the suckler cow scheme, to do so. In terms of prioritising cuts, there is no cost to many of the proposals made in our pre-budget submission.

These are elements that would not have a huge cost. There should be a concentrated effort by the Department of Finance to facilitate mechanisms by which land consolidation can take place in this country. Apart from volatility, one of the single biggest constraints is fragmentation of the Irish land structure. Anything facilitating an orderly consolidation of the land base is a priority. The rural environmental protection scheme, REPS 4, has taken a 19% cut and there was a cut of €19 million last year. No other cuts could be justified in that respect.

The importance of the disadvantaged areas scheme is critical, as it is the least complicated way of getting money to farmers who farm on areas of natural constraint. It does not have the complications of other schemes and a cut in it would have detrimental effects. I am not sure I have the political skills to answer the question without committing myself to anything but I have done my best.