Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I have great respect for the Chairman. I have another engagement at 10.15 a.m. but I will raise a number of issues to which the Minister can reply whenever he gets the opportunity. I welcome the Minister to the committee. It is great to see him here. He has made a good start in the Dáil and is forthcoming in responding to queries.

I am delighted to hear about the beef genomics programme. I was probably the only member of the committee the last time who supported it. While there was not 90% support for it, there was 120% support from me. Some of the campaigns that were launched were less than becoming. Some people were just creating political storms to gain credence about particular positions that were adopted. Coming from the midlands I could see the value of it, 100%. I know there were teething problems with various bits and pieces of it. I want the scheme to be open to as many people as possible. There was a doomsday scenario, nobody was going to enter it. Everybody was talking about this but I held firm. I know farmers on the ground as I probably deal with beef farmers probably more frequently than many.

I have a number of queries across the programme. Perhaps the Minister would take notes. I beg the indulgence of my colleagues, I am not coming back to ask any more questions. On programme C, has any progress been made in relation to farmers who had their lands designated special conservation areas, SPAs, for the hen harrier population? I am aware €70 million was allocated to local-led agricultural environment schemes. When will a specific scheme be devised to accommodate the 3,700 farmers who were denied compensation promised to them in 2008? This is not a midlands issue but concerns the Minister's county and possibly the Chairman's county because it affects the sterilisation of lands. Given that what was done was illegal, there will be a court case at some stage. I know a number of people joined GLASin order to alleviate their difficulties. We have met these farmers here at the committee. Surely a specific scheme over a long period, say, 15 years or so, should be devised. It would allow them to go into the bank and borrow money on the strength of a 15 year scheme. They could show they have money coming in every year and could repay. It is time the issue was dealt with.

The Minister is dealing also with Teagasc. The cohort of young farmers need a FETAC level 5 equivalent, similar to the old green certificate, in order to obtain the funding devised under the CAP schemes. We have singularly failed to provide the necessary places. There are some 3,500 applicants waiting to get in. Education is very important. There are a number of Teagasc offices across the country but what are we going to do to progress this issue?

Beef is a big issue. I will be parochial about beef farming. We cannot go into denial. The animal identification and movement, AIM, database signals that there will be 80,000 or 90,000 additional cattle coming on stream in the autumn. That will lead to pressure on prices. That is the ultimate demand-supply situation. Will the factories do their usual thing? One can bet one's bottom dollar they will seize the opportunity. What plans are in place to deal with the likely overspill in the market and what is being done to open up other potential markets, such as Egypt, Turkey, Iran or wherever? Are there any developments in the Russian market? What efforts are being made to reinvigorate the live export opportunities that would offer some opposition to the likely factory cartel that will rear its head at the first opportunistic moment for them?

Under programme A - electronic identification for sheep - I understand the Minister is quoted as saying that a new tagging scheme has to be part of the €25,000 sheep grant scheme. That would help the export trade in so far it promotes traceability. Maybe I misread the Minister or maybe he was misquoted. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility for anybody to be misquoted. That last time a similar type scheme was introduced it was for a 200 head maximum flock. If electronic identification was introduced there should be no limit to its application across the sheep flock because they paid €1.20 per head. A genuine sheep farmer with a flock of 100 ewes or sheep would have to tag all his or her sheep.

A sheep farmer with a flock of 400 sheep would have to tag all of his or her sheep. I think the scheme has to be targeted widely. That is very important, otherwise, it will be increasing costs for producers.

There is concern about the prevalence of Johne's disease in dairy herds. Has the Department plans to introduce targeted, additional bio-security or programme measures to combat or reduce the incidence of this disease? Those wishing to expand their herds may have to resort to buying in animals. Are we launching a battle to combat this disease similar to what was done in Sweden where they have achieved Johne's disease-free status for their herds?

Chairman, I am nearly finished. Let me raise issues in regard to TAMS II scheme in programme C. There are only 5,300 applicants to date. I think a snail would move faster than the pace in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. With due respect to everybody who works in the Department, many of whom are colleagues who trained with me, when will the first payments be made? I am delighted, and fair play to the Minister, that the categories of eligibility for the scheme were expanded, with the inclusion of sheep fencing as an investment item. Can we put a bit of speed under the process? It is no use introducing a scheme, which holds out tantalising supports for farmers, and expecting them to hold on.

As I have said at committee meetings and in the Dáil, the major issue for farmers is price volatility in the agriculture market. It will be well into 2017 before there is any possible correction in the milk market. The legacy issues are Russia and China, weather dependency, income growth. A host of factors are at play, but the question is what can we do to try to help farmers in the interim? My view is that we must try to focus on access to low cost credit for farmers. The banks are playing puck, they are paying negative interest rates for money and are going to town on lending rates. They can charge what they like. The banks can borrow at 0.5%; even allowing them a 2.5% handling charge, they should be able to lend at 3%. The Minister should be able to devise a scheme to allow farmers to borrow at attractive interest rates. The SMEs and small shopkeepers should also be able to avail of credit at low interest rates, instead of paying 8% on overdraft facilities. The same should apply to credit from the merchant co-operatives. There is nothing cheap about what they offer. They are there with their hankies, saying how well they are doing for farmers, but they are still charging interest rates that are up there with the best of them. Our farmers are paying three times more than their European colleagues.

Fertiliser costs are an issue that has been discussed by the IFA. They have made some progress at European level. Is the Minister co-operating with that campaign to get a reduction in tariffs and customs on fertiliser imports into the EU? That could bring a further €50 million to €60 million into the pockets of farmers.

The Chairman has been taking a lead role on the issue of an independent retail ombudsman with attendant powers and duties, similar to what operates in the United Kingdom. There is no use behaving nicely nicely with those boys, they just throw it back into your face, you need statutory powers to deal with them. Allowing below-cost selling is a racket. Of course there will be below-cost selling. It is the old story, the big shops will locate on the outskirts of the town and there will be nothing in the middle as the local shops have closed. What has wiped out the shops will wipe out farmers eventually. We should look at the possibility of introducing a ban on below=cost selling, so that people can produce at a reasonable price and consumers will know they are getting a quality product.

I thank my colleagues and the Chairman for facilitating me this morning. I know the Minister will respond to my questions to the best of his ability. If he does not have the answers, he can write to the committee.