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

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. We are acutely aware there is a two-way relationship between agriculture and climate change. The nature of our climate impacts upon our ability to produce goods. As the climate changes and variations arise in it, the agriculture sector will have to adapt. When I first started out in 1974 there were almost 300,000 farmers across Ireland. There was low-intensity and low-productivity farming and they were mostly family farms. That is the model that many people now advocate as a sustainable model but it would not survive. How do the witnesses see us achieving the targets set out in the various agriculture reports such as Food Harvest 2020? How do they fit in? Do the witnesses see us trying to achieve those targets to maintain the maximum number of farm families in rural Ireland? This is about rural Ireland. It is very important. Many people come in and make presentations and forget they are dealing with real people who are trying to eke out a living on the ground. People in rural Ireland are deeply concerned about climate change. It has been evident in the past week. We still have to try to live there. Very often, the agricultural community wants to ensure it maintains its production levels but wants to do so in a climatically sustainable way. It has made significant changes.

There will be a consultation on CAP. Do the witnesses have any idea how CAP should be distributed? Are they suggesting we move away from a basic payments system to an alternative system that rewards people in a more proportionate way for reducing climate change impacts? Climate conditions in Ireland are generally favourable to grass growth. Many of our products are based on grass, which is the comparative advantage we have. Our beef and dairy sectors are highly focused on it. Is it not very difficult to tell Irish farmers that they should drop the only place where they have a comparative advantage in terms of production capacity and ability? Notwithstanding what the witnesses said, the products from nine out of ten animals we produce are exported. We are self-sufficient. We have to sell nine out of every ten animals. That is important.

There have been fairly intense contributions made by the witnesses and they were well summarised. They said another country will not fill that gap but of course one will. We are talking about the world population increasing by about 1 billion over ten or 15 years, and eventually being 10 billion. Where will the food come from to feed those people? Has anybody given any thought to that in the context of this issue? I am all in favour of many of those things. I have been very supportive of various things such as heat production, oilseed rape and bioethanol production and all of those things that would be very useful as cash crops down on the farm. I was very supportive of them. When the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine tried to introduce them, they fell flat on their face. They went south. Not alone did they go south but many of the farmers almost went south with them as well. We are trying to replace fossil fuels. I note Deputy Eamon Ryan is present. He has been very consistent in advocating the displacement of fossil fuels. He has been a strong advocate of rotation crops. Could any of those methods, including anaerobic digestion and various things, significantly contribute to climate change success down on the farm?

I hope such methods are affordable but some are significantly expensive. I recall that farmers were encouraged to grow miscanthus in the midlands but it was a disaster and it took years to extricate farmers from the resultant difficulties. I applaud the submissions that have been circulated. I hope my Marine Institute colleagues will forgive me for not being an expert on the fishing industry. The cattle, sheep and dairying sectors are more important in the midlands and the witnesses present have made presentations on those sectors. Outside the farming sector, people believe that farmers are doing their best to offset emissions.

I am surprised none of the witnesses have commented on the following point. Like my parliamentary colleagues here, I have firmly called on Coillte to produce more afforestation. Coillte is no longer a major player as the vast bulk of afforestation is carried out by about 18,000 farmers. The carbon sink has been mentioned and the actions taken by farmers have made a huge contribution. The work done by farmers has not been factored into the equation.

In terms of carbon emissions, the original target was 39% but now Ireland must reduce its carbon emissions by 30% by 2030, a fact referred to by Mr. Coghlan. I acknowledge Mr. Coghlan had a view on that but can the witnesses identify specific actions that could be taken at a broad agricultural level, ether at the basic producer level or the processing level, that will help us to achieve the 30% target by 2030?