Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman and members for their contributions and constructive approach to these three very complex issues that are inter-related in many respects and are dynamic situations. They have not been concluded but individually and collectively have considerable potential to have an impact, adversely or otherwise, on the future of the agrifood sector, the rural economy and the economy generally, given that the agrifood sector is the biggest indigenous industry, employing nearly 180,000 people around the country. All three issues are hugely important and dynamic - what may be the situation today could very much change by tomorrow and so on. The issues are taking up a huge amount of time and we could spend a considerable period discussing any one of them. In that context, I do not agree with the point made by Deputy Cahill because I am not that fatalistic, although there is no doubt that they are challenging issues. I will try to deal with them as comprehensively as possible without attributing the response to any particular question. If I leave something out, I ask members to come back to me.

Reference was made to reference years in the context of CAP. This point came up on several occasions during the debates around the country in the context of it now almost being 2020, the reference years being nearly 20 years old and that it is time to start afresh. As a result of the redistribution efforts that have been under way since the reference years were established, we have in a way been moving further from them. The reference years were finite and determined one's absolute entitlements at that point in time but the redistribution efforts have moved matters some distance from them and it is my intention that we would continue and accelerate that redistribution process. That is a clear obligation and was the message we received from the majority of those who contributed at our public consultation and it is a matter on which the Commission is also clearly indicating a direction of travel.

It is untrue that 80% of the money goes to 20% of the farmers under CAP, as stated by Deputy Martin Kenny. Under Pillar 1, 95% of Irish farmers get 77% of the funds, so 80% of the money does not go to 20% of farmers, although I often hear that figure trotted out. Nevertheless, we must do more in terms of redistribution, whether that be tearing up the reference years or just continuing the redistribution. In the lifetime of the current CAP, we will have distributed €100 million from those with higher payments to those with lower payments and brought lower-paid farmers up to 60% of the average payment. There has been significant progress and the question is as to whether to continue that and, if so, at what pace but that direction of travel is inevitable, as it is clear that more must be done in that regard.

As regards the Chair's question as to whether a CAP deal will be concluded in time and the timescale in that regard, that is very challenging for many reasons to do with electoral cycles in the European Parliament, for example, and a new Commission. To put it in context, the multi-annual financial framework, MFF, which will deal with the budget side of it, will publish proposals in May, which will be for negotiation.

Then in June, the Commission will respond with its proposals. Positions will be taken by the Agriculture and Fisheries Council by the end of the year and by Parliament. If Parliament does not conclude its positions in time, it could well be for a new Parliament for to do that. There are many moving parts. Thrown into the mix is the fact that the budget is unclear with the British withdrawal, given that the UK is the largest net contributor. There is uncertainty on whether this can be concluded but we need to continue to progress and engage on the issues. The Council hopes to have its conclusions by the end of the year and we will feed into that.

I will deal with some of the specific issues therein. It is imperative that we continue to encourage new people into farming. I note the point Deputy Cahill made about entitlements, linear cuts and all that. Nonetheless the only other way we can give entitlements to young farmers is through unused entitlements or the clawback provision.