Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I hear a lot of Deputies questioning the efficiency of the herd. Some have asked why in 1995 we were able to have 7 million cattle and now all of a sudden it is a problem. Let us consider the reports, especially the most recent report from the Environmental Protection Agency. We can see that the emissions from the herd are actually growing. If I have it right, the EPA projects that by 2020 agriculture will account for 33% of emissions. That figure is projected to rise to 34.5% by 2030. If we combine Teagasc's presentation with the previous one and think about the graph in terms of where our problem is in not reaching our targets, agriculture is a major part of the picture and, in turn, the size of the herd. This is something we have to tackle.

Mr. Donnellan has said there is a desirable economic outcome from increasing the size of t he herd and the output from each bovine creature. I accept that there is a desirable economic outcome for some farmers, but I do not believe that is the case for all of them. In its last presentation Teagasc illustrated clearly to us that a significant tranche of farmers lived in poverty and struggled on low incomes. Many of them find it difficult to cope with the pressure to increase their herd. They have told me personally - I have also witnessed it - that it is coming from all quarters, including the Department, the IFA and the journals they read, including the Irish Farmers Journal. The view is increasing one's herd is the way to go, but that is not of great economic benefit to those who operate on a smaller scale and have the least income. It is especially the case in the context of climate change and when we move from drought to flood and the fodder crisis when farmers have to watch the catastrophic deaths of animals on their farms. That must be so awful for them because it is a major financial loss, as well as a major tragedy for them. That cohort has to be thought about.

I am not convinced that it would be that difficult to convince farmers to shift to more sustainable methods of farming. That is why I am keen to ask Mr. Donnellan about this matter further. We are to hear a presentation later by the Irish Natura and Hill Farmers Association. Has Teagasc held discussions with it? Is it on its radar in the context of how farmers should move forward and how it should communicate and convince them to make changes in how they farm?

There is also the idea that we can grow the herd and at the same time reduce emissions. That is a glaring contradiction, which I do not accept. I know that Teagasc's representatives do not accept it either, but some think that because we are increasing the herd, we are simultaneously more efficient in reducing emissions. There is a glaring contradiction.

Mr. Donnellan has said a lot about afforestation being a major part of the solution. Let us suppose that is the case, but it is only a proposal, on which I am keen to hear a comment on from him. Perhaps this is above his pay grade, but would it be sensible for the Government to pay farmers to engage in afforestation, rather than buying carbon offsets or engaging in carbon trading?