Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for taking the time out to be with us this afternoon.

Some of my questions follow on from other questions that have been asked. On the situation at the ports in the Six Counties over the past 24 hours where staff were withdrawn by the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs in the North, and now staff have also been withdrawn by the European Commission, will the Minister clarify what are the implications of this? What will it mean if staff cannot go back for a prolonged period? Of course I join in extending our support to the workers and condemn any intimidation or harassment of the workers. In that context, has the Minister spoken with his counterpart in the North? I am aware there has been a change in the past 24 hours but has there been any direct correspondence or engagement on the issue with the Minister there, the Department or the European Commission?

The Minister's statement refers to financial and other support measures that have been put in place, and specifically direct aid. We are now in the new, post-Brexit scenario. What direct aid does he propose to provide for farmers? Reference was made to the €100 million investment scheme that was agreed with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment but many farmers rolled their eyes at the thought of processors being able to avail of a grant when there are no new supports in place, and when it appears there are no criteria for the processors' engagements with the farming community. Perhaps the Minister will outline for us whether it is his intention to provide direct supports to our primary producers in the short to medium term.

Regarding the BEAM scheme and the Minister's application for a referral, the question is whether we have left it too late. The Minister, when an Opposition spokesperson, would have raised this issue before the summer last year because he would have heard, as we all did, from farmers who were finding it increasingly difficult to meet the reduction criteria without losing more than what they were set to gain from the scheme. Why was there a delay? What other measures can be put in place to support farmers who may not now be in a position, even with revised criteria, to meet the terms and conditions of that scheme?

With respect to the Brexit adjustment reserve fund, I am a little concerned by the remarks that we have heard here today. I welcome the Government’s progress in ensuring that the draft scheme suggests that we will be in line for approximately €1 billion but the reason our arguments were so strong related to agriculture. The potential impact of Brexit on Irish farmers and the agrifood sector was set out in lights in terms of the challenges that Brexit would present to Ireland. If we get to a scenario where a Brexit adjustment fund does not reflect that reality, it will be an absolute failure. What we need to ensure, in the first instance, is that this reality is recognised and that other Departments do not pull a fast one over the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, in other words, that we and Irish farmers secure a very high proportion of that fund. I wonder if the Minister can put a percentage on the proportion of that €1 billion he sees coming to agriculture, in particular, to our primary producers.

On mixed milk, when it came to arguing for the need for a backstop and for an Irish protocol, one of the issues that was easy to articulate to European negotiators and others within the political institutions was the issue of milk production because it clearly operates on an all-island basis and requires co-operation and interaction, North and South. The figures speak for themselves. We have a scenario where that sector, despite all of that, could be the one that is impacted as a result of the outworkings of Brexit. The problems have been well-articulated; the solutions less so. People need assurances in the first instance that the Government has informed its European counterparts that there will be no support for any new trade deal that fails to resolve this issue at that stage but also that we will go back to the Commission and say that existing trade deals need to be amended to reflect the fact that we have a milk product among the best in the world that can be sold across Europe and in Britain without tariffs or conditions, and the same should be the case for any third country that the EU has a trade deal with. I am not convinced that argument is being made forcefully enough at this time and it should be.

I welcome the comments that have been made in respect of the issues relating to trade, logistics and the potential for disruption. I hear that the templates and the proposals put in place are reflective of a 2019 level of demand. Could we get some assurances that they will also facilitate surges? January has been a particularly quiet month in trade and that has allowed us to put in place the transitional arrangements in a way that has not resulted in large delays. The fear is that this will result in some form of a backlog at some stage in the future. Can we have assurances that this will be addressed?

A number of contributors at our earlier hearings referred to the need for credit export insurance.

I would welcome the Minister's views on whether we will be in a position to put such a measure in place for our exporters, considering that many of our counterparts across the EU have such an insurance in place.