Professor Gerry Boyle:

I am an ex officiointerim member but Deputy Naughten will understand that in the deliberations of the climate council I have to maintain my fiduciary responsibility to that group also. However, despite what might be the outside perception, and it has been a challenge for me, I have been most impressed by the way the council has addressed agriculture. In the past two or three years the council was the first body in the country to identify the issue Deputy Naughten has underlined of the uniqueness of biogenic methane and argued for a separate target for biogenic methane. I have no reason to believe that, notwithstanding the Deputy's comments in respect of the Bill being discussed, that emphasis on the uniqueness of biogenic methane will be maintained. It is certainly something I will be articulating.

The Deputy and I are in complete agreement in respect of the challenges of disadvantaged land. I have been saying for some time that there are no alternatives to the production of human protein through livestock and also to the maintenance of those landscapes in such a way that the rest of us can enjoy them for recreation purposes.

I do not necessarily agree with the Deputy but we could argue the point. He is presenting a very pessimistic and worst case scenario where there was a significant additional reduction in sucklers. As I said earlier, there is a strong future for suckling. I believe it will be maintained in the traditional areas. I accept that a premium price is required for a premium product. There will be alternatives in dairy beef and so on. It is not that long ago that the country managed quite well with substantially fewer suckler cows. If that future were to unfold I do not believe it has to be as pessimistic as the Deputy says but time will tell.