Mr. Tim Cullinan:

I thank the Chairman. I could not agree more with the point made by Deputy Fitzmaurice. If one goes down the road of derogation, it is a slippery slope. Deputy Naughten referred the nitrates derogation, where one must go back year after year to reapply for derogation. I am clear that, in the context of these carbon-rich soils, we cannot have a system for one type of farming and another system for the other type of farming. In fairness to the Deputy, I recall working with him in 2004 and 2005 on the issue of nitrates. We did not go for zones but, rather, for the country as a whole. Our position is clear that that is where we are staying and we will fight that to the bitter end. A clear message for the Minister is that he cannot divide the country. The same agricultural practice has to follow through.

Deputy Browne raised the issue of divergence in the context of taking farmers' income to support environmental measures. As was stated earlier, in the dry stock sector, anything from 130% to 160% of farmers' income comes from direct payments. We are now being asked to do an eco-scheme. It will impact on anything from 20% to 30% of the direct Pillar 1 payment that was put in place to compensate farmers for producing cheap food. We are nine months out from signing off on this but the Department and the Minister have given us no clues as to what we have to do. We have no problem working with the environment. We have been doing so for many years, playing our part. We are the actors in the chain who will play our part in the future on climate change, but we need fair play on this. I will leave it at that.