Tim Lombard (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses. This has been a positive discussion. The contribution from the farming organisations has been really good and it has helped the debate on the proposals. I will touch on the higher banding of cows in particular, those producing over 650 l of milk. Taking that into consideration, I spent yesterday afternoon at Grange going over the new proposal of calf to beef and how that is interacting with the idea of having a sustainable beef product. The lack of joined-up thinking in bringing in banding for bigger cows and calf to beef research done at Grange in Meath does not seem logical.

What are the views of the witnesses on the matters we must consider in that banding? Should we consider more bands or a different way of measuring? The banding is done in litres of milk.

Most of us traditionally deal in kilograms of milk. We have moved away from the litre model when measuring volumes of cow's milk. Could we debate the issue of how to get an appropriate banding system that would suit the farming regime? There are 22 or 23 different elements within this proposal, which I have read. Most of the farmers who have used low-emission spreading say that it has been a fantastic tool over the past three or four years, since we really got into it. However, the biggest issue for us is trying to get capacity in the sector to deliver that on the ground. I was talking to the company, Lynch and McCarthy, yesterday and it would be 12 months before a tanker would be available if I was to buy one tomorrow morning. That is the lead-in time we are looking at. Could we look at, and talk about, the issue of the time required to get that kind of infrastructure in place?

The targeted agriculture modernisation schemes, TAMS, also play a role. I am open to correction but it is my understanding that this is the last year for derogation farmers. They can no longer apply for support for low-emission spreading. That will have an impact as we try to ensure that there is appropriate equipment on the ground, the knock-on effect of these efforts being that farmers must have capacity to get grants for such equipment. It does not seem to be logical. There are so many issues we need to tie up together in this regard. I will move on to the biggest issue I have come across. It is to be hoped that climate change will be sorted by our scientists but the biggest issue will be the financial infrastructure and the money we need for storage infrastructure for the next decade. How we are going to fund that is a significant issue, which has to be discussed.

For me, soiled water is the biggest issue in town. How the separation of soiled water works, the storage times involved and the four weeks have the potential to affect nearly every farmer in derogation. That is probably the most crucial element of these entire talks. I realise that we are very tight on time so I will leave the witnesses with those thoughts. It is about trying to make sure that these proposals are suitable going forward because, at the moment, that suitability is lacking.