Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

It is great to have representatives of the FCI here today. The opening statement was quite complex but exceptionally good. The piece that jumped out at me was:

A farm contractor cannot easily become a farmer...

By purchasing a new tractor or machine grant-aided, supported by the TAMS scheme, overnight a farmer can become a farm contractor.

That encapsulates the challenges and difficulties. The statement indicated that farmers receive 60% grant aid for the low-emission slurry spreading scheme, commonly known as LESS. How can a contractor compete with that? A major investment in equipment is involved requiring loans etc. We talk about the issue of the environment and the serious issues with emissions etc. We know that farming is inextricably linked to climate change, which makes perfect sense.

Who administers the FCI contract register? How does a contractor get on that register? Is that register linked to the Department in any way? Mr. Moroney made some reference to the Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine. I ask him to outline the relationship between the register and the Department.

The FCI submission states, "If all LESS slurry spreading was grant-aided based on FCI contractor invoices, not just to existing GLAS farmers, the cost to the Government would be significantly less than the current cost of machinery grants which have run to more than €55 million." I ask Mr. Moroney to tease out that argument and explain it further.

Water quality issues in Irish forestry are very important and we have considered them in detail. Indeed, we have considered forestry in detail at this committee. Mr. Moroney mentioned the risk of diffused water pollution. We are all familiar with that regarding the pollution and how it relates to the Irish forestry. He mentioned poor management and monitoring of machinery. He said, "There is often a lack of clear understanding of the forestry contractor’s challenges and responsibilities". I fully support the FCI's belief that forestry contractors and their operators should receive funding for training on operations, plans, identifying risks to water and training on the use of machinery. That is very valid and I would like Mr. Moroney to explore that more with the committee. I again thank him. It is high time that representatives of the FCI appeared before the committee. We recognise the enormous role the FCI plays in the agriculture industry.

Deputy Carthy asked about the membership. Am I right in saying that 60% of the professional contractors are also farmers? That does not necessarily mean they all qualify for TAMS. Mr. Hughes outlined from his direct experience that it is possible to open one door and get in so far but can go no further. I have been frequently told about that. Holdings below a certain threshold do not qualify. There are major challenges for farmers without a herd number who cannot qualify for TAMS. This is a common problem.

I am delighted the FCI has come before the committee. I ask him to tease out those important issues.