Mr. John Keane:

I will do my best to answer the questions asked. On Deputy Fitzmaurice's question around the land use change, I think we are in broad agreement about the procedures Ms O'Sullivan laid out and Mr. Enright spoke about. Similarly, none of the details around what is going to happen regarding that have been imparted to us as of yet.

On the Burren Life project the Deputy spoke about, we have supported EIPs and investigations on that. We also have some members involved but in terms of wider-scale support, we have not been involved.

On the impact of the 20% to achieve targets, our interpretation of that is quite black and white. It is very clear within the regulation which states that of the maximum area that is to be rewetted, up to a maximum of 20% can be achieved from peat extraction points. From our side, unless there is something to the contrary, it is fairly black and white that 20% can be taken from peat extraction points. Currently, with 80,000 ha under Bord na Móna, that does not even meet 20% of the overall amount of land they are speaking about. It is currently 352,000 ha.

We also have serious questions and concerns about Article 12, where it refers to the organic soil carbon content in all carbon soils and that it must have a positive trend. I am not sure how anybody proposes to do that, when we are currently only doing the research that can tell us how much organic carbon is stored in our soils. Teagasc has, I think, 15 or 20 different soil towers that are establishing that at the moment. I am not sure about the timeline. We have outlined in our document that there is talk of putting this into practice in 2024, to have plans in by the end of 2026 and to come into force in 2027. The research by Teagasc will not be completed on a large scale even by that stage. What are we basing the baseline measurement on?

The other question on the measurement implications is on the role other soils, aside from peatlands and so forth, will have in terms of reducing the impact on emissions and habitats. As was rightly pointed out, how can one be sure that a measure conducted by one farmer does not affect the land outside the ditch? The last time I checked and drained land at home, water did not know where the ditches were. If Mr. Hanrahan is doing something on his land, how does it not negatively impact on my land right as well?

On the restoration question, there are no other definitions or references given for what restoration looks like other than rewetting. That is the only measure mentioned in the entirety of the document. Where it breaks down is that we must have 30% of such areas done by 2030 and at least one quarter rewetted. We are going to have to rewet them all to meet that. That is the reality of it.

On the question of tick-tacking between us and other member states. We have engaged with our European young farmer partners in CEJA and are meeting them next week specifically on this. The Swedish, Finnish and Norwegians have serious concerns about this, as do some of our members in eastern European countries, as the implications for frozen soils also come into this. Obviously, that does not affect us but affects other EU members states.

Envisaging the problem down the line, while Mr. Hanrahan may be a bit younger than me, I have the luck of being one of the youngest members in the room. The Deputy may be trying to retire others in the room, but I hope to still be farming in 20 or 30 years' time. That is my ambition. Having the durability and persistence to stick it out is something we will need to have no matter who is sitting in the positions representing the organisations here today. Letting something like this slip through is simply not an option. All doors and accesses to agriculture must be kept open, no matter if they are in this habitats directive or in Bills before other groups proposing measures around access for young people.

We must all unite behind those to make sure all doors are left open for young people.

As regards the final question around the environment and what has been sent forward from the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, our understanding is that the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage also has a role to play here because the habitants and the biodiversity directives fit under the remit of the Department and the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan. We have not had any engagement or the Department has not reached out to us on any of these points and I am not sure whether any of the members know what engagement has gone on between the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, the Department of Environment, Climate and Communications or the Department responsible for implementing biodiversity measures which is the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. We would love to know what measures and what communications have happened between those three different Departments.