Mr. Brian Rushe:

I thank Deputy Ring. The question is whether we can achieve the 25% emissions reduction in agriculture. The IFA was clear from when this started to be negotiated. We nailed our flag to the mast and said we could go a long way to achieving 22%. There was a pathway for farmers. That depended on having complete buy-in, but it was something that farmers could buy into and there was a pathway to it. The problem is that we do not see any way to achieve 25% without a cut in cattle numbers. The Department said it will not make anyone reduce cattle numbers or take their cattle away. The fact is that the Government is using every policy lever at its disposal to reduce and put pressure on cattle numbers. All the schemes, eco-schemes and measures will result in a reduction in production. The 25% is not achievable without a reduction in cattle numbers, which will have a massive impact on parts of the country that can least afford the economic blow that it would deliver.

We get frustrated about some critics of farming or people coming up with proposals about what farming can do, including alternatives and diversification, because we have yet to see anything based in economic reality. When the targets were being set, we were told that anaerobic digestion would take off and that we would start feeding grass and crops into anaerobic digesters. Anyone who has tried to establish an anaerobic digester will understand how difficult it is to get even one off the ground. Our proposal to achieve widespread anaerobic digestion as a potential solution in a short period is not grounded in reality at all. With these emissions cuts, we need to support farmers both financially and with knowledge relating to feed additives and more efficient management of organic and inorganic fertilisers. We need that kind of real feet-on-the-ground assistance.