Mr. Miche?l McDonnell:

I refer to the social impact of not doing anything. That is not just down to the farmer who owns the land; the social impact relates to everybody, including legislators. We throw the book at the farmer who owns the land. Back in 1998, for example, 95% of my land was designated and we were promised a great package after five years but that was totally eroded. Now we are allowing the designation but we have no income from it. It is important, therefore, that the task is broadened more and that by implementing one system we do not have a negative effect on some other system. We are talking about methane and the whole idea of carbon sequestration. I have spoken to ecologists in different EIPs, as previous speakers have mentioned, and ecologists and their like have said that we cannot just be totally focused on carbon. If we are totally focused on carbon and rewetting, will we be entering the area of monoculture and invasive species? We have seen what has happened with the rhododendron, for example, so we have huge issues down the line. We need to have a broad view of this and we cannot just have a high-level approach that says we need to start rewetting and this will save everything. We have to be broader than that and we have to have stakeholder engagement, which is vital.