Mr. Bill Callanan:

I will respond to a couple of the Cathaoirleach's opening remarks. I appreciate they were comments rather than questions. He will find that this side of the table understands the importance of this matter and shares his concern regarding how we approach and manage it. I assure everybody here that there is certainly not a defeatist approach to how we are progressing and doing this. I have dealt with farmers for a long time and the one thing I realise is that they like the facts straight, and to be given it straight as regards what the challenges are. In many ways, as the Cathaoirleach identified, the challenge is the economic importance has to be tempered by the consideration that the likes of a derogation is done on the basis of environmental and not economic concerns. We wanted to articulate in the opening statement that there is quite a sea change in Europe as regards the number of countries that are, effectively, walking away from derogation. They have options that they can explore. If they have, for example, a higher area of tillage in a country, they can move manure etc. to suit. They do not have the same dependence on grassland.

To explain the derogation and the nitrates regulation, the first thing to understand is that the regulation, annexe 3, is a limit on the amount of manure applied, not on the number of animals present. The regulation itself states that. People need to understand that. Within the derogation its availability is primed by four key questions. I do not have them off the top of my head but they are principally the long growing season, high rainfall, which denitrifies, and soils that have the capacity to denitrify. I cannot recall the fourth one but there are very specific conditions on which a derogation is sought. That derogation, however, is a derogation from the limit but not from the objectives of achieving good status in respect of water, and that has to be clear. The challenge here and for Ireland is that I want to be very realistic with farmers about the need to work together. That has to be one of the core messages, that we work together to get us on a trajectory of reducing nitrates and phosphorous in water and, therefore, when it comes to 2025 we are in a much better position from that we are in today in respect of the discussions and negotiations with the Commission. I have to be very honest about that. It is assessed in terms of environmental compliance, and the difficulty, as I said in my opening statement, is that the trend in respect of nitrates has been upwards - modestly upwards but upwards. In that context we have a lot of water which has nutrient levels that are too high in respect of the objective of the water framework directive of good status. That is what is resulting in the scrutiny in terms of that future viability. The message I want to give is that we have to work together and both Departments will work very closely with farmers in that regard.

The Senator asked a direct question. To answer it specifically, our Minister was quite clear that we needed a process as to how to bring the EPA water report to people's attention. He set up a working group, which is under my chairmanship, to bring stakeholders together to look at what we can do collectively. That is a very open process in that we have already met three times. It was felt that that is the most appropriate forum to which to bring this report first. We brought the report to the working group on Thursday of last week, before it was sent to the Commission. We then uploaded it onto our website once the EPA had uploaded it to its website, and then it was very much discussed at the likes of the dairy day yesterday. All the farm bodies are aware of this report and are participating in the working group. Effectively, they got sight of this first, before anybody else did.