Mr. Bill Callanan:

I caution that in terms of discussions with the group that I chair, I worked very strongly to ensure there was not a perception that we were asking the group to consider how to improve the situation. That cannot be taken as a certainty in reopening the decision that was agreed on, the reduction to 220 kg per hectare as part of the derogation negotiations at that time. The Minister has asked us to engage on the potential for flexibility. We are doing that, and we will continue to do so. I just do not want it suggested in any way that it would be a quid pro quo for us. We are trying to get our house in order, in particular in regard to the medium term. If that were to emerge from discussions with the Commission, so be it, but it should not be taken as an expectation. We are asking farmers to do more now. We want to get greater cohesion between industry, the Department and the Government. I do not want to give a false expectation of the talks resulting in that kind of change. The discussions on our current derogation, which took place two years ago, included this condition. I remind people that despite seeking to revise it, when we negotiated a four-year derogation a year and a half ago, compared with the previous four-year negotiation, we have seen 300,000 additional cows in the system, give or take, increases in overall fertiliser usage and a decline in water quality. That was the overall environment in which we were negotiating at that time. It was therefore going to be difficult, given the demand we have seen. Those conditions were a part of that discussion at the time in terms of even securing a vote across all the members and getting a qualified majority.