Mr. Bill Callanan:

I will start in terms of the argument, to be clear. Mr. Massey has ongoing engagement with the Commission and I went over in July as well with him and Mr. Flynn for that meeting. We set out the challenges this has potential to cause in terms of that land, the competition element of it. We also provided them with the work Teagasc has done in terms of the calculation and contribution of a reduction from 250 kg to 220 kg. To be clear, as the Commission was very conscious that by the end of June, it would have a water quality report, the substantive argument we are making around that is contingent on this report. We have provided the Commission with an invitation or request to meet its representatives. We have also invited it to Ireland to see Ireland and our environment in terms of where we work. There will be ongoing engagements on that argument. However, we will have to look at it in the context of - the Commission will be very much looking at it in the context of - this report and the water quality associated with it. We must be conscious that when Ireland secured a derogation, it was on the basis of certain conditions, including this review. The Commission now has the data relating to it. I would not like to give people absolute confidence that what we proposed in terms of additionality to the working group or whatever will result the willingness of the Commission to reopen that discussion or to even propose another vote. I just cannot give that guarantee. It would be incorrect of me to do so. We have committed to that discussion with the Commission overall in terms of the flexibility part. There is no guarantee that it may be open to that.