Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Regarding the annual report and the figures therein, we see a huge increase in the pension bill because of retirements. In that context, one could question the return to the State from the early retirement policy. Pensions account for approximately 22% of costs in Teagasc. Does Professor Boyle see that growing in the future, in actual cash terms, or has that figure reached its peak? In other words, will people leaving exceed the numbers coming into the organisation?

My other question is related to this issue. Professor Boyle said that Teagasc is earning 40% of its income and some of that income comes from purely commercial work. Can Professor Boyle tell us how much of Teagasc income is derived from work on CAP schemes, including the area-based payments scheme, the agri-environment options scheme, discussion groups and so forth? In other words, how much is Teagasc dependent on an indirect subsidy from the taxpayers of Europe to fund its operations? If the CAP were to change in the future, what effect would that have on the income stream for Teagasc?

I have been a consistent opponent of blanket embargoes. I can never understand the position of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in this regard, which proves that some things never change no matter who is in Government. Even if Teagasc could hire staff who would pay for themselves, it cannot do so because of the embargo. That said, if Teagasc is hiring staff who would pay for themselves, it is only fair that the long-term pension contribution be factored in, on an actuarial basis. That is reasonable but I believe that Teagasc should be allowed to hire staff where there is work to be done.

I ask Professor Boyle to clarify an issue for me. D-day for the GLAS scheme is 30 April. In response to a parliamentary question last week the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine told me that there are over 350 registered GLAS planners. Apparently 700 have been trained but only 350 have been accredited to date. Of the 700 who have been trained, how many come under the aegis of Teagasc and how many of the approved GLAS planners are Teagasc planners, either direct or indirect?

Allowing for other work that Teagasc has to do with regard to area-based payments, young farmer applications and so forth, how many plans does Professor Boyle think each planner will put out per week?

I am fascinated by what Professor Boyle had to say about the dairy industry. He seemed to be telling us that in order for farmers to maintain relative immunity to price volatility, they must keep their costs down. The big variables are input prices and capital expenditure. In respect of the latter, he is saying that farmers should not over-borrow. The efficiency index supplied to the committee shows the top 10% and the bottom 10%. In that context, does Professor Boyle know whether there are more farmers in the bottom 10% who would be classed as small farmers? In other words, is there a relativity between farm size and efficiency in terms of cost management? Are there more big farms in the top 10% of the efficiency index? That may be the case but it may also be the case that those in the top 10% are much more highly geared, which is a counter balance in the sense that their profit may not be all it is made out to be. Perhaps the operators at the low end have not borrowed so heavily so what they lose on the swings, they gain on the roundabouts. Is there a pattern there in terms of younger farmers and older farmers? If these figures are not readily available, perhaps Professor Boyle will supply them to us at a later date.

Do we know if the more efficient farmers are those in the older age group who have a lifetime of experience in management or are the younger farmers more efficient? Do we know anything about age versus efficiency? I am particularly keen to find out if we know anything about the efficiency, in terms of cost control and output, of the new entrants to dairying. I have a hunch, which could be proven wrong, that some new entrants might not be very efficient because they do not have the savvy that the old hand would have.

We had a very interesting presentation recently on what I would call treadmill farming. This is the scenario where, as happened in New Zealand and Northern Ireland, production increases but profits do not rise accordingly. Furthermore, risk is increased because margins are much tighter and if anything goes wrong, the farmer is much more vulnerable. Does Professor Boyle have any information on that?

On sheep research, concern has been expressed that there is only one Teagasc research station working on sheep and none working on hill sheep at all, to my knowledge. Furthermore, part of the sheep research station has been given over to a demonstration beef farm, funded by a certain meat factory. Professor Boyle will know that sheep farmers are concerned about that and I ask him to clarify whether it will impact on sheep research. Does Teagasc have any plans to do research work with hill farmers? In terms of hill and mountain farmers in the west I believe we need a united brand for black-faced sheep. They should all be sold under some label like Connemara lamb or similar, regardless of whether the animals come from Donegal, Kerry or elsewhere. We need a national brand for that type of sheep because each region trying to sell it on its own does not give scale or season. We must overcome that problem. Has Teagasc worked with farmers to try to get them to work with their counterparts in other regions? It is difficult enough to get farmers in different regions to see that if they do not put scale into their marketing they will not have a chance.

It is better for farmers to do simple accounts, factoring in the 89% of costs and taking a stab at the rest, than for them to be doing no accounts.

Sometimes it can get so complicated that they just give it up as a bad job. In the profit monitor, e-accounts and the rest, are there variations to suit different levels of farming and the different levels of educational attainment of the farmers, so even a farmer with a very basic approach can at least keep some type of record of how they are proceeding, particularly in high productive systems such as dairying?