Mr. Colm Hayes:

I thank the Co-Chairman and members. I will try to deal with the various issues as they arose.

Senator Hopkins asked about further supports for young farmers during the lifetime of the current CAP. She and I both noted that supports are already in place, such as the national reserve and the TAMS, and we will continue with them until the end of the current CAP. Before I arrived at the committee, I had a glance at the TAMS to give an example of supports for young farmers. Approximately €48 million of what has been spent on TAMS has gone to the young farmer scheme, which is close to 45% of all TAMS money thus far. That is a direct route investment support and a vote of confidence by the Department in the future of young farmers by prioritising and incentivising them through a higher grant rate. For another example, last week the Minister announced the reopening of the national reserve, which is also of benefit to young farmers. Furthermore, there are the taxation measures that we discussed previously.

In regard to the next CAP, we touched on that earlier. In addition to the 2% obligation for young farmers, we are very much of a mind to continue with those young farmer supports, within the parameters of the regulations, the policy decisions and the available budget, and the Minister has been very public in that regard. Everybody recognises that there is a generational renewal issue on farms. A larger issue, however, which the Co-Chairman touched on, is farm incomes, which are the driver of whether a young person may or may not want to take over a farm or go down that line of work. It is outside of all of our control, aside from the parts to which we can contribute, but it reinforces the point we are all making of the importance of a strong CAP budget, which is the ultimate insurance policy if going down that route. There are also differences in incomes between individual farm sectors. I am sure these are all factors taken into account by intelligent young farmers when they consider that line of work. All we can do is outline our indicative commitment to consider a continuation of those individual supports.

Senator Hopkins also raised the question of the NMPs. We have received approximately 50,000 NMPs from GLAS farmers. As I referenced in my opening remarks, the requirement to have sustainability tools such as NMPs for all farmers next time around might not be the most efficient approach on the basis that an NMP will probably deliver a more benefit to a farmer of an intensive farm but less to one of an extensive farm, for which something else might be more appropriate. That flexibility is currently not in place but we are raising it and pushing for it. One-size-fits-all might not be the best approach.

Senator Hopkins also made a general point about the speed at which schemes got up and running under the current RDP, which we are also very aware of. There were delays as we went along and we do not hold ourselves up to be perfect in that regard. Lessons were learned for the next time around. As much continuity between the schemes as possible, and as smooth a transition as possible, will be a great help, not only for the participants of the scheme but also for us in our systems, controls and obligations. If I am correct in presuming that was the point the Senator was making, she is right. Lessons were learned and we will bear them in mind next time around.

I will not focus on beef prices because they are a separate discussion, but on Senator Mulherin's question about what is in place for beef farmers in this CAP or the next, the scheme of the current CAP shows that beef farmers enjoy participation in the €300 million beef data and genomics programme. Beef farmers are the predominant participants in the GLAS scheme, they are in the organic farming scheme, they are entitled to TAMS and a new €20 million beef scheme was announced in budget 2019, which we expect to be launched in the near future. I reiterate my main point, namely, the importance of the CAP budget, but I think the Senator was raising the issue of the importance of supports for beef farmers and of whether those supports are enjoyed by market returns, which we are very much aware of.

Senator Mulherin also asked a detailed question on our level of engagement with climate change policy, the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment and his Department. I know it is not the core topic of the meeting but I might pass to my colleague in a moment for a brief update.

Senator Paul Daly made a point about timelines, and the answer is clear. We are working on the basis that the deadline is 1 January 2020 because that remains the deadline, although it was set at a time when everybody thought the regulations would be resolved by now, the budget would be in place and the European Parliament and the European Council would have their work done. There is no question of whether our feet are to the flames in terms of what we have to get done. We have started some internal work on a SWOT analysis. As the committee will know, we have also tendered for consultants to advise on an intervention needs analysis, which is one of the requirements for member states. We expect to appoint the winning tender around the middle of February and the tender will then start to engage in a more intensive way with stakeholders on what the schemes might look like. If one factors that in, along with the obligations on us to take steps such as an appropriate strategic environmental assessment and the fact that the budget might well not be concluded until very late this year, which appears to be a live possibility, it is clear that we are all up against it. Nevertheless, we are working on the basis that the deadline is the one we must meet.