Mr. Richard Kennedy:

First of all, in terms of what we do, I accept it is very much a research farm, but we have always done our research on the basis of it being commercially applicable, and at a very early stage. A key part of that is ensuring this is something farmers can do.

In terms of leakage, having met farmers recently, they are thinking they had better not look at their carbon footprint because if they do not know it, they do not have to do anything about it. In fact, everybody has got a carbon footprint. Once we exist, we have a carbon footprint. Farmers have a carbon footprint inside their gate that has real value to the processors and the retailers because it is ultimately the responsibility of the retailers and processors. What I mean by that is that the carbon footprint of the farmers is termed the scope 3 or tier 3 carbon that a retailer or processor will have and the farmer is the only one that can influence it. There are several anomalies in a number of areas where this needs to be addressed.

To answer the Senator's question on how legislators can engage, it is very important that a clear policy direction is given on carbon in particular. There is quite a bit of noise out there at the moment as to who owns the carbon. From a legislative point of view, that should be clarified very quickly. To me, farmers are the people who own the land, and they are also the people who can take the actions. The Teagasc MAC curve shows what can be done around carbon and the environment. The farmers are the people who will take the action. Therefore, it is vitally important for me that farmers have ownership of their carbon. The reason I say it is vitally important is because if they have ownership of it and there is a monitoring incentive or otherwise to have the best carbon footprint they can have, then they have the place and the time to do it. Our structure plays to the ability to do that. By proposing or suggesting that, it means that our current structure of farming has the potential to deliver on that basis.

What I mean by that is it will not just deliver in terms of carbon reduction for the environment but will also drive economy and business into the rural community. I know the Senator is from a rural area, like me. That approach can underpin the rural community.

I know concern is being expressed about how carbon will be counted on the national inventory and how to avoid double counting. We need a clear policy and a clear infrastructure coming from legislators and Departments with a framework to deliver it. Once carbon is measured, verified and reported in a robust manner, then it is more valuable. It can then be allocated in the national inventory and will only be counted once. However, in order to do all of those things, we must set out our baseline on the basis of individual farms.

The committee may have seen one piece of work that has come out of Devenish and Dowth farm, that is, the soil nutrient health scheme that has been launched in Northern Ireland. Every hectare of soil in Northern Ireland is going to be analysed for carbon and other nutrients. That will mean an immediate baseline across Northern Ireland so farmers know where they are and can build from there.

I hope I have answered the Senator's question but a clearer policy direction is required. Of course it will not be easy. It will take courage and determination but it also has the potential to set us up as an island at the forefront of sustainable farming practices.

The Senator also talked about leakage. Ireland has businesses throughout the world and considering how the rest of the world looks at us, we are positioned very well. However, we are also vulnerable to being passed out by developing countries that will be able to implement changes to their infrastructure very quickly. The consumer is now demanding such changes.