Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute on the Private Members' motion moved by the Green Party. Tabled in the context of the upcoming meeting of the leaders of the G8 countries in Edinburgh and the World Trade Organisation ministerial conference in December, the motion affords Members the opportunity to re-examine the Government's policies in the context of the goal of making poverty history. While Fine Gael supports the Green Party Members in principle in bringing forward the motion, as my time is limited I will concentrate on just a few points.

Fine Gael concurs with the policy of 100% debt cancellation for heavily-indebted poor countries. While the write off by G8 countries announced on 10 June for 18 of the poorest states in Africa is a step in the right direction, Fine Gael would like to see the policy broadened to include the 42 most heavily-indebted countries in the world. A write off would provide them with more money in their budgets to achieve the millennium development goals by spending more on the vital services in health, education, agriculture and infrastructure which are crucial to their long-term futures.

If we are serious about making poverty history, we must do more than pay lip service to an ideal. The Government must immediately agree a new target date to achieve 0.7% of GNP on overseas development aid. The Minister of State, Deputy Conor Lenihan, informed the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs recently that a timeframe and mechanism to meet the UN target was under ongoing review. It is imperative that the ongoing review reaches a conclusion quickly. I call on the Government to stop procrastinating on the issue and honour its commitment by immediately setting out a realistic timeframe to reach the 0.7% target.

The Green Party motion demands a re-examination of the supports given to producers in the developed world and their effect on producers' counterparts in less developed regions. I will first consider the effect of subsidies on the developed world using Ireland as an example. Since reform of the Common Agricultural Policy in 1992 and the Agenda 2000 agreement, the emphasis of EU agricultural supports under the CAP has moved away from the traditional market supports to direct payments to farmers. In 2003 direct payments received as a percentage of farm income amounted to 68%. Last year the payments accounted for 74% of aggregate farm income. It is clear that for agriculture to survive such support measures are needed.

We must support our indigenous agricultural industry. The agrifood sector as a whole accounts for 9% of GDP and employment and 8% of exports. More than 112,000 people are employed in primary agriculture and nearly half that number again in the food and drinks industry. Agrifood exports last year were worth €7 billion to the economy, but when taken as a net value based on balance of payments etc., they are worth €11 billion so they are a significant element of our economy.

In many rural areas where farming is on the decline, this decline does not stop at the farm gate. It has a significant domino effect. If we are serious about preserving our rural landscape, we must encourage people to remain on the land and maintain farmers in rural areas. It must be pointed out that as a result of EU payments, Irish farmers are now encouraged to farm in an environmentally sensitive way, which has had a significant impact on the rural landscape.

It is important to point out that for 80% of European farm holdings the amount of direct support farmers receive is less than €5,000 but it is crucial to ensuring that small farmers in rural Ireland can continue to live and work the land.

For those who have not been following the recent reforms, the single farm payment is now completely decoupled from food production. We no longer have a system of agriculture that encourages inefficient farming. The focus is now on quality, efficiency and environmental practices. The revised Common Agricultural Policy which was agreed in 2002 by all member states was to provide funding for agriculture between then and 2013. The budget was to start at 38% of the total EU budget and scale back over the period to 30% by 2013. That deal was signed by each member state and we must abide by it.

The jury remains out as to whether removing all subsidies will help poor countries. A cut in EU sugar prices could have a negative impact on less developed African countries——

See this speech in context