Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)

The pig and poultry industries account for 6% of total nitrogen usage and 10% of total phosphate usage in Irish agriculture. In 2002, the Department of Agriculture and Food published a report, Eco-Friendly Farming, which noted that in regard to the rural environment protection scheme, which had been in place since 1994, we had gone far beyond the minimum level of compliance required under the EU scheme at that time. The Department made its own admission in that regard and acknowledged that there was a high level of enforcement in Ireland. On that basis, the proposals on the nitrates directives go beyond what was set out in the REPS plans and the good farming practice guidelines. They also go beyond Teagasc's green book which was last revised in 2004.

I am disappointed that nobody from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government thought it worthwhile to come to the House to respond to these issues. That Department has clearly gone to ground on this matter. Why has it gone further than the scientific basis provided by Teagasc? The recommendation on the phosphorous threshold rests at a P index of three on the basis of REPS plans, the good farming practice codes and the Teagasc green book. The new recommendations reduce this level to a P index of two. In regard to phosphorous, a farmer could in the past choose to operate either on an index of two or three. It was up to the farmer and based on the type of farming practice. For example, a farmer who wanted early grass would opt for a P index of three.

At last week's meeting of the Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food, Mr. Tom Quinlivan from the Department of Agriculture and Food said that practically everything set out in the table regarding the P index corresponds with Teagasc recommendations. He went on:

As I said, some elements were introduced to bring clarity and allow for enforcement. There were some amendments but they were generally minor and reflect the Teagasc recommendations.

Last Friday, however, Dr. Seamus Crosse, the chief technical officer of Teagasc, sent an internal memo to the Departments of Agriculture and Food and the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, stating that Teagasc would not be in a position to substantiate this report legally or otherwise. This is based on what Mr. Quinlivan had said earlier in the week at the Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food.

The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government rejects that letter from Dr. Crosse on the basis that it did not come from the director of Teagasc. The reality, however, is that the Department has cooked the books on the issue of the nitrates directive and is not prepared to provide any shred of scientific evidence to support the restrictions it proposes under the nitrates directive. As they stand, the proposals will make every REPS plan illegal. REPS is supposed to be the benchmark for good farming practice and in terms of environmental protection. However, all that is being thrown out the window along with all the scientific evidence Teagasc has to back it up. Figures are now being plucked out of the sky by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. There is no scientific evidence to support its position. Teagasc has stated clearly that it has not provided the scientific evidence to support these proposals and is withdrawing its support.

It is unbelievable that representatives of both Departments have acknowledged that pig and poultry producers will have a significant problem early next year with the transition from the current system to the new one as set out by the nitrates directives. However, nobody is prepared to do anything about it or provide any flexibility. It is a damning indictment of both Departments.

See this speech in context