Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)

The implementation of the nitrates directive is a matter in the first instance for the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, who recently introduced regulations to give legal effect to Ireland's national action programme under the directive.

In the context of the nitrates directive, it is not possible to talk in terms of the disposal of surplus manure. An underlying principle of the directive is nutrient balance, which means that nutrients may be spread on land only to the extent that they will be taken up by crops. I am aware this has implications for pig and poultry producers in particular, as they generally will not have enough land of their own to utilise the manures that their activities generate. Considerable efforts have already been made to alleviate the impact of the nitrates regulations on the pig and poultry industries and to help farmers in meeting their obligations.

A significant concession was secured in December, just before the regulations were finalised, when the European Commission recognised that 80% of the country's pigs are produced in units licensed by the EPA under the integrated pollution control directive. As a result, the regulations provide that the EPA must review all licences by October 2007 but that, in the meantime, these producers will not be bound by the provisions of the nitrates regulations on nutrient management. This means that, until a producer's licence has been reviewed by the EPA, he or she can continue to operate under the terms of the existing licence. It also means the farmers taking producers' slurry will be able to operate under their existing nutrient management plans. This provides a vital window for the larger pig producers to adapt to the new regulations, for example, by finding additional spread lands, modifying their feeding regimes or acquiring new machinery for separating solids and liquids.

My officials are in negotiations with the European Commission on a revised farm waste management scheme and I met the Commissioner last week to emphasise the importance of the matter. The revision of the scheme will make it available for the first time to pig and poultry producers. Among the proposed improvements is an increase in the grant rate for both animal housing and slurry storage from the current rate of 40% to 60%, with 70% being available in some counties. Other elements of the scheme will include significantly higher investment ceilings and the removal of any minimum income requirement from the scheme.

Given that pig and poultry manure is high in phosphorus, there will be a limit to the amount of land on which it can be spread. The most suitable outlet for this kind of manure is tillage land.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

There is more than enough tillage land in the country to utilise all the pig and poultry manure but I am conscious that not all producers have tillage land available nearby. The high liquid content of pig manure makes it expensive to transport. Pig producers should, therefore, start looking seriously at technology for separating solids and liquids. Subject to Commission approval of the new farm waste management scheme, I plan to offer grant aid for that kind of technology. I also urge other farmers to show solidarity with pig and poultry producers by taking their manure instead of using chemical fertiliser. I have asked Teagasc to undertake a promotion campaign to demonstrate the nutrient value of slurry and the savings that farmers can achieve by substituting it for chemical fertiliser. I am also urging REPS planners to encourage their clients to use pig manure on their farms.

Most of the controversy in recent days has centred on the nutrient management provisions of the regulations. These were finalised following difficult negotiations with the Commission's scientific experts, with both Departments making use of the advice provided by Teagasc. It was the Commission, however, which determined the final content of the regulations. Teagasc has recently indicated that it may be possible to review part of the advice it had given on the application of phosphorus in a way that could improve the effectiveness of the regulations. The Government and the European Commission saw merit in allowing Teagasc time to elaborate this new advice and, accordingly, the Minister, Deputy Roche, announced a brief de facto deferral of the implementation of part 3 of the regulations. Teagasc has been requested to provide, as a matter of urgency, the necessary scientific case to support any revision of the phosphorus tables in the regulations. The two Departments will carefully consider any submission received from Teagasc, while also bearing in mind that any proposals for revision of the phosphorus tables will have to respect the environmental requirements associated with the nitrates directive and meet with the agreement of the European Commission.

Teagasc has not been specifically requested to review its advice on nitrogen issues. However, if its revised submission on crop nutrient requirements suggests further beneficial adjustments to the regulatory regime, these will of course be considered. The possibility of such further adjustments will also depend on their respecting the environmental requirements involved and on their acceptance by the European Commission. The disposal of residual materials from public sewerage works is not a matter for my Department.

See this speech in context