Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)

——and other WTO negotiating partners must make equivalent contributions to ensure that an ambitious and balanced agreement is realised.

It is time for realism to prevail at the negotiations with regard to what is attainable and acceptable in respect of agriculture. We must achieve genuine balance in any final agreement. Crucially, the European agrifood sector must not be sacrificed for the sake of a deal. This is the position consistently taken by the Government and it will continue to be strongly reflected at various EU and WTO meetings. My colleagues in Government, my officials and I have taken every opportunity to make our concerns clear to the EU Commission in bilateral contacts and at meetings of the EU co-ordinating groups in Geneva, the Article 133 committee, the Agriculture Council and the General Affairs and External Relations Council.

This is not just an Irish concern. I have been engaged for several years in a continuous process of encouraging and cajoling other member states to join Ireland in its strong stance on this issue. I have also been pressing the Commission, both at the Council of Agriculture Ministers and in direct bilateral meetings, to stiffen their backs in the negotiations. My colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, has played a similar leading role at the General Affairs Council. Like his predecessor, Deputy Michael Ahern, the Minister of State, Deputy McGuinness, has also been active in this intensive effort on the part of the Government. The Taoiseach has taken every opportunity to put forward our case at the very highest level in Europe. This has been a signal to others both of the importance of this issue to Ireland and the need for engagement at the highest levels by European Governments in respect of this matter.

We have also established an alliance with a group of over 14 EU member states and there is good support for the view that the legitimate interests of the EU agrifood sector must be strongly defended. At the latest Council meeting the membership of the group of 14 swelled to 20. Of course, each member state has its own particular concerns. While Ireland focuses on the "Green Box", export refunds and market access for beef and dairy products, others are, for example, concerned about Mediterranean products. However, such broad alliances are crucial in an EU of 27 member states.

The Government's intention is to continue these contacts with other member states and directly with the Commission. This process has been particularly intense in recent times. That will remain the case in the coming months as the WTO Director General, Pascal Lamy, has indicated his intention of calling a ministerial meeting in 2008, with a view to finalising the modalities of an agreement on agriculture and NAMA. The timing of this ministerial meeting is as yet unclear, although dates in April, May, June and even July have been mentioned. The timing is very much dependent on the progress that can be made to resolve the large number of technical issues that remain outstanding.

In recent weeks, intensive discussions have taken place in Geneva on the texts. However, there are still many technical, as well as political, issues that have not been resolved. The possibility that further texts might issue from the agriculture and NAMA chairs, before discussions move to a horizontal process at senior official and political level, has not been ruled out.

It is not only the timing of the ministerial meeting that is in doubt. A number of WTO members have outlined their opposition to dealing only with agriculture and NAMA at a ministerial meeting and have emphasised the need for progress on other elements of the WTO negotiating agenda such as services, rules trade facilitation, etc. This is in line with the WTO principle of a single undertaking in the negotiations, whereby nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. It is, therefore, unclear at this stage which issues would be addressed at a ministerial meeting. If agreement were to be reached on agriculture and NAMA at this time, the suggestion is that, in the period needed to produce detailed WTO schedules, the other areas of negotiation would be concluded so that the final overall agreement would be in place by the end of 2008.

As to the prospects for an agreement this year, it is very difficult to call. In addition to the large number of complex issues across the broad spectrum of negotiating areas that are unresolved, the uncertainty in the US political situation will play a crucial role in whether this proposed timetable for reaching a final agreement is achieved. We must assume, however, that regardless of whether a WTO agreement is concluded this year, sooner or later there will be an agreement. It is important, therefore, that we prepare ourselves for this. Irrespective of the precise substance of such an agreement, it will present significant challenges for the Irish food industry and for the beef sector in particular.

As the negotiations continue, and while I am committed to a successful conclusion to the round, I assure the House that the Government is determined to ensure that EU agriculture will not be sacrificed for the sake of an agreement. There must be an equitable agreement which will deal with all elements of negotiation. Ireland and the EU must secure an agreement that will ensure continued economic development. Therefore, my overriding objective is to ensure that the CAP reforms, which have already been implemented and which represent the limit of the EU mandate in these negotiations, are not undermined. I will continue to argue this point forcefully in the negotiations.

I have a number of specific priorities in respect of the ongoing agriculture negotiations. On domestic support, I aim to ensure that the system of decoupled direct payments continue to qualify as non-trade distorting payments under the WTO "Green Box" classification and so remain exempt from reductions under the new round. There can be no question of the decoupled single farm payments being undermined by any WTO proposals for reviewing the "Green Box". This is a clear red line for the Government which cannot be crossed in the negotiations.

On export subsidies, we want to ensure the full parallel elimination of all forms of export subsidy, while seeking the maximum flexibility in the phasing out arrangements for the EU export refunds scheme. On market access, it is vitally important that Irish and EU farmers have sufficient time to adjust to CAP reform and, in particular, the impact of the introduction of the decoupled payment system. An effective import regime has a vital role to play. Therefore, my aim is to retain a realistic and effective level of protection for our producers and exporters. As to non-trade concerns, with others, I have repeatedly drawn attention to the importance of this issue and, in particular, the fair application of equivalence in sanitary and phyto-sanitary protection. I will continue to raise this issue in the context of the WTO negotiations and elsewhere.

It is regrettable that other negotiating partners are focusing on pursuing further concessions from the European Union without sufficient reciprocal movement on their part. The European Union cannot be blamed for the current difficulties in the negotiations because we have made significant contributions to the round. Other developed countries and the more economically advanced developing countries must step up and deliver if an ambitious Doha Round which will benefit the poorest countries is to be achieved. I will continue to have an active role in the ongoing negotiations and will vigorously pursue the key objectives I have outlined. I will also continue to work closely with the Commission and other like-minded member states to secure a balanced agreement which will benefit Ireland.

See this speech in context