Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)

They will go out of business because they will not be able to afford to 100% fund it themselves, or else they will operate outside the law with all of the consequent detrimental impact on the environment which none of us in this House wants to see happening.

Whether it is 3,000 or 12,000, or as I suggest somewhere in between, those farmers will be put out of business. That is the legacy that hangs on this motion, that so many farmers will be forced to shut the gate, put the place up for sale and get out of the business. That is what we want to avoid and that is what the Government is forcing those farmers to do ultimately. It will not happen on 31 December, but it will happen over a protracted period of time because they will be hounded out of business by virtue of those whose job it is, rightly, to police the environment, and that is the consequence. Regardless of whether it is 3,000 or 12,000, that is the real human tragedy in this motion.

There are immediate consequences for more than just those farmers. The association of contractors representing those involved in construction of farm buildings has stated quite clearly that some 10,000 people will be added to the dole queues in January if the scheme is not extended. I have a letter from a small west Cork concrete company which clearly states, as has been instanced by many speakers in this debate, that it will lay off 40 people on Christmas week. Deputy Tom Hayes outlined the case of a long-established company in County Tipperary involved in the business of steel-shed erection. That is replicated all over the country and those are the 10,000 workers who, in terms of social welfare alone, would cost in the region of €100 million to the Exchequer to keep paid to do nothing when there is work that can be done, whether for 3,000 or 10,000 farmers, if the deadline was extended.

We are confident if the Minister went to Europe that the Commission would say "Yes" to a request to extend it. I do not buy all of this argument, that in March 2006 the Commission factored in the weather for 2008. That is an absurdity that the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food came out with, and an insult to the intelligence of all of us around the table. The Commission would respond. It is the typical sleeveen politics of Fianna Fáil that if there is credit going for anything that comes from Europe we will take it, but if there is blame to be dished out we will hide behind the Commission and let it take the flak. That is what substantially contributed to the Lisbon treaty going down the Swanee.

I would be pleased to take our chances if Deputy Ó Cuív's colleagues in Government decided — even if he does not want to pay the departure tax in Dublin Airport and get on his bike to cycle out there — to put a stamp on an envelope and write to the Commission, or send an e-mail, requesting it. I am absolutely confident the Commission will respond favourably to a well-argued case, and the Minister should send the Commission the contributions from this side of the House.

I am glad Deputy Treacy has come back in because I never heard more ráiméis and failure to address the issue before the House than in his contribution.

See this speech in context