Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I strongly endorse Deputy Stanley's amendment. Monoculture or overdependence on one or two agricultural sectors is a very dangerous game. We need to diversify enterprise and industry generally, as well as agriculture. The idea we would have an ever onwards and upwards beef export industry or we can solely rely on the beef and dairy sector is a mistake. It makes us vulnerable to any sort of serious fluctuations, increased competition, diseases and other factors which could potentially hit a single sector and, therefore, make the entire economy vulnerable. We learned about the folly of overconcentration on a particular sector with the property crash. It would be devastating if we did not learn the same in the areas of agriculture which we have prioritised. One has to have diversity in this sector basically for safety, sustainability and protection of the economy.

I do not know as much as Deputy Stanley does about the sugar beet sector and the sugar industry. However, it is an amazing fact that even in Dún Laoghaire, people regularly approach me to decry the collapse of the indigenous sugar industry and that it was a national tragedy to allow it to happen. The passion and conviction with which this point is put, a point echoed by Deputy Stanley, coming from an area very much affected, indicates the need to take the resurrection of that industry seriously.

Another important sector in which we have desperately underperformed and allowed to decline is forestry. Of course, there were historical reasons it was devastated under British rule. It is an absolute tragedy and shame that in the country in Europe which has the best conditions for growing trees, we have the lowest level of forest cover. This is a perfect crop for addressing climate change, CO2 emissions, as well as dealing with the consequences of climate change and environmental damage and yet we have failed spectacularly to develop the sector. In so far as we have developed it, again it has been on a monocultural basis with one crop being prioritised, which has questionable effects on soil and water quality, as well as making it vulnerable to disease. This is an area in which we should be diversifying and expanding to a significant extent.

There are many other such areas but a focus on the diversification of crops to develop industry, enterprise and agriculture could be beneficial in terms of meeting our targets. It would be environmentally sustainable and good economically, socially and in every other way. This must be a key part of our moving towards a sustainable future and dealing with climate change.

It is a reasonable and sensible amendment and I see no reason the Minister of State would not accept it. It is very much the direction in which we need to go if we are to think outside the box and widen our horizons. In some cases, we need just go back to things we used to do. This was a forest-covered country. We also had a sugar industry. Both of those have been devastated but there are things in these areas we could do terribly well, realising multiple benefits at every level. The Minister of State should accept the amendment. More important, however, this Government and future Governments need to take the spirit of the amendment seriously in addressing not just climate change but also a sustainable economic and environmental future.

See this speech in context