Martin Browne (Tipperary, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Pringle and the Independent Group for tabling the motion. Detailed scrutiny is foremost in determining whether an obligation signed up to on behalf of our rural and agricultural communities will work for or against them. For the purposes of ensuring that the fears of those farming on carbon rich soils are on public record, I will relay a number of questions and concerns to the Minister. If these concerns are not addressed in the course of the remaining negotiations, then the Department of Agriculture, Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Green Party will have to answer to rural Ireland for their failings. Signing off on a course of action that is such a threat to the sector it affects the most is not something anybody here should be willing to do.

Fundamentally, the motion deals with the need to maintain and protect the agricultural area status of the lands referred to in GAEC 2. The Minister must acknowledge the wording of GAEC 2 proposed by the Council of Ministers has the potential to leave farmers powerless regarding the agricultural status of their land, and at the mercy of future Ministers when it comes to their entitlements for basic income supports, for which farmers are paid per eligible hectare of agricultural land. It has already been acknowledged that if the amendments proposed by the Council of Ministers were signed off, a member state derogation would be needed to receive payments. This already acknowledges the fundamental problem with the wording. It also raises concerns that if such a derogation, or whatever other term is used for this instrument, is put in place, any future Minister or negotiations could effectively abolish activity on these lands permanently. This level of uncertainty simply cannot be tolerated.

As I have said, I want to relay a few of the many questions I have received from farmers to give the Minister an idea of their concerns and the faults they see with the current wording. They have asked the following questions. Will the Minister give examples of what he means by "maximum flexibility" as regards the Article 4 amendment? The Minister is acutely aware of how in 2017 maximum flexibility failed for more than 98% of 927 Natura farmers who sought it. How will GAEC 2 flexibility or derogation work in a commonage situation with multiple farmers on the same derogation-eligible hectare? Is land subject to GAEC 2 flexibility on the eligible hectare automatically eligible for the eco scheme, the areas of natural constraint scheme and pillar 2 agri-environmental schemes? If, as a result of a GAEC 2 derogation to eligibility, land loses its status as permanent grassland established under local practices, what timeframe does the EU allow to re-establish local practices traditional to the area concerned? We cannot allow the Minister to accept decisions that undermine the agricultural area status of these lands and risk so many livelihoods. These are the reasons I am supporting the motion.

See this speech in context