Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the motion. There are a few things to be said. The Minister, Deputy Ryan, and the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, have gone around Europe, where a lot of countries are kicking back at this law for the simple reason of the consequences it will have. It is bad legislation and should not be let in here.

The Minister of State has spoken about it being voluntary. I will give him an example of what the Department of agriculture is going to do in August with a voluntary measure. If you have peaty type land with green grass growing on it, to receive next year's BISS scheme payment, you have to say you will not plough it, shore it or make any new drain in it. Is that voluntary? Technically it is but realistically it is putting a gun to a farmer's head. That is what this is about.

Small family farms, especially in the west, the north west, the midlands and the south west, will be adversely affected by this. The Government will talk about how measures under Article 9(4) are voluntary, but we should look at the other parts of the legislation. Articles 4(1) and 4(2) catch you on every bit of peaty type ground you could talk about. They put every bit of peaty type ground down as degraded without anyone ever having looked at it, which is unacceptable.

We should be ashamed of what the Minister, Deputy Ryan, has done in going around looking for other Ministers to come on board. The Ministers should have got their answer as to what rural people think of what has gone on in the European elections over recent days. Today and last year, 10% of every farm in this country has been put aside for space for nature because that had to be done under the new BISS scheme and what was called greening but is now called the eco-scheme. That is 1 million acres of Irish farmland that have been put aside under the Department of agriculture's scheme but it is still not enough.

This does not kick in today or before 2030 but after 2030. In fairness, everybody is genuine in saying it will not affect this, that or the other. The State will cover the period up to 2030 but, after 2030, when we go into the straitjacket of the European Court of Justice, that court will rule and the State will have to come in heavily, as every one of us has seen with the habitats directive. We have seen this with the likes of the habitats directive over many years. It is not that a Minister will intend to do this but that the environmentalists will watch. By the way, there are parts of this under which they can object if they think Johnny or Mary down the road is doing harm.

I ask the Minister of State to put to bed this work he is doing in Europe. We do not want it in Ireland. Many countries are opposed to it. We are not radicals. We are all in favour of doing things better. It should be borne in mind that 10% has been put aside. If the State wants to do something on its own lands, let it off and let it do that. No one has a problem with that but, by God, it should not try to force people into anything. This is the way it goes about it. It is not forcing people in the sense of catching them by the neck and saying they have to do something. Instead, it will say that you cannot get the single farm payment unless you do it. I gave the Minister of State the example of what is coming in August, which Ireland tried to kick back on but was not allowed to change, as regards farmers who have peaty type soils. It is not their fault where they were born, whether in the Golden Vale or on peat soil lands. These farmers will now not be allowed to shore it, plough it or make any drains in it. They have to sign up to that. What of the farmer? Because they rely on the single farm payment, they will have to adhere to this. In other words, it is voluntary but it is compulsory.

See this speech in context