John Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 8: To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his priorities in the negotiations of the Common Agricultural Policy post-2013; the recent discussions he has had with his EU counterparts on future negotiations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36264/09]

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A first policy debate on CAP post-2013 took place at the informal Agriculture and Fisheries Council in September last year under the French EU Presidency. The Czech Presidency continued the debate in the first months of 2009, focusing in particular on the issue of direct payments to farmers. The Swedish Presidency programme provides for further discussion later this year concentrating on rural development issues. In addition to these discussions at Council, both my officials and I have engaged with other member states and the Commission bilaterally on the future of the CAP.

Notwithstanding the discussions to date, concrete proposals have yet to emerge on the shape of EU agriculture policy beyond 2013. The Commission is expected to bring forward a formal communication in mid-2010 on the future of the CAP, followed by legal proposals in mid 2011. A first round of formal negotiations will commence on the communication, leading possibly to the agreement of Council conclusions, while the more intense phase of formal negotiations will commence once the legal proposals are tabled.

My view, expressed at meetings of the Council and bilaterally to my ministerial colleagues, is that we must maintain a strong agricultural production base in the European Union in the future to take account of the challenges ahead in meeting increased demands for food. Any reduction in food production in the EU would be taken up elsewhere, where less efficient production systems exist and would result in a heavier carbon footprint. We must also undertake food production and distribution in a manner that is sustainable in all its dimensions, including economically, socially and environmentally.

There will be major challenges ahead from climate change, increased competition on world and EU markets, the international economic crisis and other factors. We must ensure we have the capacity to cope with the challenges and fully exploit the opportunities as they emerge. To do so our whole sector, from farm to fork, must be highly efficient and competitive. It must also be innovative, producing the products that changing consumer tastes demand and it must be relentlessly focused on quality and safety.

To achieve these objectives, there is a continuing need for an active and appropriately resourced European agricultural policy. That policy must recognise the role that a cohesive agriculture and rural development policy can play in addressing future energy needs, addressing environmental concerns and providing a secure and sustainable food supply in Europe.

I launched a consultation process in July last with stakeholders to obtain their views on what EU agriculture policies would serve Ireland and the EU best in the years to come. I am very pleased with the response received to date and I call on those organisations which have not already made submissions to let me have their views as soon as possible. All submissions received will be carefully examined and will help to inform our position in the very important negotiations that lie ahead. I thank Members of the Oireachtas who have made individual submissions as well.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister's and Department's publication on the reform of the Common Agriculture Policy seems to favour a move from the current system of support to a flat, area-based payment system. Does the Minister intend to pursue that objective at a European level in negotiations? Does the Minister believe he undermines his own case in that regard by current and proposed further cuts in the area-based payments inflicted on farmers?

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No. I point out to Deputy Creed the document we issued was consultative. It was to generate debate and to put out the parameters of the issues to be discussed. We have clearly stated that we have no set views. The point we have outlined strongly, clearly and consistently in Europe is that we must have a well-funded CAP. We will not tolerate the weakening of the European Union's food production base. We must meet the challenges.

Food production must be doubled by 2050 and there are climate change issues and those of the protection of the environment. I have reiterated the point consistently in Europe and I fervently believe that if we were to lessen or weaken the food production base in Europe which, by definition, is a very efficient system, it would shift the demand for more food production to less efficient systems in continents far away from us. Such a shift in demand would lead to deforestation, production of food in less efficient systems and the transport of food throughout the world. The end result of this would be an increase in the carbon footprint. We sent out the document during the summer and I appreciate Deputy Creed's response, that of other Members and that of many organisations. The purpose of the document was to initiate discussion and debate. We have not given any indication that we want to move from the single payment supported scheme to a flat base system. We have not indicated that to any extent whatsoever. In the CAP health check, a consultative committee worked closely with my Department. We will again be establishing a consultative committee representative of all interest groups to work on devising proposals well in advance of the serious discussions that will commence.

Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Environmental measures, such as water management, will become more prevalent under the CAP in future. The question concerns the administrative functions. There is a suggestion afoot that we will move from pillar one to pillar two and that, instead of direct payments to farmers for management of the economy, it will be administered through various local organisations. That danger is there, so the question needs to be addressed. It may not be a real fear, but it is something that needs to be addressed. I would like to hear the Minister's view on that in the first instance.

Second, as regards carbon reduction, at some stage there will have to be an internal debate between the Minister, Deputy Smith, and the Minister of State, Deputy Sargent, as to whether methane reduction will become an issue if the process of carbon reduction becomes part of the CAP regime. The climate change agenda is also on the cards, given the forthcoming UN conference in Copenhagen in December. How will we get to a situation where we do not compromise production or market share, while meeting future demands for food, as well as other targets? There will be an internal battle within the Government on that issue. It is something that will arise in the context of the CAP. I would like to get an opinion from the Minister on these questions.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

All the points raised by Deputy Sherlock are very important. I do not favour additional funding going to pillar two. Pillar one has been extremely beneficial not just for farmers, but also for protecting the environment and ensuring that Europe has security of food supplies for its citizens. That was the second article of the Treaty of Rome in 1957 and it is as appropriate today as it was for the founding fathers of the EEC. All these issues are being discussed at the Cabinet sub-committee on climate change. The Deputy rightly mentioned the leading research and advisory role of Teagasc, which has done phenomenal research work for my Department. It works closely with the Department's inspectorate on what is achievable. Together with New Zealand's farmers, Ireland's agricultural sector is regarded as having one of the most efficient food production systems in the world. Therefore we cannot reduce methane gas emissions that much. A lot of research has gone into the dietary requirements of animals, including grass breeding as well as animal breeding. There has been phenomenal progress in that regard.

Andrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Going back to Deputy Sherlock's first point, can we take that as a commitment and not a negotiable point - that the CAP will be based on pillar one on the basis that food production needs to double by 2020?

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, but it is by 2050.

Andrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Otherwise the CAP will be about issuing food coupons to consumers. That is what will happen. Is the commitment non-negotiable?

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I cannot give a commitment for the other 26 member states of the European Union.

Andrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister can do so for Ireland, however.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Absolutely. My commitment is to pillar one. I have outlined that very clearly at every opportunity we have had to discuss the future of the Common Agricultural Policy post-2013.