Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

2. To ask the Taoiseach his response to the NESC’s report, Just Transition in Agriculture and Land Use. [36287/23]

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 3 together.

The National Economic and Social Council, NESC, advises me on policy issues relating to sustainable economic, social and environmental development in Ireland. The NESC report found the agriculture and land use sector can increasingly be part of the solution on climate change and biodiversity loss. It emphasised an approach that is opportunity led to enable farmers to benefit from the significant benefits of transition for rural livelihoods and recognised that transition would entail significant costs that needed to be fairly and sustainably distributed to ensure no one is left behind.

The report stresses the importance of a just transition that is based on dialogue and is inclusive, and participation underpinned by a co-ordinated approach so that it can achieve real change in a balanced, inclusive and just way. The findings of the report offer a valuable contribution to our understanding of how best to reduce emissions in the area of agriculture and land use. It outlines a series of interventions and recommendations for implementing the principles of a just transition in practice.

Regarding NESC report No. 163, entitled Inequality and Well-Being Frameworks, this report considers how Ireland’s well-being framework, adopted as part of the 2020 programme for Government, can provide a deeper understanding of inequality and disadvantage in Ireland. The report proposes the well-being framework can help identify inequalities. It focuses on the distribution of well-being across Ireland, using data that are more disaggregated on the basis of gender, age, social class, disability and ethnic background. NESC also highlights the well-being framework’s use of new data in areas such as caring, housing tenure and environment to help further pinpoint particular concerns and inequalities across Ireland and elsewhere.

The Irish well-being framework is similar to others that have been developed internationally. While few well-being frameworks have yet to be fully embedded in policy decisions, the NESC report recognises the Irish well-being framework has been strong on raising awareness of well-being and inequalities in Ireland as well as highlighting new data in these areas. The report and its findings are being examined and used by the well-being unit in my Department.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Taoiseach for his response. As we all know, the move to a low-carbon economy involves a transition across many sectors. In this instance, we are focusing specifically and momentarily on agriculture. The ambition is for the Government to align food production systems with consumer sentiment and environmental ambition. As a result of the commitments made in the programme for Government to achieve that, we have seen the climate action plan and emission reductions across Departments and various sectors, including agriculture, and we have signed up to the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, scheme with its many associated environmental elements and conditionalities.

I wish to focus on one of those elements, that being, the good agricultural and environmental condition, GAEC. On first glance, it appears to go much further than was committed to under peatlands restoration. Bord na Móna drew down approximately €100 million from the European Commission for its restoration and rewetting programme. The National Parks and Wildlife Service, NPWS, and the Office of Public Works, OPW, also drew down funds for that practice in respect of their lands. The initial EU restoration programme was eventually tailored to meet our commitments under the rewetting programme in terms of State lands, lands owned by Coillte, etc. The programme was not envisaged as going beyond that, but it would appear there is talk in the context of the GAEC of a certain percentage of soil matter not being subject to normal farming practices as a condition of CAP. This matter needs to be clarified. I am sure the Department will do so in the coming weeks now that the issue has been highlighted to it.

The ambition behind the NESC’s report is to ensure there is dialogue and consultation across all sectors and stakeholders, ultimately leading to agreement on land use, biodiversity, just transition, farming practices, commitments on energy provision, what the agricultural sector can contribute in that regard and the funding associated with it. However, it would appear the horse has bolted in some respects and that consultation, dialogue, commitment, inclusiveness and informed decision-making are coming after the commitments we have signed up to within the GAEC under CAP. I would like the Government to reflect on this matter and respond appropriately so we can square the circle that appears to be emerging. The nitrates directive was a commitment that was signed up to on the basis that there would be improvements in water quality. In the absence of those, there is an understanding that we cannot revisit it. We must ensure that, in the meantime, we provide measures and show the progress that can be made on retaining the level of 220 kg N/ha as opposed to 170 kg N/ha, which would decimate the sector. This is notwithstanding a period within which we might be able to find new initiatives to assist those who have been hit by the initial derogation.

Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to draw the Taoiseach’s attention to the issue of the nitrates derogation. I attended an IFA meeting just outside Dunleer approximately a month ago.

Members of the Taoiseach's party were there. The meeting was to deal with the nitrates derogation and Aine O'Connell from the IFA dairy policy executive spoke. In fairness, sometimes one can get a better quality of narrative or communication at these meetings than happens out in the wider world. There was an attempt to say water quality was very important but was impacted by the fact there was a huge increase in population. In fairness, she shut that conversation down straight away. She said we should be absolutely clear that when we talk about nitrates, this relates to cattle and farming and that we must keep our house in order and that it is an absolute necessity that rogue operators are dealt with because they do everybody a disservice. The understanding, as I said, among some of the political representatives who were there and the IFA was that there was to be some form of negotiation or at least more communication with the Commission. When the Minister, Deputy McConalogue, had a Zoom meeting and said that was it, that was part of the reason there was some shock. What was the communication between the Government and even some of its own elected representatives and, beyond that, with the IFA, if we already knew this was a done deal?

The Taoiseach, alongside the Minister, has looked to have the Commissioner over. What is the expectation in relation to that? While accepting that water quality is of the utmost importance to us, there are some disputes in relation to how this was gauged.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to ask the Taoiseach if he has seen the film "I, Daniel Blake". It is heartbreaking.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is it good?

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is very good but it is a very difficult watch because it is about people with disabilities who are forced to go through medical assessments under the work capability assessment introduced by the British Tory Government. Their disabilities and inability to work is not being recognised. It is a heartbreaking and very difficult film to watch. The reason I ask is that it seems the Government is out to make this film happen in real life in Ireland by copying the Tory policy of the work capability assessment. That is the essence of the Government's proposals in relation to the disability and domiciliary care allowance by introducing a medical assessment to assess capability of work and putting people into three different tiered categories based on how much they can work. It is rooted in a fundamentally Victorian view of the deserving and undeserving poor. Either a person is fit for work or they are not. The idea of a tiered system is just about dragging people through the mill and putting huge pressure on them.

A woman, who was in touch with me, is the parent of four children, all of whom have disabilities. She also has a disability. She said that the assessment process would be dehumanising and soul-destroying to try to prove that you and your children are "disabled enough" to get the support needed.

If the Government is genuinely concerned about persons who are long-term sick, it should change the current conditions to qualify for the invalidity pension. If someone's medical condition deems them permanently incapable of working, they should be automatically entitled. If there is a real desire to help people with disabilities into the workforce, an onus should be placed on employers for real inclusion. The Government should expand illness benefit qualifying criteria to allow self-employed persons to qualify.

Christopher O'Sullivan (Cork South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The issue of nitrates derogation came up. I understand the Commissioner for the Environment, Oceans and Fisheries has been invited to Ireland by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy McConalogue, to learn about the dairy sector. I understand he has accepted that invitation. I ask that we go further and bring the Commissioner, with the Taoiseach, if he wishes, to west Cork. It is one of the areas most impacted by the new nitrates rules, nitrates derogation and the reduction to 220kg N/ha. There has been incredible work happening in the Timoleague catchment area and 15 years of research undertaken by Teagasc, where it has shown and demonstrated that measures like low-emission spreading and soil management work in terms of reducing the amount of nitrates going into our water systems. When the Commissioner comes to Ireland, can that invitation be extended to bring him to west Cork to see the incredible work going on?

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for the important issues they raised. Deputy Cowen raised the issue of peatland restoration and rewetting, the drawdown of funds and good agricultural and environmental condition, GAEC. I do not have the information to hand but I think he is correct in that the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine will want to clarify the matter in the coming weeks. I will ask for that to be done. On the general issue, I am firmly of the view, which I said when I met the IFA a few weeks ago in Limerick, that we need a better structured dialogue when it comes to climate action and land use in relation to agriculture, involving the Government, farm organisations and environmental NGOs. I will give some consideration to how that might best be done.

We have a model for industrial relations called the Labour Employer Economic Forum, LEEF, which involves unions, employers and the Government all trying to work together, making compromises and trying to implement solutions. We do not have that for climate, agriculture and biodiversity but we should. Any such structured dialogue would have to focus on identifying problems, finding workable solutions and implementing them together. No dialogue can be about delaying action on climate or biodiversity loss or enabling us to resile from international or legally-binding commitments.

In regard to nitrates, we will have to work very hard and play very smart to keep the 220kg N/ha derogation. We may be the only country that has a derogation in a few years' time. Other countries see it as a competitive advantage for us that they have to vote for and that puts us in a difficult position politically. We can defend it; our model of grass-based agriculture is different from that of other countries where it is much more intensive and indoor and not as grass-based. Going to 175 kg N/ha would be catastrophic not just for farm incomes but also the wider food industry. We have to remember that it is not just about farmers; it is also about everyone involved in the supply chain, farm-related businesses, the food industry and export revenues for the country. Therefore, there has to be a national effort to make sure that we maintain the 220kg N/ha derogation.

The Minister, Deputy McConalogue, and I have jointly invited the Commissioner for the Environment, Oceans and Fisheries, Mr. Sinkevičius, to Ireland. I do not know if he will be able to go to County Cork but we will suggest that he visit a farm somewhere in the country if we are able to work that into his programme. I am glad he accepted the invitation. I do not want to and, never have, raised expectations as to what is possible but we want to explore any flexibility that might exist in terms of timelines and other matters. I welcome that he will visit.

It is worth pointing out that the Minister probably meets him on a monthly basis at Agriculture and Fisheries Council and other meetings. The idea that he only met him by videoconference is very unfair and does not represent the level of engagement between the Minister and the Commissioner.

Deputy Paul Murphy asked if I have seen "I, Daniel Blake"; I have. I saw it when I was Minister for Social Protection. It is a very good film, by the way, and I would recommend it to anyone. It is, of course, one-sided. All of the characters in the film, or at least all of the people in receipt of benefits in the film, are very genuine and honest people who need help and have done as much as they can for themselves. There are other programmes, like "Benefits Street" and so on which show a very different picture. Of course, as is always the case, the truth lies somewhere in between. That is the real world we live in. In terms of reforming disability payments, we are not going to follow in UK model, which is all about knocking people off benefits. Our model, which is still under development, is about recognising that all disabilities are not the same and that some people need more support than others.