Joe O'Toole (Independent)

Go raibh míle maith agat a Aire as an méid sin ach caithfidh mé a rá nach raibh morán ann chun dóchas a thabhairt d'fheirmeoirí na tíre i ndáiríre. Tá cúpla rud sa mhéid a dúirt an tAire atá tábhachtach agus tiocfaidh mé ar ais chucu go luath. I begin by congratulating Senators Bradford and John Paul Phelan on tabling this excellent and timely motion. I feel sorry for my colleagues on the other side of the House, including my friend, Senator Carty, who I know is probably as worried about these issues as I am and is under a party whip on the issue.

There is no hope in this. I had intended to speak at some length on installation aid, early retirement and the other related issues addressed by the proposer and the seconder, but the Minister of State raised some issues in his speech to which I want to return. They are absolutely contradictory, do not sit with the position coming from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and raise major questions for me. I will come to those shortly.

Following the announcement of the budget I met some of the farmers' groups. What they have faced is appalling. They are the quieter victims of the budget. I do not argue with the Minister of State's statistics, but farmers have taken a reduction in income. The amount they have been getting for their commodities over the past ten to 15 years has been reducing. That is not the fault of the Minister of State or the Government, but it relates to global issues. However, the provisions in the budget will make it more difficult for farmers to get a sustainable livelihood from their lands. The reduction in the disadvantaged areas scheme from 45 ha to 34 ha was particularly difficult. That is absolutely unfair given that we are talking about places such as boglands and the sides of hills.

I support the motion and had considerably more to say on those issues. Suffice to say that I concur completely with the points made by the proposer and the seconder. I believe farmers individually will take an average income reduction of approximately 11%. I do not argue with the point made by the Minister of State that the effect on the agriculture budget is different. However, there is a reduction in what farmers are earning. In addition, like everybody else, they will also be hit by the levy, which is fine for those earning a decent income.

The Minister of State took my breath away in some of the things he said in his speech. Towards the end of his speech he said that despite the current global economic situation, "the long-term prospects for agricultural commodities on world markets are good at this time." He went on to say that the demand for dairy and beef products is forecasted to double. Let us consider this in the context of what he said earlier about climate change. Europe is demanding a 20% reduction in agricultural emissions. While I stand to be corrected, I believe there is no way — this is why I am disappointed in the Minister of State's speech — that Irish farmers will be able to double output and at the same time comply with a 20% reduction in emissions. It cannot be done, as I have been advised by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The only way to comply with a 20% reduction is by decimating the size of the national herd. There is no other way it can be done. Unless we put nappies on cows or keep them in tents, there is absolutely no way that we can sort out the emissions from cattle in fields given that the Minister of State talked about them being grass-based. This cannot be done. It is a conundrum and there is no way the Minister of State can match his two points. One of the reasons I wished to speak tonight is that there is a long-term issue for Irish agriculture, which will be decimated on that basis.

The Minister of State also stated forestry will play a major role in combating climate change. The Minister of State's Department has indicated the Government had previously proposed that total land use would be taken into consideration in dealing with agricultural emissions but this is not being allowed. The forestry element will not be taken into consideration. That is what we have been told on the climate change committee by the Department. The Acting Chairman heard that today, along with Senator Coffey and me. We questioned the representatives from the Department and got a very clear and fair presentation, but it is at odds with what the Minister of State told us this morning. Alternatively, we are not being told all of what we need to hear tonight.

I believe the Minister of State and agree that the world demand for beef, for example, will double. Arising from Europe's direction, we must reduce the emissions from agriculture here, which means herds must be reduced. Therefore we will not be able to supply the demand for beef in Europe from Europe. I am not making this up as I go along; these are incontrovertible facts. Irish farmers will see a growing market — as the Minister of State rightly indicated — but will be unable to participate. They will not even be able to hold their own position in the market. The gap will be filled by Argentinian and Brazilian beef coming to Ireland at the cost of the rain-forests in South America, food miles and inefficient farming habits in South America. That is the future being faced by Irish farmers currently.

As well as being hit by the budget, these farmers are not even being told what is coming down the line. They face eradication and need a champion. I know the Minister of State's own views on these issues and he must speak for them. The hits taken in the budget should and must be reversed, although this would only be a stepping stone. We must then consider the greater good. I know the Minister, Deputy Brendan Smith, has indicated he cannot see how we can meet the 20% reduction in emissions. He is 100% correct, as it cannot be done if we are to take advantage of the demand for dairy products and beef.

When the commodities market is finally coming right after 20 years going the wrong way for the Irish farmer and agriculture industry, they will not be there to take advantage of it. They will be halving their herds and shooting the cows. If the Minister of State finds a solution to this, he will be promoted immediately to a senior position in Europe. What I have said is correct or else I have been misled by all the experts appearing before us in dealing with the issue.

I agree that we are in a position to produce green clean island food in many ways. On the previous occasion the Minister of State was in the House I asked him to ensure farmers' markets got greater recognition and support, and he agreed with me on the issue. I also asked him about the nonsense of sorting vegetables by their shape. I told him that in the middle of his constituency we were dumping misshapen tomatoes that French housewives would be dying to buy. I am glad the European Union has reversed that daft decision today and I hope the Minister of State will claim some credit for that. He is entitled to do so.