Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister and wish him well in his endeavours to secure a package favourable to Ireland, its agricultural industry and our economy in the ongoing negotiations. The Minister referred to welcoming the input and co-operation of all sides in this House. On the Order of Business we had a debate on political consensus and I assure the Minister that in respect of this issue concerning the vital funding of Irish and European agriculture, there is broad consensus in the House. We are all wearing the green jersey. We are all committed to ensuring a package of measures will be arrived at which will retain agriculture in its key role as a driver of the rural economy, an employer and the centrepiece of farm families across the European Union.

The Common Agricultural Policy has been the most successful policy within the European Union, formerly the European Economic Community. It has produced for the people of Europe at minimal cost a food supply, in terms of quantity and quality, not available prior to the foundation of the European Community. The possibility of food shortages across the continent of Europe has become a distant memory as a result of the success of the policy.

The Common Agricultural Policy needs a good public relations manager, as no policy is more wrongly maligned or misunderstood. We see ill-informed commentary and articles written on its cost. It is often reported that it uses up 40% of the entire EU budget. We, therefore, need to get matters in perspective. The total budget for the Common Agricultural Policy as part of the broader activity and income of the European Union is minuscule. The current cost is approximately €100 per head of population. For €100 per citizen we are guaranteeing a food supply in terms of quantity, quality and security that is vital to the economic and social well-being of the peoples of Europe.

We should reflect more often on the situation in Europe just after the Second World War up until the mid-1950s when food scarcity was the norm. There was no guarantee of a food supply. As a result of the thinking behind the Common Agricultural Policy and the modest amounts of money spent on it, these worries are part of history and that is where we should leave them. We must continue with an agricultural policy that provides for security of supply from both a quality and quantity perspective. Beyond that simple equation of producing the basics for life, the Common Agricultural Policy has been the great generator of jobs in rural economies across Europe. This country has been a major beneficiary. We appreciate, however, that there must always come a time when we have to reflect on and renew policy. The Common Agricultural Policy has changed dramatically since this country joined the European Union in 1973 and we are now back to the change agenda. I appreciate that the matter is up for debate, consideration and, possibly, amendment.

I was impressed by the performance of the new European Commissioner for Agricultural and Rural Development, Mr. Ciolos, at the meeting of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food a fortnight ago. He appears to have a broad grasp of the issues over which he has a great degree of control. I know the Minister will engage closely with him in order to find a solution that is fair, balanced and good for the country and its economy and the broader population of Europe.

My party wishes to ensure the maximum national envelope is retained. Our priority is to secure a level of funding for Irish agriculture at least equivalent to what we currently enjoy. There is a need for ongoing debate on how the money will be spent. However, we in this House are united on the fact that we must maximise the funding the country receives from the EU budget. For that to happen it is imperative that the agriculture budget retains a strong significance in the total budgetary expenditure programme of the European Union. It is important that the Minister and his counterparts across the 27 member states of the European Union lobby in that regard and I accept that he is doing so.

It bears repeating the success of funding for agriculture since 1973 and highlighting the need for it to continue. We have received a significant number of submissions on how future moneys should be spent. There is a wide variety of ideas on the best way of putting the money to use. First, we must focus on the size of the budget and then move on towards analysing the historic payment basis and other variations of the theme. We have become used to such payments. It appears current thinking within the broader European Union suggests there will be a change. However, if the change is carefully managed, it will allow new opportunities to emerge. I took on board with interest the comment of the Commissioner that he was a practitioner of evolution rather than revolution. Accordingly, he will, wisely, tread with a degree of caution.

The Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has been examining the subject in some detail and is drawing up a report on the matter. We have expressed concern that major change could result in a regime of winners and losers. However, we must recognise that even under the current system of historic payments, there are winners and losers. I would be disappointed if those who have lost out under the current system were not given some hope that there will be flexibility under a new scheme. Whatever scheme is put in place must allow an opportunity for new entrants to become involved in agriculture. Too many have been shut out since the system of historic payments began. The basis for new entrants should be commercial, with a reasonable income.

The debate also centres on rural development and environmental measures. Farm families have ensured a "guaranteed Irish" form of rural development. Unfortunately, such families have disappeared in great numbers since 1973, which is understandable, given the introduction of industrialisation and modern technology. I accept things never remain the same. However, we must ensure farm families are recognised as offering the best guarantee of ensuring a strong rural economy and rural development. I participated in and supported Leader and other rural development projects. We must consider them as add-ons to the broader direct funding of agriculture. We must try to maximise the amount for the direct support of agriculture.

To return to the questions faced by the Minister, his colleagues and the Commissioner, the message must be sent from the House that retention of the maximum national envelope is our first and strongest request. There is no point in putting our heads in the sand and saying things will remain as they are. We must recognise there will be a degree of change, flexibility and, as the Commissioner described it, evolution. If we can secure the funding we need, we can have an additional debate on how the money will be spent to keep farm families on the land, support active farmers and protect the environment and rural communities.

The Common Agricultural Policy brought to an end food shortages and starvation in Europe. It has been a tremendous success story at a very modest cost - €100 per head per annum. We need to see this investment continued. I support the Minister and his colleagues in his endeavours to secure the best possible package for Ireland.