Feargal Quinn (Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Minister is very welcome. Actually, I am not sure he is all that welcome, because I put some thoughts together before he came in and he must have read my speech - or at least, he said exactly what I had planned to say. I planned to start off by talking about the fact that the world's population would increase from 6.7 billion people to 9 billion people by 2050 and asking how we are going to feed all those people. I did not anticipate the figures the Minister gave, and I was very impressed by them because I planned to talk about the challenges and opportunities in the dairy market. I did not know of the likely anticipated surplus stock in the dairy sector, particularly in China.

The fact that we have such an increase in the world's population means that we need to look at new ways to farm if we are to continue. How are we going to feed those 9 billion people? If we continue along the same path, emissions will continue to increase, we will waste water and we will continue to kill crucial animals and insects. There are some very interesting examples from Europe. The Netherlands is notable in that it is moving ahead with technology and improved farming techniques, which I am sure the Minister is aware of. New animal sheds are being installed with underground conveyer belts which remove manure instantly. As a result, the Netherlands has the second lowest level of animal carbon emissions in the EU. Some of the greenhouses in the Netherlands have solar panels which produce energy for homes. I think we can do a lot more in introducing technology such as this to Irish farms. In addition, the Dutch example is interesting, as they are using this sort of expertise in technology and intensive farming and selling it abroad. One Dutch university has close links with China's biggest company. Ireland, with such renowned and massive dairy production, should be selling its expertise abroad in a similar way, and maybe we are. I am involved with the Institute of Food and Health in UCD and I know it has a strong link with universities in China. I have previously raised the example of Fonterra, the New Zealand dairy co-operative, which is establishing its own farms in China. Most interestingly, it is developing dairy products specifically to cater to the tastes of the Chinese consumer. The fragmentation of our dairy industry is hindering us and we have much more to do in terms of food innovation - not just selling Irish food products abroad, but developing country-specific products and catering for those specific markets.

Many scientists will agree that we need more intensive farming. That is not to say we need more crowding of animals into small spaces, but we need to increase productivity and look at areas that use fewer resources. It has been found that white meat is much better than red meat in terms of damage to the environment. It takes two kilograms of feed to produce one kilogram of chicken, while it takes five to 20 kilograms of feed to produce one kilogram of beef. We must take this into account. The figures are huge.

When we talk about sustainable agriculture, we also need to ask the difficult questions about genetically modified crops. I think I am the only one who ever talks about genetically modified crops. Everybody else seems to shiver when they hear about them. It is a simple fact that organic farming will not be able to feed the world. The proponents of genetically modified products argue that altering crops is nothing new, given that we have been altering crops genetically for 10,000 years. In respect of the safety of crops, the European Commission has funded studies involving 500 independent research groups over 25 years. The studies concluded that there is, as of today, "no scientific evidence associating GMOs with higher risks for the environment or for food and feed safety than conventional plants and organisms." Indeed, genetic modification can massively increase productivity - by more than 30% - and provide food security for people around the world who desperately need this. Professor Pamela Ronald from the University of California at Davis, argues that some of the benefits of genetically modified food include massive reductions in the amount of insecticides in the environment, improved soil quality and reduced erosion, proven health benefits to the farmers growing these crops, and their families, as a result of reduced exposure to harsh chemicals, economic benefits to local communities, enhanced biodiversity of beneficial insects, a reduction in the number of pest outbreaks on farms with genetically modified crops and neighbouring farms with non-genetically modified crops, and increased profits for farmers.

It is argued by Professor Ronald that "there is now a clear scientific consensus that genetically engineered crops and ecological farming practices can co-exist and if we are serious about building a future sustainable agriculture they must." I think we should be able to debate the issue of genetically modified crops and discuss whether crop productivity can be improved with science. I am not sure who is right in regard to this issue but we should debate it. We should not ban such a debate. Will we debate the issue or take an anti-science stance which poses the danger that our agriculture industry could be left behind? I mention this issue because it is clear there is an opportunity to develop this area and I think we are avoiding this debate. The lack of debate about genetically modified organisms and moving to this area means that we are losing out in the agriculture biotech sector where we could create hundreds if not thousands of new jobs if we are open to supporting this sector by making some decisions. It is strange that we are pro-science in most areas but not in the area of genetic modification. Given the recent horsemeat scandal, the agricultural sector should move towards more traceability to instill more confidence in the consumer. I am sure the Minister will tell us we are doing that already. I believe it is possible to do even more.

Scientific progress and regulation in this area will be beneficial. We need to use such technology to ensure that we do not sit still and we need to learn from countries such as the Netherlands to-----