Joe O'Reilly (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I join others in welcoming the Minister to the House. I thank him for coming here to facilitate this debate. The commendable commitment and competence he has brought to his Ministry since he assumed office is widely recognised throughout the sector.

I would like to focus on Cavan-Monaghan as a microcosm of the country as a whole and as a great exemplar when we are discussing the ANC scheme. As a result of the designation of both counties in their entirety as areas of natural constraint, payments of almost €9.5 million are made to farmers in County Cavan and payments of approximately €7.5 million are made to farmers in County Monaghan. The multiplier effect of those payments in local communities, in village shops and in the lives of people in these areas is crucial. This is not just about payments to farmers because this vital payment goes straight into the local economy.

The topography of Cavan-Monaghan makes the land difficult. In many instances, the land is very sloped and very difficult to farm. That has to be a consideration. When I looked through the list of biophysical criteria, my humble opinion was that the Cavan-Monaghan area would qualify in each instance. It certainly qualifies under criteria like temperature, dryness, soil, shallow rooting, poor depth, poor chemical properties and steep slopes, etc. It qualifies right across the biophysical criteria. Sadly, it was similarly eligible under the original criteria. In my view, there are no question marks over the justice of all of Cavan-Monaghan being included. I am proud that my party was in government when that initially happened and I would be anxious for it to be maintained.

The type of land we are talking about means it is very expensive to engage in activities like tunnel draining and reseeding. This can involve the reinvestment of almost all the farm income. The nature of the land requires farmers to spend a lot of money and to do a great deal of hard, physical work. When this work is done, it needs regular renewal and extensive upkeep. I emphasise to the Minister that when one engages in tunnel draining on one's land in an area like Cavan-Monaghan - this also applies to many other areas - that work needs to be redone, topped up and upgraded every so often. That is why it is expensive to maintain the land. If it looks well on day one, that does not mean it will look similarly well at a later stage, especially if money is not invested.

In Cavan-Monaghan, climatic conditions and land and soil types make it necessary to store slurry and house cattle for a few weeks longer than in other parts of the country. That is an important consideration. As a general observation, we should not penalise enterprising farmers who do back-breaking work and reinvest all their available income to improve their land. If land appears improved and looks good on a given day, that is not a reason for exclusion. In fact, it is something that should be applauded and supported. The basic underlying condition of such land, as indeed set out in the criteria, should be recognised. These farmers should continue to be supported and their success should be seen as a success for the concept of ANCs. The extra cost of maintaining these improvements should be recognised. It is a reality that a large number of farms in Cavan-Monaghan would not be viable without this additional payment. Food production is supporting the maintenance of rural communities. I do not have to tell the Minister that there is a perennial debate about the drift to the east as part of the demographic shift in this country. We need to maintain our rural communities. I think the maintenance of the ANC scheme, which brings in enormous income, is critical in that regard.

Senator Hopkins made an important point about the Brexit context to this debate. Like Senators Paul Daly and Mulherin, I have the privilege of being a member of the special Seanad committee on Brexit, which meets virtually every Thursday.We had representatives of the agrifood sector in last week. There were people from farming organisations, the food sector and so on and to a man and a woman, every one of them cited the huge difficulty Brexit presents for the sector, so the areas of natural constraint payments are critical in that context.

The areas that are included should be maintained. I have a deep knowledge of Cavan, not Monaghan, and I stress that those areas should be maintained. I have no doubt that the case made for other areas is equally valid. The areas should be maintained because they have the underlying conditions. Insofar as one identifies improvements in spots, that is only a sign of the success of the scheme. Were it otherwise, the scheme would need more questioning than if it was being used for food production, the maintenance of family farms units and the support of our rural towns and communities.

This is a critical scheme, and I am delighted the Minister is here to discuss it. I agree with Senator Ó Clochartaigh that it is welcome that we are focusing on something specific rather than making general remarks about agriculture as an important sector, which it is, but those general remarks are not necessarily as important. What is important is that we hone in on specific realities, and this is one. We must hold and maintain what we have already. I wish the Minister well in his effort to do that, but I could not agree more with the IFA people I met from Cavan-Monaghan, and the people who approach me all the time. That area depends on the payments, and the rural economy depends on it. Were that to be declassified, in addition to Brexit and all the other pressures that are coming on the rural communities, it would be a doomsday scenario that we cannot even contemplate.