Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Senators Tim Lombard and Pádraig Mac Lochlainn raised the very important issue of trying to attract more young people to enter agriculture. It is an issue that has bedevilled us since the days of the early retirement scheme and the installation aid scheme, but it is not a problem experienced exclusively in Ireland or the European Union as a whole; it is a global problem. Every country is facing the same challenges. Yesterday I met the New Zealand agriculture Minister and it was one of the issues that came up in passing. It is also an issue in other countries I have visited, but I have a sense that we are turning a corner. There is now a greater appreciation of the people who produce food. There is a greater interest globally in food provenance and respect for those who farm the land. That might help to turn the tide and make farming an attractive proposition for many, but we need innovation. Whether we look at it from the point of view of encouraging older farmers to get out of farming - we did this under the early retirement scheme and we also had the installation aid scheme and various iterations of different schemes - it is one of the major challenges. In the context of the next CAP, generational renewal will be an important element. To that end, I am interested in hearing Members' suggestions.

Senator Pádraig Mac Lochlainn referred to the agricultural markets task force. Again, this is really important because we export one third of our produce to the United Kingdom, one third to the rest of the European Union and one third to international markets outside it. We favour having a trans-European legal framework to deliver the best results for the primary producer, but that view is not universally shared. Other member states see it as a domestic competence and do not want to have a pan-European legal framework. There has been a public consultation process on the agricultural markets task force initiated by the Commission which is expected to bring forward proposals before May which we await with interest. Trying to ensure primary producers get a fairer crack of the whip has been an issue since Adam was a boy. In fact, if one looks at it, the two extremities of the supply chain are screwed when the squeeze comes on. The distributor, the retailer and even the processor all seem to have an untouchable proportion of the price, while the primary producer and the consumer very often are squeezed. Greater equity is required. I hope the agricultural markets task force, the public consultation process and the awaited Commission proposals will deliver. We did some work in the groceries and goods regulations of April 2016 on written contracts and to abolish hello money. It has had an impact, but given that we export 90% of what we produce, we need an European legal framework for that element of the market.

Senator Grace O'Sullivan made a specific point about the suckler cows figures, which are really interesting. Prior to the introduction of milk quotas in the early 1980s, we had about 400,000 suckler cows. We now have about 960,000. The reason for the growth in the intervening period is that dairy sector expansion was curtailed and people saw an opportunity to move into the suckler cow business. In fact, it was anticipated when the quota regime came to an end in 2015 that there would be a 30% reduction in suckler cow numbers.The drop in the number of farmers who have moved away from suckler cows has been about 6% nationally but, from my recollection, the biggest drop has been in Waterford, with the second biggest in Kilkenny, the third biggest in Carlow and the fourth biggest in Cork. We could safely assume that has been primarily driven by farmers who had a dairy operation and decided they would expand their dairy herd at the expense of the second enterprise they had been running. Interestingly, there has not been a significant drop in the suckler cow numbers along the western seaboard. The overall national drop in numbers since 2015 has been about 6%. The biggest reduction has been 22% - 22% of what number is the interesting aspect - in Waterford, 9% in Cork, with the reductions in Carlow and Kilkenny being somewhere between those two percentages.

We are supporting suckler cow farmers very significantly under a programme called beef data and genomics. That programme is about improving the genetic merit of the herd, trying to make sure that we can finish these cattle faster at a younger age through that genetic improvement, improving herd fertility, etc. If farmers have more herd fertility, they are not carrying a suckler cow for perhaps 20 months between calving rather than having a cow calve every calendar year or every 11 months which might be considered the optimum. We are putting a good deal of money into that. Off the top of my head, it is about €250 million or €300 million over the lifetime of the rural development programme. That is an important factor.

What has been called for is a coupled payment and we need to have an honest debate on that. With respect to a coupled payment, in this context it means that the more suckler cows farmers keep, the more money they will get paid. The challenge for the industry is to be able to get to market the beef progeny we have at a reasonable return. If we were to have a situation where we would be paying people, regardless of the quality, to keep extra numbers, we would drive numbers and cut across the improvements we are trying to make in quality through genetic improvement. Therefore, a coupled payment would be a retrograde step. The challenge with the growing dairy enterprise is to be able to manage the increased progeny that is feeding into the beef sector in particular. We are doing work on increasing the number of calf exports in particular, which is addressing that problem. We have much more work to do in finding a progeny off the dairy expansion that is suitable for a beef purpose as well.

One matter I often lament - it is like a dialogue of the deaf and one might say it often happens in chambers such as this one - is that it is difficult to have a constructive dialogue between the dairy enterprise and the beef enterprise in Ireland. They seem to be of the mindset that ne'er the two should meet, whereas we have to develop some kind of a complementary offspring from the dairy herd that is suitable for the beef enterprise. I know there is a concern in the meat industry generally that the expansion of the dairy herd could be at the expense of quality in the beef sector. We need to work at that to make sure that the progeny is appropriate. At the same time we need to ensure that the suckler cow sector, which is an important backbone to the beef industry, in particular in the west, is supported. However, driving numbers through a coupled payment - which is the terminology used - where there is coupling whereby the more cows one has, the more one would get paid, would be the wrong system of travel at this stage.

I have probably gone on too long but Senator Ó Clochartaigh raised an interesting issue around food waste. We must also consider the input waste that has gone into growing that food, which all feeds into the climate change debate. Many social entrepreneurs are involved in the issue of food waste such as FoodCloud, etc. It is probably reflective of the disposable society in which we live that we could buy a product today, put it in the fridge and two weeks later note we did not use it and decide to throw it out. We need to educate consumers and have a shorter journey between the consumers and retailers to ensure we minimise food waste. It is loading our carbon footprint as well. It is one of those areas on which we need to make progress.

Senator Conway-Walsh raised the issue of the appeals process. We recently got a report on a review of the independent appeals office. It is a very good report. The appeals office works very well for farmers. If they feel aggrieved about a decision by the Department they should be encouraged to explore the appeals option because its success rate is quite strong. I acknowledge the role played by the people who participated in the appeals review. Some of the report's recommendations will require legislative change to implement but, broadly speaking, I accept the thrust of it. I will be sending it to the Oireachtas committee and to the stakeholders for their feedback but it is a very good piece of work.

In principle, the appeals office does good work. I take the Senator's point about the process being slow. A four-year case would appear to be a wild exception and there may be circumstances around that. In respect of files, it is a little like what happens with the social welfare appeals office, when they leave my Department and are passed to the independent appeals office and I do not have any reach into the operation of the independent appeals office. It is an important process and delivers quite a lot.