Jerry Cowley (Mayo, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 180: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food if the nitrates regulations will damage farming here and the rural economy; her views on whether the research imposing fertiliser limits on farmers is not conclusive; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6083/06]

Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The implementation of the nitrates directive is a matter in the first instance for the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The Minister has recently made regulations giving legal effect to Ireland's national action programme under the directive.

There has been much comment and speculation in recent days and weeks about the effect of the nitrates regulations on farming. I am aware that the implementation of the regulations will be challenging for some farmers and I am also aware that there is a serious information deficit on some aspects of the matter. Clearly this is not in the interests of farmers themselves and I am anxious to bring clarity to the situation as soon as possible.

As a first step, the Department has placed advertisements in the farming press explaining the main provisions of the regulations in clear and straightforward terms. A handbook is being finalised and will be sent to every farmer as soon as possible. Officials of the Department have already had discussions with Teagasc about arrangements for the delivery of information which will further help farmers to understand the practical aspects of the new regulations.

The Government is committed to giving the farming community all the practical help that it can. Following from commitments made in the Sustaining Progress agreement, which related explicitly to the nitrates directive, payment rates in REPS increased by 28% on average in 2004. The number of farmers in REPS reached record levels last year. The Department's Estimates for 2006 includes a provision of €323 million for REPS, the highest ever.

It also introduced improvements to the farm waste management scheme and the dairy hygiene scheme in 2004, and I have tabled proposals to the Commission for further major improvements to the farm waste management scheme which will provide a far more attractive package to farmers than that which was previously available. Only last week in Brussels, I met Commissioner Fischer Boel and impressed on her the need for early Commission approval of the scheme as submitted. I have secured an Estimates provision of €43 million in 2006 for the revised scheme.

Most of the controversy in recent days has centred on the nutrient management provisions of the regulations. These were finalised following difficult negotiations with the Commission's scientific experts, with both Departments making use of the advice provided by Teagasc. It was the Commission, however, that determined the final content of the regulations. Teagasc has recently indicated that it may be possible to review part of the advice it had given on the application of phosphorus, in a way that could improve the effectiveness of the regulations. The Government and the European Commission saw merit in allowing Teagasc time to elaborate this new advice and, accordingly, the Minister, Deputy Roche, announced a brief de facto deferral of the implementation of Part 3 of the regulations.

Teagasc has been requested to provide, as a matter of urgency, the necessary scientific case to support any revision of the phosphorus tables in the regulations. The two Departments will carefully consider any submission received from Teagasc while also bearing in mind that any proposals for revision of the phosphorus tables will have to respect the environmental requirements associated with the nitrates directive and meet with the agreement of the European Commission.

Teagasc has not been specifically requested to review its advice on nitrogen issues. However, to the extent that its revised submission on crop nutrient requirements suggests any further beneficial adjustments to the regulatory regime, these will of course be considered. The possibility of such further adjustments will also depend on its respecting the environmental requirements involved and on its acceptance by the European Commission.

A central issue arising from the nitrates directive is the need to secure a derogation which will allow certain farmers to operate, under appropriate conditions and controls, up to a level of 250 kg of organic nitrogen per hectare. The proposal was given an initial presentation to the EU nitrates committee in December, and further scientific data have been supplied to the Commission following bilateral discussions.

The proposal will need to be discussed again at future meetings of the nitrates committee before approval can be obtained. Securing this derogation is vital for the most productive dairy farmers in particular, and it is important that the position on the regulations is clarified at an early date so that the negotiations on the derogation can proceed.

Mary Upton (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 181: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food the discussions she has held with farming organisations and on what dates about the nitrates directive since 1 January 2006; her response to some farmers' organisations' provisional withdrawal from the partnership talks; her views on the potential impact this will have on the overall partnership arrangements; the action she is taking to ensure the continued involvement of the farming organisations within the framework; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6085/06]

Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As indicated in the following table, since 1 January 2006, myself and the Ministers of State in the Department, along with Department officials, have met representatives of the farming organisations on issues of particular relevance to them, including the nitrates directive.

In the weeks leading up to the signing of the nitrates regulations by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on 11 December, there had been a number of meetings with representatives of the major farming organisations. These meetings were part of the consultation process on the regulations, launched by the Minister, Deputy Roche, on 7 October 2005. This was itself the culmination of a lengthy and broader consultation process on the implementation of the nitrates directive.

I very much regret the decision of some of the farmers' organisations to suspend their involvement in the partnership talks. They retain the option of re-joining the discussions, and I would urge them to do so, but this is a matter that they must decide.

The Government believes that the farming pillar has a significant and useful part to play in the partnership process. The Government's objective is to continue to use this process as a proven and effective mechanism for the achievement of economic progress. In addition, it is desirable that the importance of the agri-food sector is reflected in national agreements as it has been for the last 19 years through six partnership agreements. The Department will therefore remain fully involved in the talks with the remaining farmer organisation and will stand ready to engage with others should they choose to rejoin the process.

To this end, a significant amount of preparatory work has been undertaken by the Department in advance of these discussions. All the farm organisations have made positive contributions at the initial plenary and bilateral sessions of the partnership talks on 2 and 8 February respectively, where they raised the implementation of the nitrates directive among other issues. The IFA and the ICMSA have also submitted comprehensive papers setting out in detail their views on what is required for a successful national agreement and the Department is currently examining these documents.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 182: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food the reason guidelines have not been made available to the farmers affected in view of the fact that the nitrates directive is now law; the position of farmers in relation to the law; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6241/06]

Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The implementation of the nitrates directive is a matter in the first instance for the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The Minister has recently made regulations giving legal effect to Ireland's national action programme under the directive. It is now important for farmers to be given as much accurate information as possible about where they stand legally and about the practical implications of the regulations.

A good deal of recent comment and speculation has been selective and indeed misleading, and has only led to greater confusion among farmers. As a first step towards clearing up that confusion, the Department has placed advertisements in the farming press explaining the main provisions of the regulations in clear and straightforward terms. A handbook is being finalised and will be sent to every farmer as soon as possible. Officials of the Department have already had discussions with Teagasc about arrangements for the delivery of information, which will further help farmers to understand the practical aspects of the new regulations.

The position of farmers on the nitrates regulations is that the regulations came into law on 1 February. The organic nitrogen limit of 170 kg organic nitrogen per hectare per year applies from that date, although the Department is in negotiations with the Commission on derogation arrangements for more intensive farmers. The rules about record keeping, about soil and weather conditions for spreading fertiliser and manure, and the rules about buffer zones, also came into force from 1 February 2006.

Prohibited application periods for the spreading of organic and chemical fertilisers come into force on 15 September 2006 for chemical fertiliser and 15 October for organic fertiliser. The manure storage requirements also came into force on 1 February, though in practice farmers have up to 31 December 2008 to comply fully with these. The only exception relates to holdings with more than 100 pigs, which must have 26 weeks' storage in place on 31 December 2006.

The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has, however, announced a brief de facto deferral of the implementation of Part 3 of the regulations, which deals with nutrient management. These provisions were finalised following difficult negotiations with the Commission's scientific experts, with both Departments making use of the advice provided by Teagasc, although it was the Commission that determined the final content of the regulations.

Teagasc has recently indicated that it may be possible to review part of the advice it had given on the application of phosphorus in a way that could improve the effectiveness of the regulations. The Government and the European Commission saw merit in allowing Teagasc time to elaborate this new advice and it is for this reason that the implementation of this part of the regulations has been briefly deferred.

Teagasc has been requested to provide, as a matter of urgency, the necessary scientific case to support any revision of the phosphorus tables in the regulations. The two Departments will carefully consider any submission received from Teagasc while also bearing in mind that any proposals for revision of the phosphorus tables will have to respect the environmental requirements associated with the nitrates directive and meet with the agreement of the European Commission.

Teagasc has not been specifically requested to review its advice on nitrogen issues. However, to the extent that its revised submission on crop nutrient requirements suggest any further beneficial adjustments to the regulatory regime, these will of course be considered. The possibility of such further adjustments will also depend on their respecting the environmental requirements involved and on their acceptance by the European Commission.