Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

240. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on coupled supports for disadvantaged regions as laid out in a report (details supplied). [30779/17]

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ireland has supported the greater market orientation of the CAP, including by decoupling of payments from production, because farmers’ freedom to respond to the demands of the market is vital for the long-term development of the sector (as set out in Food Wise 2025). This approach to the reform of the CAP was one which is recognised as being the most suitable approach to take, on the basis that the best interests of farmers were served by allowing them the flexibility to calibrate production to market demand without compromising income from the Basic Payment Scheme.

The report referenced by the Deputy clearly emphasises the economic importance of the cattle sector within EU agriculture and stresses the importance of further product differentiation at EU level, increased export opportunities as well as compensation for environment services to support extensification within the beef sector. I agree with the general thrust of this and the work that I and my Department carry out in relation to the beef sector very much reflects these goals. I have recently returned from successful trade missions to the USA and Mexico. I have also hosted a number of high level visits from other countries outside of the EU including China and Vietnam. These missions will serve to improve our existing levels of market access and promote Ireland’s reputation as a producer of high quality, safe and sustainably produced meat.

With regard to compensation for environment services to support extensification the Rural Development Programme already provides significant supports which include a range of supports available to the Suckler sector.  From an environmental perspective GLAS provides support to all participating farmers including suckler farmers to farm in an environmentally sensitive manner.

The introduction of a voluntary coupled support specifically for suckler cows in disadvantaged areas raises a number of issues. First, the funding of any supports from existing Pillar I funding would require a redistribution of existing payments within Pillar I to all farmers. A further consideration would be the effect introducing supports for suckler cows in disadvantaged areas would have on the wider suckler cow sector especially those producers in non disadvantaged areas. I am of course conscious of the unique challenges faced by all farmers regardless of sector, in disadvantaged areas. However it should be noted that the report also states the benefits of not limiting such supports to land type.

Another important factor to consider would be the impact that funding of voluntary coupled supports in Pillar II of the CAP would have on the various commitments already made across a range of schemes and supports provided for under the RDP. Indeed through Pillar II of the CAP some €300 million of funding over a six year period has been targeted at the Irish suckler herd through the Bovine Data Genomics Programme (BDGP). In response to significant demand, earlier this year I reopened the BDGP programme for new entrants. This clearly reflects the success of the programme.

Several other supports are in place for suckler farmers under the RDP, notably GLAS, ANCs and Knowledge Transfer groups. I am of the view that the current range of supports available to suckler farmers is the most appropriate way to support the continued development of this sector at this time.