Vol. 733 No. 2
34 Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the reason Ireland continues to support several Irish fishing vessels that are currently operating in the over-exploited and disputed waters off the coast of Western Sahara; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8776/11]
In many ways this is a human rights issue rather than a fishing issue but there is a crossover. I debated this matter as a Member of the European Parliament's fisheries committee when the EU-Moroccan fisheries agreement was being considered. The current fisheries partnership agreement, FPA between the European Community and Morocco came into force in February 2007. A fisheries protocol setting out the detailed operating rules for the FPA was also established at the time. The FPA, which includes the waters off Western Sahara, renews automatically every four years. However, the protocol expired on 27 February 2011.
The FPA with Morocco is considered one of the EU's most important bilateral fisheries agreements. Under the protocol, the EU provides a financial contribution to the Moroccan authorities each year in exchange for fishing opportunities for EU fishermen in Moroccan waters. As with all FPAs, this contribution is intended as payment for the fishing opportunities and as assistance for the development of the capacity of the local fisheries sector to exploit its resources sustainably. Eleven member states, including Ireland, are allocated fishing opportunities under the agreement. Ireland receives a quota of 2,500 tonnes each year in the FPA's industrial pelagic category but no Irish fishing vessels have operated in Morocco under this FPA since 2007.
Negotiations on the renewal of the protocol, which were due to commence late in 2010, were delayed because Morocco was considered not to have provided sufficient data regarding the regional socioeconomic impacts of the EU's annual financial contribution. Given the EU's important fishing interests in Morocco and because Morocco belatedly provided some information, the European Commission asked the Council to be provided with a mandate to negotiate a one-year protocol on similar lines to the expiring one. The Commission's goal was to allow EU fishing operations in Moroccan waters to continue uninterrupted while detailed consideration was given to the merits of negotiating a new longer and potentially different protocol.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
Given the urgency of the situation and the importance of this agreement for European fishermen, Ireland supported the Commission's request to the Council to be provided with a mandate to negotiate a one-year protocol. Ireland's support for the Commission's mandate was given on the proviso that, before the Council would ratify the new short-term protocol, the Commission would share with member states the information provided by the Moroccan authorities concerning the implementation of the current protocol and its regional impact. This would allow member states to make a full assessment of whether the current agreement was providing a benefit to the Saharawi people.
In late February, the EU Commission and Morocco initialled an agreement for a one-year fisheries protocol. As part of this negotiation, transitional arrangements have been put in place for up to six months, allowing EU fishing operations in Morocco to continue uninterrupted pending completion of the ratification procedures. The initialled protocol must still be ratified by the EU and this only takes place when agreed by Council and consented to by the European Parliament. The Commission has not yet made a proposal for ratification, but this is expected shortly. The new protocol has additional requirements for the provision by Morocco of details of the geographic distribution of benefits.
Ireland has been clear that our final decision would be influenced by whether it can be persuasively shown that there is appropriate benefit deriving to the Saharawi people through implementation of the FPA. Therefore, our position on the ratification of the one-year protocol remains reserved, as the Commission's analysis of the information provided by the Moroccan side on the regional benefits has not been unequivocal. While citing that positive benefits were in evidence in the regional distribution of funds including to the Western Sahara, the level of those benefits remains uncertain. Ireland has always been a firm supporter of the right to self-determination of the people of the Western Sahara and the Government remains firmly committed to this principle.
Ireland is also of the view that the FPA with Morocco should be implemented if it can be shown to be to the benefit of all the people concerned, including the Saharawi in terms of the waters off Western Sahara, and in full accordance with the principles of international law. I am not convinced that this is the case at present and will consider carefully Ireland's final position on ratification of the one-year protocol when a formal proposal comes from the Commission.
According to the Minister, the protocol regarding the fisheries off the Moroccan coast was due to cease in February 2011. Is there any evidence that any part of our fishing fleet or, more importantly, any part of an Irish-registered fishing fleet as distinct from Irish vessels is exploiting those waters without operating within the protocol?
I accept fully that it is a human rights issue. It has been brought to our attention for some time that waters off west Africa, in particular Morocco, have been exploited to the detriment of those countries' peoples. In many of the countries in question, questionable leaders are prepared to sell national resources for their own benefit as distinct from the benefit of the people they are supposed to represent.
Is there evidence of Irish vessels with Irish workers and skippers fishing there or are the boats referred to in the information that has come to us just registered in the Republic of Ireland?
In terms of our approach towards the Western Sahara issue, I will reread two paragraphs into the record, as it is an important matter. They read:
Ireland has been clear that our final decision would be influenced by whether it can be persuasively shown that there is appropriate benefit deriving to the Saharawi people through implementation of the FPA. Therefore, our position on the ratification of the one-year protocol remains reserved, as the Commission's analysis of the information provided by the Moroccan side on the regional benefits has not been unequivocal.
While citing that positive benefits were in evidence in the regional distribution of funds including to the Western Sahara, the level of those benefits remains uncertain. Ireland has always been a firm supporter of the right to self-determination of the people of the Western Sahara and the Government remains firmly committed to this principle.
I am quite familiar with the Western Sahara issue. I am unaware of any evidence of Irish boats or Irish interests operating under a flag of convenience fishing there, but I may be wrong. If the Deputy has individual cases he wants to explore with me, I would happily discuss them with him.
35 Deputy Noel Harrington asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his views on the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12587/11]
As this is a general question, I might use it as an opportunity to outline the Government's position to date.
I understand that there are two questions on this matter, this question and Question No. 37.
Yes. This question is on the Common Fisheries Policy, CFP. As people will know, along with the Common Agricultural Policy review, there is also a CFP review. It is important that both get the priority they require. Those negotiations are occurring in parallel with the overall EU budget negotiations. Next month, the Commission will publish the first draft proposals on the so-called EU budgetary framework. We will then have an idea as to the proposed allocation of funds for agriculture and the CFP. I suspect it will not be good news. As such, there will need to be a great deal of subsequent political lobbying to try to change the figures.
Ireland is likely to hold the Presidency of the EU when the CFP and CAP reviews are to conclude and an acceptable compromise across the EU is to be delivered in the first half of 2013. I have made it my business to try to get to know some of the key personalities with whom Ireland needs to build understanding and alliances, for example, my counterparts in France and Spain. I have met both Ministers as well as Maria Damanaki, the Commissioner with responsibility for this area.
Ireland has specific concerns about how the Commission looks like it will approach the CFP. The most dangerous change in policy for Ireland is the Commission's consideration of a single transferable quota. Under this, instead of giving a country a quota and allowing the relevant Department to allocate it responsibly with the industry to keep everyone in business, boats would be able to transfer quota between them. My fear is that the buying power of big Spanish, French and possibly British and Dutch fishing companies would allow them to buy out Irish quota through companies they would set up in Ireland, as quota transferability will be restricted to domestic transfers.
I am sorry to interrupt the Minister.
I am answering two questions.
I apologise for saying that we were dealing with two questions; I read an incorrect note. We are dealing with one question only.
Let me conclude. The single transferable quota is a potentially lethal policy for Ireland which we need to resist, because we do not want to see quota seeping out of Ireland through loopholes in the law. This has already happened in the UK, by the way, as quota was taken by Spanish companies under British flags, and those fish never see the British coast. We do not want to see the same happen in Ireland.
The other issue is that of discards. Fisheries did not do well, particularly in Ireland, from the financial package that went with the current Common Fisheries Policy, and we must aspire to improve on that.
I thank the Minister and welcome his comments on the question. The first thing to acknowledge is that the CFP, while minor in an overall EU context, is a major issue for coastal communities in this country and throughout the EU. We will not go through the entire CFP today, but there are some specific questions the Minister might address. The first issue is the perception that the current CFP has largely been detrimental to the conservation of fisheries throughout the EU, which will affect fisheries on our coast. I hope the new review will address this.
I welcome the Minister's comment on single transferable quotas. I agree completely that this would be detrimental to Irish fisheries and I hope we will get support across the House for his efforts to resist it.
I propose that the Minister support the idea of subsidiarity or a ground-up approach towards the management of sea fisheries. We have had significant success in the Irish sea fisheries industry with the Celtic Sea fishery, in which there was an industry-led initiative to conserve stocks. We have seen major improvements in stocks based entirely on an initiative that was instigated by the industry, supported by the Marine Institute and the Department, to solve a problem. Much more work on and support for ground-up, industry-led initiatives such as this would be useful.
I must bring in the Minister now.
I will speak about one more specific issue, with the Leas-Cheann Comhairle's indulgence, which is that of discards. This is a major problem and has been identified by the Commissioner as a particular issue she wants to address. I urge the Minister to have close consultation with the industry in this regard. It is a crime against conservation and the industry when good fish is thrown out dead, for many reasons. One aspect of this is economic discards from factory ships.
I share the Commissioner's concern about discards but I do not agree with her solution to that problem. It is simply a moral issue, but, in addition, the killing of juvenile fish in order to catch marketable fish is detrimental to future fish stocks. Literally hundreds of thousands of tonnes of juvenile fish are dumped over the side, dead, because they cannot be brought ashore by a boat that is over quota. This is something that simply must be tackled, but in a way that is workable and that will not put people out of business. I have had preliminary discussions with industry representatives on this issue. We are considering, for example, the introduction of a pilot project in what is called the biologically sensitive area or the Irish conservation box, which would help the Commission understand the practicalities of what it is proposing. This would also be a way of reinforcing in people's minds the fact that the Irish box is a vulnerable area that needs to be maintained. If we were to lose that area, the impact on Irish fish stocks would be devastating. I am cautious about the discards issue, but I am also realistic in admitting that something must happen. I encourage the industry to work with me on this.
The principle of subsidiarity is one that should apply to the CFP. We have good examples of stocks, including Celtic Sea herring, that are actually growing at the moment. We have put measures in place on a voluntary basis, including set-aside at sea, under which the industry has agreed not to fish in certain areas to allow stocks to breed and grow. That type of approach should be factored into the CFP.
I have invited the Commissioner to come to Ireland to see for herself how the industry works here, because the industry in Ireland is structured in a different way from that of France or Spain. In France, the fleet is predominantly owned by big multinationals, while in Ireland trawlers are owned by families. It is a different financial structure, and the Commissioner needs to understand that in the context of the CFP.
I fully support the Minister in his endeavours to ensure the quota system is preserved as it is. If there is a major deficiency in the Irish fleet, it is a lack of quota. In the negotiations on the CFP, I hope the Minister will do everything in his power to gain extra quota for Irish fisherman so they can have a sustainable income and a viable business.
I support the Minister's comments on earlier questions. However, I ask him to consider in particular those who are fishing with smaller boats. I tried to raise on the Adjournment the issue of last Monday's storm, in which fishermen in Arranmore Island lost €150,000 worth of lobster pots. As a result of conservation elements and because of EU and State law, those fishermen cannot fish for salmon and cannot fish in area 6A, and now their livelihoods in lobster fishing have been taken away. There are issues in the CFP, particularly to do with area 6A and boats under 15 m, that must be addressed. I ask the Minister to consider the effects of the natural disaster that occurred on Monday.
Deputy McGinley raised that issue with me this morning. I am going to Killybegs and Greencastle next weekend and I hope I will have an opportunity to meet some of those fishermen and hear what they have to say. It is not as easy as the Deputy might think to simply transfer quota to them to make up for losses they have experienced, because this would mean taking quota from somebody else. There are some contentious issues to resolve this summer, including mackerel quota, Celtic Sea herring, new fish stocks that are in their first year under the quota system, and the allocation of quotas. I accept that we need to try to keep the small guys in business.
36 Deputy Joe McHugh asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the position regarding his meeting with EU Fisheries Commissioner, Maria Damanaki, and their discussions on the Common Fisheries Policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12595/11]
40 Deputy Joe McHugh asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the position regarding his meeting with EU Fisheries Commissioner, Maria Damanaki; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12594/11]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 36 and 40 together.
I had thought we would take Nos. 35 and 36 together. Maybe this is an opportunity for people to come back and ask for more detailed answers if they want. These questions are about the discussions I had with Commissioner Damanaki. To say that I made a clear case in terms of my reservations about single transferable quota would be an understatement. We met for about an hour and a half, and for an hour of that we were discussing the issue of single transferable quotas — why it makes sense for France and Spain and perhaps Britain to have a system under which quota can be traded, as milk quota was in the past, but it makes no sense for Ireland. This is because of the way our industry is structured, primarily along family lines. In some cases, particularly the big 23 in the pelagic fleet, it is different, but the whitefish fleet consists of relatively small trawlers. Under our system, the national quota is allocated with the aim of keeping intact as many fishing families as possible in coastal communities by giving them a viable quota. The quota is shared out in a way that will give maximum benefit to coastal rural communities, and this has worked. Although I accept that we do not have enough quota, the allocation of resources, in terms of the quota we do have, has worked quite successfully. The industry works with my Department. I accept that differences of opinion sometimes occur but by and large the industry works well with my Department.
The idea that we would allow people to sell or lease their quotas to anyone they like with a view to exiting the industry or making money is extremely dangerous. If we were to allow this to happen it would enable fishing companies which have significant resources and which are linked with multiples to expand their activities. The latter is particularly true in the French case. For example, one of the largest retail multiples in France — it is a really good company — owns 15 trawlers, eight of which operate, perfectly legally, in Irish waters much of the time. We are meeting representatives of the company in a few weeks to try to encourage it to land its catch in Ireland in order that it might be processed here.
We could not allow the Spanish fleet in particular to buy up additional quotas in Ireland in order to feed what is, as everyone is aware, a fleet which does not have sufficient quotas to allow it to remain viable. We cannot permit this to reduce the level of quotas available to Irish boats. We have made this absolutely clear. My expectation is that when we see the first draft of the proposals relating to the Common Fisheries Policy these will contain a recommendation regarding single transferable quotas. I am sure the EU will try to accommodate our concerns by putting in place restrictions relating to the need to retain quotas within individuals countries. However, I am not convinced this will protect quotas to the extent we would like.
The second issue about which I had quite a long conversation with the Commissioner was that relating to discards and the importance of the Irish Box, or the biologically sensitive area. I have already made my position clear in respect of that matter.
I congratulate the Minister on getting out of the traps extremely quickly in respect of this sector. His experience and his passion for this subject will be of assistance to the industry.
I wish to raise two points. The first relates to the fact the Minister has inherited a Department which is paralysed by fear. This is the case as a result of the European Court of Justice's 2007 decision to penalise Ireland for being in breach of the birds and habitats directive in the context of the aquaculture industry. There are possibly upwards of 700 licences which must be expedited. I have spoken about this matter to the Minister on a private basis and I am of the view that some form of public timetable is required. There must be a meeting of minds between him and the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport, Deputy Deenihan, who has responsibility for the National Parks and Wildlife Service, in respect of this matter. A timetable must be placed in the public domain in order to instil confidence among those in the industry to the effect that a roadmap exists and that there are potential investment opportunities in this area for entrepreneurs. Such a timetable must be drawn up by the Departments of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Tourism, Culture and Sport.
My second point relates to the disaster involving Arranmore Island, which has placed the entire debate on area 6A in context. I had an in-depth discussion about this matter with the Minister of State at the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy McGinley, this morning. The fishermen on the island were completely dedicated to the lobster and crab industry, which has now been totally wiped out. Their hands are tied because they cannot, for example, sail out to catch bait. Neither can they catch the lesser spotted dogfish, pollock or other whitefish. The reality is that area 6A is an example of how the system is not working. Donegal, most particularly its coastal communities, voted "No" to both referenda on the Lisbon treaty. This is a significant matter which must be examined.
I request that the Minister examine the research currently being carried out by Bord Iascaigh Mhara, BIM, in respect of the possibility of catching the lesser spotted dogfish within the mixed fishery of area 6A. The cod recovery plan is in place but everything else is being penalised as a result of this plan. Fishermen who want to catch lesser spotted dogfish are not catching cod and neither are those who want to catch pollock. As already stated, therefore, we must examine the research being carried out by BIM. A good and in-depth analysis has been carried out locally as well as nationally. I hope the Minister will give serious consideration to the research to which I refer.
There is a detailed discussion to be had with regard to the consequences of what happened off Arranmore Island where a localised fishing industry that was entirely reliant on crab and lobster was wiped out when the fishermen lost all their gear in a storm. That is a matter to which I will give consideration when I visit Donegal. I do not want to raise expectations without first having examined what occurred. To date, I have literally engaged in a five-minute conversation in respect of this issue.
In respect of aquaculture, I have seen the expected timetable for assessing all of the harbours located in Natura 2000 areas or SACs before licences can be applied for, considered and granted. If I recall correctly, Glengarriff will not be dealt with until 2017. The system is not working nor will it work into the future. If we were to apply the timetable that is currently proposed, we would miss an extraordinary opportunity to develop an aquaculture industry in Ireland which could fill markets across Europe and further afield.
I recently visited the largest fishing expo in the world, which is held each year in Brussels. Some 19 Irish companies were represented there and the biggest difficulty for them was the fact that buyers did not know why they were present if they could not sell them the volumes they required. Last year, 12,000 tonnes of farmed salmon were produced in this country. Scotland produced 150,000 tonnes and Norway produced over 1 million tonnes. I understand that production in the latter is now heading towards 2 million tonnes. We have a fantastic natural resource and we must manage it in a proper and sustainable way in order that it will not impact on other fisheries. I accept there are concerns in respect of aquaculture but I am of the view that we can deal with these. We cannot allow this huge opportunity to pass.
Some 70% of the fish consumed within the European Union is imported from outside of it. There is a huge market for our aquaculture products on our doorstep. The way to expand the fishing industry in this country is to expand aquaculture and the processing element of the fishing industry. In the interim, we must examine the position with regard to quotas and try to improve our deal in the context of the Common Fisheries Policy etc. The window of opportunity that exists is, for political reasons, limited. However, there are major opportunities in the other two areas to which I refer. My officials and I met the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport, Deputy Deenihan, and his officials and we are trying to find a way to progress the position with regard to the granting of aquaculture licences in Natura 2000 areas in a much more speedy fashion.
Did the Minister discuss with the Commissioner the issue of electronic log books, particularly in the context of their introduction not just in Ireland but rather, as the industry desires, across the entire EU on a simultaneous basis?
Yes, we did discuss that matter and the Commissioner was quite taken aback when I stated that Ireland is ready to proceed with the introduction of electronic log books. I also informed her that we are hugely frustrated that she is not taking a stronger position in respect of this matter, particularly in the case of Spain. The Commission has set a date — I believe it is September — after which it expects electronic log books to be introduced on trawlers. This will give Irish authorities a much more accurate picture with regard to who is fishing, where they are fishing and what they are catching. Even though we are doing a reasonable job in terms of policing the European waters for which Ireland has responsibility, I suspect there is a great deal of fishing occurring in those waters which should not be taking place. Electronic log books will assist us in our efforts to counteract that activity.
I wish the Minister well in his further talks with the Commissioner and with the relevant EU officials. I support what he had to say and was impressed by it. I was taken by how strongly the Minister put his points across in respect of this matter. I am glad he will be meeting the Arranmore fishermen on Friday. He stated he does not wish to raise expectations. However, approximately €150,000 worth of fishing gear was destroyed. Some 15 fishermen — they represent the entire fishing fleet of the island — were affected. All of those 15 fishermen did not participate in the voluntary buy-out when the issue of salmon drift-netting was settled.
Does the Deputy have a question?
It involves only a small amount of funding. Will the Department be flexible to ensure this traditional fishery can survive?
Does the Minister agree with islanders and many others who argue there needs to be a unique set of policies across the European Union for island communities when it comes to fisheries policy? It is argued policy should be adapted for those in the island community given that in many cases it is their only industry.
If the single transferable quota is introduced, what options do we have? Are we looking at allowances being made for Ireland? Can we opt out of the Common Fisheries Policy, CFP? Could an exemption of the six-mile limit be considered under the CFP for island communities in west Donegal and the VIa area?
I do not want to make commitments in the Chamber when I may not be able to deliver on them later. However, I would be more than happy if the Deputy wished to talk to me in person about the case he raised of the 15 fishermen. Deputy Pearse Doherty does not need me to remind him that we do not have much money to spend. My Department must make significant savings next year which will stress many people. I will examine the case he raised if he gives me the full details and see what is possible for the Department to do.
I do not think a separate islands policy in the CFP is a runner. For example, could Britain be considered an island? How does one classify rural coastal communities in Spain and Portugal which are not on islands? The new CFP will examine sea areas rather than land masses. That is why we want to get preference for Ireland in several areas. For example, we want to retain Ireland's special treatment for a white fish quota through the Hague preferences. The reason behind this is to keep economies of scale in Ireland's fishing industry. If the amount of quota allocated for a particular catch falls below a certain tonnage, it may not be viable to fish it any longer. I hope this reasonably good deal will be protected under the new CFP. I have made this point to the Commissioner. It is not a done deal but I am working on it.
The second special treatment I will be getting for Ireland will deal with the biologically sensitive area around the Irish Box which comprises the south-west and south coasts. It is probably the most fertile spawning ground in the EU seas. Spanish, Dutch, French and British trawlers concentrate most of their fishing efforts around this biologically sensitive area and are desperate to enter it. We need to keep the existing protections in place.
Regarding the single transferable quota system, we cannot simply opt out of the CFP just like we cannot opt out of the Common Agricultural Policy. However, we can make it clear at an early stage what we consider acceptable and not. The single transferable quota will be the most contentious issue for Ireland and one on which we must make a real stand. Spain, the most politically powerful of the fishing nations, sees the single transferable quota system as a solution to the quota problems its current fleet is experiencing. The Commissioner for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, Maria Damanaki, however, now understands our concerns in this regard. It is up to her to put a solution together that can accommodate Ireland.
What can be done to increase Ireland's farmed salmon production from the current level of 12,000 tonnes per annum to the realistic potential of 1 million tonnes per annum? When there are seven jobs for every 1,000 tonnes of production, an increase to such a level would mean the creation of 7,000 jobs.
A very technical question.
I can always rely on Deputy Peter Mathews for figures. He is correct about the number of jobs that could be created. It is my ambition to dramatically expand the aquaculture industry in Ireland in a way that is consistent with protecting special areas of conservation, SAC, and Natura areas. As well as putting fish farms in harbours and bays, we must examine the potential for offshore fish farming. The technology and engineering capacity is available to put larger cages further offshore that can have higher density of stocks. Some private companies are already examining the potential in this area. We could expand the industry quicker if we did not have to base it in Natura areas. My twin-track approach is to assess the SAC bays and harbours for fish farms while examining the potential of development in offshore areas.
Having been to the recent seafood exposition in Brussels, I know of the enormous demand for Irish fish products. We have much capacity to expand processing and add value to our fish products. The industry could employ thousands and I intend to make it a big good news story over the next five years. However, I will need help with it.
37 Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his policy regarding improving the quantity of energy crops grown by farmers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12608/11]
65 Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the supports he has in place to encourage farmers to grow energy crops; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12607/11]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 37 and 65 together.
The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food supports the planting of miscanthus and willow crops by giving farmers grant aid under the bioenergy scheme. Farmers are paid a grant of up to a maximum of €1,300 per hectare to cover 50% of the cost of establishing the crop. This scheme is co-funded by the EU under the rural development programme.
In 2010 the area planted under the scheme was 353 hectares. For 2011, 89 applications were received and approvals to plant 480 hectares have issued to date. There are 14 further applications, with a total of 260 hectares, with outstanding issues. The Department is pursuing these with the applicants. It continues to work closely with other Departments and agencies, particularly Teagasc and the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, with a view to maximising the development of the bioenergy sector.
I thank the Minister of State for his response. Is the target of 70,000 hectares by 2015, set by Teagasc in 2008, achievable and what policies are being followed by the Department in this regard? Will the changes to the Sustainable Energy Ireland schemes and greener home scheme, which abolished the grants for wood chip burners, have an impact on the uptake of miscanthus and willow growing?
I have attended a number of conferences during the six weeks I have been in office, at which serious interest was expressed in regard to the growing of miscanthus and willow crops. Many local authorities, in particular in County Clare, have taken it upon themselves to provide their own heat, through the use of wood pellets and chips. We have an obligation to do this.
There is much frustration within the energy industry. With the support of the Government and Department, many people got involved in the growing of willow and miscanthus but the refit tariff has not yet come through despite our having applied for it almost 12 months ago. This is a major factor in terms of people opting to grow willow, which is a long term plantation, or miscanthus. With greater demand for arable ground and farming going well, this will become more competitive. I am happy that the refit tariff problem will be sorted out shortly. One must apply to the EU for status and accommodation of the tariff and we have replied to all of the questions put to us in this regard.
I am happy this matter will be sorted our fairly soon. This will encourage people, in particular in the energy, sector, to get involved as they will have a fixed income. One cannot get involved in something on a wing and a prayer basis. Willow cannot be grown on any type of ground and one must grow a certain tonnage in order for it to be viable. Also, one must have an outlet for it. I recently attended the Birr show and other shows. People are confident that we can provide our own energy. Energy prices are resulting in higher costs in the farming and pig industry and as such the more energy we can provide the more viable these industries will be.
I am unable to provide the Deputy with a response in regard to his question about whether the 70,000 acres is achievable. However, given the year that is in it we must steady ourselves. We have set targets which I believe we can reach. We must steady the situation in terms of funding. As Minister of State, I am responsible for horticulture and forestry. We must steady the flow of money to support these sectors. Farmers and other people cannot be encouraged to get involved in a business unless it provides a steady income. It is great that marginal land is coming back into grazing. This land is also good for willow and miscanthus planting.
It was announced today at a conference that peak oil occurred in 2006. Does the Minister of State believe we should be putting a stronger case to Europe for improved grants for miscanthus and willow growing?
Two other important energy crops are sugar beet and rapeseed oil. Perhaps the Minister of State will outline any developments in policy in regard to these crops.
A study on sugar beet is currently underway and I would be foolish to comment on that. As regards rapeseed oil, I recently visited a plant in Carlow where I saw it being processed on an experimental basis. Every area is being looked at. Willow and miscanthus grass growing is the way forward. I do not believe there will be any increase in funding in this regard. The Minister has a job to do in terms of the manner in which the Department is run. We must ensure that every sector of agriculture is growing and that we fund to the best of our ability the people at the coalface who are being asked to get involved in willow and miscanthus growing. This is a crucial year. We must seek to stabilise the acres we are growing, get the refit tariff in place and convince local authorities, hospitals and other institutions that use a great deal of heat to consider moving away from oil. I referred earlier to local authorities using local fuels, namely pellets or timber, to produce their own heat. This is the way forward. The more energy we can provide within our own system the better for everybody. Also, thousands of jobs can be generated in this sector.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
