The purpose of this meeting is to hear a presentation from two members of the agricultural movement in Australia. On behalf of the joint committee, I welcome Ms Mary Carroll, formerly equality officer with the IFA, who made a presentation to the committee last April on women in agriculture. I also welcome Ms Cathy McGowan and Ms Alana Johnson. I ask MsCarroll to make her opening remarks, after which Ms McGowan will make a formal presentation.
Women in Agriculture: Presentation.
Ms Mary Carroll
We attended the committee a year ago and return to update members on our progress. I will introduce the agenda and my Australian colleagues, Ms McGowan and Ms Johnson, will talk about their experience. Ms Johnson is a past president of the Foundation for Australian Agricultural Women. Ms McGowan is a past president of the Australian Women in Agriculture movement, which is a farm women's union.
I will update the committee on the role of women in agriculture in Ireland and review what has happened since we were here last. Then we will examine how the rural women's unit has worked in Australia and consider how it might work here. We will present ideas to the committee for a rural women's unit or a women in agriculture unit in Ireland, as we discussed it when we were last here. I can propose options or models for such units but it will be of benefit to hear from the two Australian women about how they work there.
Two years ago the first ever women in agriculture conference took place in Croke Park, around the time of world rural women's day, which is always on 15 October. It is timely to recognise the role of farm and rural women around the world and to take this opportunity to update members on progress in the past two years. There were 600 delegates from throughout Ireland at the conference. We highlighted all the issues of concern and there was huge energy and drive at the event. The issues, which I will expand on later, were familiar ones, such as social insurance, access to land for women, gender proofing in agricultural policy, access to herd numbers and the culture of women in farming, which is still dominated by men. If people close their eyes and imagine a farmer, it is not a woman that comes to mind. We want to change that culture.
I will remind members of the declaration that came out of the conference:
We hereby call on the Government to urgently establish a women in agriculture section within the Department of Agriculture and Food, charged with driving forward the agenda for women in agriculture. This executive unit will lead the development and implementation of viable strategies and policies in full co-operation with every other relevant Department and agency.
That was supported by the 600 delegates from throughout Ireland. We are here today to see how we can best take that declaration forward. That was the main theme.
When we called for the idea of a women in agriculture unit, it was based on the Australian model. I will not spend time discussing this model as there are two Australian women here to do so. However, to explain briefly, the model has a rural women's unit in the Australian department of agriculture. This unit promotes the whole contribution made by women in farming and rural industries. As it encourages women to become part of decision-making processes in their industries, it is not just a matter of recognising women, but of encouraging them to be positively involved. It works directly with the department to ensure that all its policies reflect a broad range rather than a male-oriented, one-sided aspect of agriculture.
A wider perspective on agriculture such as this in a time of change for Irish agriculture is vital, and everybody's opinions should be taken into account. Many people will argue that women in agriculture now work off the farm, but the current time of change is when we must hear women's ideas and those of farm families.
With regard to the European situation, a resolution emerged in June 2003 from the European Parliament that called on member states to implement policies to support women farmers. It stated that there should be social insurance rights for farm spouses, and it called for representation of women at decision-making levels in agriculture. Interestingly, it recommended a unit in the DG Agri of the European Commission for gender policies to allow gender mainstreaming to partake in all main policies in European agriculture.
These examples demonstrate that this concept is not new or unique. There is an Australian model and the European Parliament has supported a resolution on a similar issue. Many studies have shown that specialised units and sections can help in moving ideas forward. One can talk indefinitely about including women in agriculture and allowing gender mainstreaming, but research has shown that the best way to achieve this is through a specialised unit or section to oversee the matter.
Ireland now has an opportunity to lead the way in Europe as we can implement the European Parliament proposal. However, we need a lead Department to take responsibility for initiating and driving forward a unit for women in agriculture. The main point of today's discussion is how such a unit might work in this country and how a similar unit is functioning in Australia.
I will now finish and allow my Australian colleagues to speak, unless the joint committee wishes to hear about our model for the functioning of such a unit. Would the committee prefer to hear about the proposed model or the Australian experiences?
We will hear both if time allows.
Ms Carroll
Will I continue discussing the proposed model? We can then hear input from my Australian colleagues.
Yes.
Ms Carroll
I will outline for discussion purposes how the unit might work in Ireland. The role of the unit would be to link the Department of Agriculture and Food and key client groups, that is, the different organisations that represent women in farming. It would meet relevant groups and bodies two or three times a year to hear their views. It would liaise with the gender equality unit based in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform on gender proofing agriculture and rural policies. A national women's strategy is being published next year that contains a commitment that all Departments must enable gender mainstreaming. The presence of a unit or section in the Department of Agriculture and Food will help to meet such a commitment.
The unit would also be an important source of women for State boards. It can be difficult to find women with enough decision-making power in agricultural bodies, and these women can be made available to State boards. The unit could empower more women in their involvement in agriculture and give more recognition of their role. This could help break down the cultural barrier that is often present for women in farming.
The unit would have a role in different facets of the Department. A unit, or even one dedicated person, would exist at the centre of workings in the Department, liaising with different sections, such as environment, animal health, organic farming or the single farm payment unit. In my role in the IFA, women would contact me feeling that they had been discriminated against with regard to some agricultural matter such as access to a herd number. These women had nowhere to go with these problems and ended up contacting the various different units in an effort to find an answer. It would be different if a dedicated person was in place to deal with an equality or discrimination issue based on gender.
The section would also ensure that all policies in the Department have been gender-proofed. The national women's strategy due in 2006 demands that all Departments carry out gender mainstreaming, and this unit in the Department of Agriculture and Food could help in meeting this commitment.
The Department of Agriculture and Food links with other Departments and agencies, and this is a vital aspect also. The unit could thus link with Teagasc or the Department of Social and Family Affairs which is relevant for the important issue for farm women of a lack of access to a pension in their own name. That is still an important issue despite some people thinking it has gone away. Farm women coming to the end of their working lives do not exist in the system if they have not had a partnership with their husband because they have not paid PRSI. They are not entitled to any pension except for the non-contributory State pension, which most cannot even get because it is means-tested on the basis of their husband's finances. These women end up dependent on their husbands.
The issue is significant in terms of pride and recognition, and action needs to be taken on it. We have for years tried to solve this problem by working with the Department of Social and Family Affairs, and an answer often received is that the issue relates to the Department of Agriculture and Food. A section that could be used as a link could help solve the problem.
With regard to Teagasc, there is an issue of educating for the future of farming and bringing young people into the sector. Women have much control over their children's future actions, and if a woman does not encourage her children into agriculture, there is less chance that the children will take up farming.
The unit would also link with relevant groups, such as the IFA, the ICA, Macra na Feirme and the National Women's Council. These groups can be beneficial as they can inform what are the current issues. Such issues include social insurance cover for farm spouses and access to herd numbers. It is correctly difficult to get a herd number, but I have heard too many stories of women encountering difficulty in getting herd numbers. It is also very difficult for a husband and wife to keep two herd numbers, and most herd numbers are amalgamated into the husband's name if they are joined together. This links to the culture of farming as there would be a doubt over whether the woman could really be farming. It was often assumed that she had a herd number to maximise subsidies when we had the old subsidy system.
Only 3% of Irish farms are made up of partnerships. This is despite the Department of Agriculture and Food's database stating that 64% of men in the sector are married. Teams of farming husbands and wives are obviously not forming partnerships. The low level of partnerships is probably connected to the culture of land ownership and concerns about the future. The recognition and promotion of women is vital if they are to get involved in agriculture. In the Irish Farmers’ Journal women are rarely featured towards the front and are more likely to be seen in the paper’s second section. That is a simple example of how women are recognised in the farm industry. There is not enough leadership from women in agriculture. One needs to rack one’s brains to think of a possible role model of women in agricultural politics. They are not to the fore.
I will conclude my presentation on my feelings that we require this unit and that it could work. The request for such a unit is not without a solid basis and it is not unobtainable. I will hand over to my two friends and colleagues from Australia, both of whom have worked with me for the past four or five years on this issue. I have learned much from them, and it is good for them to be here to tell us of their experiences and their opinions on this idea.
Does Ms Cathy McGowan wish to begin her presentation?
Ms Cathy McGowan
I thank the joint committee for the opportunity to speak today. I hope everyone can understand me, and I will speak slowly as my accent is quite broad.
I am a farmer in my own right and own my own farm in southern Australia. I am a sheep farmer and produce sheep for wool and for what is known as the prime lamb market. I am active in agripolitics in Australia. I have been the chair of our national Australian Women in Agriculture organisation and have chaired the Australian Deputy Prime Minister's advisory committee on agricultural matters. Hence, I have worked at multiple levels within the agricultural sphere in Australia. This is my fourth visit to Ireland and I was the keynote speaker at the Croke Park conference to which Ms Carroll referred. Since then, a deputation of 30 Irish farm women came to Australia last year as our guests and in June of this year, 30 Australians came to Ireland. The connections between the two countries are extremely strong and it is delightful for us to be able to appear before the joint committee. I thank the members for the opportunity.
I want to talk briefly about what we have done in Australia. While I do not suggest that Ireland should copy us, I hope Irish people can learn from our experiences to improve matters here. We welcome questions from the members because we also have much to learn. Moreover, as Ireland differs greatly from Australia, an Irish model must be adopted.
In 1994, just as Ms Carroll has done, as women we lobbied our Government because we wanted it to listen to us and not exclusively to our farmer organisations. In its wisdom, the Australian Government thought it would be a good idea to have women represented and so it established a rural women's unit within the main department of agriculture. When it was established, five people were assigned to the unit as one person could not possibly do the job and cross-party commitment was secured for five years' funding. Although the unit's role has changed subsequently, the initial tasks were viewed as being sufficiently large to keep five people working for five years to make things happen. Obviously, that approach might not work here. Ms AlanaJohnson and I are happy to discuss the initiative's results. We believe that while it has been successful, it could have been done better.
The unit had a programme of building relationships between the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and other departments. It did so because Australian governmental practices were indicative of "silo thinking", whereby the Department of Health and Ageing concentrated on health matters, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry considered agricultural affairs and the Department of Education, Science and Training considered educational matters. They rarely communicated with one another. The Australian Government decided it wanted to adopt a whole-government approach in which the Departments of Education, Science and Training and Health and Ageing communicated with the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry to ensure that the delivery of services locally had the appearance of the act of a single government rather than that of a range of departments. Our unit worked closely to ensure that happened and did so extremely well.
We also had a funding programme whereby the Government made small amounts of money available to enable women's groups to establish networks. For example, if women in Tipperary wanted $1,000 to establish a women's network, this funding programme would come into play. Consequently, the local Member of Parliament would build a close partnership with the farm women locally. We found this to be extremely successful and built up close relationships with Members of Parliament. This meant we were not always obliged to go through our farmer organisations to contact them, which could sometimes be a slow process. The new way was productive because we knew the Members and the relationships were good.
We did other useful things such as working with our Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister on national issues. For example, unlike in Ireland, we do not get enough rain in Australia and frequently experience droughts. Recently, as we had experienced a massive drought in Australia, we approached the Government. We stated that the drought was having an impact on our families and communities, on agriculture and everything else and asked it to adopt a national approach to help people deal with the drought. Ms Johnson might wish to deal with this in greater detail, but the Government responded to the effect that this was a fantastic idea. Hence, where traditionally the farmer organisations had worked on the production side of drought and on issues such as the loss of income to individual farms, we women were able to state that we must work with whole communities as well as with the farm sector. This worked extraordinarily well and while we did not solve the drought, we did much to lessen the suffering experienced.
Another example concerns how Australia had a strong system of regulation of our dairy industry in place. The Government set prices and, in the main, controlled how production took place. Five years ago, it decided to get rid of all the regulations on the dairy industry. The members can imagine the effect such a move would have in Ireland and it was devastating in Australia. Women played an enormous role within family homes to help those in farming enterprises realise they could no longer remain in the dairy business. They were not making any money, would be obliged to earn some off-farm income and would be obliged to do some things differently. Men were reluctant to do so because they had been farming for a long time.
Although it did not happen everywhere, when families were obliged to move out of agriculture in what is called restructuring in Australia, women really made a difference. While the Government had established many support programmes which men were not terribly keen to access, women would state that doing so was necessary. Hence, we found we had an important role in supporting that adjustment. Although it could have been done a lot better, we learned many lessons as to how that movement from agriculture to another activity could be handled well.
While the unit has performed its governmental duties well, its greatest achievement has been to improve relationships between the Government and farming communities. Unlike in Ireland, people believe that our Government, which is based in Canberra, is remote from the people. However this unit has been able to further relationships and make people feel more closely connected. Consequently, issues are dealt with more quickly. I will be happy to answer specific questions, but perhaps Ms Johnson will talk about her experience with the unit first.
Ms Alana Johnson
I have been the national president of a not-for-profit non-governmental organisation called the Foundation for Australian Agricultural Women. It was formed in response to a recommendation made by the first international conference for agricultural women which was held in Melbourne.
Australia is interesting because in the last 15 years we have seen the establishment of what is almost a plethora of women's groups. Women have been able to find a place to participate in agripolitics and their local communities in a more visible way because of a groundswell of opportunities. The rural women's unit in the Australian Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry facilitated many of them. Hence, not only did the unit make a significant impact in terms of working in the governmental system with the Ministers and between departments, it also had an enormous impact on creating a groundswell or ripple of opportunities for women in areas as far flung as the top of Western Australia and other places that knew nothing of Canberra.
I want to discuss the rationale behind why this has happened in Australia over the last 15 years. Some of the findings to emerge from research carried out examining the actual participation of women in agriculture which was not necessarily being shown by the census statistics were interesting. The situation is the same here. One finding we all laughed about was that it was discovered that 80% of farm cheques were written by women. It would be interesting to know whether the figure is the same in Ireland. It also demonstrated that women were decision makers on farms. The Government then realised that women were its clients as they made decisions as to how money was to be spent as well as the direction and future of farming activities. Since that time, both the Government and the commercial sector have recognised that they are obliged to talk to women as they make choices about how money is spent on farms. While the level of women's participation in influencing the direction and development of agriculture was hidden previously, it is now much more visible in Australia.
Another factor to emerge as a clear rationale for providing increased opportunities for women to become involved in decision-making in the agriculture sector is that they have been shown to be good change agents and change managers within the sector. During some of our bad times of economic downturn, women created new innovations on farms and started new farm-based businesses.
Many of the issues Australia faces in terms of the future of farming, resource management — including that of water — environmental issues and the changing world stage in which agriculture must participate have been taken on board by women who are regarded as agents of change in their communities. Australia has an aging farming population, an issue that is probably equally relevant in Ireland. I think the average age of Australian farmers is approximately 58. Questions relating to the future of agriculture and identifying who will be the farmers of the future and to whom will land be passed on have been hidden and people have not talked about them often. There has been considerable disruption in agriculture and many young people have left farming and are not likely to return. The issue of what will happen in Australian agriculture in ten years' time needs to be put on the agenda. The increasing visibility and involvement of women in discussions on the future of agriculture in Australia has provided a space for families to discuss succession planning. It is on the agenda in Australia because of the work of women's organisations and has been brought forward by the change-focused and future-focused attitude held by women.
Women in Australia have been very vocal in publicly tackling some contentious issues in their communities. The notion that talking about community and family is the soft side of agriculture and that there is a distinction between the soft and hard sides of agriculture is no longer held in Australia. We believe that agriculture is a three-legged stool composed of production, environment and the social and community context and that all three elements are equally important in keeping agriculture viable.
I forgot to say that I work on a beef farm that also grows farm forestry trees. As I am a fifth-generation Australian farmer of Irish descent, it is wonderful to be here and I am happy to answer any questions members might wish to pose.
I welcome the delegation from Australia and thank it for its presentations. The comments made by members of the delegation were very thought-provoking and interesting. I hope Ms Johnson can make a better living out of beef farming in Australia than the poor farmers in Ireland.
Ms Carroll spoke about women in leadership roles in agriculture. We are very lucky that matters have changed dramatically in Ireland in recent years. We now have a female Minister for Agriculture and Food and two very articulate female MEPS, in Máiread McGuinness and Avril Doyle, who are very focused on agriculture. In addition, Deputy Upton is the Labour party spokesperson on agriculture and Deputy Hoctor is the Vice Chair of this committee. Attitudes are changing and women are taking a more active role in agriculture, which will hopefully continue.
From the perspective of a Government Department and particularly in light of changing times, it is critically important for us to examine all elements of agriculture and the three legs of agriculture to which Ms Johnson referred. We need new perspectives, inputs and ideas about agriculture if we are to maintain farm families and the fabric of rural Ireland. The Department of Agriculture and Food is not as consumer-orientated as it should be. The lack of input from women has led to the focus being placed solely on production rather than the target market. The development of a women in agriculture unit would progress this and many other areas of agriculture.
Ms Carroll hit the nail on the head regarding women in agriculture. There seems to be a growing reluctance among elderly parents to sign over land to their sons or daughters because of the issue of marital breakdown. Fewer farmers will be able to avail of stamp duty relief because their parents are signing long-term leases rather than signing over the land to them. How does MsCarroll think this can be addressed in the context of trying to promote farm partnerships, which are the way forward? The advisory committee on women in agriculture and rural communities established by the former Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Walsh, made 36 recommendations in 2000. Have these recommendations been implemented and what is their current status?
I was very interested to hear Ms McGowan's comments on the silo attitude regarding the responsibilities of the different Australian Government departments, a problem we also face in Ireland. It affects all Government Departments, not just the Department of Agriculture and Food. Could Ms McGowan elaborate on how this attitude to Government departments was changed? We have an interdepartmental working group, which is led by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, that deals with women's issues but it is difficult to see the entire Government's approach rather than a departmental approach. As a result, priorities seem to be falling between the stools. Ms McGowan said that the Australian unit was very much a facilitator of this type of co-ordination. Could she elaborate on that?
Ms McGowan also said that the leadership role regarding restructuring came from women in agriculture. They led the movement away from agriculture to alternative enterprises and employment. The focus in Ireland seems to be on providing education, training and information for farmers. What challenges were faced in Australia and how were they addressed in terms of targeting training and education resources at women?
Women are farm managers in Ireland and Australia. They do the books but get no recognition in terms of PRSI and social welfare. Giving women in agriculture the recognition they deserve and which they have previously been denied is an enormous challenge. We all have a responsibility to try to give women in agriculture this recognition, the lack of which gives rise to a number of anomalies within the system. We should raise this issue with the Minister for Social and Family Affairs in the coming weeks to see if it can be addressed in the forthcoming budget because many women are being left in very difficult circumstances because they do not have their own incomes and did not work outside the home because they were the farm managers. They managed the books and the accounts and yet are given no recognition for this.
The three spokespersons from different parties and the Vice-Chair will speak, followed by the remaining members of the committee. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I apologise for being late; I was speaking in the House. I also apologise because I must leave this meeting early to attend another. I welcome the Australian delegation. I met some members of it at the women in agriculture conference two years ago in Croke Park and I recognise the great work they did at that event. They highlighted the central and important role of women in agriculture. They did not make a fuss about this situation; it was merely something that now existed and was to be welcomed. We learned a considerable amount from this; the psychology of it was very significant.
Women historically played a very important, hands-on role in agriculture in Ireland. More recently, as Deputy Naughten said, they have taken on another important role, namely, the management of many aspects of the farming business. However, they are sidelined and uncredited for this contribution. There is certainly no formal recognition. We must take on board and find a way of dealing with issues such as PRSI for farmers' spouses.
Agriculture in Ireland has changed in terms of production because it is no longer production driven. We now have agriculture that depends on the production of good and safe food and women, in particular, will have important roles in determining how this can be delivered. Such a shift in agricultural practices may allow women to find this niche and make it clear that they have important contributions to make.
Does the Australian delegation believe there is a case to be made for a gender quota system in our farming organisations? I apologise for missing the presentation and my questions may have been dealt with. If one examines any of our major farming organisations, they are dominated and led by men. Why can we not have women leaders? It is difficult due to the role women have played in the home and on the farm. As in any other profession, it could be difficult for a woman to find the necessary time but should there not be some way to get around this and create a more suitable environment? Should there be a quota system to ensure that there is adequate representation and that women's voices are heard? It is still the case that Irish farming organisations have a strong say in determining the direction of agriculture. Unless there are women with strong voices inside those organisations — these individuals would not be token members and would have important leading roles and functions, we will continue to fight an uphill battle.
I like to think of farming as a profession. Other professions have partnerships. Why, therefore, do we not have partnerships in farming? It is the case in the legal and medical professions. Partnerships have been established everywhere. In this instance, two people on a farm are committed to the development of their enterprise but why can there not be a partnership role?
I hope the Deputy will be the next leader of the Labour Party.
I hope the Chairman is correct.
Is the Chairman abdicating his field?
I am not.
She might be the next Minister for Agriculture and Food.
I welcome the ladies from Australia and thank them for their presentation, which was quite informative. It was evident from what they said that there is a structured relationship between woman, farmer and the national Government in Australia. I also thank Ms Carroll for her presentation and commend her on her work. I refer here, in particular, to the Croke Park declaration, the work surrounding it and its implementation.
As the guests are probably aware, farming has undergone a significant change in Ireland. In the not too distant past, the situation was one of having a partnership between husband and wife in running a farm but without any recognition of this status. It is an equality issue in so far as women were denied their status. Deputy Naughten referred to the issue of land ownership, inheritance and so forth, which is more startling in today's world as fewer relationships last. It is a cultural problem that creates difficulties.
The building of relationships between women representatives from the farming and rural communities and Members of Parliament and Government to identify the needs and requirements was mentioned, as was the forthcoming Government funding to develop this type of partnership approach. Could our guests elaborate on this as it would be informative for everyone here? Our guests mentioned that farming organisations concentrated on the agricultural side, whereas women in farming took a broader view within their communities. Could they elaborate on this also?
It would appear that the political will for change and recognition was forthcoming from the Australian Government. Perhaps our guests could confirm this. Was this promoted by the farming organisations?
Ms McGowan
Yes.
I understand. It would be helpful if our guests could develop this topic. I would have assumed the approach taken in formulating the strategy was a collective one involving the Government and women in farming. How broad was the input? Obviously, its implementation was driven both by the Government and women in agriculture.
I welcome Ms Carroll and the Australian deputation, Ms McGowan and Ms Johnson, and thank them for their interesting presentations. We should welcome the opportunity to acknowledge and thank Ms Carroll for her work in promoting and communicating with women in agriculture in this country. I am aware of the farm families groups because there is an innovative group in north County Tipperary. However, I know these groups are not as strong in other areas. I would welcome Ms Carroll's comments in drawing the committee an overall picture of how the groups are operating across the country and the role they would play in the proposed unit she has discussed. When applying for funding, many groups seem to need to go through the IFA, which is unfair. They should, as a right, have the means to apply for funding. This matter should perhaps be addressed by the committee in future.
One of the first comments we would make about women in agriculture in Ireland relates to concern about isolation. Hopefully, the feeling of isolation will be overcome by today's proposals but the same feeling must be more profound in the vastness of Australia. I would be interested to hear from both Ms Johnson and Ms McGowan as to how this was overcome by communication. Was it done by way of newsletters? I do not know whether people were knowledgeable enough to use e-mail in that way but I imagine the communication systems must have been very well thought out to achieve that level of success.
Ms Carroll
I thank members for the feedback. Deputy Naughten referred to the role models we have at the highest level. I still remember Deputy Coughlan being appointed Minister for Agriculture and Food on the day on which the ploughing championships took place last year. I never thought it could happen and it was fabulous. That did more than anything else for women in agriculture. It was recognition that helped to change the culture. This was followed by the appointment of Mariann Fischer Boel as Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development. I also recognise Deputies Hoctor and Upton andMáiread McGuinness, MEP, and Avril Doyle, MEP, who have been wonderful in helping me. Although it is fantastic to have women at the very top as role models, I was referring to role models lower down the chain.
I will respond to Deputy Hoctor's point on farm family groups, the IFA and other groups where there are not enough women at the level of decision-making. It is important to start at this level in order that they can progress to State boards where decisions are made. In the Visitors Gallery we have Ms Phil Leech from the farm family committee of the IFA and Ms Kitty Harlan of the ICA. Both must be recognised because their groups have done much for the agenda of women in agriculture and rural women when no one else did anything. Coming from a rural background and as a woman, I recognise the role these women have played and I am also delighted to do anything I can to push this forward.
A good point was made about partnerships and in my home situation I see reluctance to hand over the land in case the son marries some floozy from the town and the farm is ruined.
It would not be the first time.
Ms Carroll
There is this belief and we must be realistic. This is a barrier to the idea of forming partnerships and fear is a major element. Partnerships are common in Australia because this is how the business of farming is conducted. I find the issue of farm succession planning amazing. Farmers, like many of us, do not make wills and something must be done to promote planning for the future. The latter is what any small business would do. Businesses do not leave this matter to chance and farm succession is vital and should be examined.
When I was with the IFA we held seminars on farm succession planning that generated major interest. Many people were keen to learn more and we must promote partnerships and make them more attractive. If it were more beneficial to be in a partnership than to not be in one, more people would take it up. This encouragement could take the form of a tax break, which could solve the related problem of social insurance cover for women in farming. In a partnership, both partners can make PRSI contributions and this model would resolve many difficulties and recognise the role of women.
Deputy Naughten referred to 37 recommendations in the report of the advisory committee on the role of women in agriculture from September 2000. It was commendable that we took this step in 2000 and the recommendation to set up a unit for women in farming was on the table but was not pursued due to resistance. In January 2004 a progress report on these recommendations emerged and we welcome the substantial progress made on many of them. A national rural development forum was set up and it meets twice a year. Women's issues, along with other matters, can be highlighted here.
The gender equality unit was also established in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform but there remains a gap for women in farming. In our previous presentation made to the Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food we referred to blocking the gap. This term is often used in respect of women in farming.
Ms McGowan
When a woman physically blocks a gap while working with cattle.
Ms Carroll
That is symbolic of so much a woman must do in blocking the gap. She must do miscellaneous tasks, such as bookkeeping, as well as farming. There remains a gap and we must determine how best it can be blocked.
Deputy Hoctor referred to farm family committees in the IFA and we recognise the work of Ms Phil Leech, who is present on behalf of Ms Mary McGreal, chairperson of the national committee. Much good work has been done and in some counties these committees are very strong while in others their presence is weak. The same is true of the ICA, which has also done much good work. The national farm family committee of the IFA needs to become more mainstream because it is often referred to as a separate entity even though it is of major importance to the IFA. Major changes are about to take place and the committee will be developed in order that it has a stronger power base.
Women in farming need to engage in networking. The manner in which this links to the unit is the point of contact for the unit instead of the unit having to contact every group. There are many groups and networks for rural women in Kerry alone, as Deputy Ferris will be aware. I get confused as I no longer know who to talk to and pulling them all together would endow greater strength on the network.
The Australian women will refer to the isolation factor but newsletters and e-learning have been major factors in countering this. A single network that could inform women of events would be of great importance.
Ms McGowan
If the Chairman agrees, Ms Johnson can speak on succession planning before I make a contribution.
Ms Johnson
There are a few interesting points I can share. In Australia, business partnerships in farming do not always include land ownership. A family or company may own the land and a husband and wife may have a business partnership based on running the farm. There are many ways in which we have evolved to allow farmers to make a contribution that suits them. Recently there was a change in the tax laws allowing families to leave farming land to one child and forestry, that which is on the land, to another, even though the trees are planted on the land left to the former child. We are loosening the structures, allowing us to plan differently for the future and viewing succession in a different way and participation in farming in a broader context.
Succession planning in Australian farming has been brought to the fore because women have an opportunity to meet and deal with issues of isolation. There are annual gatherings of women on farms in many states and women hold workshops and seminars. This has led to succession planning coming to the forefront in the past ten years.
In respect of isolation and farm family committees, there is no single structure that suits all women. As a result of the rural women's unit, small sums of money have allowed women to create structures that work for them. We have a saying that giving a woman $100 leads to a value of $1,000. Some money is spent on farms the size of Ireland and women use methods of communication that are different to those used where I farm, an area in which people can meet. We have allowed different structures to evolve, including the not for profit organisation, of which I am a director, and the Australian women in agriculture group. The latter is similar to a women's IFA. Small amounts of money from a central facilitating source can allow different results to suit the needs of different women.
Various groups emerge that suit a particular need and during the past five years in Australia a movement towards a large national rural women's consultative committee, involving many rural women's groups, has evolved. It consults not only the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry but also the Department of Health and Ageing and the department with responsibility for justice. This group has a broader impact on Government than it did when it only dealt with agriculture, which means it has a slightly different structure. It not only comprises women farmers but also people such as rural women doctors and, as such, it has become a broader consultative process.
People asked why women's organisations were created and why the existing farming organisations were not allowed to develop through quotas or to evolve to a stage where women's' participation could happen. An organisation with a long and rich history already has a set view on how it participates in the political structure. One can spend one's energy trying to change that culture but sometimes one does not want to do that. In Australia, women in agriculture have emerged as a dominant agri-political voice because they wanted to put their energy into issues and not into changing an existing system. They now have good working relationships across the existing committees. Ireland will find its own path but that was an important path in Australia.
With regard to encouraging and promoting education within the farming system, a national summit held in Canberra on farm finance and the future of farming approximately a decade ago heralded a major push in this area. One of the results was a realisation that we needed to move towards farms operating more like businesses and being more business oriented in order to be prepared for changes in agriculture. The Government put a great deal of effort into creating a range of incentives to bring people to a new thinking about themselves in farming and to promote the role of farmer as a business manager.
One of the schemes, FarmBis, gave people financial incentives to get involved in education and training. Over a period of three years we moved from 4% of farmers accessing some education in the previous 12 months to 52%. A major change occurred and part of that change included that women already accepted the concept of education. Attending seminars encouraging farm partnership and examining new ways of working and attending new training programmes with their husbands became part of farming culture. That momentum is now at a point where we are moving people towards having business and succession plans and that men and women should work in partnership. That is a great leap forward and we hope it will better position us to face the changes that will be required in agriculture in the future.
An extremely important development for women in Australia was that the Government, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and the rural women's unit realised one cannot change perceptions of women in agriculture unless it is done in an extremely visible way. We instituted a national rural women's award in various states which demonstrated what women in agriculture did and it received coverage in the urban media and on television. In terms of promoting change and new knowledge, the winners of those awards won scholarships to travel abroad to learn new ways of farming and to attend the Australian Institute of Company Directors to become skilled in terms of future participation on boards. The nation saw these women putting themselves forward and stepping up to be seen and that changed many views on the role of women in the future of agriculture in Australia.
Ms McGowan
Do I have enough time to speak?
We will give Ms McGowan all the time she needs.
Ms McGowan
I thank the members for their questions. I will begin with the question on political will, which puts the finger on the pulse and is the reason Ms Johnson and I were so keen to attend this meeting. Political will made the difference. We had been lobbying but it was not until the politicians became our champions and, dare I say it was our male politicians who became our real champions, that change occurred.
I ask members to become champions of this issue here. Women can say "Let's do it" but it rolled out when our Deputy Prime Minister, a man, stated that it must happen. It was better that a man did so because it would not have had the impact it did if it had been our women politicians. I ask male politicians working on rural issues to take that responsibility and state that it will happen, without excuses. The Deputy Prime Minister never apologised for it. He stated that of course women are important and that they are not even the backbone of agriculture, they are partners. He stated that his wife is a good woman and that he is a good man and that this is how modern Australia works and we will do this. He was able to introduce the tax breaks Ms Johnson described and if a committee was formed only of older people, he would request that good women be included. He rejected the membership of one committee in which I was involved three times until it contained the diversity of interests he wanted.
This development happened because of the wisdom of politicians to see that if one keeps travelling in the same direction, one ends up where one is headed. That is obvious. He saw where we were going and he did not want to go there. He wanted an Australia where agriculture had a future, where people were proud to state they were farmers and that although we had a past, our future would be different. He saw that if our faces were reflected in a picture of the future of farming, people would see it differently. They would buy food from me, know I was a farmer and part of the new agriculture. He saw that vision and knew that if only men's faces were seen it would not portray the new image he wanted.
I will discuss education and training but I am anxious to briefly discuss succession planning. I am one of 13 children, I have nine sisters and I grew up on a farm. One can imagine my father's situation. My mother is deceased. Five of my sisters married farmers and my father has left his farm to one of my sisters who is a doctor. She had money and some of us were extremely jealous because we thought she would be able to buy a farm if she wished. I am fourth in the family. At the age of 28 I decided I wanted to be a farmer but I did not want to get caught up in the politics of the family distribution. I bought my own farm in my own right. My situation is different but I am interested in the topic of succession.
We developed farm succession planning well and I encourage anyone with an interest to examine what we did. We worked at many levels. We changed tax rules and ran major education programmes for accountants and solicitors because they advise farmers. In addition, we run professional education programmes throughout the country. We organise farm meetings at which a professional accountant, a lawyer and other experts, for example, agricultural consultants, as well as the farm family attend and we get Government funding to go towards payment for the professional services. These are called facilitated farm family meetings, which are extraordinarily popular. I have a friend who, as a professional, conducts approximately 200 facilitated farm family meetings per year. The results are often fantastic. I am not saying that there are never any fights but they are invariably resolved.
We have also done much work in education. We have run programmes where husbands, wives and children get together to discuss their vision for the future. They discuss what they want their communities and families to be like in the future. Then we draw up action plans to ensure their vision can be realised. We regularly run such training programmes in communities. It often becomes clear to the parents that if they want their community to continue to be a farming one, they must ensure that the young people stay. Therefore, they need money and training. That education programme is working particularly well.
I invite committee members to come to Australia on a parliamentary exchange scheme. We would be very happy to set up meetings with our federal and state staff to introduce the members to our system.
I thank Ms McGowan.
I suggest that May 2007 would be a good time.
Ms Johnson
I am involved in organising the first national farm succession planning conference which will take place in June next year. Perhaps that would be a good time for members to visit.
Ms McGowan
I wish to address the question of the quota system, as raised by Deputy Upton. We tried to set up a quota system in Australia but it did not work. We worked with our national farmer organisation, which is called the National Farmers Association of Australia. We had many meetings and discussed the political issues involved. The organisation passed a motion declaring its aim, within five years, to have 30% female membership. While it readily agreed to adopt this policy, it simply did not work. No one wanted it because such things cannot be done by force. If something is going to happen, it will be because people want it. We have found that education and training is much more effective. It is better to work from the bottom up, creating opportunities for women, than from the top down.
However, that is not to say that the decision of the farmer organisation had no impact. The organisation is hugely embarrassed because it passed that motion but failed to implement it, which gives us some degree of political power. We can put pressure on the organisation to find ways to change. The notion of a quota has not worked for us to date. We must take our time and if change takes 50 years to come about, then so be it. Hopefully it will not take that long. Women must get more involved for change to happen. We must also continue work on the unit and to operate at the political level to initiate change.
If the committee comes to Australia, it will see that the funding scheme has been key to our communication programme. When we set up our organisation, we thought we knew how to communicate. We used electronic media, organised conferences and so forth. Some of that has worked but the grants scheme has been the most effective. Under that scheme, we give $500 to groups for communications. They must be responsible with that money and report back on their activities. That has resulted in some amazingly innovative ideas and developments.
For example, one of the communities is in a very isolated part of rural Australia, with a number of typically large sheep stations, thousands of miles apart. The community obtained funding from the health department to set up satellite stations for health consultations. In Australia, the Internet and satellites are widely used for health consultations where, for example, a doctor in Brisbane can communicate with a patient in remote satellite centre. The women in the community now use those satellite stations to communicate with one another. They come together once a year for two days. Their annual gathering is attended by health professionals, educational professionals, career advisers and many other service providers. We would never have thought of the potential of the satellite network and the wonderful thing about it is that it is very cheap. They are using infrastructure that is already in place and they achieve wonderful results at their annual gathering.
It was the unit that made it possible because it brought all of those people together. We did not know of the existence of the infrastructure but our representative in Canberra did all of the work, the so-called "Mary Carrolling", to make the project happen. The facilitation and co-ordination from the unit gives a good return in terms of value and also ensures that what we undertake works and is not a waste of time.
I thank Ms McGowan.
Is the unit made up solely of public servants or is there outside involvement?
Ms McGowan
That is a good question. Our champion Minister said that he did not want a public servant in the unit. He advertised widely and then asked Mary Carroll, the farm families, the ICA and two public servants to be on the employment committee. In fact, a public servant ended up heading the committee and she was fantastic. However, she had to demonstrate to the other women that she was able to do the job. Once a year she had to report back to them on her strategic plan. That advisory group worked very closely at all times with our political champion to ensure that the job stayed connected to reality and did not become part of the bureaucracy.
I welcome our Australian visitors and compliment Mary Carroll on her work. I recently had the pleasure of meeting a group of women who travelled from New South Wales and it was interesting to hear what they had to say. They told us that one of the crops grown in the state is opium. I wonder how we would manage such a crop in Ireland
Was any of it brought home?
We should acknowledge the role that women played in agriculture in Ireland and how that role has changed recently. There is no doubt that there were women who did wonderful work here. They raised families and did much of the physical work. That has changed now. Today we have a new breed of farm women who work outside of the home. It must be acknowledged that were it not for the fact that they work outside the home, we would not have as many farms as we have today. Women are the lifeblood of many farms.
This group of women must be organised in some way to make a contribution to agriculture. Their time is limited because they have families and jobs but they also have a great deal to contribute. Many of those women, based on the history of farming in Ireland, would be inclined to encourage their families into education and away from farming. Such women must be organised because their contribution to the future of farming in this country could be immense.
I see great merit in what Ms Mary Carroll is trying to do. She raised some very important issues and I have examined the pension issue in particular. I will not go into details here but that is a major issue. We have the ICA and farm families. Perhaps the time has come to bring women into one group, although that will not be easy. Owing to the changing nature of Irish agriculture, the IFA, ICMSA and other farming bodies should explore the possibility of coming together. Farm numbers are decreasing and we need to strengthen our voices. Ms Carroll noted resistance to her ideas. Where did that resistance come from? I hope the delegation's stay in Ireland will be pleasant.
I extend a céad míle fáilte to the delegation and hope its members are having an excellent time. They should go to the country, where real life exists, and visit Deputy Hoctor and me in north County Tipperary. Ms McGowan will be especially welcome because she has €1,000 for the women of the area. I suggest that she confines her largesse to the north of the county and give the women there $2,000. She should forget about the people of south County Tipperary.
I do not wish to rehearse issues previously addressed. I have cooled down since some of the remarks were made but take a different view to most of the speakers on this issue. I am delighted that the movement exists and wish it every success but I believe that it is acting negatively as a farm women's movement. I say this with respect and in the hope that I can be of help. The members of the delegation are underselling themselves. Negative sentiments were expressed by Ms Carroll and Deputy Hoctor.
With regard to the role of leadership, one should be judged on the abilities to lead and deliver rather than on one's gender. The Minister for Agriculture and Food should not hold that post merely as a woman but because she is an able politician and is capable of performing the duties involved. A women's movement should be more positive.
Deputy Hoctor suggested that rural farming women in north County Tipperary are isolated. I must live in a different constituency because I think they are great innovators and motivators who are involved with every aspect of rural life. Perhaps "isolation" is the wrong word because such situations arise from poverty traps or family and health issues. The movement should sell its abilities, what it has to offer and the fact that its members are as capable as any man. As legislators, we have a crucial role in this matter. To carry out what I recommend, attitudes as well as conditions and facilities must be changed to enable women complete involvement. They should not be penalised because they are women.
I want to raise the issue of pensions. I am aware of a woman farm owner who married another farmer. Both continued to farm but because the unit was registered under the husband's name, the wife has no pension rights. It will be shameful for the Government and us as legislators if we do not change this situation. I second the proposal by my colleague and Fine Gael spokesman for agriculture, Deputy Naughten, that we raise this matter with the Minister in advance of the budget. The time for discussions is over and this anomaly should be addressed immediately, along with many other issues.
The issue of land ownership was addressed and reference was made to the fear among men that wives might take the farm land upon marriage breakdown. An old saying in the country describes a bride who walks down the aisle with a bunch of flowers and returns with a smile and half a farm. This issue not only concerns women, however. I am aware of women farm owners who are concerned that their daughters, who will inherit the farm, will marry a chancer or a waster. That is the passion of Irish landowners, be they men or women. It is not a gender issue, as was negatively presented.
I was incensed by some earlier remarks but will not dwell on them. I am delighted to have this opportunity to discuss matters with the delegation and wish its members well. It was noted that Australia is suffering from a severe drought. We have the opposite experience here in that we get too much rain. However, most Irish men suffer from severe thirst.
When I discuss these matters with farmers, they will want to know the size of the average farm holding in Australia. Members of the delegation might tell us how they would describe a small farmer. What would they consider to be an economically viable unit in Australia?
I am grateful for the invitation to visit Australia. This committee should limit that invitation to the members attending today.
I join other speakers in welcoming the delegation from Australia. I was surprised that I did not see my county woman, Mary McGreal, but I see that she is ably represented. Matters have been thoroughly discussed.
I do not understand the issues arising from herd numbers. I served for many years as a field officer for the Department, during which time I never encountered problems in supplying a herd number to a woman. The same criteria were applied to both genders. I would be amazed if that has crept in because we always provided the same treatment to male and female applicants. They had to meet the same criteria. With regard to the livestock section, where the death of a male herd owner gave rise to hardship, the Department was accommodating in paying out money to the spouse until the herd number was registered in her name. I would be happy to raise with the Minister any problems that may exist in this area.
The record will have my exact remarks on the concerns among rural women in terms of isolation. The main objective of farm families groups is to avoid situations where women live in isolation in rural Ireland. I referred to the fact that north County Tipperary has a strong farm families group, as does County Carlow. Such groups are not as strong in other regions but they would be strengthened if a unit were established in the Department, as was proposed in the 2000 report. I ask this committee to recommend such a unit, which could be to the fore in providing the necessary support to ensure that the isolation experienced by many rural women is eliminated. It is now 2005 and, following this productive meeting, there is an onus on us to make that proposal to the Department of Agriculture and Food. I ask the Chairman to do so.
I thank the Deputy. We will certainly do that.
Ms Carroll
I will take the joint committee's questions in order.
I thank Deputy Wilkinson for hosting the group from Australia in July. I welcome his point that new farm women, among whose ranks I count myself, who live and work on a farm often fall between the cracks and lack representation. Even if we do not go so far as to bring them together under a group such as the IFA or the ICA, it is important to establish links among those women, perhaps under a rural women's network such as that which exists in Australia. That network could then be linked to a unit in the Department of Agriculture and Food.
I take Senator Coonan's point that we must be positive. Women must promote what they have to offer and that is what we are trying to achieve. We are not painting a gloomy picture and emphasising the negatives but trying to create a positive solution whereby women can become more prominent in the world of agriculture. It should be a top-down and bottom-up process. He is correct that land issues are not confined to women but only 9% of land is owned by women in Ireland. Therefore, it is a more one-sided matter.
The other 91% is owned by bank managers.
Ms Carroll
Deputy Hoctor made the point that isolation is a huge issue in rural Ireland. It is a factor in the incidence of suicide and needs to be explored in greater detail. It is unacceptable that so many people take their lives and much of what causes them to do so is isolation. A person can feel isolated in the busiest place. Changing times mean young men do not know what to do with themselves and lack direction. Men and women have a role to play in addressing that.
Deputy Carty is correct that the issue relating to herd numbers is confusing. It is difficult to obtain evidence in respect of it. In my time as IFA equality officer I encountered it through women coming to me with their stories. The biggest issue is joint herd numbers, which are allowed by the Department but on which there has been little uptake. That relates to the debate about partnerships and the number of women who wanted their names on joint herd numbers. In some counties women do not appear to have got the message about its benefits. Women often felt that once they were married, it was more difficult to maintain their herd number. Therefore, they tended to amalgamate. Politicians probably had constituents who made the same point.
I said it was not a big problem.
Ms Carroll
It is not a big problem but it needs to be examined, particularly in respect of discrepancies between counties.
It is an important issue.
Ms Johnson
I take Senator Coonan's point about positivity. Change happens when people move forward in a positive way, not when they expect it to happen because they complain that they are being treated unfairly. We have changed our thinking in Australia by dispelling the notion of the poor farmer, which we had for a long time. When circumstances were bad for farming, such as during periods of drought, we helped them out with assistance programmes. We could have adopted that policy for women too and complained about being disadvantaged but we avoided that trap. The Government believed that if we wanted a positive future for farming in Australia we would have to treat farmers not as poor people who needed assistance but as business people who needed a hand up. Our education programmes have emphasised the need for farmers to see themselves as competent operators and we have taken the same approach with women. We have established a context where women can identify their own skills and the positive contribution they can make to the future of agriculture. A positive outlook is the way forward.
Ms Carroll mentioned the suicide rate. As the Joint Committee on Health and Children is discussing that subject, we will leave it in the hands of members of that committee. Suicide is a sad issue that touches everyone and has become all too common in recent years.
We will ask the Minister to discuss social welfare issues. Successive Governments have failed to recognise the importance of the role women play. As Senator Coonan said, many women are left without pensions and that is unacceptable.
I have no problem giving way to the Vice-Chairman to visit Australia with a delegation.
How many from the joint committee will go?
We will decide at a later date. Do the members of the delegation want two to three or eight to nine?
Ms Johnson
It is a big country.
It is a big committee.
Senator Coonan posed the final question, which related to the size of holdings in Australia.
Ms McGowan
It is difficult to answer the question. According to statistics, there are 125,000 viable farms in Australia. The definition of viable does not cover small farmers with significant outside incomes. Otherwise they include very large stations and small horticultural enterprises with only five acres but with, for example, hydroponic tomatoes generating incomes of 100,000 Australian dollars. The figure is not helpful because the average size it gives is an average of impossibles.
It is like asking an Irish farmer how many acres he owns. He will answer "A few".
Ms McGowan
Statistics are even more misleading now. As Ms Johnson said, uncoupling has taken place so we do not know what constitutes a farm. Do we measure the amount of land held or the size of a business that might lease property and carry out contract work? The statistics are difficult to compile, let alone believe.
As we are talking about women, I welcome the committee's new clerk, Ms JosieBriody, who began work with us today. She comes from the good agricultural county of Cavan, which borders on mine. I wish her well in the months and years ahead. I also pay tribute to another woman, our former clerk, Ms Gina Long, who has transferred to the Joint Committee on Health and Children I wish her well.
I also thank Ms Carroll, who has come before this joint committee in the past and will probably do so again, for her part in today's discussion. I am sure that the delegation sent by the committee to Australia will look forward to visiting that beautiful country.
Ms Carroll
I thank the Chairman for inviting the delegation to come before the joint committee and Deputy Hoctor for organising the visit. She has been very helpful in recent months. I thank members for listening to our presentation and for commenting on it. I thank Ms Johnson, Ms McGowan and their team, along with representatives from the ICA and the IFA, Ms Kitty Harlan and Ms Phil Leech, who have been listening in the Visitors Gallery. We will have more discussions with them after today's joint committee meeting on moving forward.
What we have asked for today is a positive way forward. International studies have shown that units such as that to which we referred can and will work. I hope we will be celebrating the unit being discussed today on World Women's Day next year, thus leading the way in Europe and Ireland for women in agriculture. Along with the joint committee, we are the champions of this concept and we need to put in the effort to make this happen. Much as I would like to think that I can make this happen myself, I cannot do so. Other people need to take this issue on and I am calling on the joint committee to do that.
I invite members to the launch of a book I have written entitled Women Drive Tractors Too. The launch is next Tuesday and I would be delighted if members could attend. The book concerns the recognition of women in farming.
I apologise in advance because I will be unable to attend. I received Ms Carroll's invitation this morning but I must return to my constituency to be present at a launch in the school my son attends. It would not look well if I was not there.
Ms Carroll
That is not a problem.
I thank all for partaking in the debate, and I am sorry I forgot about Ms Harlan and Ms Leech in the Visitors Gallery, as I realise the good work they are carrying out. Ms Harlan is a women's champion in County Meath and I thank her for attending.
The joint committee went into private session at 1.15 p.m. and adjourned at 1.25 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Wednesday, 19 October 2005.