In respect of what we have said a number of times, the hierarchical approach to fertilisers puts mineral fertilisers way higher than organic fertilisers. Despite the fact that a European court case has declared that organic fertilisers should be treated as such, that is not drawn into this legislation in its entirety.
Pig farming expanded, as did poultry farming. Farmers had to expand in order to remain economic. Having to change from grassland to tillage will move us to a different scenario. Tillage is also changing dramatically and spring barley is now the main crop. Under the EPA, we worked on the basis that storage facilties were required for 26 weeks. If we had to direct pig manure at one crop, we would need storage facilties for 52 weeks. It would mean having to bring all our machinery together in a timeframe of one month in order to spread all of the manure on tillage ground in the spring. There are many other restrictions also involved, which we have not put before the committee so as not to over-complicate the document which is already extremely complicated because it raises many issues relating to spreading on tillage lands with which, theoretically, we can deal.
In my case, if I have to implement the directive on 1 January, I will have to double my number of customers. Currently, I have 82. Therefore, I will have to find another 82 between now and 1 January. When I go to check them out, I may find that some of them have premises that my machinery cannot access. There is also a difficulty in that I will have to deal with all of them in the one month. I have traditionally taken on some work in the spring, following which it slackens a little. Then, perhaps in August or September, I spread on wetter land which will have dried out during the summer and on which I could not spread in the spring. One takes the opportunities as they rotate. Now, I must find other opportunities. Even within a timescale, I will not be able to adjust. The figures show that the land is available, but the problem is that one will have to find customers willing to take pig manure.
It should also be remembered that there is stiff enforcement of the regulations. Any individuals caught transgressing these laws have faced stiff enforcement measures. Some judges have even remarked on the number of experts, up to 20, that the Department of Agriculture and Food will bring in to deal with a minor case.
We must deal with the issue of inordinate costs. Let us remember that we are talking about farming. Let us also remember John Dillon's message to the people that farmers are poor. Although many have part-time jobs, wives with jobs or off-farm income, the income from farming per se is very low. Everyone must understand this. When we try to adjust to the directive and find customers who can handle the changes and invest from their farm income, they may be very willing to do so, but it may not just be feasible.
On the issue of sustainability, the attitude of the EPA is very strange from our point of view. Chemical analysis of our waterways suggests there has been a slight deterioration in phosphorus levels; that over a period farming reduced its phosphorus input by 20,000 tonnes annually. However, the EPA has picked up a low level increase in phosphates in waterways. This is at total variance with what we are doing.
What do we face next year when enforcement of the directive begins? We believe this document would not stand up legally on many issues. We are the ones fighting it, with very few resources. We want to alert everyone on the side of the directive to the fact that we do not want them to bring bad science to us. Bad science makes bad law. We are at the butt of enforcement, as can be seen, for example, from the court cases taken, on which I have a file and I am absolutely amazed by the results, on which some judges are commenting. There was a case in west Cork in which the Department of Agriculture and Food was defeated in the District Court. It appealed the decision but was defeated again. It took the issue to the Circuit Court and was defeated once more. The case had to do with two small cheese farms.
People are frightened. Many see this as a threat which they all face. The penalties such as a sentence of three years in jail are written in black and white. One faces double inspections if one takes manure from an organic source, even though chemically there is no great difference. Another cost one faces is the cost of consultants to advise on REPS payments. Generally, one hires a consultant who may charge more the first year but once the process has been set in train and the farmer keeps everything the same, the fee is approximately €300 per year. However, if the farmer starts to bring in organic fertiliser from a neighbouring pig or poultry farm, the issue becomes complicated and there is more form-filling. If the farmer is going to face double inspections, the consultant will have to come and supervise and as a result will need to be paid at least €200 more.
The playing field is being made more difficult in several areas, an issue we have not raised with the committee. We are generally in agreement with the nitrates directive. However, the science is flawed, with many other elements. Farmers are taking on board the threats they face in this regard.