Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 25 Oct 2016

Vol. 248 No. 1

Agricultural Prices and Decision by UK to Leave EU: Statements

I am very happy to have the opportunity to speak to the House today about the implications of Brexit for our agrifood and fisheries sectors. In my opening comments, I would like to provide Members with an outline of the areas that are most likely to be affected by the UK leaving the EU and to give an overview of the preparatory work carried out by my Department to date. I will also explain how we are feeding into the overall Government response to Brexit. I look forward to hearing Members' contributions and engaging with them on this very important topic.

The UK's decision to leave the EU raises enormous challenges for the Irish agrifood sector.

The UK is by far our largest trading partner. Last year, we exported almost €5.1 billion worth of agricultural products. Ireland is also the UK's largest destination for its food exports, worth €3.8 billion in 2015. My Department, with its agencies and stakeholders, has been carefully considering the potential impacts of a UK exit, examining the areas in which the greatest risks may arise and on which we will need to focus when negotiations begin. The main areas in which impacts are foreseen are in respect of currency fluctuations, tariffs and trade, the EU budget, regulations and standards, and customs controls and certification. The UK exit vote also raises complex issues for the fisheries sector. However, it is important to remember that our trading relationship with the UK is not altered in any way until the negotiations that will dictate the terms and conditions of the UK’s departure are completed.

The Department of the Taoiseach is co-ordinating the overall Government response to Brexit. It has established a contingency framework which sets out the key issues that will be most important to Ireland and has published a summary of the key actions that will be taken to address them. It has also established an interdepartmental group to follow up in practical terms on the outcome and implications of the referendum vote and support the work of the new Cabinet committee on Brexit. This interdepartmental group will be supported by six sectoral work groups which will provide key sectoral and thematic advice to the Cabinet, committee and Government. My Department will participate in the work groups dealing with the implications for the economy and trade, the EU budget and customs and excise. It will also chair a subgroup examining the implications for the agrifood sector, which met for the first time last week. We are also continuing to deepen our analysis of the likely impacts and feed these in to the central contingency framework being co-ordinated by the Department of the Taoiseach. However, much of the work will depend on the UK's Article 50 notification and its likely asks regarding its future trading relationship with the UK.

A dedicated Brexit unit has been established in my Department and a consultative committee of stakeholders has been convened in order to ensure a full exchange of information, as negotiations proceed. The consultative committee held its first meeting in July and its second last week. The Food Wise 2025 high-level implementation committee has tabled a standing item on Brexit on its agenda. It has also agreed the establishment of a contact group with representatives from my Department and the various agencies in order to ensure a coherent response to any issues arising. This contact group will be absorbed into the central agrifood subgroup to which I referred earlier.

The most immediate impact for agrifood exporters arises from changes to the euro-sterling exchange rate. While this was not unexpected in light of the uncertainty caused by the referendum result, a sustained period of currency volatility would be of major concern. The Central Bank of Ireland has pre-established contingency plans to deal with market volatility. The Central Bank will continue to engage with the Department of Finance and individual financial institutions on the risks involved. Actions by the European Central Bank, ECB, and other global actors will continue to be monitored closely.

Bord Bia and Enterprise Ireland are also providing practical guidance to SMEs. Recently, Bord Bia announced a number of measures, covering areas such as managing volatility impacts, providing consumer and market insight, deepening customer engagement and extending market reach, with the aim of helping companies to maintain their competitiveness. Similar support is also being provided by Enterprise Ireland. In the context of budget 2017, I announced a number of measures that will financially underpin the Department's Brexit mitigation efforts through strategic investment in key areas of the Department, its agencies and the agrifood sector. This includes access to an innovative, low-interest agri-cashflow fund of €150 million, agri-taxation measures designed to address income fluctuations, increased funding of Bord Bia and Bord Iascaigh Mhara, investment in research and development and innovation and increased expenditure on the rural development programme and the seafood development programme.

It is also important that we renew our focus on the need to reduce our dependence on the UK market. The development of new markets and the exploitation of opportunities in emerging markets is a key component of the Food Wise 2025 strategy. I have been following it up in a very real and practical way through my participation in trade missions. Following a very successful visit to south-east Asia in early September, I plan to undertake further trade missions to north Africa and the Gulf region in the coming weeks. These activities will continue into the future, given that they play a key part in our efforts to provide as many markets as possible for Irish agrifood exports.

Beyond the immediate currency difficulties, there are potentially very negative impacts arising from possible differences in tariffs, a movement by the UK away from the common regulations and standards of the Single Market, the reconstitution of border controls and the reintroduction of veterinary certification. These will inevitably add to the costs of Irish producers and processors, affect their competitiveness and disrupt trade.

We also face significant difficulties on the fisheries side, where the most complex issues are those related to the possibility of restricted access to fishing grounds and resources. We face a very uncertain situation regarding the management and sharing of a large number of different fish stocks that we currently share with the UK and other member states under the Common Fisheries Policy framework. This could lead to restricted access to traditional fisheries grounds and resources. The impact of the UK's decision also presents significant challenges from a North-South perspective. At the North-South Ministerial Council plenary summit in Dublin in July, Ministers agreed on ten specific actions to optimise North-South joint planning and engagement on key issues arising as a result of the referendum. The ten point plan includes a full audit of key North-South risks and likely impacts and this work is already under way across all Departments. Following my discussion with the Northern Ireland Minister for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Ms Michelle Mcllveen, at the aforementioned plenary summit, senior officials met later that month for an initial exchange of views on the implications of Brexit for the agrifood sector. This was followed on 4 October by a meeting between my Department’s Secretary General and the permanent secretary of the Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. Following this meeting, the two Departments are currently finalising a joint work programme that will facilitate closer co-operation over the coming months. Contact with the UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is also well under way. A meeting at Secretary General-permanent secretary level took place in London on 16 September and was followed up by the broader Secretary General engagement that took place earlier this month. In addition, I intend to meet with the UK Secretary of State, Ms Andrea Leadsom, in London in early December. My Department and I will also continue to work closely with Ireland’s EU partners with the aim of ensuring a well managed withdrawal and a strong EU-UK relationship post exit.

I welcome the Minister to the House. At the outset I would like to express my disappointment, with all due respect to the Minister, at the fact that the Minister's appearance here today coincides with a meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine, which discommodes all of us, as spokespeople for our respective parties. None of us has the power of bi-location and the unfortunate clash is disappointing.

That said, I welcome the Minister to the House and note his statement on Brexit. Two very strong themes in his statement are the need for preparatory work and the likely outcomes of Brexit, if and when the British trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty and what may happen two years after that. However, there are a number of issues that are not about preparation but about immediate action. The most pressing issue at the moment is the situation in the mushroom industry. As we are all aware, almost 90% of mushroom product is exported to the UK and the current currency fluctuations mean that the industry is haemorrhaging large sums of money on a daily basis. Many mushroom producers are on fixed contracts which are up for renewal between January and March 2017 but many will not survive until then. Producers in the sector are very confident that if and when they sit down to negotiate new contracts they will have a very strong mushroom industry into the future, due to the fact that their main competition was from eastern European suppliers who may not tender for those contracts because they too are struggling.

Planning is not a solution to this problem. We need immediate action. I know that there will be no support coming from the European Union as this is an Irish problem. While I welcome the Minister's visits abroad and his Department's sourcing of new markets, there is no new market possible for the Irish mushroom industry, due mainly to the short shelf life of the product. The British market, irrespective of the outcome of Brexit, is and will be the only real, viable market. The bottom line, however, is that the industry is not going to survive. I ask the Minister to comment on this because there is a need for immediate action and support. We have already lost more than 130 jobs in the industry. We have also lost a supply contract worth €7 million and that is just the tip of the iceberg. I ask the Minister, in his response, to tell us if there are any plans in this regard. While the mushroom industry is under the umbrella of horticulture within the Department, it is an enterprise and jobs are at stake. There may well be a need for input from other Departments. Has the Minister had any discussions with the Departments of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and Social Protection, or any other relevant Department, on what life support could be made available to the industry to allow it to survive until the contract renewal dates? If something is not put in place, the industry will not survive.

Other sufferers as a result of the difficulties in the mushroom industry are the cereal farmers who supply mushroom producers with wheat and straw. As the Minister is aware, cereal growers have had their own problems this year from a climatic perspective, especially along the west coast. I would like to hear the Minister's comments in this regard. There was a crisis in the industry from a price perspective at the start of the year, even if it had turned out to be a good year. Almost 2,000 hectares of grain along the west coast is now unsalvageable. This sector also needs immediate support. I do not know if something could be forthcoming under de minimis aid rules whereby the Government could help them out on a one-off basis, rather than applying to the EU. This is badly needed. It is not just a question of me standing up here and beating a drum. The problems are obvious and I know the Minister is aware of them.

The major long-term issue with Brexit, if and when it is triggered and implemented, will be how we will stand with regard to the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP. The Germans have already said that if money is not forthcoming from Britain, the CAP budget will be cut. I would like to hear the Minister's thoughts on that issue. What can we do in the negotiations to ensure that our CAP allocation remains as is? Farmers tell us that CAP payments need to improve in order for them to survive. If, because of Brexit, we are looking at a situation where there will be major alterations to the CAP, then the entire industry will have a major problem.

Last week, we met European Commissioner Phil Hogan in this House and raised the areas of natural constraint, ANC, scheme review. The Commissioner's response was that no submission had been received from the Irish Government on that review. Why is that the case? Is that submission being prepared and when will it be submitted? The ANC payment is vitally important. It is targeted at disadvantaged areas, those which are the hardest to farm and the people in those areas are most dependent on payments. I was taken aback to hear that Ireland has not made a submission yet.

I ask the Minister to throw some light on the question of when the targeted agricultural modernisation scheme, TAMS, II tillage measure will be opened. This question has been asked on numerous occasions and the answers given have been very open, as in, "in the harvest", "at the back end", "shortly" and "soon". I ask the Minister to give a specific date for the opening of the TAMS II tillage measures.

On the beef sector and pricing, farmers are being offered, on average, €3.75 to €3.80 per kilogram at the moment but Teagasc tells us that the minimum price to break even is €4. We have a serious problem with pricing. What actions can the Minister respectfully take to try to regulate prices? Farmers are price takers but, at the end of the day, the buck stops with the Minister. What can or will the Minister do to try to improve the situation? Farmers will survive but they would not be looking for money through various agricultural schemes if they were getting a decent margin on their products. We need to step in and ensure that they do get such a margin. There are a number of non-money related actions the Minister could take, which I will now run by him and I ask for his response. The 30 month age restriction in the factories is imposing major extra costs, particularly on the suckler industry, which are avoidable.

Calves born at the back end of the year or early in the year hit 30 months in May, June and July, when grass is at a premium. Since the farmers have no wish to keep them and be penalised over the 30 months, they feed the livestock grain unnecessarily to have them finished within 30 months. However, if the period were 36 months, the farmers could leave them on the grass until August, September or October without having the extra cost of the grain. They are being penalised in the factory.

The 30 month restriction was brought in at the time of the BSE crisis, but that crisis has long since gone. Factories and processors are hammering the farmer on an antiquated law. Will the Minister interject to try to have the 30 month restriction changed? It would yield a considerable saving if they did not have to force-feed the cattle and have them sold before grass reaches a premium.

The Minister commented on the marine and fisheries as well. He said there will be major problems. What solutions or actions have been taken to try to overcome some of these problems?

I welcome the Minister. I note that he is proudly wearing an orange and green badge on his lapel. I noticed it as I stepped into the Chamber and I commented on it to him. That gives me an opening to say that the Bord Bia strategy for 2016 to 2018 is making a world of difference. It is an important document. It is referenced in the programme for Government, and that is to be welcomed. Clearly, the strategy is going to have some setbacks. All of this needs to be looked at in the context of the horticultural sector. Mushroom and cut flower production are among a range of horticultural activities in the food and ornamental sectors that need to be examined. I think it would be helpful to take some time out at some point to look at the strategy document in conjunction with Bord Bia to see how we can progress as much of the strategy as possible. I believe it is a good and concise strategy and I salute Bord Bia. The organisation is an altogether focused one that does a very good job. That much needs to be acknowledged.

We know that the European Union is the UK's largest trading partner, accounting for 62% of UK food and drink exports and 70% of UK imports. Therefore, it is not surprising that the exit vote has led to significant market volatility and uncertainty. The UK agricultural industry currently relies heavily on EU subsidies. A study undertaken by the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs showed that more than 30% of British farms could be in negative income without the Common Agricultural Policy. There may also be a possibility of a reduced CAP overall without the contribution from the British. This will have an impact on Irish and EU farms. It is critical to consider how the changes in CAP will affect farmers in Ireland. I am keen to hear what the Minister has to say on that point.

The UK is Ireland's largest market for food and drink, accounting for 41% of Irish food and drink exports. The value was €4.4 billion in 2015. Strong growth in exports to non-EU markets has been evident in recent years. However, the UK remains the core market for Irish food and drink exports. Between 2010 and 2015, Irish exports to the UK increased by €1 billion. This was largely driven by an increase in meat exports. Meat exports make the highest proportion of Irish food and drink exports to the UK, followed by prepared foods and dairy. The UK accounts for 54% of total Irish meat and livestock exports, reflecting the fact that this is the highest priced beef market in the world.

Exports to the UK represent 30% of dairy, 70% of prepared foods and 30% of beverage exports. In the edible horticultural and cereals sectors, the UK accounts for 90% of Irish exports. In the dairy sector, over 65% of our cheddar cheese is exported to the UK while large shipments of butter and infant formula, etc. are exported there too.

As my colleague noted earlier, mushroom exports account for the vast majority of the edible horticulture sector category and are, therefore, almost totally dependent on the UK market. We know about shelf life and so forth. Will the Minister outline the Government policy or strategy or the nature of supports in place in respect of hedging strategies for currency fluctuations? The Minister will be aware of the major stake the people have in Allied Irish Banks. How is the Minister or the Government interacting with that bank or any other financial institution in respect of currency fluctuations and hedging? Clearly, many of these problems are related to the fluctuation in sterling. What is the role of Enterprise Ireland? Will the Minister share with us precisely what measures Enterprise Ireland is undertaking in respect of these matters?

Liquidity and cashflow are critical. To be fair, there has been an increase in lending to the agricultural sector, specifically in the past year. That is to be welcomed. Clearly, this is a major issue as well.

The issue of border controls is relevant. The withdrawal of the UK from the EU would effectively mean that Ireland's Border with Northern Ireland would be, by definition, an external EU border. This will lead to increased regulatory requirements and costs as well as a physical border between both parts of the island of Ireland. This is relevant for the food and drink sectors because it will mean €525 million of fresh food and drinks will be exported.

There are serious difficulties in this area. In this crisis there are major challenges for the island of Ireland. We have heard the remarks of Nicola Sturgeon in respect of Scotland. There is a real possibility of another referendum there, and I can understand why. There may be political implications for Northern Ireland. A northern Unionist said to me recently that while they may be loyal to the British Crown, they are perhaps more loyal to the half-crown. That says something. It is about money, the economy and sustaining the family and the farm as well as farm and producer incomes.

There are major challenges for North-South cross-Border co-operation in this regard and I am keen to hear more from the Minister. Will he tell us more about his plans to foster co-operation? I welcome in particular the fact that Nicola Sturgeon will come here from Scotland to share some of the same concerns. Within all of this there are possible opportunities that we should not overlook as well.

I welcome the Minister to the House. I imagine we are going to have many more conversations about this particular issue as Brexit unfolds and as the implications become more apparent. It is fair to say that we have journeyed a long way since 1 January 1973 when we joined Europe. Most of our external trade was bilateral trade with the UK. We diversified into so many areas. To this day, agriculture and the agrifood sectors still account for a vast amount of exports to the UK. Of our exports, 43% or €5.1 billion in 2015 went to the UK. Conversely, we imported 47% of total agri-sector imports from the UK, comprising €3.8 billion. This figure compares with 14% of exports in other sectors. Therefore, our agriculture and agrifood sectors are unique and in a more precarious situation, one might argue, because of our dependence on that market.

We already know that many analyses have been undertaken. In November 2015 the ESRI estimated that we could see as much as a 20% drop in trade flow between the two countries. Without a doubt, that would pose great difficulties for us.

The mushroom industry has been mentioned. Given the nature of the industry it is a good case study. Immediately we are seeing the impact of the drop in sterling and currency fluctuation. We can learn a good deal from what is happening to the mushroom farmers and we can be decisive about what interventions work. We know that 70,000 tonnes of mushrooms are produced in this country with 60,000 tonnes going to the UK. There is extraordinary dependence on that market. Already, a number of smaller operations have closed.

It is testament to those who are there and have captured the market in the UK, competing with UK producers and producers from eastern Europe who are also dealing with the challenge posed by Brexit and the currency fluctuation. What specific interventions will the Minister make because farming is the backbone of our economy and everyone in the sector has been dealing with international market volatility? The mushroom industry is particularly affected by Brexit. Many of the Minister's interventions in respect of beef and dairy products have been to try to find new markets. While mushrooms and other vegetables are perishable there are new ways to transport them and with assistance perhaps new markets can be explored. The people in the mushroom industry who appeared before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine are innovative and do a fine job against the odds of exporting into England. Working with the industry can lead to results and help them get through the difficult time. What in particular is being done for the mushroom industry?

We made statements on the budget and I welcome the suite of measures, investments and programmes in the Minister’s Department, in particular the provision for low-cost access to credit. Farmers are paid intermittently by cheque, whether for cattle or produce or through payments from the Department but in the meantime what do they live on? It is important to protect farmers from the banks which do not treat any sector fairly, whether business or home owners, because they do not pass on the benefits of the low-cost credit they get from Europe. This intervention is very apt and welcome.

Fishermen may be restricted from going where they can fish and we do not know how the UK will proceed in this respect. Do we have preliminary feedback on this or on stock management for shared fisheries? Many of the codes or negotiated management agreements with other countries have a tendency to break down. This is fishermen’s livelihoods. Will the Minister address some of the concerns of the fishing industry?

On a related matter that affects the bigger picture, farmers and farm organisations are concerned about the demand to reduce our carbon emissions and how that affects farming. The United Nations ambassador for climate justice, the former President Mary Robinson, suggested recently that people should move towards vegetarianism and veganism to halt climate change. Any such statements should be grounded in reality and, if we want to bring people with us, we have to meet them where they are. I commend her on taking on this job. Climate change affects everybody and she has brilliant stature and experience working on other issues around the world, but I do not subscribe to this proposition. It conflicts with Food Wise 2025. What is the Minister doing to allay people’s fears because meat and dairy products are part of a balanced diet for people in this country? The only other source is high-protein food crops, which are developed in the tropics, in the southern hemisphere, and that would involve taking food from people who are already hard pressed to feed themselves.

There is also a great deal of food waste because of the way supermarkets grade food, for example, if a tomato or mushroom is ugly it is discarded even though it has the same nutritional quality as one that is not. United Nations statistics show that 1.3 billion tonnes of food are lost or wasted every year around the world, which is equivalent to the number of people malnourished or hungry. In Europe we waste enough food to feed 870 million people. We should begin to study food waste here and the energy required to produce and transport food. This would be a more realistic step to reduce our carbon footprint and address some of the problems facing the world. Ms Robinson’s proposal is out of touch with the reality of how we need to live and the farmers who produce food.

I remind speakers that the business now is statements on agricultural product prices and the decision by the United Kingdom to leave the European Union and they should try to keep their comments to that topic.

I welcome the Minister to the House to hear the observations and concerns we have about the agriculture and fisheries sectors across the island as a result of the Brexit vote. This is the third such statement I have made on the subject in this Chamber. I am more than happy to highlight the issues facing the agriculture and fisheries sectors that I hear from farmers and fishermen who have appeared before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine. This highlights the crazy situation that the Tory government has led its citizens and the rest of Europe into. It is clear that neither the Tory government, the European authorities or our Government, of which the Minister is part, knows where we are going on this issue. What has come out of the visits by the Minister’s colleagues to this House when I and other Seanadóirí made similar statements? Rather than Ministers with various other responsibilities coming in here to listen to similar statements every month or so we need a dedicated Minister for Brexit who will run the committee on Brexit in tandem with his or her office that will have real teeth to deal with this issue. This arrangement could invite stakeholders from every Department and examine the daily fallout, which is only going to get worse. I would like the Minister to take the suggestion back to the Taoiseach and consider it wisely. We have statements in this House and the Dáil practically every week yet no one has full responsibility. We are drifting into an abyss. The hard rhetoric of the British Prime Minister and other British Ministers is particularly worrying. It seems to be becoming entrenched and can only mean one thing for this island, which would be an unmitigated disaster for all of us, a hard Border.

I spoke about the practicalities of day-to-day life in the Border counties in my previous statements and the direct impact on people’s lives. Together with other political, business, farming, tourism and community representatives, I recently attended a protest at the Border at Bridgend between Donegal and Derry. There were considerable tailbacks at a Border checkpoint set up to demonstrate the impact this would have. What will happen when this becomes a reality, with tailbacks, document checking in different jurisdictions in respect of agriculture for slaughtering and processing but even worse, tariffs and taxes?

Product prices and price volatility in agriculture were already in upheaval even before the impact of Brexit. This was due to trade restrictions with Russia, possible trade deals with the US and Canada, problems with the payment of schemes, the merger of major processing companies here in the form of the ABP-Slaney deal and the poor weather conditions. Brexit has compounded them. With Brexit we have currency volatility, regulation and origin issues, bureaucracy and security issues, potential recession and decreasing purchasing power.

For the ordinary farmer and farming lobby groups following these proceedings, I suggest a number of supports from the EU and Ireland, which would work towards reducing price volatility and stabilising prices. From an EU point of view, these supports should include a commitment to provide direct market intervention for beef if prices collapse in response to a UK-Mercosur deal, the introduction of temporary export refunds to help develop non-EU markets for Irish exports, flexibility on future CAP payments to allow member states to link payments back to supporting active food producers and security around future budgets. Interventions the Government could carry out include aggressively pursuing markets, particularly the Chinese market for Irish beef, continuing to develop relations with the UK market and strengthening the Irish food brand in the UK in particular. We need to remember and be conscious that the people who are most exposed to Brexit are British farmers. Therefore, we should be lobbying them to prevent their Government from allowing their market to be flooded with cheap goods from other markets and should convince them of the importance of sourcing products from their neighbours. We should also streamline taxation rules on supply of goods and services North and South. Those are some ideas we would put to the Minister.

On the issue of fisheries, as a Donegal man I am aware from talking to the members of coastal communities that many of them have been impacted by Brexit. They have raised the obvious issues of currency volatility, the decrease in profits as a result of that and the issue of territorial waters and how that will play out, particularly as one crosses from Donegal into the waters across from us. There are serious issues for the fisheries community that need to be understood.

To lessen the volatility brought about by the changes in the rate of sterling, we should utilise flexibility to provide direct financial supports to farmers under EU state aid rules in the form of short-term cashflow financing, provide an increase in funding for farms schemes and increase competition in the banking sector, thereby providing additional sources of finance to decrease borrowing costs. The Irish Government must ensure early agreement and certainty on EU and CAP budgets up to 2020. We need firm action. I have outlined our proposals as to how we do that and I stand over them. We need an accountable, dedicated Minister for Brexit. We need a direct committee and we need to put in place supports such as the ones I put forward.

I would also like to raise the issue of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA, deal. It seems the regional Belgian authorities, thankfully, have scuppered this agreement and Irish farmers will be happy. The Minister is fully aware that this House passed a motion rejecting CETA. Why was this democratic decision not respected? Senior Ministers were still out lauding and promoting the passing of this deal against the wishes of the Seanad. It seems ironic that the Minister is in here listening to a debate about price volatility in agriculture when the Government was going to sign up to a deal that was going to flood our market with lower quality produce. Irish farmers need to be aware of who were the chief proposers of this deal. In the past the Minister's colleagues in government were calling for a green jersey to be worn in another period of economic uncertainty. I argue that in this Brexit period it is as important to don that same green jersey. The consequences of not playing our part and of not putting on that green jersey and playing as part of a team are devastating. This is too important a period to be going off on tangents. Let us do this collectively. Let us do it for the farmers. Let us do it for the fishermen. Let us do it for the communities. Let us do it for the businesses and, most importantly, let us do it for our country.

I would like to voice my concerns over the jobs in the agrifood sector in particular. Like many of my colleagues, I will focus on the mushroom industry, which seems to be most impacted on at this stage. The Irish mushroom industry is the fifth largest in the EU. Irish mushroom growers rely on the UK for 80% of exports, representing €120 million in farm-gate income, twice the value of Irish potato exports. The industry employs approximately 3,500 people, mostly in rural areas. Five of Ireland's 60 mushroom farms have been already driven out of business by a 19% drop in the value of sterling relative to the euro in the past few months since the UK voted to leave the EU. That is €7 million in exports and 130 jobs already gone. However, mushroom exports are only a small part of the bigger picture of €1.2 billion in bilateral trade that takes place every week between the UK and Ireland across various agri-industries that employ 400,000 people on both sides of the Irish Sea. Almost half of our beef exports and 60% of our cheese products are sold to the UK. Therefore, this situation is critical.

The areas threatened with job losses are precisely those that can afford them least. Unemployment in rural Ireland is still over 10% despite its fall below 8% at national level. The Government will need to consider greater emergency financial supports beyond those promised in this year's Finance Bill and even an appeal to the European Commission for short-term supports, through CAP, to allow Irish mushroom growers, in particular, to weather this storm without having to move their operations to the UK. The Government needs to monitor and gather data on the effects of Brexit on Irish industry and agriculture so as to co-ordinate the adaption to the rapidly evolving situation. The Irish Government needs to work to ensure stability by engaging bilaterally with the UK Government to ensure stability of the Border and to reduce uncertainty. The fluctuations in the pound are partially caused by the uncertainty regarding UK access to the Single Market and other aspects of the final Brexit deal with the EU.

Seeking a quick resolution to the nature of the deal between the EU and UK will go some way to decreasing this. If Theresa May's Government is, as it seems at this stage, determined to go for a hard Brexit without regard to the consequences, Ireland will have to reconsider its current strategy of trying to be the UK's best friend in negotiations. Our future lies with the European Union ultimately and while all effort is made to maintain friendly and constructive relationships with our nearest neighbour, especially when it comes to the future of the Border with Northern Ireland, we cannot pursue it at the cost of our position as a full and active member of the EU. As regrettable as it is, the British people have made their decision to leave the EU and over time we must rebalance our trade focus to a broader European market and possibly away from the UK, which has chosen separation over unity at this stage.

Like the Acting Chairman, Senator Horkan, I come from south County Dublin and I got a slight smirking remark from the Whip when I asked for speaking time for this debate this evening. While, like the Acting Chairman, I spent my entire time in the council representing the 63 farmers in the Glencullen-Sandyford ward to the best of my ability, I appreciate that I do not come from a typical rural background with a typical interest in the agricultural sector. I welcome the Minister to the House and I thank him for his comments. Even though my late father lived and worked in Dublin, it was for an agrifood company. I spent far too many days as a youngster at the National Ploughing Championships and shows all around Ireland handing out brochures and various other knick knacks, not to mention time spent on the beef and dairy farms of both my grandfathers.

I want to speak on the post-Brexit situation and how that fateful decision taken by the people of UK will impact on the Irish economy in its entirety. We appreciate that so much economic activity in this country relies on, is tied to and is dependent on the agricultural sector.

One does not need to be from a family farm in rural Ireland to appreciate that and know the importance. It is in that context that I want to pick up where Senator Mac Lochlainn left off in stressing the importance of new and ever freer and deeper trade deals to allow Ireland to navigate the choppy waters we face into, given the fateful decision by the British people to leave the EU. The statistic is that 50% of our beef is exported to the UK, which is great. We can offset that and enter into new EU trade deals with China and the US that would see Irish beef as well as Irish lamb enter those markets. I welcome the decision announced by the Minister in the past few days that Irish lamb would be allowed into the Iranian market. What are the other opportunities? What other trade deals are on the table? How have the decisions taken by the people of the UK, this Chamber but, more importantly, the Parliament of Wallonia last week jeopardised the CETA agreement?

I stated on the record a few weeks ago that I believe CETA is a good deal that protects the interests of farmers in Ireland and across the EU bearing in mind that 95% of farms in the EU are family farms. While I appreciate that there is far more commercial farming in Canada, there were necessary provisions in the deal to protect this area. What will be the impact going forward? I know the South Korean trade deal has proven to be wholly beneficial both to the Europeans and the South Koreans, particularly Ireland, but is the fateful decision of a region in Belgium with a population of less than three million jeopardising talks with the Australians, as I read in reports on debates in Canberra overnight? What about possible EU deals that are starting to be negotiated with New Zealand, other Asian countries, Latin America, the Caribbean, China, Russia, Turkey, Africa and, of course, the US in the fateful TTIP agreement? I have done some work on this agreement through the Committee of the Regions. I have taken time out to look at the negotiating documents in Dublin and Brussels. I think it is a good deal. However, while there may be commercial merit in negotiating trade deals in secret behind closed doors, it jeopardises their well-being and has played a large part in the resistance to CETA, particularly among the labour movement in continental Europe and various sectors here, including food producers and providers. It is vital for the Government to take cognisance of this issue and for it to be brought back to the European Council.

We need free trade. We need more, better and freer trade but in order to grasp that, take advantage of it and offset some of the obvious negativity that will come post-Brexit decisions, we need to see our leaders at Government and European Council level taking the initiative to make sure these deals are negotiated. Language from Senator Mac Lochlainn and others that we will flood the European market with low-quality produce harks back to the protectionist ideals and scare mongering we saw in early 1970s Ireland and the UK from certain agricultural producers, manufacturers and elements in the labour movement. These scare tactics were proven to be untrue. Anyone in this Chamber can accept that membership of the EC, which became the EU, has been wholly positive, particularly for the Irish agricultural sector, and that we have benefited greatly from the Common Agricultural Policy. Could the Minister address what possibilities there are in the future in respect of trade, what can be done about it and what changes can be made to negotiating tactics?

I welcome the Minister to the House. I am always intrigued by the credentials of other Senators. I commend Senator Richmond on putting his credentials on the record. Some people might ask about my credentials in agriculture so I will put them on the record. I have licences to breed pigs and rear poultry and I previously showed and trained ponies so I think my credentials are pretty okay for a Labour Party guy in Seanad Éireann.

I commend the Minister and Government on the work that has been done to date. Unlike a previous speaker, I believe that much work is actually being done. We are in an area of unknowns but I take great solace from a recent round of discussions that I had in my capacity as chairman of the economic committee of the British–Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body, which is holding an inquiry into the effects of Brexit on the agrifood sector both North and South. We attended Stormont on 13 October where we consulted with, among other groups, the Ulster Farmers Union, the Northern Ireland Meat Exporters Association and many environmental groups. On 14 October, we consulted here in Leinster House with the IFA, the Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association, the Irish Cattle & Sheep Farmers Association, Enterprise Ireland, IDA Ireland, Teagasc, the Irish Exporters Association and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. I intentionally left the Department until last. I want to put on the record my gratitude to a departmental staff member, Paul Savage, for the effort he put in that day in bringing us up to speed on all that is ongoing in this country in respect of the outcome of Brexit. On the other hand, I must also record my condemnation of the lack of appearance from the Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. I have since written to the Minister for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Michelle McIlveen, stating the economic committee's disappointment at the response we received, which was that the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs had nothing to say on the matter. I will leave it at that. Our disapproval has been registered and has gone by post.

It is true to say that nobody knows the outcome and that the uncertainty is the biggest problem in respect of this issue. A voice is badly needed in respect of the issue of currency fluctuations for the main players in the agri-sector. Most people do not understand the term "hedging". I am talking about SMEs. I will not go into individual commentary because it was of a private nature but one of the speakers at an inquiry meeting in Dublin could not express the importance he placed on a forum that would provide information to mainstream farming and the agri sector in respect of currency fluctuations and their implications post-Brexit. In his speech, the Minister said that Enterprise Ireland is doing some work in this area. He mentioned some other group as well. I would like to know exactly what they are doing. I have taken soundings in my constituency from people I know in the farming industry and none of them has heard anything from anybody on this. As the Minister knows, sterling has dropped 40% in the past year. It has already been said so I will not go into it but Senator Paul Daly spent a lot of time talking about the mushroom industry and I completely support him. One of the businesses that was lost was in Tipperary and it is all because Irish exporters of produce must take produce off the shelves in the UK, because while the market is there, they are losing money by leaving it on the shelves. This is an area in which they need to be educated.

Loss of market has already been outlined. It is a loss of market both ways. A total of 50% of Northern Ireland beef and milk comes to the South while about 45% of pigs go North so we are not just talking about the €7 billion worth of exports that go to the UK. We are talking about North-South trade. I am very concerned about the mixed political messages. One of the main political parties in Northern Ireland, the DUP, voted in favour of Brexit while others voted against. They are now telling us that they are totally engaged with the British Prime Minister, Theresa May, who was supposedly a "Remain" supporter but who certainly did not break any sweat in respect of it. Mixed messages are coming to the market and there are mixed messages internationally. That also feeds into the difficulty we face because we are going to be minus a market worth €64 million. The Northern Ireland farmers' associations are concerned. They provide a quality product that meets all of the requirements of EU standardisation, as we do, but the UK mainstream is already looking to bring in produce from South America that does not meet any standards we meet. It is not directly our area but this problem will impact on us and the Minister should address it.

I know Senator Paul Daly has a particular interest in the horse racing industry in this country. If one reads this week's The Irish Field, one will see where markers are falling because of sterling. One will also see that trainers are falling. One example is given in a two-page article of 26 horses in training. The net profit for the trainer per month is €847.

That is unsustainable. I request that the Minister attend the House at another time for a debate on the horse racing industry in view of the fact that Brexit has implications for it.

The disadvantaged areas scheme has been mentioned. However, I wish to ask that the Minister consider another matter. There are flood plains across the country. Last week, a group from the Blackwater Valley in counties Waterford and Cork visited Leinster House. The group's problem is not with the disadvantaged areas scheme, but with flooding. There is annual flooding. In the mid 1990s when the late Noel Davern was Minister of State with responsibility for agriculture, I, as a councillor, proposed to him that we provide a set-aside scheme for farms that were flooded annually. When making our submission to Europe, there is an opportunity to seize on this idea. I am prepared to give the Minister information on this and to discuss it with him.

What practical steps are being taken in the context of the €150 million fund the Minister has commendably included in the budget? How will North-South trade pan out? Many of the companies that trade in the North, particularly in beef, also trade in the South. Will jobs move south as a result of Brexit?

My colleague has already addressed some of the concerns relating to the mushroom industry and rural employment. It is an issue that I am aware of, having worked with young unemployed people in rural areas and seen the importance of such industries there. The mushroom industry is one in which standards have been strengthened, particularly in terms of workers' rights. It is important that we acknowledge, encourage and support this.

I will address the question of trade, which the Minister and Senator Richmond discussed. It is important that we set the record straight. There has been a suggestion across much of the media that Wallonia is the only area in Europe that has opposed the provisional application of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA, but it is actually the case that Belgium and this House are the only places where there has been parliamentary debate on the issue. We are not talking about Wallonia disagreeing with the consensus across Europe. We are talking about a situation in which only the Seanad, which voted to express sensible and reasonable concerns regarding the provisional application of CETA, and Belgium have held parliamentary debates on CETA. If we are passionate about being European, as I am, we must point out that we are members of the EU and it behoves us to be able to challenge for and look to better and more appropriate trade deals. In that respect, Ireland needs to be able to look for better trade in this and future trade missions and agreements. I encourage the Minister to do this.

In Wallonia, it was mainly small farmers who campaigned and agitated regarding the real obstacle, namely, investor courts. The impasse is not a matter of whether one country or district will sign, rather, it is whether we are willing to acknowledge that the investor court system, which no one will defend and which is unnecessary for dealing with, for example, countries such as Canada that have well-established legal systems, as we do, is an unnecessary obstacle to an effective trade ratification process across Europe. Senator Richmond referred to family farms. However, it is not them, mushroom producers in Ireland or small producers that will take cases to the investor courts. Rather, the major agribusiness companies will be able to take advantage of and be advantaged by the investor court system.

We need trade agreements that are workable for farmers, other citizens and the environment, can be passed, deliver sustainable jobs and do not place blank-cheque pressure on future Governments and public policy. For example, it would be difficult under an investor court system if we wanted to use public policy to intervene and support our local mushroom industry. I encourage the Minister to reconsider this matter. It is important that, when the UK makes a trade agreement with Europe, we will have moved past the current unworkable model of trade deals and towards something that is workable for everyone.

I echo my colleague's concerns and call on the Government to find appropriate ways to intervene and support those specific food and agricultural product industries that are struggling to make this transition. I urge the Government to link with groups such as the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice, which has examined a shopping basket of goods. We need a goods-by-goods approach to this matter and we must look to each sector - section by section - in order to address this. We could also link with major supermarket purchasers and apply pressure in that regard.

Next is Senator Lombard, who is sharing time with Senator Kieran O'Donnell.

I welcome the Minister and compliment him on the impact he has had on agriculture in only a short time. He provided a safe pair of hands when such was needed. It is great that we have him with us today.

In many ways, Brexit is the greatest challenge facing our food and drinks industry. The coming months and years will say much about how our industry develops. There have been major changes in recent decades in the form, for example, of quotas and mechanisation, but how we will deal with our largest market being placed in long-term jeopardy will be a significant test. How the Minister deals with these issues will be his legacy. I have faith that he will deal with them appropriately.

Unfortunately, there is a considerable amount of upset about how we handle the issues of sterling and our dairy industry. Approximately 60% of our cheese goes to the UK. We are building a magnificent empire in our dairy industry but tariffs could be placed on it. What of pork products from the North coming to the South and vice versa? What of labelling issues, for example, Ireland as the place of origin, and the sustainability that we have given our products so that we can sell them on international markets? Our real brand is our good name. As such, a cross-Border organisation needs to be established in order to ensure that the good name that we have built continues. These will be major challenges for us in the period ahead.

After a number of years, the dairy industry is moving forward again. However, Brexit has created doubt with regard to its pricing structures. The Minister has introduced working capital, which has been acknowledged as a forward-thinking move, but the real question for us is how we will deal with the market next door.

Other industries have been mentioned but what of our dairy industry's stock being sold abroad? Sterling is having a major impact on this matter.

I welcome the Minister to the House and commend him on his work to date. He will undoubtedly leave a legacy, but we will not give him a legacy just yet.

I represent Limerick and Clare farmers. The greatest issue is that of sterling. Senator Lombard touched on the expansion in quotas and so forth. Now on top of this is uncertainty over sterling. The euro could shortly have parity with sterling. It is more of a probability than a possibility. One could say that it is even more of a certainty than a probability. We must determine ways to counteract it.

I welcome the low-interest rate agri-loan, but when does the Minister expect it to be put in place? It has been sent to the Commission but farmers are already asking when it will come into play and how it will work practically. I assume that they will go to their local banks. What is the appraisal process?

Is it done through the bank? Will an independent body oversee the loans? What will be the mechanism? I very much welcome the measure.

I welcome also the engagement the Minister has had with his counterparts in the North both at departmental and ministerial level. In terms of Brexit, an all-Ireland focus is extremely important.

I refer to an issue that is slightly outside this area but one in which I have a personal interest, and it applies regardless of Brexit. Farmers have studied in great depth the breakdown of farm prices from the farm gate to retailers, taking into account the producers, wholesaler-retailers and end-customers, because it is impacting on them directly. The issue arises with the multiples. In many cases the price they can pay back to the farmer is determined by the price they are getting from the co-operatives. Will the Minister consider doing empirical work, both at national and European level, to come up with a mechanism to ensure the farmer gets a fair price, because in the rural villages I represent in east Limerick, farming is vital? It continues to grow and prosper to keep businesses open and to keep people living in rural Ireland.

If we had finished at 6.25 p.m. the Minister would have had only five minutes but he now has until 6.30 p.m. if he wishes to use the time.

I thank the Acting Chairman. I thank my colleagues in the Seanad for their contributions, observations and suggestions. This is an unprecedented period in terms of the economic challenges the country faces. There has probably been nothing equivalent to it since the foundation of the State. It is that significant. I am on record as having said there is no upside for Ireland Inc. There may be localised victories but, overall, it is a real question of damage limitation. That is an extremely uncomfortable reality and for an industry like the agrifood sector, which has its tentacles spread into every corner of rural Ireland, where in many areas there are not real alternative forms of employment available, it is a challenge to protect the industry in that context. Our position is best served by remaining within the European Union and in remaining within the European Union we have pooled our sovereignty in respect of negotiations on trade agreements. I want to take up the point raised by Senators Mac Lochlainn, Higgins and Richmond on that area.

In terms of the commentary on trade in these Houses, there have always been naysayers in respect of trade deals we have concluded. However, with the benefit of hindsight we have seen that, on balance, the trade deals have been beneficial for Ireland Inc., Irish industry and, in particular, Irish agriculture. We need to bear in mind that we are an island nation of 4.5 million people with a capacity to feed multiples of that number, an ambition which translated in economic terms in 2015 to values of €10.8 billion in exports. An ambition in Food Wise 2025 is to reach almost €20 billion by 2020. If we do not trade, that industry dies, and it is not a question of trade under any circumstances. We need to remain vigilant on the detail and in the context of, say, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, TTIP, one of the things we have sought at Agriculture and Fisheries Council level is to ascertain the cumulative impact, particularly in the area of beef exports or imports into the European Union, as the case may be, of multiple trade deals.

The fundamental principle is that we need to trade. We need to get 90% of what we produce off the island. In principle, therefore, our starting position must be pro-trade, in favour of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA, pro-TTIP and in favour of any other trade deal that, on balance, reflects our best interests. I believe that, on balance, CETA reflects our best interests, and I say that with all due respect to the vote in this House. I am surprised that some people who voted against that trade deal would now purport to articulate the interests of the Irish agriculture sector. It is an extraordinary contraposition to take because, on balance, anybody who has looked at this from the perspective of Irish agriculture would undoubtedly conclude that the interests of Irish agriculture are best served by CETA. The Senators should not take my word for that. They should ask the people in the broader agriculture-agrifood industry what they think about it.

We do not serve ourselves well in terms of all the public commentary on trade and the level of secrecy, which Senator Richmond referred to, is counterproductive and fuels a conspiracy theory that this is big business.

I have to correct the Minister on the phrase "conspiracy theory". We need to be very careful in the language we use. I hope the Minister is not suggesting that is anything to do with the Seanad.

I am not talking about any particular person. If the cap fits, wear it, but the point is true. There are conspiracy theorists out there who believe that every step taken by the State is somehow a betrayal of the interests of its citizens. When we look at the history of trade deals, that does not stand up to scrutiny. In that context, we at least deserve the benefit of the doubt in terms of the trade deals we have negotiated but we also need to look at it objectively. For example, the study done independently for the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation by Copenhagen Economics identified in clear areas, for example on TTIP, the challenges and the potential downsides but the on-balance assessment was that trade within certain parameters is beneficial for us. As an agrifood exporting nation, we need to be very aware of that. Secrecy in respect of our partners in those negotiations brings the system into disrepute and in that sense I have stated publicly that the United States approach to those trade agreements is unfortunate. The European Union's position has been available online.

The issue of access to the courts is very interesting because in the context of Brexit, we are facing very serious challenges to the terms and conditions under which we will access space on the supermarket shelves in the United Kingdom, and we would like to believe that whether it is an artisan food producer or a global Irish agrifood industry, they would have access to an appropriate judicial process to protect their interests. It is not that there is a process for adjudication on these matters, it is that in the context of Brexit, we may wish to have access to an appropriate structure. There is an inclination to jump on an anti-trade bandwagon and I do not believe that, on balance, that serves us well.

I refer to the North-South dimension to this issue, which was dealt with by a number of contributors. Tomorrow, for the fourth time since my appointment, I will meet Michelle McIlveen, the DUP Minister for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs in Northern Ireland and officials at a bilateral meeting in Armagh. The Minister of State, Deputy Ring, will also attend. This is an area of the most extraordinary complexity, which I will outline in some detail. On the dairy side, straddling the Border, we have LacPatrick, Lakeland Dairies and Strathroy Dairy Limited in Northern Ireland, processing a milk pool that is broadly collected from both sides of the Border. The question that arises is that if milk coming South from Northern Ireland for processing in LacPatrick or Lakeland Dairies is to be subject to a tariff post-Brexit, how profitable will that be? What is the product that is manufactured in terms of food labelling? Is it Irish? Is it British? Is it a hybrid? Where does that fit into the labelling regulations about which consumers are entitled to know? That is a glaring example of the complexities we need to work through. I have made the point previously to Minister McIlveen, that the historical aspect in terms of the Border and the Troubles is entirely a separate debate and anything that raises that issue in the context of Brexit is an unnecessary distraction. We need to focus on the practicalities.

I am interested in protecting the best interests of Irish agriculture, its export opportunities, primary producers and the co-operatives involved in processing. We need to work through the detail of it, and everything else can be parked for another day. This is not the time to mix issues that, while they may be significant, are not compatible with the debate.

Senator Denis Landy referred to the equine industry. While we are global leaders in the equine industry, the greatest traffic in equine exports is between Ireland and the UK. This is one of the industries that is incredibly mobile. If we put serious impediments in its place after Brexit, the industry could up and leave overnight. The Senator knows this better than anybody, given that he comes from Tipperary, where the industry has a presence. We need to work through all the detail necessary to facilitate the ease of movement that has facilitated the industry to grow and prosper and provide 14,000 jobs. The industry is worth more than €1 billion and there is an ambition in Food Wise 2025 to grow the sector to more than €2 billion. This is challenged by Brexit.

Approximately 350,000 sheep come to the South from Northern Ireland for processing every year. Somebody referred to pigs going North of the Border for slaughter, and it is a daily occurrence. Some 55,000 cattle went North of the Border in 2015 for breeding or slaughter. It is an extraordinarily complex area. We need to work through, with our counterparts in Northern Ireland, arrangements around these issues and identify the best solutions to protect our respective interests. They are not very different interests, although they are different jurisdictions. We have had the benefit of an all-island approach on animal health. What will happen if the UK leaves the EU and begins to unpick veterinary certification standards? It would be an additional cost to business that we could do without. This bears up my assertion that there is no upside whatsoever. This is a case of managing a very challenging and difficult situation which will bring the level of ambition in Food Wise 2025 under scrutiny.

The critical question is whether, given that the value of our exports to the UK is €5.1 billion, we are excessively dependent on our nearest market. I accept Senator Boyhan's point that it is the most valuable market for us to be in. The obvious solution is to search for new market opportunities. They are identified in Food Wise 2025, which mentions emerging opportunities in south-east Asia. This is why I was recently on a trade mission to China, Singapore, Vietnam and South Korea, along with the Minister of State, Deputy Andrew Doyle. This area is identified given that is has an emerging middle class with greater purchasing power. In a very short space of time, while the UK is our premier market for dairy exports, our second biggest market for dairy exports is China, in particular due to the market foothold we have gained in infant formula. While the UK is our biggest export market for pork, our second biggest market is China. If we could clear the remaining hurdles on getting beef into China, in a short space of time it would become a very significant market. Senator Paul Daly and others raised the issue of the beef industry. It is an extremely challenging area.

As with all of the debate on Brexit, there is no silver bullet. There is no one issue. With apologies to Senator Pádraig Mac Lochlainn, there is a simplicity about the suggestion that a single Brexit Minister, which Fianna Fáil also raised, would solve all the issues. It is so enormously complex across all Departments that it oversimplifies the issue. The issue requires a whole of Government approach and not just saying it is the responsibility of Deputy Michael Creed, Deputy Mary Mitchell O'Connor or whoever. The issue has an impact in practically every Department. One would struggle to find a Department that will not be impacted by Brexit. Even in the UK, there are three wise men. David Davis, Boris Johnson and Liam Fox are leading their charge. Let us see how they progress it.

We are fortunate that we did a lot of pre-planning, as did many other reputable bodies, institutes and individuals. When, on 6 May, I was appointed Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, the Secretary General gave me a substantial file and the two biggest parts of it were the climate change agenda and Brexit. Although we had hoped that by 24 June it would be in the shredder, it has moved to centre stage and informs every single thing we are doing. We have a dedicated Brexit unit in the Department. I take the point about my Department colleague, Mr. Paul Savage, who does tremendous work in the area and is involved in the dedicated Brexit unit, as are many others. It is a very hard-working unit and is scoping out all these issues. After my first meeting with the Northern Ireland Minister for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Michelle McIlveen, MLA, we decided senior officials, North and South, should begin the detailed parsing and analysing of the issues and it has been ongoing since summer.

We established a stakeholders forum, given that we are not all-knowing. It is important that my Department and officials, and the agencies that operate under my Department, hear at first hand what the issues are. The immediate manifestation has been sterling fluctuations. I cannot fix the market or control currency fluctuations. Neither can I determine the price of beef or milk, and anyone who says he or she can do so is being deliberately misleading. What we can do is ensure we are as well informed as we can be as we attempt to navigate a route to bring the industry through this extraordinary challenge in the best shape possible. Some of the response is finding new markets. Some of it is encouraging our agrifood sector to move up the value chain and insulate itself against the worst excesses of the market in order that it is moving in an area where prices are premium for the product we are producing. Fortunately, we have this collaboration between the State agencies, research and development, and the big food companies. While we were travelling this road before the Brexit decision, it is important we accelerate it.

One of the things I asked the agencies under my Department, including Bord Iascaigh Mhara, Enterprise Ireland and Bord Bia, to do very early on was to make direct contact with their individual client companies and tailor-make specific interventions that would assist them to come through. They have been engaged in workshops on currency fluctuation management, hedging options, strengthening engagement and deepening their understanding of the UK markets they are working in. Last week, I was in the UK meeting the CEO of one of the major multiples and saying that while we are in a difficult space, we are not surrendering the hard-won yards the Irish agrifood sector has made over several decades in terms of supermarket shelf space. We can and will rise to the challenge. We are working through it.

One of the initiatives that will help the industry come through is access to affordable finance. We had this initiative in the budget and Senator Kieran O'Donnell raised the question of how it will work. It has been leveraged by €11 million we got in the July compensation package. There was a €350 million package. Our share of it nationally was €11 million. We put €14 million with it and leveraged €150 million. We used the €25 million we put into it to subsidise the interest rate and put in a guarantee against first losses on the loan. It is a loan fund of a maximum €150 million at an interest rate of 2.95% and a six year term. The Strategic Banking Corporation of Ireland, SBCI, which is administering the fund, will soon make a call for partners to deliver the loan at a local level. I have spoken to the CEOs of the pillar banks, AIB and Bank of Ireland, and Ulster Bank. They are all enthusiastic about participating in delivering the fund at that interest rate to their clients. It is not an encouragement to farmers to borrow their way out of the difficulties but to say that if farmers have credit at a more expensive rate, particularly merchant credit or overdrafts at a high interest rate, this is an opportunity.

It is working capital and has minimum red tape around it. It is a groundbreaking financial product. In many respects, and Senators have raised this issue regarding the agrifood industry generally, there is now a template for how to access low cost finance for other sectors. The agrifood industry will need that. A Central Bank report in April 2016 provided a league table which showed, unfortunately, that we are at the wrong end of the table in terms of interest rates paid relative to those paid by our eurozone counterparts. My recollection is that Austria had the lowest rates and we were at the wrong end at an average of 5.7%. Senators will appreciate that with a rate of 2.95% this is a significant product we can use.

There were many references to the mushroom sector. This sector has been in the firing line. My colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Andrew Doyle, has met with representatives of the horticulture industry and some of the major players in that industry. It is a very difficult environment. Under the low interest loan fund, and under de minimis rules which is a way of overcoming the state aid regulation, we are making some of that access to funding at low interest rates available to the mushroom industry. In addition, in the budget we increased the capital grant scheme for the horticulture sector to €5 million. Recently, we paid in excess of €1 million - I do not recall the exact figure but it is probably approximately €1.5 million - to one of the major producer organisations for the mushroom sector. It is a transnational producer organisation.

The point was made that this is not a sector where alternative markets are an option because of the short shelf life. It is the most convenient market for us. It is the closest one and the cheapest to access. However, one of our main challengers for market shelf space are the Poles. They have many advantages, including that their minimum wage rates and ours are significantly different, but if they can bring their product that distance to the market it suggests that we should possibly explore alternative markets as well. Obviously, markets in the eurozone would bring advantages. We cannot afford to say "No" to any area. The UK is undoubtedly the market with which we are most comfortable and it has served the industry and its expansion well. This is one of the areas most exposed to the challenges and, through a series of initiatives, such as the low interest loans, capital grant scheme and support of the producer organisations, we are trying to work with the organisations to see what we can do. We remain open to further dialogue and suggestions regarding an area that is particularly difficult and exposed, given that it is a high volume and very low margin industry. The movement of sterling versus the euro, year on year from September to September, is over 20%. That tells its own tale in respect of a low margin business.

With regard to fisheries, the Common Fisheries Policy is an extraordinarily complicated tapestry that has been woven over several years of December Council negotiations. When one unpicks one strand of that, which is the UK when it decides to leave, the tapestry begins to unravel. This will be an enormous challenge. We are a shareholder in over 30 of the 40 species of fish for which the UK holds a quota. Imagine it simply in geographical terms. Consider the UK and its coastal waters and if, for example, one of the terms of its Brexit negotiations, and this is a big "if", is that the UK takes access to those territorial waters exclusively. That means all of the fishing endeavour that takes place across the European Union, where there are shared rights to fish, will spill into a smaller space because the UK will control exclusive access to its area.

In terms of a finite resource of fish stocks, that will bring enormous challenges for the industry. The annual total allowable catch, or quota, is based on science and the fishing effort is retrofitted into the science. That is an uncomfortable exercise every year for the industry. Unfortunately, fish do not recognise any borders drawn on maps and obviously individual states, particularly if they are outside the European Union, will have an entitlement to regulate their own coastal waters, so fishing efforts will be restricted to those who fly the UK flag. Interestingly, however, much of the UK fishing effort has been privatised and now flies foreign flags. One of the hallmarks of the industry in this country is that we have retained quotas in public ownership and they are allocated to the industry almost on a monthly basis, by agreement and in consultation with the industry, after the October or December Council as they may apply to the species of fish. Brexit is going to be extraordinarily complicated because the UK will then move into an area in which we will still negotiate with the UK but where it will have exclusive access to its own waters. That is a challenge.

I hope I have dealt with most of the issues. Senator Mulherin raised the issue of climate change, which is relevant in the context of the greater food industry, and mentioned comments by the former Irish President, Mary Robinson, on veganism and vegetarianism. The ambition we have for the agrifood industry in very much grounded in sustainability, but it is sustainable intensification of our agriculture. We have a very good story to tell in terms of our sustainability credentials. We are, bar none, the most carbon efficient producer of milk on the planet. In the European Union, we are the fifth most carbon efficient producer of beef and, by virtue of incentives such as the green low-carbon agri-environment scheme, GLAS, and the beef data and genomics programme, we are driving down our carbon footprint each year. Those incentives are informed by meeting the challenges of climate change. The investment we make each year in the forestry sector is very significant, with over €3 billion spent by the State on forestry between 1990 and 2015. We will continue that in the budget this year, which provides over €110 million for the forestry sector. That is reducing our carbon footprint.

Yes, we have more to do and the sector will not shy away from that. However, it is subject to some unfair criticism from commentators because it contributes a high proportion of the State's greenhouse gas emissions. That happens because, as a nation, we never had the historical legacy of heavy industry. Although the sector is a significant contributor to domestic carbon emissions, it is nonetheless a very carbon efficient producer of food. It would be at least ironic and ultimately counterproductive to dismantle a food producing sector that is carbon efficient, while stating that we have obligations to produce food to feed a growing world population, and consequently import food at the cost of very substantial air miles or nautical miles. For example, ships steaming with beef from South America would have a far higher carbon footprint. There must be joined-up thinking. We believe that sustainable intensification which is geared towards meeting a global demand for food is the way to proceed. Certainly, my Department is up for the challenge of meeting the twin objectives of reducing our carbon footprint and increasing our food output.

I believe I have dealt with most of the matters raised.

The Minister has timed it perfectly.

I thank the Members for their contributions and suggestions. I certainly will reflect on them because this is something that will continue to evolve. It is an enormous challenge that requires our collective endeavours to ensure we achieve the best results for Ireland.

I thank the Minister for his opening statement and comprehensive response to the Members. I also thank the Members for their participation in the debate. When is it proposed to sit again?

At 10.30 a.m. tomorrow.

The Seanad adjourned at 6.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 26 October 2016.
Top
Share