Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 20 May 2004
10 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the situation regarding the nitrates directive in view of the fact that many farmers are complaining that the Government is giving neither guidance nor assistance to ensure compliance.[14826/04]
View answerIreland is legally obliged to put into effect an action programme for the further implementation of the nitrates directive. The European Court of Justice in its judgment of 11 March 2004 held that Ireland had not fulfilled its obligations by reasons of its failure to establish and implement an action programme in accordance with Article 5 of the directive. It is open to the court on the application of the European Commission to impose substantial fines on Ireland if early action is not taken to give full effect to the directive.
The terms of the action programme must be finalised at an early date as EU co-funding of the rural environment protection scheme, REPS, various compensatory schemes and single farm payment which commences on 1 January is conditional on cross-compliance with the nitrates directive.
A draft action programme was prepared by my Department in conjunction with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and in consultation with Teagasc. It was presented in December 2003 to representatives of the main farming organisations. Written submissions on the draft action programme have been received from 70 of those bodies and a revised draft is being prepared by officials of the Departments involved.
Under Sustaining Progress, the Government is committed to using the flexibility of the nitrates directive to seek European Commission approval for organic nitrogen limits of up to 250 kg. per hectare per annum. When the draft action programme is finalised and submitted to the Commission, Ireland will also submit a derogation proposal designed to take account of the unique characteristics of Irish agriculture. Guidance documentation to support farmers in the successful implementation of the action programme is being developed by my Department.
Since the Estimates and the 2004 budget, account has been taken in a number of significant ways of the costs involved in meeting the requirements of the action programme. In Sustaining Progress, the Government stated: "recognising the importance of the nitrates directive and its impact on certain farmers, a number of initiatives shall be taken in the context of optimising the use of available EU and national budgetary resources". These initiatives included a review of REPS funding which was increased by €70 million from €190 to €260 million. This translated as 28% higher payments. We also changed the conditions of the farm waste management and dairy hygiene schemes, increasing substantially to 40% the rates of payment. The ceilings under which people could qualify were also raised. Funding for these schemes has increased by more than 75% over 2003.
All these improvements took into account the nitrates directive. Improvements in the farm waste management and dairy hygiene schemes are already in place and it is hoped changes to REPS will be approved shortly. The changes will have retroactive effect from 1 March. The scheme of capital allowances for expenditure on farm pollution control has been extended to the end of 2006, and a committee is examining issues associated with the possible introduction of low cost wintering facilities such as earthen banks for the storage of livestock manure.
I am not sure the Minister's words are any comfort to the farming organisations. They are understandably suffering from shock given the way the Government ignored the nitrates directive for so many years, only then to put the vehicle into gear and pedal to the floor. Farmers are left wondering how this came about so suddenly. We are entering a period of large-scale lobbying with the IFA writing to Members and MEPs. Will discussions include not just REPS but also quantify costs of implementing the nitrates directive? The IFA has claimed minimum storage requirements on farms will cost €1 billion. Will the Minister clarify the costs that will be involved and the number of farmers affected? Has the Minister had any recent discussions with the farming organisations? Will any assistance or guidance be put in place to help those affected?
I do not know if anyone can take consolation from the fact that though this directive was introduced in 1991, it was not implemented until 2004. To date, no other member state of the EU has adhered to an action plan. The Netherlands was taken before the European Court in October 2003 and Ireland in March 2004 for failing to implement the directive. The time has come to address the problem by way of an action plan, while at the same time seeking a derogation from the tight limit of 170 kg. per hectare to 250 kg. per hectare to allow commercial farmers to be competitive and stay in business. Teagasc has reckoned it will affect approximately 10,000 commercial farmers over the 170 kg. per hectare limit. We want a commercial and vibrant farming sector but also a directive that can be implemented given the uniqueness of Irish agriculture. Derogation is the way to achieve this.
Commissioners Fischler and Wallström, who have immediate responsibility for the directive, have indicated they would be sympathetic to Ireland's application provided it is supported by scientific evidence. Teagasc has been enlisted to work on providing scientific documentation. The best way to proceed is by submitting an action plan while at the same time seeking a derogation on the limits.
What about the meetings with the farming organisations, which will be critical to teasing out the minutiae of the issues involved?
The farming organisations are consulted on a regular basis. A number of days ago, the organisations had intensive meetings with officials from the Departments of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Agriculture and Food to reach a consensus to submit an action plan and an appeal for a derogation to Brussels.
