Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 20 May 2004
4 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the recent discussions he has had with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government with respect to the nitrates directive; and if he will make a statement on the matter.[14887/04]
View answerThe implementation of the nitrates directive is, in the first instance, a matter for the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Ireland is legally obliged to put into effect an action programme for the further implementation of the directive. The European Court of Justice, in its judgment of 11 March 2004, held that Ireland had not fulfilled its obligations under the nitrates directive by reason 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 need to be finalised at an early date given that EU co-funding of schemes such as the rural environment protection scheme, REPS, the disadvantaged areas compensatory allowance, early retirement and forestry schemes is conditional on satisfactory implementation of the directive. Compliance with the directive has also been specified as one of the conditions for farmers' participation in the single payment scheme following the decoupling of farm supports from production.
A draft action programme prepared by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in conjunction with my Department and in consultation with Teagasc was presented in December last to representatives of the main farming organisations and other stakeholders. Written submissions on the draft action programme have been received from 70 stakeholders, including all the main farming bodies, and a revised draft is being prepared by officials of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government together with officials from my Department.
Under Sustaining Progress, the Government is committed to using the flexibility in the nitrates directive to seek European Commission approval for organic nitrogen limits of up to 250 kg. per hectare per annum to be allowable in appropriate circumstances. It was also agreed in Sustaining Progress that the Government would engage with the main farming organisations and other interests on the development of the action programme for implementation of the directive. The consultations initiated by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in December last are part of that process. The issue has also been discussed at meetings, including a meeting earlier this week, between officials of both Departments and the farming pillar under Sustaining Progress.
Once the draft action programme is finalised and submitted to the Commission, Ireland will also submit a derogation 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.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
A number of significant steps have been taken to address the costs at farm level of the implementation of the draft action programme. The Government, in Sustaining Progress, 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, with 28% higher payment rates, and changes to the terms and conditions of the farm waste management scheme and dairy hygiene scheme including, in particular, increasing the income and eligible investment ceilings.
The improvements in the farm waste management schemes and the dairy hygiene schemes are already in place and changes to REPS, delivering an average increase of 28% in payments to farmers, are expected to be approved shortly by the European Commission with retroactive effect from 1 March. The scheme of capital allowances for expenditure on farm pollution control has been extended to the end of 2006. A committee is examining issues associated with the possible introduction of low-cost wintering facilities such as earthen bank tanks for the storage of livestock manure.
I realise the implementation of the directive is not the Minister's responsibility in the first instance, but does he agree that the procrastination of various Governments since 1991 has left us in a position such that little can be done about the matter? Will he confirm that we are talking about a level of 170 kg. per hectare? I understand this figure has been mooted for several months, yet in recent days farm organisations seem to be up in arms, and quite rightly so, because there seems to be no way around it. Where did the false dawn come from? If my memory serves me well, the Minister stated during the Estimates meeting that the limit would be 170 kg. per hectare and that he would seek a derogation of up to 250 kg. per hectare for those who need it.
The policy we have of sweeping things under the carpet and waiting for someone else to make a decision has landed us in a position in which farmers are facing a difficult scenario. I am sure the Minister has agreed that procrastination has caused the difficulty. Given that the level is 170 kg. per hectare, is there any way the Minister can influence the European Commission into increasing it? I understood from talking to Mr. Fischler last week that he felt there was room for manoeuvre. Will the Minister confirm this?
Upon how many farmers will the limit of 170 kg. per hectare have an impact? For how many farmers will the Minister be seeking a derogation? When will the revised draft be sent to the EU? Have we any idea what the cost to farmers will be?
The position is that the directive dates from 1991 and we are grappling with it 13 years later. We were entitled to a transitionary period in the mid-1990s before the full implementation of the directive but did not avail of it. In the autumn of last year, the Netherlands was taken to the European Court of Justice and then it became a legal matter. We were taken to that court and a decision was made on 11 March which meant that neither the additional limit nor the transitionary period was available to us any longer. Therefore, we are now left with a general limit of 170 kg. per hectare on foot of the court decision. However, it was intimated by the Commission that if we sought a derogation and supplied it with supporting scientific data, it would regard our case sympathetically. Although there will be a general limit of 170 kg. per hectare, we are saying we want to increase it to 250 kg. per hectare by way of derogation.
One might ask why this poses a problem. The problem is that the stakeholders feel there will be too many conditions attached to the derogation. It would be the job of the negotiators to say they want a limit of 250 kg. of organic nitrogen per hectare because of Irish conditions and as few attached conditions as possible. That is what we are about to do.
Within the next couple of months, we must supply an action programme to Brussels, stipulating the limit of 170 kg. per hectare but seeking a derogation allowing for a limit of 250 kg. per hectare. The derogation sought will be deliberated upon and we will probably have a definitive outcome by November this year.
We will be implementing the direct payment system from 1 January 2005 and we will be liable to substantial fines of perhaps €20,000 to €30,000 per day if we do not meet our obligations. We would be jeopardising the direct payments and the compensatory payments. Time is running out, but we have a few months in which the social partners, stakeholders, the relevant Departments and Teagasc can create an action programme and a parallel application for a derogation shaped to suit Irish conditions.
It is important to point out that the Minister——
We exceeded seven minutes. We must proceed to Question No. 5 in the name of Deputy Upton.
——and Minister of State have been in the Department for a long time during that period.
We have been very generous in the way we have treated everyone.
The buck stops with the Minister of State.
