asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the Government's response to the recent European Commission Green Paper on the Common Agricultural Policy and whether he has had any discussions on it to date at Foreign Minister level.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - EC Green Paper on CAP.
18.
The Commission's Green Paper Perspectives for the Common Agricultural Policy published last July is a discussion document which sets the framework for a Communitywide dialogue on the future of the CAP. Consultations have been taking place since its publication at Community level and at national level here in Ireland with interested parties. General discussions on the Green Paper have taken place in the Council of Ministers for Agriculture and are to continue later this month. Foreign Ministers have not discussed the matter.
No overall definitive Commission proposals arising from the document have emerged as yet. This country's response will be formulated when substantive proposals are presented and having regard to the views of all the Irish interests concerned.
Would the Minister agree that the Green Paper is almost totally negative and if implemented it would prevent any future growth in Irish agriculture?
I said in my reply that this is a discussion document. If implemented as written down it would certainly not augur well for growth in Irish agriculture in the future. That does not mean that the proposals emanating from this Green Paper, if it is accepted, will have the same effect on Irish agriculture. The Government are very much aware of that position and we are watching closely to see that that does not happen. Having said that, let me say that we should also recognise that the original purpose of the CAP has been well achieved or over-achieved. The original purpose of the CAP was to ensure that Europe did not import food and was self-sufficient in food, but now we are producing large surpluses which are extremely difficult and costly to dispose of. We should be realistic and recognise that some adjustment of the CAP is essential in the future.
That is not what the Irish farmers think the CAP is for. They do not think it is just to prevent food from being imported into the EC.
There are different views on that, but the CAP has been of enormous benefit to this country in helping agriculture to divest itself of its dependence on virtually one market in the past. We must look to diversify within the CAP in agriculture in Ireland into other products and get added value here also. We would be very foolish if we thought the future for Irish agriculture was going to be precisely the same as the past ten years.
The Minister should be aware that I am appalled at the answer he has given. Anybody involved in agriculture would surely recognise that any dismantling of the CAP as it is now will be a very serious concern——
I did not talk about dismantling it.
Well, any changing of it, and it must be improved. The Minister must be aware that Irish agriculture has a great deal of potential for development and, if it is not allowed to develop, our agricultural industry and our economy generally will be affected seriously. Is the Minister aware that another Commission study group are at work, as reported on the radio this morning, and are likely to recommend an end to beef intervention? I want the Minister now to say whether he agrees that this would be totally disastrous for cattle production in Ireland. The whole attitude of the Commission is negative and, unless we are in there fighting positively, we as a nation will lose out very heavily on it.
As regards the first part of the Deputy's question, yes, I agree with the thrust of his argument. For that precise reason we argued for an achieved successfully under the super-levy proposals of 18 months ago that Ireland should be allowed to develop its dairy industry. While other countries in the EC were asked to cut back we were allowed to increase for precisely the reason Deputy Collins has mentioned. I know nothing about the report on the radio this morning, but I have heard about it. If it is as blunt as the Deputy says about bringing an end to taking beef into intervention, that will be damaging for Irish agricultural interests.
Having regard to what the Minister said I want him to understand and accept that there is great concern amongst the Community generally at the acceptance of the limit on milk production brought about by the super-levy. It is nothing to be proud of and we cannot be pleased with it because milk production has been stopped at a level far below our potential and many people involved in the dairying industry are affected seriously by this and are in great difficulty. Will the Minister agree with me that Ireland's interests are largely ignored in strategic Commission proposals in agriculture, and does this not reflect a very poor lobbying job by the Minister and his colleagues in Brussels that they seem unable to get proposals, even proposals for discussion, that will take account adequately of our vital national interests?
That is not true. Quite the reverse is true. The production of dairy produce has been stopped in the Community.
At the existing level.
That does not apply to Ireland which is the only country in the Community which was allowed to increase its level of production under the 1983 agreement on the super-levy. No matter what political football may be made out of this, I do not believe that the Irish farmer is under any illusion about the difficulties facing him in the future. They are not under any illusions about the extremely competent negotiations pursued by the Government over the super-levy and the good results achieved. It is clear, if one discussed the matter with farmers or any organisations over the last two years, that they all recognise that a good job was done.
Is the Minister aware that two years after the super-levy was imposed on us milk production here has been stopped at a level far below the potential of our dairy industry and that that represents a far more severe blow to our dairy industry than the stop imposed by the milk levy on our partners in Europe? We must have regard for the fact that their production limit is at its maximum, they could not go much higher, but we are stopped about half way. If the Minister regards this as a good deal achieved by his colleagues in Government for the Irish dairy industry he is not in touch with reality.
It was precisely because it was recognised that the Irish dairy industry had not developed to its full potential that we were allowed to increase when other countries were stopped.
We were only allowed a pittance. If we were allowed to develop to our maximum potential in line with other member states who had a head start on us that would be a concession we could all be proud of, but we cannot accept as fair or just the super-levy limits imposed on us and accepted for the last two years.
They are precisely the arguments that the Taoiseach, the Minister for Agriculture, and I were making at the time of the super-levy debate two years ago. They were listened to and accepted and hence we were allowed to increase our production in the last two years when other countries were cut back.
Allowed to increase by 4 per cent?
Everybody else was cut back.