asked the Minister for Agriculture if he is aware of the recent survey, the result of which indicates that a lesser area of agricultural land in Europe generally will supply the food needs of present markets by the end of the century; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Agricultural Land Survey.
7.
The article referred to deals with the possible future land requirements of the EC, excluding Spain and Portugal, to the year 2000. Using Dutch and Danish studies, it identifies the possible levels of surplus grassland and arable land which could be in evidence by that date and suggests alternative uses to which this land could be put. These alternatives include options which would suit our climate and soil conditions.
Our milk production is expressed in terms of a tonnage per hectare of forage, and we are lagging far behind the other states in the EC, notably The Netherlands whose tonnage per hectare of forage is five times our rate. In effect, are we not saying that we have missed out very badly in the negotiations in regard to the super-levy? The implications of that for our dairy and beef sectors will be very considerable.
These facts were known for donkeys' years, even before we joined the EC. The Dutch have particularly high quality land, and they use massive amounts of cereal substitutes in their milk production which are not so readily available to us. On the other hand, we produce a great deal of our milk through the use of grass, a far cheaper method of production, but it involves a high proportion of seasonality, a major impediment to our processing industry. The point made by the Deputy has been well known for many years.
Is there not a very strong case to be made for a cutback in the use of cereal substitutes? Would it not alleviate the problem about surpluses in the dairy sector in view of the severe penalties imposed on our industry and our entire economy?
The Deputy is correct. We continuously ask at Council meetings that imports of cereal substitutes be reduced. We have only one real supporter in that regard, the French, who, as I pointed out earlier, are very large producers of cereals. Some of the others are beginning to have second thoughts but I have yet to see any of them definitely put their shoulder to the wheel and back us up on that. The use of cereal substitutes has inflated milk production and is largely responsible for the problem we face.
We thank the Minister for the information, but would he not agree that the time has come for us to prevent the introduction of further blunt instruments, such as the super-levy or the phasing out of beef intervention, while the other members of the Council ignore this major contribution to increased milk production and the creation of surpluses by imports from third countries?
The French Minister is very helpful and supportive of demands to cut out imported cereal substitutes. Some other Ministers have come around to our way of thinking but I have yet to see them demonstrate that support in terms of votes. They are all getting the message that it is counter-productive to allow these cereal substitute imports.
There is a direct link between the two.
Of course there is.