It is my privilege to welcome to the meeting Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP, Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development, Northern Ireland Assembly. We are pleased she has accepted our invitation to exchange views with us on current agricultural issues such as the World Trade Organisation, the health check of the Common Agricultural Policy reform and animal diseases. I invite the Minister to make her contribution and I am sure members will wish to follow with some questions. The Minister may wish to outline her concerns regarding the WTO and members wish to hear her views on simplification and modulation proposals regarding the health check of CAP reform. She also might update the joint committee in respect of animal diseases and concerns she may have regarding the fishing industry. I call on the Minister to make her opening remarks. She and her officials are very welcome.
Agricultural Issues: Discussion.
Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP
Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach. It is lovely to be down here. While I am aware it has taken us a while and there has been some difficulty in agreeing on a date, I am delighted to attend the meeting today. I thank members for giving me the opportunity to discuss some areas of common interest. I also formally record my regards to Deputy Ferris and I hope he makes a full and speedy recovery.
I wish to give a brief overview of our approach and my priorities before turning to the specific issues raised by the Chair. I have been the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development in the North for slightly more than one year and during that time I have sought to make the most of the opportunity created by the restoration of our devolved Assembly to shape our policies to better reflect our local circumstances and needs and, through the all-Ireland institutions, to begin to build for a future that more fully reflects the way farming is going in respect of an all-Ireland approach to all that. I have based my approach on building partnerships with both the local industry and community and the EU and my colleagues in the South, as we have much in common. My vision is of a thriving and sustainable rural community and environment. In pursuit of that aim, I have been taking action under four broad themes which are used in my Department's strategic plan.
Its first theme is competitiveness, and the mainstays of agriculture in the North are beef and lamb production as well as dairying. While the dairy sector has been profitable, our red meat sector, in common with beef and lamb production across Europe, is struggling. The decoupling of CAP support in 2005 has made clear the reality of the sector's lack of profitability. A point I have made a number of times at different events I have attended is that we must begin to work to promote Irish beef from across the island on a global scale. For too long, we often have been in competition with each other, when we should compete together with the rest of the world. Beef and lamb production is highly challenging at present. It is very difficult to make a living at it and we must work together to try to maximise the opportunities for our farmers, many of whom, the hill farmers in particular, do not have many alternatives available to them. To its credit, our industry has shown a great deal of initiative in forming a task force to help address some of their problems. It published a major report last October and is exploring possible ways forward at present. My Department is involved closely in this work alongside the industry representatives.
To help competitiveness, I also seek to reduce the cost burden imposed by regulation. In conjunction with the Minister for the Environment, I commissioned an independent panel to review this area and to produce a simplification plan to deliver a minimum reduction of 25% over the next five years in the burden imposed by red tape. I expect a report from that organisation in the autumn. As members are aware, the fisheries sector also faces major challenges in the face of declines in key fish stocks and the rapidly increasing cost of fuel. As fisheries was one of the areas specifically mentioned by the Chairman, I will return to it in some detail later.
Our second theme is animal health, and robust traceability is essential to maintain customer confidence. I believe we have one of the leading cattle traceability systems in Europe. It has been crucial in helping to rebuild export markets after the ban arising from BSE was lifted in 2006. Our industry now is interested in taking the next step towards the electronic identification of cattle and I am keen to encourage this. It offers the prospect of efficiency gains and will further strengthen our reputation for high standards. It also may assist the preparations for electronic identification of sheep if the European Commission's plans in this regard remain on course.
Staying free of disease also is key to retaining export markets and controlling costs. The problems in Britain since last summer owing to foot and mouth disease and bluetongue have put the spotlight on the value of the so-called fortress Ireland approach we have adopted in conjunction with the Department in the South. The island of Ireland is a distinct geographical area for disease control purposes and it makes sense to recognise that in our approach to animal health. Work on an all-Ireland strategy has made good progress and I hope it can be agreed through the North-South structures next autumn.
We were very glad of the approach that was adopted last year. I had full access and was able to speak to the then Minister, Deputy Mary Coughlan, many times during the difficulties that arose. It was very important to take an all-Ireland approach to keeping disease out of Ireland. We saw how Europe then reacted regarding certification and how we were able to keep exports going. Equally as important however, trade could continue on the island and it is not that long since 2001 when people were stopped at the Border and milk or ham was taken out of lunch boxes. A very different approach was taken this time, owing to the fact we worked as a unit to keep the diseases out of Ireland and took the same approach, North and South. Through that close North-South collaboration and a productive dialogue with the European Commission, we have delivered solid protection against the entry of disease, maintaining business as usual as far as possible except that we cannot afford to drop our guard on this.
We also face challenges on tuberculosis and brucellosis. We have had some success in reducing disease levels but there is still more to be done. The issues of disease eradication and biosecurity were raised to which I will return. Before leaving animal health, I will mention responsibility in cost sharing which is being developed in Great Britain and is emerging as an issue at EU level. The strands are interdependent and centre on the development of a close partnership between Government and industry in managing risks more successfully and achieving better value for money all-round. If the right balance is struck, this approach can offer benefits to the industry and to Government. I am planning to consult on the issues and options for the way forward.
The third theme for this morning is the environment. The need for responsible farming is widely accepted and the issue is less about whether we should raise standards to protect the environment and more about how we can do this without reducing profitability. My work to reduce the cost burden on regulation is relevant here and I also support investment by farmers to manage the shortage and use of livestock slurry to avoid water pollution and to realise the benefits of a natural alternative to increasingly expensive chemical fertilisers.
I also want farmers to take steps to enhance the quality of farmland habitats and landscape. There has been a good uptake of our agri-environment support schemes since they were launched 20 years ago. Nearly half of our farmers now participate in those schemes. I want to push that participation even higher and have recently launched a fresh round of support. At those launches, we were represented by the South. Again, it is very important to share ideas and good practice.
My final theme is the wider rural community. I accept that this lies beyond the committee's direct remit but in terms of information, it is helpful. While farming remains at the centre of rural life, it sits within an increasingly diverse rural economy and society. That presents opportunities for farmers and their families to find other sources of income. This is important in upskilling and reskilling members of the farm household to help them make the most of new business and job opportunities available.
I have also sought to go further to ensure that the distinctive needs of rural communities are addressed. I have committed myself to be a rural champion and will soon commence work on a rural White Paper that will, for the first time, take stock across the whole spectrum of public policy. It sends a strong signal that we recognise the contribution that rural areas make to society and the economy and presents an opportunity to create a shared vision of what our rural areas should be like in the future.
On the specific agenda items, my priorities in respect of the CAP health check are to secure a fair outcome in the modulation proposals and promote simplification where possible. I realise that the South's perspective on modulation differs from our perspective due to our need for voluntary modulation but I am sure we both see it as important that farmers continue to benefit from a stable underpinning of CAP support. It is certainly essential if the red meat sector is to have time to build a more viable future. A similar issue applies to the process for abolishing milk quota where we need a steady rate of change over time to help the industry plan and adjust. Again, I accept that there are differences in the reality on the ground in terms of quotas. I intend shortly to consult on the health check proposals to help inform our position for the forthcoming negotiations.
The committee also wants to talk about the WTO negotiations. Like the committee, I am very concerned about a deal being made that is unbalanced and threatens not just our agriculture industry but European agriculture as a whole through increased imports that may not have been produced to EU quality and traceability standards. We want a balanced outcome that does not sacrifice the interests of agriculture for the sake of an early agreement or for uncertain gains on other products and services. The WTO negotiations have, obviously, played a major part in discussions both with the previous Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the new Minister in respect of how they affect farmers across the island.
In respect of disease eradication and biosecurity, our priority is to reduce the incidence of brucellosis and tuberculosis. In respect of brucellosis, I have initiated a partnership approach with local farmers in the high incidence areas to promote increased attention to biosecurity. If that proves successful, we would be interested in pursuing the eradication of brucellosis in the North in the longer term if we can devise a suitable strategy in conjunction with the industry. We have looked at what the South has done on brucellosis and how successful it has been in reducing the number of reactors. We want to be able to replicate that success.
In respect of tuberculosis, the current debate centres around the role of wildlife in spreading the disease. Opinions on the role of badgers in the North are extremely polarised but during this year, I want to decide what we should do about the issue and move forward. Again, we are liaising with the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food about its experience and its work on the development of a vaccine. We are also considering how farmers can increase their biosecurity so that badger-cattle contact is reduced.
On fisheries, my objective is to help the industry to achieve a profitable future while ensuring that stocks are fished in a more sustainable way. There is scope for more co-operation in fisheries management and the development of a sustainable and profitable fishing fleet throughout the island of Ireland. I am very aware of the current difficulties faced by our fishermen, particularly due to rising fuel costs, and want to work with them to find a lasting solution to this problem. I have established a fisheries forum to prepare recommendations for a long-term strategy to address this issue.
I welcome the ongoing cross-Border co-operation on aquaculture issues, particularly the recent all-island review of the bottom-growing mussel sector and the publication of the report entitled The Rising Tide, which I launched with the former Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on 1 May 2008. There are opportunities for aquaculture that we can work to exploit. This is where a joined-up all-island approach on finding the best methods, research and development and opportunities for our aquaculture sector would help.
To sum up, the agri-food sector faces enormous challenges but there are also great opportunities to be grasped through a successful partnership between Government and industry. This completes my opening remarks. I hope they have been helpful in setting the scene. I am now pleased to go into more detail regarding the issues.
I thank the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development for her presentation. She gave us a very up-to-date outline of the situation in Northern Ireland and the co-operation between both Governments and Ministers, which is very important. I now call on the spokesperson for Fine Gael, Deputy Michael Creed.
I welcome the Minister and her colleagues. It is a very welcome exchange of views and I am very pleased with her opening contribution. It is only right and proper that there cannot and should not be any great divergence of opinion on the broad interests we share on the island in terms of the interests of agriculture. In the current climate, where we will see other forms of employment on the island under threat, particularly the relocation of many jobs out of the country, and the global demands for food production, it is very important that the primary producers, the food-producing sector and the processing industries are nurtured and enabled to achieve their potential regardless of which side of the Border these enterprises are established. Obviously, we share the same policy restrictions in terms of the CAP and, on a global level, the framework established by the WTO talks. It is also right that our interests should not diverge in any way.
Will the Minister outline to the committee the relationship she has with her parent Department in the UK and how it might have a different approach in respect of the agricultural industry, particularly the CAP, and the approach to the WTO? I am not making a charge in respect of the Minister because her views would be entirely different but it must make for a difficult working relationship in respect of a UK Government approach, regardless of whether it is a Tory or Labour Party Government, which has been consistently hostile to the CAP and which takes a very different approach to matters like the world trade talks than the Minister or us on this side of the Border.
In respect of matters like the CAP health check and negotiations on those issues, what is the approach emerging from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, DEFRA? I appreciate that there are nuanced differences in respect of modulation, for example. Is DEFRA more prepared to concede and yield to budgetary pressures at a European level than the Minister were she in a position to conduct those negotiations or the Department here? Frightening proposals are emerging, particularly in respect of modulation. The level of the single farm payment has been frozen for a number of years. Given inflation, its value to farmers has decreased and placing it under further threat to invest money in rural development would be ridiculous. I am alarmed by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food's recent press statement on this issue. What is the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' overall opinion on the CAP health check, particularly in respect of modulation?
While opinion varies on the degree to which milk quotas should be phased out and what preparations should be taken, the broad consensus is that quotas should be increased to prepare for a soft landing. A more ambitious approach than the proposed 2% increase to 2014 is required. Dairy farmers North and South would be in a position to take up a more ambitious relaxation of the quota regime than the one on the table.
The Minister is aware that the South has just had its referendum on the Lisbon treaty. The entitlement of states to each have a Commissioner was a contentious issue. I do not intend to reopen debate on the treaty at this meeting, but the opinion in the agriculture sector in particular was that, had the British not had a Commissioner in recent years, no tears would have been shed by farmers. Mr. Mandelson's proposals are troubling for all sectors - beef, dairy, pig, poultry etc.. His proposals reflect where he is coming from, namely, the UK's pursuit of a cheap food policy and a lifetime of political hostility towards CAP, and undermine years of progress.
The interests of primary producers and consumers are at one in that the primary producer is rewarded for the production of a highly traceable food with environmental safety and animal welfare at the core of its enterprise. The WTO proposals would open the floodgates to products that would otherwise be illegal on EU supermarket shelves and have dubious standards of production. They do not meet the environmental safety and animal welfare requirements that we must meet. Cost is a factor. These matters must be elevated in the political debate within the UK's Department, DEFRA, in particular. It is not an issue for primary producers alone, but for consumers in terms of protection from substandard products.
The Chairman may advise me on the fisheries industry, which the Minister did not address. The North and South share similar concerns about an industry that is in crisis.
The programme for Government pursues a GM-free island. An impediment is being placed in front of millers who have been involved in importing a GM component for compound feed for many years, be it in respect of the beef, dairy, pig or poultry sector. Those industries have marginal viability. It has been estimated that the impediment placed on importing and buying forward compound feed components with a GM element will cost the South's industry approximately €160 million per year. Members of the committee will jump up and down about lesser costs, but this matter has stayed under the radar. No one is willing to grasp the nettle. The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food seems to want to run to ground and the Minister of State, who takes pride of place in this regard, has shifted his ground somewhat in terms of the meaning of a GM-free island, namely, that we will not grow GM crops. However, we continue to place significant impediments on imports into the industry, which costs all sectors in agriculture.
Do the Minister and the North's farming community share this view of a GM-free island? What practical and tangible policy direction will she take in conjunction with our Minister? The GM issue has almost been elevated to the status of the sacred cow in that a real debate is feared and anyone who puts his or her head above the parapet is considered fair game for name-calling and the nastiest type of political point-scoring.
We need a rational and informed debate. The Green Party tells us that science must be placed centre stage in terms of global warming, that the evidence should be accepted and that appropriate policies should be pursued, but we are asked to bury our heads in the sand and ignore the science in terms of GM. A science-based informed and rational debate should be led by the Government. I welcome the fact that the committee is arranging to give all sides of the debate — industry, opponents and academics — an opportunity to air their opinions. We cannot ignore science, which must be at the centre of everything we do in ensuring best practice. I am not urging anything that would expose farmers or consumers to risk. What is the Minister's opinion on a GM-free island, how does she interpret the policy and what would it mean for Northern farmers?
I apologise for being late, but I was delayed. I welcome the Minister to the meeting. I have monitored her progress from afar with some admiration because her rise within politics has been phenomenal. I admire her work on North-South relations and in addressing agriculture from an island of Ireland perspective. She has been strong in that respect and it is a perspective with which I agree. Speaking as a member of the same generation, she has been an inspiration. I do not mean to be ageist——
We will not look for birth certificates or traceability.
I empathise with the Minister in that sense and congratulate her on her success to date.
Since Deputy Creed outlined many of the issues in which I have an interest, I will not repeat those points. Agricultural policy must be undertaken from an island of Ireland perspective. If I have missed a presentation and this point has been taken up, I apologise. The co-operation between the two Departments with responsibility for agriculture is necessary and vital. To what extent is the relationship working and will there be a deepening of the relationship, particularly given what the CAP health check will mean for Irish agriculture? That is an issue that will have major significance for Irish farmers, North and South.
I call Deputy Morgan, who is deputising for Deputy Ferris.
I thank the committee for its kind comments about Deputy Ferris, who was unwell overnight but who assures me this morning that if the proposed lengthy suspension for the Kerry captain is confirmed, he will offer to tog out. He is nearly back in shape. I extend a warm welcome to the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development, Ms Michelle Gildernew, and her officials. Ms Gildernew and I have been battling for a long time but not with each other. Between ard comhairlí and Ard-Fheiseanna, we have been on the same side for as long as I can remember. I do not want to talk about how long that is because it might take away from the goodwill. I will not talk about ages and birth certs.
Ms Gildernew is lucky because, without prejudice to other Ministries, the Minister, Deputy Smith, the Minister of State, Deputy Killeen, and the Chairman of this committee, Deputy Brady, are personable and competent people and there will be no obstacle to co-operation with these people and their officials. As long as I know them, they have had a spirit of co-operation and competency that encourages me and I hope Ms Gildernew will find that as well.
Agriculture is the backbone of rural Ireland and is an important industry. While it is evident that it has gone through many changes, further change will be required. I welcome the spirit of co-operation in the all-island project. We have seen the foot and mouth experience and other threats. A level of co-operation is being achieved, particularly but not just in animal health. It also applies to gain efficiencies and competitiveness across the island. The first item on the agenda is competitiveness because the industry must be fit for purpose and must be a world-class food production project. It will get there under the stewardship of Ms Gildernew and the colleagues in this State.
Fishing communities are often isolated and dependent on the sea for their livelihoods. We know the difficulties they are going through at the moment, which Ms Gildernew will raise in Brussels next week. I refer to the fisheries forum. Will there be an opportunity for input at any level from within this State, such as at the level of producer organisations or individuals?
I extend a warm welcome to the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development, Ms Michelle Gildernew. I am delighted that I was one of the first people, with Deputy Ferris, who I hope is doing well, to propose having the two Ministers, Ms Gildernew and the then Minister, Deputy Coughlan, appear before the committee. It was not possible to have both Ministers here together but we met the Minister, Deputy Coughlan, and now Ms Gildernew is here, for which I am very grateful. I apologise for being late but we had a series of votes in the Seanad, one of which was called by a Member from Ms Gildernew's party, but that is democracy.
The Minister, Deputy Smith, the Minister of State, Deputy Killeen, and Ms Gildernew have proved that the two Departments worked well during the last outbreak of disease, and that is as it should be. There was success in the Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food under the then Minister, Deputy Coughlan. I would like to see that prosper into the future. Coming from Monaghan, a neighbouring county, and reared on the Border, it is my wish to see agriculture, other businesses and the whole economy of the North and South going forward together. I wish the Northern Ireland Minister well in her portfolio, with the Minister, Deputy Smith, and his Department. Good luck in an all-Ireland agricultural dimension.
Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP
I thank everybody for the kind comments and the warm welcome. Deputy Creed's question on the relationship with the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs was interesting. I must have a working relationship with Ministers and officials in London. It is professional and is going well, but there are differences of opinion and robust exchanges. We have some extreme differences with Britain on the CAP health check. There is much that is worthy in it in terms of simplification and the abolition of set-aside. We must carefully consider other issues such as the proposed increase in EU compulsory modulation and the impact it will have on us. We had to bring in voluntary modulation.
We are in a slightly better position regarding milk quotas because we have been able to trade on quota across Britain and to buy quota that farmers in the Twenty-six Counties——
Is there an all-Ireland market that we could buy into?
Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP
I have already looked into that but I was told it cannot be traded across the Border. It would have been useful to do that for the sake of dairy farmers in the Twenty-six Counties. I take an all-Ireland view on all these issues. We were able to buy milk quota. It is fairly valueless in the North because we could buy additional quota and farmers could improve their businesses and increase their stock. The dairy industry is in a good condition in the Six Counties but it is not the same in the Twenty-six Counties. We have a difficulty with the British Government about ending the single farm payment or dramatically reducing import protection. We have had a robust exchange of views on these matters. The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs must realise that it is dealing with Ministers from three parties, Plaid Cymru in Wales, the Scottish National Party and Sinn Féin.
Some of our meetings are interesting because we have a Minister in a Labour Party Government in the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs who was used to dealing with Labour Party Ministers in each jurisdiction and now he is dealing with a very mixed bag of political opinion with a very different approach to dealing with local issues and finding local solutions. The relationship is friendly and good but can be robust and quite difficult at times when we are trying to get our point across.
In terms of the World Trade Organisation, we have written to Mr. Gordon Brown and Mr. Hilary Benn on the issue. We now have asked the First Minister and Deputy First Minister also to write to Mr. Brown about the negotiations. I envisage major implications for farming, not just in Ireland but across Europe. We have asked Mr. Brown to rein in Mr. Peter Mandelson and to try to control him to some extent, given that he is a British European Commissioner. He will do severe damage otherwise.
We disagree with the British Government on much of what is contained in the WTO talks. Any agreement reached must be balanced. To sacrifice agriculture in favour of an early agreement is not good enough. I share the concerns of the farmers' unions in the North and the South. It is an issue on which I have worked with the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Brendan Smith. I also discussed the issue with Ulster Farmers Union and the IFA at a meeting in Belfast. The fact that the whole island is speaking with one voice on the WTO is very important and is sending a very strong message to the British Government. I also raised the issue with the Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, Ms Mariann Fischer Boel, on 14 March. She knows my views on the WTO negotiations and knows where we stand on the issue. She also knows that our views are very different from views in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs but that I must fight the corner for farmers in Northern Ireland.
Deputy Michael Creed asked about genetically modified crops. Our party position is that we agree with a GM-free Ireland and do not believe that GM crops should be grown on the island. However, the issue is more complex than that, especially with regard to grain. There used to be a 0.9% tolerance level for grain that was imported into Europe. The industry has informed me that with the removal of that tolerance level, which is now at 0%, they cannot import grain which has even a trace of GM crops within it. Therefore, the availability of crops is very restricted, which is particularly hard on the poultry and pig industries, which are heavily dependent on imported meal. It is less of an issue for the red meat sector because of the grass-fed system in place here. I have raised this issue with various European Commissioners. I still believe in retaining our all-Ireland GM-free status but we must accept that there are pressures on the industry, particularly as a result of the zero tolerance approach adopted. There is a pragmatic and sensible solution to this.
I have been told very clearly by the poultry industry that at the moment, 50% of poultry consumed on the island of Ireland is not produced here. We know where that poultry is coming from but it does not have the same traceability standards as Irish-bred poultry and we do not know what the animals have been fed on. We are importing poultry that does not have the same strict requirements that are imposed on the native industry and we are not always aware that the poultry we are eating is imported. Much work must be done on the issue of GM crops by both myself and the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Brendan Smith.
Deputy Seán Sherlock asked about the all-Ireland working relationship and I am very pleased with the level of co-operation. In fact, it has been pointed out that keeping foot and mouth disease out of Ireland was dealt with by two Ulster women, which is very gratifying. I have known Deputy Brendan Smith for some time and met him before he became Minister. As an Ulster man and a Cavan man, I met him at St. Tiernach's Park in Clones on a number of occasions. We already had a relationship and within days of him taking up his portfolio, he attended the Balmoral Show, which is the biggest livestock show on the island. It is an all-Ireland show in terms of the trade stands and so forth and it was wonderful that the Minister was able to attend. We had a breakfast with approximately 250 of the most influential people in agriculture in Ireland. The Minister addressed that audience, about which I was very pleased, given that he had only been in the job for a few days. I appreciated that start to our working relationship. It is incumbent on both of us that we remain in close contact and work together.
With regard to Deputy Arthur Morgan's point, farmers in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland have much to gain from our respective Departments working together. Often the challenges and difficulties we face in this country are not the same as those faced by farmers in England, Scotland or Wales. It is very important for our farming community that we highlight and promote their needs through our new working relationships with Europe. For the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs farming has a different profile and a different level of importance to that which I place on it and from that point of view, an all-Ireland approach to protecting the industry is essential. Agriculture is vital to the economy of the island and we must ensure it continues to be so. We also have a rural way of life that is not necessarily understood by people from across the water and we want to protect and enhance that to the best of our ability.
The fishing industry is experiencing enormous difficulties. Increased fuel prices mean it is costing fishermen a day's takings just to run their boats and if they do not catch anything, they are incurring expenses they cannot meet. Our fisheries forum has not been set up yet but we are hoping that will happen in the next few weeks. We should also extend the all-Ireland approach to dealing with the fishing industry problems and finding solutions, and I hope the fisheries forum can be part of that. Fishing on the island of Ireland is facing similar challenges concerning quota allocation and so forth. This is an area in which I felt at a certain disadvantage when I attended the Fisheries Council meeting in December last year. The former Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Mary Coughlan, was participating in the negotiations along with the Minister for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Mr. Jonathan Shaw. I was not directly involved in the negotiations but was sitting in the row behind the main participants, because I am part of a devolved administration. We find that we do not have the same voice as Ministers in the South because of their status, which places us at a disadvantage. That is why we need to have a positive working relationship with the Minister for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. We also need to be punching above our weight and explaining what our industry needs. It is very important we respond to the challenges on an all-Ireland basis to ensure we get the best deal possible for our fishermen.
I do not think I have missed any questions. That is probably all I need to say for the moment, but if there are further questions, I am happy to answer them.
I have a quick supplementary question on the GM issue. I appreciate the Minister's party policy favours a GM-free Ireland but what is not clear from the response is the policy being pursued by her Department. Nobody is advocating that GM crops be cultivated here but the specific issue, which is a cost factor to the industry here, is the impediments being placed on those who import ingredients for compound feeds for the dairy, beef, sheep, pig and poultry sectors. When the Minister says that it is her party's position that we have a GM-free island, is that also the position of the Department? Is it the case that the GM content of compound feed in Northern Ireland has been replaced by a non-GM component?
I asked that question because Professor Jimmy Burke of Teagasc argues that within ten years it will not be possible to source non-genetically modified produce for import. That is the reality we face. There is potential for using GM technology outside the food chain, such as in energy crops. Our Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is of the view, however, that energy crops are not among the uses approved in the North.
Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP
The policy we are promoting is the Department's policy on GM crops. I outlined our party's position on the growing of crops but I accept this is a separate issue to the use of GM crops. We are facing the problem of the removal of the 0.9% tolerance level and we no longer have room for manoeuvre. On a global basis, the availability of non-GM crops is decreasing. It must be asked whether it is morally right to burn wheat and maize as energy crops when they are needed to feed people. We must consider also global conditions, such as the drought in Australia, but ultimately we have to find a way to provide solutions to the industry. It is a controversial issue but we are working on it with the industry. Last week I had a useful discussion on a range of issues with the Grain Trade Association in the North. I subsequently wrote to the Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, Ms Fischer Boel, regarding the association's concerns. Imported meat is being fed on GM crops but we do not know about it. We are facing difficulties in sourcing foodstuffs for our own animals now that zero tolerance has been applied.
Does the Minister accept that the milk, beef, poultry and pigs produced here are fed on compound feed that has a GM component?
Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP
Yes. Much of the discussion has pertained to consumers and the promotion of non-GM food. Many major retail outlets promote non-GM food in their own brands, so consumers have bought into the idea. Few of us understand all the component parts of the food we eat and the difficulty the industry faces is that people believe what they are eating is non-GM even though that is not always the case.
I accept the industry is undergoing significant difficulties and that there are shortages in the availability of grain. I am working with the industry to find solutions to that problem, so I am not sure what point the Deputy is trying to make. We have clearly stated that we recognise the pig and poultry sector is especially dependent on imported grain. We cannot produce sufficient grain on the island of Ireland for our animals' needs, so we have to be pragmatic about finding a solution.
I should apologise to the Minister regarding the Balmoral show. Unfortunately, only a couple of members managed to take up her kind invitation to the committee to attend the show.
She referred to her meeting with the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in Clones and I am sure she met Senator O'Brien in Brewster Park a few weeks ago.
Many times.
I welcome the Minister and extend good wishes to my fellow county man, Deputy Ferris. Has she observed a similar mass exodus from the sheep farming community in the North to what is occurring in the South? The sheep flock has dwindled over recent years by almost 1 million ewes. Has she put in place any measures to maintain the flock at its present level?
What percentage of agricultural produce is exported in the North? What is the Minister's policy on labelling? We do not appear to have a policy in this jurisdiction, despite calling for one for a long time. Successive Ministers have kicked to touch on the issue. The Minister noted that 50% of the chicken consumed in the Six Counties is imported but I estimate we import an even higher percentage. Similarly, beef and pork products are being imported and advertised as packed in Ireland. No mention is made of origin. When one orders in a restaurant, one does not know if the beef will be an Aberdeen Angus from Goleen or an Aubrac from wherever.
Unfortunately, responsibility for fisheries in this State is spread over three Departments, namely, the Departments of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Transport, and Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. The Minister has direct responsibility for agriculture, which I understand also includes fisheries. Responsibility for our fisheries is all over the place. On the Order of Business, Deputy Creed sought a debate on the fishing industry in advance of next week's meeting between the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the European Commission. I do not know whether we made much ground in that regard because a blasé approach is taken in this jurisdiction to fisheries. There is such a level of militance among fishermen in this country that I think they will follow the French example of closing the country down. They would want to become more militant because they are going out of business on a daily basis. They are unable to recoup their fuel costs for a week's fishing.
Does the North have a similar body to the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority, which was established 18 months ago but only received a boat last week? The authority and its 70 staff were waiting on the shore for every Irish fisherman who came off the sea, while French and Spanish boats were plundering our waters. Fishermen and the authority have a "them and us" mentality. The administrative sanctions we have sought do not appear to be on the horizon and enforcement remains heavy-handed. I acknowledge the authority is implementing the law but are similarly stringent regulations imposed on fishermen in the North?
Mussel harvesting is important in my constituency. Several weeks ago, the committee met a deputation from Cromane, which is renowned for its mussels. There were seven fishermen in the deputation and their boats are not up to the standard required in the South. As a result, they have had to import identical boats from the North of Ireland to harvest mussels. It is a joke. One would not find it anywhere else other than in these 32 counties. They can hire the same type of boat in Belfast or wherever in the North of Ireland to harvest their mussels in Cromane while their own boats are tied up.
I welcome the Minister. I do not want to repeat the points already made. I have a question on the administration of the Minister's Department. I apologise for not fully understanding the devolution process. The Minister mentioned the meetings she has with the Welsh and Scottish Departments. What is Ms Gildernew's level of policy discretion? We have had discussions here on such matters as the CAP health check, milk quotas and a broad range of agricultural issues. Is the Minister in a position to have a separate regime of agriculture policies in Northern Ireland from the policies in England, Scotland and Wales? Is it possible for her to have a different milk quota regime or system of response to the CAP health check?
My other issue will arise in the Republic over the next number of months, namely the publication of the list of recipients of EU support including single farm payment and REPS payment. That system of publication has already happened in Northern Ireland and I wonder what was the response of the media, Department and farmers. Did it turn neighbour against neighbour? Did the local media lead with the five largest recipients? As far as I know we will publish the list of what our neighbours receive here next September or October. I look forward to being, sadly, at the bottom of the league, but it will be interesting to see how the small farmers from south Kerry are getting on.
I will be very brief.
That is unusual.
The committee has covered much ground since we began this morning. I welcome Ms Gildernew. Let us hope this is the first meeting of many, with God's help. I am a firm believer that co-operation is the name of the game. There is an old saying here in the South that great oaks from little acorns grow. It is very interesting to know that agriculture is the predominant industry in both sides of the country. Coming from the Mizen Head Peninsula in County Cork in the extreme south west, where my nearest neighbour is in Manhattan, New York, we have much in common regarding agriculture. I thoroughly agree with the Minister that our production of meat and vegetables is insufficient. In a minimarket in Goleen I saw carrots from Israel. That tells the trend agriculture has taken in the past two or three decades. Farmers in the South no longer grow potatoes, except a few large farmers in County Louth. They do not grow cabbage or any vegetables. The import of vegetables and meat into this country is colossal. Pork is coming in by the shipload. Meat is also finding its way into the supermarkets.
Traceability is the main issue for our products. We have a genuine product in Ireland, North and South, and if it were properly marketed and labelled it would be a major advantage to the housewife because she would know exactly where it comes from. I estimate we import 60% to 70% of our chickens in the South. There is no country of origin stamped on them and if they come in loose and are packed here they can be stamped as Irish produce. This is ridiculous and we should tighten up on the regulations appertaining to that.
The Minister did not mention forestry. I am sure it is her responsibility. Is there much forestry in the North? How is it progressing and is it treated as a major industry? In the South we are only skimming the surface regarding afforestation.
I welcome the Minister. I have three questions and one general observation, mainly around food production and promotion of local food. What policies, if any, has Ms Gildernew on protection of local abattoirs? Here we are having a difficulty maintaining local abattoirs in counties. This leads to two other points, namely country of origin labelling and more specifically, clear labelling, which has been addressed, and the promotion of producer groups within counties or regions.
I would like Ms Gildernew's thoughts and opinion on the following observation. From an all-Ireland point of view as a food producing island it makes far greater sense to have closer ties between what is happening in the Republic than anything in England. Ms Gildernew says she sits in the second row when she negotiates. It is welcome that there is a Ministry as an advocacy but in any joint future progress tourism and agriculture must be examined. Perhaps there will be differences and agreements to be reached regarding the likes of GM. Unless the European Food Safety Authority and the FDA harmonise their ratification of what is and is not acceptable in ingredients and we fast track that, we will always be in catch-up mode for sourcing proteins for animal feed ingredients.
For an all-island agriculture and food production policy it is important that Ms Gildernew's Ministry, whatever else happens in the relationship, gets a higher grade of authority than some of the other Ministries in the legislative assembly. I say that as an outside observer. It makes sense that this should be the pilot. There are many issues but it is pure common sense. We have rules on scrapie and disease control but if we do not harmonise these as an island, a line on a map, a road or a river will not stop diseases spreading, whatever about a stretch of sea. It is fundamental that this is progressed and it is in everybody's interest, no matter what their political persuasion.
I welcome the Minister and, like the other speakers said, it is great of her to come here to exchange views. It is great to listen to her, see what is being done in Northern Ireland, hear about what they are working at and what ideas they have. It is a good learning process for both North and South in that we can work together on agriculture on an all-island basis. That is very important and I am very interested in it. I thank the Minister.
The Minister spoke of the red meat report, which we discussed with our counterparts and some of her colleagues when we were in Stormont. There is no doubt that parts of the report were frightening. Has there been any improvement with the ban on Brazilian beef coming into Europe? Has it helped, because it has definitely helped beef prices here?
I have put an enormous amount of effort into the disease issue because we have all seen over the years what the likes of brucellosis and tuberculosis can do to farmers. I understand there was a serious outbreak of brucellosis in south Armagh so perhaps the Minister will update us on that case at present. I am sure Deputy Morgan may be affected in that area of County Louth.
He might not know the area very well. He certainly knows his constituency well. There was a bluetongue scare but that has gone away.
I welcome the Minister's comments regarding the WTO. When we met our counterparts, the Minister's party colleagues and some SDLP people were very supportive of our proposal on the day, and this was one of the reasons we went, although there were other issues as well. Co-operation would mean that we would take an all-Ireland approach. Unfortunately, the Chairman was not very forthcoming in that regard but I thank the Minister's colleagues and the SDLP people who were present on the day for their full support. It was unfortunate we had to draw back from that particular discussion. We all know how the WTO will affect us.
I represented this committee, along with the clerk, in Slovenia recently at a European Chairmen's meeting. The real discussion for the whole day was food security and issues of shortage not only in Europe, but across the world. Mr. Mandelson has spoken about putting farmers out of business in some EU countries. There seems to be a serious problem with food security across Europe and the world so I do not know what he is up to. The Minister might comment on those few issues.
Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP
There were comments at the beginning of the session regarding the Balmoral Show and Balmoral Breakfast. I reiterate that although it would be at short notice and not on the committee's calendar, it would be great if we could get the event in the calendar for next year. We would love to welcome members to the Balmoral Show next year and to that particular event.
There were very broad and varied questions so I will try not to leave any out. The first question concerned the exodus of sheep production from the South and how the North is being affected. I do not have specific figures but we have seen a small dip. It would not have been as big as what I have heard from people here about numbers decreasing.
On sheep, one of the issues we must address is that the European Commission is pushing hard on electronic identification. Members may not be aware of this but we have approximately 2,000 sheep involved in east-west trade on an annual basis. We have either 20,000 or 200,000 involved in North-South trade. For us, the trade in sheep is already a very important all-Ireland issue.
Some of our difficulties are compounded because England, Scotland and Wales all moved in January towards double-tagging of sheep. The South has a derogation from double-tagging and its industry is absolutely opposed to both double-tagging and electronic identification. We are caught in the middle because we do not have a derogation, so we are now acting illegally. We are trying to resolve that issue and to be as creative and imaginative about the problem as possible.
I have discussed the matter with Ministers here and we must find a solution which enables harmonisation on the island, where trade exists. We are under a bit of pressure in that regard. This illustrates the difficulties we have in that we are trapped within a UK system that does not have a derogation and has gone for double-tagging. It will go for electronic identification as well, although we are more in line with the position in the South on double-tagging and putting off EID for as long as possible.
We have looked very closely at the Liam Aylward report on this and we want to see the Commission move on it. We also want it to give us some breathing space so we do not have to move to double-tagging in the interim because of the impact that will have on trade across the island.
We have also seen a consumer shift away from carpets and the need for wool has dropped. All these issues place increased pressures on an industry already in difficulty.
On the question of exports, we in the North live in an exporting area. Approximately 80% of our produce is exported. That relates to the matter of the carrots mentioned earlier, with consumers wanting the same product on the shelves 365 days in the year. They have moved away from the idea of seasonality, considering what is available that is produced locally in specific months such as May, June and July, for example, but not available for the rest of the year.
There are unrealistic expectations from consumers that they will have the same standard of produce for the whole year. That did not happen 50 years ago in Ireland. We must recognise there are pressures on the industry to keep up with that level of demand. We have worked very closely on the issue of public procurement with regard to the service sector using and buying local produce. The supply chain has to be right. It is very much a live issue.
This works into the matter of labelling, which a number of members have raised. It is a difficulty. As a Department, we only have responsibility for beef labelling in the North while the Food Standards Agency has responsibility for labelling other items. It would be a real coup for us to work on an all-Ireland basis towards a labelling regime which would reflect where food has come from - the country of origin and the country of packaging if necessary. There should be a differentiation between these two concepts.
Consumers are crying out for this, as well as industry. We would love to act on it but it is an area in which we are restricted by EU rules. It is not just a matter of political will and is much more complicated. If we could move to straightforward or country of origin labelling on the island of Ireland, I would view it as a legacy issue that I would be very proud to leave behind.
There is also the fisheries issue. To put it in context, we have a very small fishing industry based in County Down made up of approximately 300 vessels. Some of these are over 40 years old. There is significant pressure on the fishing industry and its small size does not make it any less important. We have put an inordinate amount of time and energy into the protection of our fishing fleet and industry, as well as the long-term sustainability and viability of our fishing villages. The protection and enhancement of the fortunes of our fishing industry is close to my heart. Approximately 1,600 jobs depend on those 300 vessels; in addition to the fisheries those jobs are in processing and in the harbours. This is not to be sneezed at. Stringent rules apply and North and South are bound by EU rules.
Deputy Tom Sheahan made a point on the need to monitor Irish waters to ensure illegal catches are not made and that is an item for discussion at next week's Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting in Luxembourg, which I will attend. I have heard about this issue from fishermen and Killybegs fishermen make a strong point on it. They want the same rules applied to Spanish and French vessels that apply to Irish vessels and this is where close co-operation is essential. If this means we should pool resources to reach the right outcome, that is what we should do.
I think it was Senator Paul Bradford who mentioned the rural environment protection scheme, REPS, and other schemes. He asked whether there are similar issues in the North and wondered what was the media response. To put this in context, our rural development programme, including the voluntary modulation aspect, is approximately £535 million over five years and that is a fraction of what is available in the South through the rural development programme. The ability in the South to introduce schemes such as REPS and the suckler cow scheme creates difficulties for us. Perhaps that is not accurate because the Irish Government is entitled to use the money as it wishes and I take my hat off to this Administration, which has maximised the opportunities presented by European funding.
While Ireland drew down the maximum and matched its funding, Britain did the exact opposite and that is the legacy we are left with. It can be very difficult for farmers in Northern Ireland who may look across their fields and see farmers in the South who have all sorts of grants and options available to them. At times I get frustrated and say there is one solution to this that could easily remedy the situation but I must be careful where I make that point. Farmers are pragmatic people and they recognise that farming is a business better understood in Ireland than in England, Scotland or Wales. This is what we are up against and this is where frustration at the difference in the systems lies. We will try to be as imaginative as possible about how the money is used but we cannot do everything that the Irish Government can.
We must listen carefully to members of the industry as they have strong views. They told us that if we do not have enough money for a retirement scheme and a new entrants scheme they would prefer if we invested in new entrants as investment in the future is preferable to retiring off older men. I am mindful of the ageing population of the farming community. The job does not appear attractive to young people because their peers do jobs that earn far more money. I aim to protect the industry, which means introducing new blood and making farming as attractive as possible.
Senator Paul Bradford raised the matter of putting the single farm payment on the website. There was a battle and a half involved in this and when I arrived in the Department it was something I was determined not to do. The Department had previously put the lists on the website using the farm business's name, which was usually the name of the individual. The farmers' union said it would prefer if farm business numbers or other identifying criteria were used. This was a fraught issue and I did my best not to publish; I am told that the European Union will make us publish it in the next year or two but we tried to resist that this year. In spite of our best efforts the information was sought in a freedom of information request, which meant we were forced to release it. One can do one's best but if a person seeks the information he or she is entitled to it. I have tried to listen to farmers and put their needs at the heart of what we do and this was a contentious issue. The Senator is correct that farmers used the website to see what their neighbours received, which created difficulties, resentment and hostility. This is something one tries to manage as best one can.
Deputies P. J. Sheehan and Andrew Doyle raised the issue of forestry. We are lagging behind the figures for the Republic of Ireland — that for the South is approximately 12% and for the North it is approximately 6%. We have much ground to cover and the most highly forested area is Fermanagh, which has most of the industry capacity. For example, Balcas, which is involved in much of our forestry production, is based there. I am very keen on renewable energy and I think the forestry solutions available to us are a good place to start. We have targets on increasing our forest cover and our broadleaf and native woodland cover, and these initiatives are funded through the countryside management scheme. We fund short rotation coppice as a renewable energy source and an alternative farming method for people for whom regular farming is no longer viable.
We may have a different point of view on local abattoirs because we have perhaps too many factories for the amount of production. We had an interesting meeting on Monday with the meat exporters' association and we spoke about the prices farmers get for their produce. Unfortunately it is a buyers market so factories have an advantage over the farming community - if they do not have enough stock from Northern Ireland they can import stock from the north of England and Scotland. This creates resentment among farmers and I would support a rationalisation of some factories. However, I would not necessarily agree with my Department funding this process. There is a difference of opinion on this.
Someone mentioned producer groups, which I think are very important. If farming is to have a future farmers must work together and have strength in numbers. If they can form co-operatives and share resources, experiences, expertise and labour, they could have a stronger voice. One of the successful groups is the Aberdeen angus quality assured scheme, which has managed to negotiate better benefits and rewards and has a good working relationship with the Foyle Meats factory. When the supply chain works well it is a win-win situation for everyone.
This brings me to the point on harmonisation. We need this and agriculture is poised for it. Deputy Andrew Doyle mentioned a pilot scheme and no other area of work on the island is better suited to it, with the possible exception of the roads issue. We must find ways for North and South to work together. I ask what the point of view in the South is on every issue that crosses my desk. I believe we will see changes in how the island is managed over the next generation and I feel we should ensure farmers prepare for this now. Farmers are enthusiastic about the work that needs to be done and the support needed. This is why we established a North-South unit. There are nine working groups in the area of animal health and the officials in the Department are working on every issue. These officials have a good working relationship with their counterparts in Dublin and we would like to see this enhanced.
The Brazilian beef issue helped with prices but this was offset by higher input costs; the prices of meal, fuel and fertiliser went up. The Brazilian beef issue has been less of a benefit than one might have thought but if it was still available and competing with our products more farmers would have gone out of business. We are glad that this has been resolved and we will keep a close eye on the matter.
In terms of the disease brucellosis, we have work to do. South Armagh is a high incidence area and it was the first place we held a farmers' meeting to seek farmers to help to eradicate the disease. We had officials from the Department, our vets and vets from the South. We invited a vet from County Louth to talk about how it had been done on one side of the Border and how we could learn from that experience. Again, we will use the experience on the island to help us help our farmers.
With regard to bluetongue, we have agreed to buy the vaccine in case the disease does strike. With the north Antrim case in February, it was a fraught and difficult time for all concerned, most especially for the farmer involved, but we worked well with the industry which we asked to come out and support us in the work we were doing on the ban. There was close co-operation between Ministers, North and South. We pushed the boat out in the European Union — we did not think we would secure an amendment to EU Regulation 1266/2007, but we did. We proved that Ireland, as a nation, could punch above its weight in changing things in Europe and making things better.
My final point is on the issue of food security. We are an exporting nation and export the majority of our foodstuffs. Food security has perhaps not grasped the imagination in Ireland as much as it might have. However, we are only 150-odd years from a famine. We cannot ignore the issue or become complacent. While we are seeing an increase in food prices around the world, aspects such as the cheap food policy in Britain are driving down prices and making things difficult for our farming community. We have to keep a close eye on this and must work closely together. Ireland is feeding Europe and the world. We export milk to more than 100 countries from Northern Ireland alone. This is something of which we should be proud. Much of that milk, in its powdered form, is going to some of the poorest people in the world. Because it is such a good, high quality, grass-reared product it provides valuable nutrition for people around the world. We cannot take it for granted that food will always be freely available in this country. There has been a difference of opinion in that the point of view in DEFRA has been that the United Kingdom is a wealthy country and can buy or import food, whereas we are an exporting nation — we are a food producing nation — and need to keep it that way.
I hope I have tried to cover all the issues raised. I take the opportunity to thank everyone for coming. I have enjoyed the meeting.
I am afraid I must leave in a minute——
Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP
That is why I was rushing.
I thank Ms Gildernew.
I asked a question that Ms Gildernew perhaps answered in her earlier presentation which unfortunately I missed. It related to the level of policy discretion with regard to the devolution process from London. For example, can Northern Ireland have a milk quota regime separate from that of Great Britain? Is the role one of advising or administering?
Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP
It depends on the issue. With sheep double-tagging, we have taken a very different route from those taken by England, Scotland and Wales, but are often bound by the position taken in DEFRA. That is where the robustness in the relationship comes in - we have a different point of view and will say we want to see it reflected in DEFRA's policies. However, that does not always happen. There are difficulties in the relationship in terms of where we need to go to help our farmers, which is not the way DEFRA sees it. We cannot separate out. While the current administrative system in Ireland is in place, there will be disadvantages for farmers in the North due to being attached to the United Kingdom. That is as delicately as I can put it.
I am happy to take other questions.
On behalf of the joint committee, I thank Ms Gildernew for attending and her interesting remarks. We appreciated her presentation and the manner in which she answered queries from all members. I stress the importance of such meetings with Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly, as they provide an opportunity for an exchange of views between parliamentarians, which is very welcome. I wish Ms Gildernew well later in the year and hope everything goes well for her. I also hope we will have further meetings. I thank her for her invitation to attend the Balmoral Show next year. I hope the clerk to the committee will keep it in the diary to ensure we will be available. Unfortunately, with the Lisbon treaty referendum and so forth, it was a difficult time to do anything at short notice. I thank Ms Gildernew and her officials for attending.
Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP
I am delighted to be here and would be delighted to come back. This has been a useful exchange of views and there is still much to discuss. I accept that we only scratched the surface today. If there is any help that I or my officials can give to the committee, we would be delighted to do so. I look forward to having a close working relationship with it.