Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD díospóireacht -
Friday, 1 Oct 2010

Reform of Common Agricultural Policy: Discussion

Apologies have been received from Deputies Martin Ferris, Mattie McGrath, Christy O'Sullivan and Senator Francis O'Brien. On behalf of the members of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food I welcome the EU Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mr. Dacian Ciolos, and the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Brendan Smith, to our meeting.

We appreciate the Commissioner's attendance this morning to address the committee on the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, post-2013. I also welcome the ambassador from Romania and the Irish MEPs in the Visitor's Gallery. We are all aware of the enormous challenge facing Europe currently and the importance of the reform of the CAP in this context. We are equally mindful of the importance of CAP at national level given that agriculture and agri-food sectors support employment for 250,000 people across the rural economy. In addition, the CAP supports the family farm structure and it is a vital income support tool for Irish farmers, contributing approximately €1.7 billion in 2009.

I look forward to our discussion today and I compliment the Commissioner on his personal input into the debate on the CAP. I understand he is visiting a number of member states and I attended a conference he chaired in Brussels last July, listening with interest to the wide-ranging views expressed by the participants on the challenges beyond 2013 and the proposals put forward for this important European policy.

At this stage I mention that the committee is currently finalising a report on the reform of CAP after 2013 which will be copied to the Commissioner. We hope he will take account of the committee's recommendations in advance of the Commission publishing its communication paper in November. Before I call on the Commissioner to address the committee, I ask the Minister, Deputy Brendan Smith, to say a few words.

I join the Chairman in welcoming the Commissioner to this meeting of the joint committee and I thank him for visiting Ireland. He is a former and valued colleague of mine from the Council of Ministers and I am aware of his deep knowledge and understanding of European agriculture. I am also aware that he is a good listener and somebody who is genuinely interested to hear the views of all stakeholders in the agri-food sector on the shaping of a reformed CAP. He demonstrated this clearly in the extensive and very successful consultation process he undertook earlier this year and in now visiting member states to hear directly what key national players have to say. It will come as no surprise that Ireland wants to see a strong and properly funded EU agricultural policy into the future. The CAP can continue to play a vital role in ensuring a supply of high-quality safe food for our consumers while supporting sustainable production systems and rural communities.

It is important to ensure adequate recognition for the high standards that apply to agriculture production within the European Union. I am also committed to further simplification of our support systems. A primary role of pillar one payments in future should be the support of farm income, with direct payments stabilising incomes at farm level and market management measures establishing a safety net in the market. This support and stabilisation will, in turn, underpin farming activity and therefore security of food supply. It will also support the viability of family farms, which are the essential platform for the production of public goods in most European countries.

We also need to maintain an appropriate balance between income support and payment for public goods in the two pillars. The CAP should not be exclusively about one or the other. We support pillar one decoupled payments as the best means of income support for family farms and we have fully decoupled since 2005, ahead of most other member states in this respect. During very difficult market conditions last year we saw clearly just how important our decoupled single farm payments were in providing some level of income stability to farmers. Continuing with these payments into the future is essential for Irish agriculture and the Government will resolutely pursue this objective in the upcoming negotiations, where it is clear there will be discussion of the distribution of funds between member states.

With regard to the distribution of funds within member states, we favour allowing member states flexibility in the area, as is currently the case. The ecological and social conditions of farming vary significantly within the Union, as does the political debate about the justification for farm payments.

The core purpose of rural development policy is to support farmers in developing their productive capacity while securing the environment and ensuring the well-being of the wider rural society. In pillar two we should focus in particular on supporting competitiveness and innovation in European agriculture through appropriate measures. We should promote sustainability in all its dimensions and reward farmers for the public goods they produce.

I favour the continuation of important elements of national flexibility in the payment models under pillar one and in the measures adopted from a menu of options in pillar two. That said, we must ensure that future agricultural policy retains its common and unified approach.

Commissioner Dacian Ciolos

Chairman, Minister, honourable members of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, I am very happy to be here and have the opportunity for a frank exchange of ideas about the future of the Common Agricultural Policy. I know we share at least two fundamental ideas. First, the EU agriculture sector needs a strong Common Agricultural Policy and second, a heavy purse makes light heart, as we can see in Ireland. We need to work on the issue together.

Before getting into the debate, allow me to give a brief overview of where we stand with the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. As has been mentioned, a broad public debate on the future of the Common Agricultural Policy ended in July. The debate received a high level of response, not just from farmers — which is important — but also from think tanks, non-governmental organisations, environmental protection organisations, development and consumer rights bodies and so on.

During the public debate, in response to questions on why we need a Common Agricultural Policy, various contributions identified seven major challenges. I will share these with members. They are food security, the competitiveness of our agriculture, globalisation, environmental challenge, territorial balance, diversity and the simplicity of the CAP.

Based on our discussions at the conference and with member states we can summarise the main objectives of the CAP into three main priorities. The first is food production. We still need to have a strong capacity to ensure food production in terms of quantity, quality and diversity. The sustainable management of natural resources is an important element also, not alone for society but for farmers in whose interest it is, economically speaking, to have a high quality of soil, water and biodiversity. The third objective is the maintenance of the social fabric and landscape of rural areas, or territorial balance. The future of the Common Agricultural Policy can contribute to these three main objectives of food security, management of natural resources and territorial balance.

I shall say a few extra words about some of these challenges. Regarding food production, it is clear we need to ensure capacity and the supply of our internal market but in addition the European Union must contribute to the supply of food at international level, especially taking into account the FAO forecasts. Global food demand will increase by more than 50% in the coming years until 2030. We also have a responsibility towards the citizens of the world and to not create problems by way of our CAP for other regions as they develop their own agricultural policies.

The European Union should not become too dependent on imports. We all agree on this. Members will know what happened this summer on the international markets when, due to a decrease in cereal production, Russia decided to impose a ban on exports. There is no risk for Europe at this stage, thanks to our Common Agricultural Policy, but we must be careful in the future not to be in a situation where we base our food supply too much on importation thereby running the risk of a food crisis and not being able to ensure our food supply.

On international trade, I ask members to allow me one digression. I am well aware of their concerns relating to the relaunched negotiations with MERCOSUR. Last May the Commission as a whole decided it was worth restarting talks with MERCOSUR countries, estimating that it would be a net gain to the European economy. The progress is not fast. Aware of the concerns expressed — not least Irish concerns — about the impact this agreement could have on certain sectors of our agriculture, I have called for a more detailed up-to-date analysis of costs. I want to make it clear I am not ready to make a proposal on these negotiations before we receive this analysis on the impact a potential agreement would have. However, whatever happens with MERCOSUR, my intention is to make sure we have sufficient mechanisms in place to support vulnerable European producers. I am aware also that we cannot take risks with this kind of agreement that might make agriculture disappear in some regions. We have certain limits regarding these potential negotiations; some red lights which we must respect. I do not think we can ignore the fact that we expend a great deal of money from the European budget to support agriculture in certain regions because it is important for our citizens, and then destroy this with trade agreements. Members can be sure I will be very careful in this regard.

I have absolutely no doubt that agriculture can provide a major response to several challenges the European Union faces, not only in the area of food security but also in environmental challenges, climate change, biodiversity loss and water scarcity. In their activities, farmers can provide answers to these challenges to society. In the future, the Common Agricultural Policy must be an instrument for farmers, giving them the possibility of providing answers to the new challenges for society.

We have to maintain our production capacity in all regions of Europe and cannot concentrate agricultural production only in certain favourable regions. With the CAP, we must give instruments to member states and the regions in order that they will be able to maintain agriculture in all regions, taking into account the specificity of each region. I do not really like to talk about natural handicaps because that would mean some regions have handicaps while others are more favourable for agriculture. All regions in Europe are favourable for agriculture. We simply must provide instruments so that we can maintain this production capacity in all European regions. Ireland is a very good example. With its extensive agriculture it is also able to be competitive in the markets, having, of course, certain specific instruments that support farmers. Members can be sure than in the future we will try to maintain and develop this kind of instrument.

I wish to underline my opinion that any future Common Agricultural Policy must be maintained with two strong pillars that are complementary. We cannot have a good pillar and a bad pillar, reinforce the good pillar and weaken the bad one. We must have two good pillars that are complementary. Direct payments are crucial for the future of European agriculture. The direct payments of today are income support for farmers. The principle of maintaining this pillar is not for discussion. We must also consider how we can place this first pillar more in line with specific situations in the 27 EU member states and with the diversity of agriculture while ensuring a clear complementarity between this first pillar of direct payments and the second pillar. We must also ensure a more equitable repartition of the budget for direct payments. We discussed this issue with the Minister this morning. My intention is not to make a revolution in this direction but to have an evolution in order to be more clear regarding the expectations made by our contribution and to have a clear justification for this first pillar.

Preserving the diversity of our agriculture does not mean reactivating national policies to the detriment of EU policy. The renationalisation of the CAP is not acceptable because this would destabilise the only truly integrated European policy. That is why we must give flexibility to the regions and member states but must maintain this coherence at European level and maintain the Common Agricultural Policy as a real common agricultural policy.

Direct payments must be seconded by a strong package of market measures. In this regard we need to maintain a strong safety net to give the market the possibility of playing this role but also to have the capacity to act when the market fails and to avoid loss of income for farmers. That is why we must not only maintain a strong market measures package with the possibility of intervention to avoid crisis but must also develop a parallel system in order to solve the problem of volatility of both prices and incomes of farmers. I am open to proposals and opinions but it is clear that we will propose some new instruments in this direction.

I thank the Commissioner for his address to the committee. I propose to take all the members and then he can reply. Is that agreed? Agreed. Before I call on Deputy Doyle I ask members to be brief because an enormous number of members have indicated that they want to speak.

I thank the Commissioner for taking the time to come here. We are involved in a co-decision process and to be fair the Commissioner has to visit and get the perspective of every country. Many of us sing from the same hymn sheet, trying to defend CAP, which is a victim of its own success, in so far as it has done what it was designed to do, namely, provide a stable food supply and support rural communities. It has come to the stage that food is taken for granted. In terms of social responsibilities, Europe will always get food but it will get it at the expense of other poorer parts of the world if we do not supply enough ourselves. Fundamentally, we have to produce as much food as we can.

From the Irish perspective, we are unique in so far as that within the European Union we are a reservoir of food. Mr. Ciolos mentioned food security. We can produce food in an environmentally friendly way here. It is our only real natural resource. Today we received a document from the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Innovation on what is required to expand employment in the agrifood sector. One thing which is required is that it is not jeopardised by too much trauma to the system in a reformed CAP which might undermine us before we start.

The nuts and bolts of the issue are that we have to maintain our national envelope based on payments we received historically. We produce in a very high cost economy which is not the case across Europe. There are parts of the expanded union which have lower costs and if a flat rate was to pertain it would give a competitive advantage to other countries. As a country that needs to export 80% of what it produces which, as the Minister said, supports 250,000 jobs, we cannot afford the destabilisation of our industry. It is critical.

It supports rural communities. It gives an edge to the rural family farm structure as opposed to an alternative model, which is not the European objective and never was. We have to make the case for it within the EU. I appreciate that as the Commissioner for Agriculture Mr. Ciolos has to defend CAP within the Commission. It is uniquely important in that context for Ireland. It allows for the protection of the environment and biodiversity. For all those reasons we agree that we will negotiate from an Irish perspective to defend our payments as they were and to work from there. As I said before, to destabilise it would seriously undermine it.

On rural development, the menu of options needs to be expanded. One area we see as being vital in the context of carbon emissions is that forestry would be funded through rural development, especially if forestry is allowed to be a carbon sequester and people are credited or paid for it. It becomes an income stream. I will leave it at that.

I again thank the Commissioner. I know he made a speech some time ago on market distortion. Retailers across Europe, in particular in smaller countries where a couple of big retailers can control the market, are controlling prices. Ten years ago the primary producer got 30% of the end price product but today it is 20%, therefore 10% has been raided somewhere in the system to the detriment of the primary and smaller producer.

I too welcome the Commissioner. It is heartening to see him and to hear his views. It is important that we hear those views and that he gets some sense of the Irish position. I am a member of the Labour Party, which is on the left, and it should be worth noting that our party would take the view that the envelope must be preserved if possible. The justification for that is that if there is a growth in the global population from 6 billion to 9 billion between now and 2050, depending on which figures one believes — it is a massive rate of growth nonetheless — then the challenges for the European Union bloc will be to feed itself and to export.

We import approximately €78 billion in food imports, therefore it seems to me that the logical position, notwithstanding the economic downturns we face at the current time, is that we must ramp up investment in ensuring that we can have a market for foodstuffs and that we can guarantee that we avoid the food scarcity the Commissioner spoke about.

The Irish model of agriculture is one whereby the public goods are built in, in the sense of the quality of the output and much work has been done in recent years in regard to environmental measures and so on. I am encouraged by what the Commissioner said regarding direct payments when he said they are crucial and that it will be an evolution and not a revolution. There is concern here, particularly when we face such a massive deficit in the public finances, that if there is a major retrenchment in the agricultural model or agrifood sector, it could further undermine an area where there is great potential for growth. If we look at theburgeoning Asian middle classes, where certain tastes have developed, we are well placed to meet significant demand for food exports. We need the assistance, however, to carry out that multiplier and if there is retrenchment in the envelope, it could impede our prospects.

We are mindful that the Commissioner faces challenges with our eastern European neighbours. They will be ironed out in due course but if we are talking about global food scarcity and the massive increases in global population, if we can preserve the envelope, we will be well placed to benefit and to add value to the EU bloc.

I too welcome the Commissioner before the committee on his first visit to Ireland. The bilateral talks with the MERCOSUR countries of South America will have an impact on the EU, particularly on Ireland, which exports 90% of its products. The talks have been under way since May. What is the Commissioner's opinion of those talks and the impact they will have on the EU and on Ireland?

Post 2013, how does the Commissioner see the budget going? It is a major question with negotiations currently under way. In 1985, 75% of the EU budget went to support agriculture. It is projected by 2013 that figure will have fallen to 39.3%. What is the future for the budget?

What impact will the new member states have on the old member states? The average farm size in the Commissioner's home country of Romania is 2.5 hectares. We have many small farms here that also depend on CAP support.

Deputy Doyle spoke about the mark up multiples are getting on produce here. The farmer gets around 25% of product price while he must carry 100% of the cost to get the product to where it is. This is an EU-wide problem, we met the former Commissioner and she accepted this was a problem across the EU. We must take this on, cut down on the profit being made by multiples and give more back to the primary producer.

Ireland produces green, environmentally friendly products that are grass-fed. With the population increases over the next ten years, we have a golden opportunity, with CAP support, to provide good food in an environmentally friendly way at a good price.

I welcome the Commissioner. I note from his CV that he was manager of the local rural development project in Romania in 1998 and 1999. In an article inThe Irish Times on Tuesday, three Ministers stated that they would ask the Commissioner to allow them to remove money from the Leader programme and give it to other Departments. With his background in local development, what is his opinion of that? We have seen a massive decline in sheep numbers. Does the Commissioner have any specific proposals for sheep production?

The two major agricultural businesses here today are dairy and beef and they drive employment in rural areas. Last year we saw a desperate situation in the dairy industry in Ireland where milk prices dropped dramatically. What support will the dairy industry have in the future with the expansion that is about to take place that will increase quotas? We can compare this to the situation in the south Atlantic, where New Zealand produces 15 million tonnes of milk while we produce 5 million tonnes. We are a grass-based country, practically all organic, which is in our favour.

We are the largest exporters of beef in the European Union but beef farmers face difficult times. The winter feeding system is under threat because of the high price of feed. If we lose that, the industry will become very inefficient. Those are the two areas we should look at because they are the drivers of the agricultural economy on this island.

When we reviewed the CAP last time, there were 170,000 farmers but today there are only 120,000. I recognise that there will be change and while I will not say we will not accept it, we would like to see a review that will be favourable to Ireland because it has lost its sugar beet industry, which was of major importance to tillage and cereal farmers and was a major employer. We have suffered and although we are the most pro-European country of all, we are entitled to special recognition in the European Union for certain areas in agriculture.

I welcome the Commissioner. When I was first elected to the Oireachtas, his country was on the other side of the Berlin Wall and now here he is as EU Commissioner for Agriculture. It shows how history evolves.

This is a time of grave economic difficulty for Ireland. We have a duty to impress on the Commissioner the importance of agriculture to economic activity here. Rural development programmes were mentioned but the family farm in Ireland was always the biggest generator of jobs in rural areas. We want to emphasise the need to keep the family farm at the centre of thinking in Europe.

The CAP has been a victim of its own success. The CAP needs a good PR manager because we must remind the citizens of Europe that for a small tax of €100 per annum, the CAP guarantees to every citizen in Europe sufficient food of high quality. That is central to the defence of the CAP. There is too much talk of the policy costing 40% of the EU budget. We must place it in the context of the broader sphere of European economic activity, where the costs are very small overall. The current system works. We need to ensure that Ireland keeps its current level of European Union funding for agriculture and I wish the Commissioner well in his endeavours to keep the CAP integral and central to the policy of Europe. It is the most successful European policy ever, let us not forget.

I welcome the Commissioner on this, his first visit. I hope he will be back again in the future. I agree fully with everything that has been said. The main thing is that Ireland protects its envelope. That is the main priority, and I ask him to keep it in mind.

On the trade agreement, I remind the Commissioner that the average farm in Ireland is around 20 hectares, so we have similar problems to those of the smallholders in his native Romania. He should keep in mind that farming is not only a small business but also a way of life. I ask that everything be done to protect such smallholdings and that way of life and that the Commissioner bears this in mind during the trade agreement negotiations.

I too, welcome the Commissioner this morning. This is a crucial visit for the man who is in charge of agriculture in Europe, to hear about our direct approach to agricultural production in Europe. It is of paramount importance that the CAP is preserved, for Irish farmers. Maintenance of the CAP budget and the protection of Ireland's national envelope is vital. On payments to support active farmers and production, the historical model achieved this in Ireland, as confirmed by the production figurers. Ireland has a perfect climate for food production, and thank God we are availing of it to the best of our abilities, not forgetting the aid from Europe over the past 30 years. This has contributed in an immense way to agricultural development here.

Agriculture is the primary natural resource in Ireland, and is of crucial importance along with fishing and tourism. Unfortunately we cannot grow citrus fruits as we are ten degrees too far north from the equator and neither can we contribute to a wine lake. However, we import a considerable amount of wine from Europe which is for sale in Irish supermarkets. Be that as it may, the Commissioner has come here to listen to our agricultural problems. It is vital to our farmers that the CAP continues. Otherwise they will founder in their efforts to provide agricultural produce for export to Europe.

The population of Europe will increase by more than 50% over the next 30 years, it is said. It is vital that as much food as possible is produced within the confines of Europe because, as the Commissioner knows, adverse climatic conditions, as seen this year in Russia and elsewhere, can give rise to scarcity. Therefore, we must take steps to safeguard food production in the European Union. It is vitally important that the Commissioner leaves us with the firm conviction that agriculture is the primary industry in Ireland. We hope to contribute to the bread basket of Europe in a big way in the years to come.

I welcome the Commissioner. Practically everything has been said, but I emphasise that the national envelope is very important to Ireland. As already outlined we export up to 85% of our produce. Given the right circumstances, we could produce more to ensure food security in Europe. I ask the Commissioner to take special cognisance of the fact that Ireland has family farms that are green and environmentally friendly. It is important that they are kept in place.

I very much welcome the Commissioner. We appreciate EU support for our most important indigenous industry. We have many multinational companies producing high-tech goods and pharmaceuticals for export, but indigenous food and fisheries are critical for Ireland's future economic and social development. I co-founded a business in a kitchen just over 20 years ago, a micro-food industry that now employs 200 people and exports all over Europe. It is critical that Ireland has the Commissioner's support for the visionary document Food Harvest 2020 which the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Brendan Smith, has introduced on farming. We must have his support on this.

On cattle and milk production, Ireland has the best conditions in the world for beef and dairy products. We do not have intensive farming, as many of our competitors do, and we therefore have to get the message across about Ireland's beautiful brand of pure good quality food.

Sheep farming has declined somewhat, but it is still very important in different parts of the country. I therefore urge the Commissioner, too, to support sheep farming.

I am disappointed the Senator did not bring a box of chocolates for the Commissioner.

I restrained myself, lest if the Chairman saw the brand name I might have been told to leave.

Commissioner Dacian Ciolos

I will attempt to answer as many of the questions as possible. I am now in the process of elaborating orientation as regards future reform. This will be the subject of a document we are to publish on 17 November. It is difficult for me to give the committee much detail on this since the document has not yet been adopted by the Commission. However, members can be sure that as Commissioner for Agriculture I support a strong Common Agricultural Policy for the future. I have launched this public debate to show the citizens and EU decision makers that the CAP is crucially important for all European society, not just farmers.

That is why a strong CAP budget is very justifiable in the future, even within the context of achieving the EU's 2020 strategy. I will try to argue in the document that we cannot attempt to achieve the objectives of the EU 2020 strategy without a strong Common Agricultural Policy, because we need to maintain and create employment in rural areas. This can more easily be achieved with a Common Agricultural Policy. We need to support green growth and innovation to ensure good management of natural resources. This is also in the remit of the Common Agricultural Policy. We also need to protect the European Union from possible food crises and that is why we have to maintain production capacity all over Europe.

Members can be sure of my political support for a strong budget for the Common Agricultural Policy, and a common budget. We must also ensure equilibrate repartition of this budget between member states.

I also emphasise that I do not intend to propose a revolution on this. I do not want to solve the problem on one side of Europe and create a problem on another side of Europe. I would also like to make it clear that while I come from a new member state to Ireland, as European Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development I am not coming to solve the problems of some new member states. I am also aware that if we want to have a credible Common Agricultural Policy, we must take a balanced approach. I am a European first of all and will act as European Commissioner. However, it must also be understood that since enlargement is part of the same envelope, we have had a phasing-in process for new member states because it was not possible for them to base a calculation on historical reference like other member states.

We must now propose a common solution for all 27 member states. We can no longer have two Europes in the Common Agricultural Policy, because that risks affecting the credibility of our capacity to manage the Common Agricultural Policy. That is the reason I have invited all here to an open discussion on the issue, with the objective of achieving a balanced approach, rather than a partisan approach which would divide Europe into different sides. Agriculture in all member states must be the winner at the end of this process. I also understand the importance of the national envelope for Irish agriculture and assure the Minister that he has a strong supporter in the Council of Ministers. We will discuss the issues openly and try to find the best solution in terms of the criteria of repartition and the transitional period for this process.

On the issue of trade, Ireland is an exporter not only to the European market, but also to the world market. The European agrifood industry is the premier exporter of food in the world, but it is also the premier importer. Therefore, this trade is important for us. However, I am not ready to risk the existence of agriculture in some regions or the category of some farmers, which are important for territorial balance, just to increase trade. We need trade, but must evaluate what action to take. We must also take into account in our trade negotiations the specificity of our agriculture and the expectations of our citizens and our contributors. I am here to ensure we take care in this regard.

With regard to the Leader programme, this morning we discussed the rural development programme. I do not remember coming across the kind of request that seeks to move money from Leader to other measures. I understood that Ireland was ready for the programme. Leader is a measure that is meant to use all the allocated money for the Leader programme. I also understood that Ireland gave high importance to this kind of programme. I intend to maintain a strong bottom-up category of programmes like Leader so all here can be assured we will maintain these programmes.

On sheep, I am aware that in many remote and difficult regions, sheep production is an important element not just of food production, but also for maintaining a farming population in these areas and for maintaining biodiversity in the environment. We will try to introduce an instrument that will support this. Perhaps we will even couple some instruments for some regions for specific products so that we support member states in this kind of production in the future in the regions.

We will have a discussion on the dairy sector and in December I intend to propose a legislative package. We will discuss how we can ensure a soft landing, but we must also be careful not to destabilise the markets with the process. We must also take into account the diversity of the situation with regard to milk production in Europe and how important production is in several regions. I understand well Ireland's specific problem and we will discuss the issue before the end of this year. I am also ready to present a report to the Council and the Parliament. If necessary, I am also ready to present new proposals for the milk sector before the end of 2014 and the end of my mandate.

I am aware we must make some movement with regard to the food chain. We have already had communication from the Commission with regard to the repartition of value in the food chain. Unfortunately, this is not only an objective of the Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development. I must also work with the Commissioner for Competition, the Commissioner for Industry and Entrepreneurship who has charge of industrial policy and agri-food industry distribution, and the Commissioner for the Internal Market and Services. However, with regard to the ideas and proposals linked strictly to the Common Agricultural Policy, we will try to bring forward a proposal that will reinforce the bargaining power of farmers and ensure more transparency in the food chain. These two elements will be a step in the right direction.

I think I have covered most of the important issues. The forestry and rural development sector is important with regard to carbon sequestration. With regard to rural development more generally, I intend to put an as large as possible package of measures at the disposal of member states, which will provide flexibility that will allow them take specific situations in their country into account. I also intend to use the multi and pluri-annual approach to rural development in the second pillar in order to deal better with specific situations, including forestry in member states. I hope I have covered everything.

Thank you. There will be no more questions.

Has Mr. Ciolos a response to my question on Brazilian beef and the bilateral talks?

The Deputy should speak through the Chair.

Mr. Dacian Ciolos

I already mentioned that for the moment my objective is to finalise the impact assessment and clarify the impact of the process. Then in the bilateral negotiation with MERCOSUR, we must take into account the proposal already put on the table in the Didier talks to limit and reduce the impact of an eventual bilateral agreement. I do not know if that answers the Deputy's question.

I am conscious of time constraints. The Commissioner can see the level of interest and the importance of agricultural issues to members. I thank him sincerely for addressing the committee and for being so frank in his contribution, replies and exchanges with members. We look forward to the European Commission communication paper at the end of the year. Does the Commissioner wish to make any concluding remarks?

Commissioner Dacian Ciolos

No, only to thank you and the committee for listening to me. This process of contact between the Commissioner and national parliaments and committees is good for me, at least. I can assure the committee that during my mandate I will be at its disposal to discuss any matters it wishes to raise with me.

I thank the Commissioner and his officials and also the Minister, Deputy Brendan Smith, and his officials for their attendance.

The joint committee adjourned at 11 a.m. until 11.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 6 October 2010.
Barr
Roinn