I was talking in general about the social costs and implications of changes to rural communities, particularly where there is a decline in the population, and the questions they raise. To what extent will we allow what is happening to continue, for instance, the cost to rural towns of the growth of our cities and particularly the inordinate growth in the Dublin region and the eastern seaboard extending to counties Wicklow, Kildare, Louth and Meath? Will the Dublin area continue to be allowed to expand at its current rate? Looking at the implications of that, does it mean that as cities, and in particular Dublin, grow, is the rest of the country to be a kind of weekend playground where an affluent middle class go to breathe fresh air and take their children to see real animals? Are tourism and recreation to be only non-agricultural sources of employment outside Dublin and the larger cities?
It does not have to be like that. We can and must make choices to halt rural decline and ensure that rural communities do not suffer the worst effects of the trends we are witnessing. Rural communities are far too important for that to be allowed to happen to them.
The choices that have to be made include a deliberate policy of bringing jobs to rural towns. I referred earlier to what appears to be the current IDA and Government policy of bringing large scale employment to cities such as Limerick, Galway, Cork, Dublin and its hinterland including Leixlip, at the expense of rural towns. I have carried out some investigation on this matter and, without going into it in great detail, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility to bring jobs to towns such as Nenagh, Thurles, Templemore and Roscrea. It would require a policy change as well as more work and a different style of approach by agencies such as the IDA. Shannon Development and other agencies are doing great work in that regard, but they need more Government support.
Rural areas are ideally placed to take advantage of the potential of the information superhighway, which simply requires a high level of investment in technology which, in the long run, will pay great dividends. The global village can be as real in Rearcross as in any of our bigger towns and cities. Rural communities deserve to have as much access to the information superhighway, its positive spin offs and benefits by way of jobs and investment as any other part of the country.
Another point that should be taken on board with regard to halting decline, promoting investment and developing a policy of rural renewal, is recognising the importance of the social economy. This was referred to in the NESF report on combating social exclusion in rural Ireland. It talks about rural community employment programmes — a subject which comes up on a weekly basis. The report recommends, on page 69, that such programmes should be upgraded to the highest level of training and work experience and that this should be a priority for FÁS. It talks about the importance and potential of the social economy. This has been taken up in Partnership 2000 and is the subject of a working group whose report and recommendations I look forward to receiving.
Community employment schemes are of huge importance in areas such as Silvermines, for example, where the traditional mining industry has ceased leaving behind a largely male workforce now in its late 40s or early 50s. Because this workforce is unskilled it does not get the opportunity to partake in the normal economy. Community employment schemes provide an opportunity, particularly to men who have become unemployed through changes in the employment market, to play a role in their locality. Whether the type of work is with tidy towns competitions or the GAA, graveyards, heritage or schools, it is of huge value to those individuals and to the community of which they are a part. Not a week goes by when I do not hear from somebody asking why they have to leave such a scheme after three years or take a break after six months?
Because of the major changes in employment where we do not see the same levels of unemployment or labour market conditions, the Government should consider a change in policy by FÁS in relation to community employment schemes. Such a policy change might involve a pool of workers in a community who get their share of such schemes and do not necessarily come off them after three years because there is no value in doing so.
The younger workforce is, happily, largely employed. Those younger people who are unemployed have a different set of needs that must be dealt with by training. That would recognise the value of the social economy in rural areas and I intend to pursue the matter at a different level in the future. I will be seeking the working group's report when it is published.
Increasingly the farming community will have to take on the notion of partnership with the non-farming community in relation to two issues — consumers and the environment. The BSE crisis showed us the extent to which our agricultural industry is dependent upon the vagaries of the consumer in the supermarket. It demonstrated the need for a partnership approach between the agricultural community and the consumer not only to the issue of food quality but also in the battles ahead to support our agricultural communities.
We know there will be compensation and that has been signalled, but it will be on the same basis as assistance which is offered to all other sectors across the EU both urban, which are growing, and rural, which are in decline. If a townsperson loses his or her job, the compensation package is not offered to every dweller. In the rest of the community those in need of help are identified and helped directly. Large groups are not generally subsidised, only when some of their members are poor. There are far too many other demands on the EU's purse to provide computers for the nation's schoolchildren or to cut hospital waiting lists, yet these are the competing demands against which farmers will be fighting.
It is especially true in this country, where so many people are from a rural background, that the wider community is willing to help farmers who need assistance to adjust to a new world agricultural order. However, permanent subsidies will not be on offer for much longer and the farming community will have to adjust to that fact.
By selling the highest quality food both here and abroad we can show the non-agricultural community that working together benefits the whole economy. We cannot take agriculture in isolation, we must see the issue as a whole.
Eutrophication of water supplies in our lakes and rivers is a side effect of greater agricultural production. This is an issue throughout the country, particularly in north Tipperary, where Lough Derg has suffered over the years. I welcome the campaign by Teagasc, an independent research body, to reduce the amount of phosphates in our waterways. Figures published by Teagasc show that farmers are using up to 30,000 tonnes of excess phosphate every year at an overall national cost of £25 million. This means that in some cases farmers would not need to apply phosphate for four to five years. This campaign operates on the basis of supporting farmers. This issue must be tackled. I hope that farmers work in partnership with the wider community and that we do not have to penalise them for overuse of phosphates and for causing pollution.
We are not facing up to the need for an integrated policy on rural renewal. This must be our aim for the future. Any discussion of the Santer proposals or any other EU proposals for change must be seen in the context of halting the decline in rural communities and meeting the needs of not just those engaged in agriculture but those dependent on them.
