Tipperary farm leader says Government plan on climate action will be ‘very challenging’

The country’s farming organisations have described the Government’s climate change action plan as “challenging” and “demanding” for the farm sector.

The plan was announced this Monday by the Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar and Minister for Climate Action Richard Bruton.

The Tipperary president of ICMSA Pat McCormack said that the targets for reduction in farming-related emission were “very challenging” but farmers were - and would increasingly be seen - as part of the solution to this issue.

He said that his organisation accepted the need for change, and he urged the Government to fully support and underwrite the development of real renewable options that would make a critical contribution to our climate change commitments.

Mr McCormack said that the Government’s previous efforts on renewables had fallen short and had, in some cases, left farmers who had invested in equipment “high and dry” when incentives and schemes were discontinued.

That could not happen again, he said.

The ICMSA leader said that farmers understood the extent of the challenge that they must help in meeting, but he wondered whether other links in the food supply chain, or, indeed, the consumers, understood fully that changes envisaged will - and certainly should - mean higher food prices that reflect the additional costs of farming and food production.

“Farmers will play our part but it’s up to the Government to drive and incentivise the policies. That has to mean real support for renewables and carbon mitigation efforts with the Government actively helping by giving farmers options and not just standing back while issuing targets, deadlines and penalties”, Mr McCormack said.

IFA president Joe Healy said the targets were “very demanding” for agriculture.

While the Teagasc roadmap can play its part in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the targets require focused policy actions. We needed a committed, whole Government approach to the Teagasc roadmap, he said.

“The critical issue for farm families is that our low-carbon agrifood sector, which is Ireland’s largest indigenous sector, is fully recognised and not jeopardised by this climate plan,” he said.

On dairy farming, Mr Healy said that the removal of quotas in 2015 had released pent-up demand for expansion.

While this had an effect on emissions, it has also had a very positive impact for farm families and rural Ireland.

“We must not forget that we are the most carbon efficient country in Europe for dairy production. Any restrictions here would lead to an increase in production in less carbon efficient regions,” he said.

Suckler farming is Ireland’s largest enterprise and contributed hugely to the rural economy. Reducing the suckler herd would have huge consequences for the economic and social sustainability of rural Ireland, said the IFA leader.

“Farmers cannot understand why the EU is hellbent on doing a trade deal with South America which will see more Brazilian beef coming into Europe. Beef from Brazil has four times the carbon footprint of beef from Ireland,” he pointed out.

IFA will study the plan and will discuss it with relevant committees and at its national council meeting on July 9.

ICSA general secretary Eddie Punch also said that the plan will be “very challenging” for the agriculture sector.

However, he said that farmers will always respond to the right incentives.

“ICSA believes that it makes much more sense to produce livestock in a sustainable way from Irish grassland rather than relocate it to South America where the potential environmental impact of increased productivity is much more damaging,” he said.

Nonetheless, the requirement to achieve a 10-15% reduction in agricultural emissions by 2030 will not be easy. Livestock farming systems have very low profitability and any extra cost cannot be carried by farm families. Some reductions in emissions can coincide with improved economic efficiency however.”

“We also need to look at policies to ensure that farmers who engage in best practice from an environmental point of view are rewarded. For example, future agri-environment schemes need to be a lot more like REPS and a lot less like GLAS in terms of ensuring that those who participate are paid for their costs and for their labour,” he said.