The Irish Natura and Hill Farmers Association (INHFA) has called for greater consistency from both the Department of Agriculture and other farm organisations regarding funding for environmental measures.

The move comes as the finalised CAP proposals look set to go before cabinet over the next week, ahead of being submitted to the European Commission in Brussels by the end of the month.

Amid rumours of a major lobby to reduce the 25% allocation of Pillar I funding for eco schemes, the INHFA said retaining the current level of environmental supports was crucial for the credibility of the overall CAP package.

ADVERTISEMENT

Ambition

“The INHFA does not want to see any backsliding on the 25% figure for eco schemes,” said INHFA president Vincent Roddy.

“Regarding the environmental ambition of the new CAP programme, there needs to be greater consistency from Government in policy terms and at farmer level on this issue,” Roddy added.

“As farmers, and farm representatives, we can’t on the one hand be demanding high payments in Pillar II to deliver on the environmental ambition of the CAP programme, while at the same time looking to reduce the level of support for environmental measures in Pillar I. There is no consistency in that approach,” he said.

The INHFA leader said CAP had to deliver for the environment in both Pillar I through eco schemes and in Pillar II through a strongly funded agri environment climate measure.

Retrograde

He maintained that it would be a retrograde step to reduce the 25% share of Pillar I that is currently earmarked for eco schemes.

“As farmers, we don’t need short-term, quick-fix thinking at this point. That approach has dogged and undermined CAP in this, and previous, reforms,” Roddy said.

The recent decision by Minister for Agriculture Charlie McConalogue to extend the number of eco-scheme measures has been broadly welcomed.

However, many commercial farmers, particularly tillage operators, still view eco schemes as a form of convergence.

They contend that recouping one-quarter of their Pillar I payment through eco schemes will either be extremely difficult or will not justify the required level of investment in terms of land or time.