Reducing the carbon output of farming is only one of the environmental objectives. We must tackle carbon emisisons along with improving biodiversity, and soil, water and air quality, so for me, I look at addressing it holistically.

There is massive potential for adaptation. You look at the work Teagasc has done and are doing.

I came across a table a couple of weeks ago that was amazing – at 2.5lu/ha they could reduce artificial fertiliser to almost nothing by using clover swards.

Low-emission spreading reduces slurry emissions by 25% per hectare. Ultimately, we need to look at emissions per hectare, rather than on a per kilo of output.

We will have sequestration on peatlands on a per-hectare basis – that is a clearer measure of the full environmental impact of farming.

Ultimately, we need to look at emissions per hectare, rather than on a per kilo of output

We need a land survey to assess how our land is being utilised. That is crucial, particularly to address the health of our soils.

Biodiversity

Biodiversity is increasingly focused on the animals living in the soil as well as over the ground. It is a less visible issue, but the ecosystem is interconnected – we have to fix it all.

Farmers love REPS, it was a far more valuable programme, and it was a simple programme.

This will have to be a simple programme, but it will have to deliver for the environment. You will read critiques of previous REPS programmes and GLAS. They didn’t really cut the mustard with a lot of environmentalists or ecologists.

We have to make sure that this one does deliver. The review of the Greening measures within CAP showed that it hadn’t achieved anything really, and that’s awful.

This will have to be a simple programme, but it will have to deliver for the environment

It’s not the fault of the farmers, some of the schemes have been poorly designed. Some of the measures under GLAS were, I felt, fundamentally wrong, and angered environmentalists.

We need buy-in, not just from farmers, but also from the environmental side. We have to bridge that gap. Ultimately, it’s about securing a future for our land, our countryside, and the people in it.

We need a deep review of the nitrates programme. I appreciate that farmers availing of the derogation are subject to far more rules and rigour, but ultimately the measure is there to protect our waterways and, if we find that we are falling short, we have to question if the regulations are achieving what they are meant to be achieving.

We need buy-in, not just from farmers, but also from the environmental side

It will be relatively easy to check. We know the areas of intensive production and the EPA can check the rivers in the high-density dairy areas.

The other things about the derogation farms, that while I know they are highly productive, but they are huge emitters. They are emitting huge volumes of methane and nitrous oxide. If you push production out to the edge of the land’s capabilites, you are getting into difficult territory there.

The CAP is in part an income support, but it has to bring farmers to a better way of farming, and that is reflected in the plans for eco-measures in both pillars.

Irish government policy is now aligning with that trend.