Overall the collapse of WTO benefits the Irish economy

The collapse of the WTO talks is on the whole beneficial for the Irish economy. Certainly some Irish manufacturing and service sectors stood to gain from a WTO deal. However its likely benefits were strongly oversold not alone by some big business interests, but also by certain academics and elements in the media.

Irish proponents of the WTO proposals arrogantly dismissed their overall potential negative influences on the Irish economy. Opponents of the WTO proposals were painted as unpatriotic and representative of selfish agricultural interests.
Some big business interests in Ireland claimed to have concern for the poor of the Third World. Of course they were prepared to wrap themselves in a cloak of concern for the poor in an effort to convince a cynical Irish public of the merits of the WTO proposals.

Concessions made by Peter Mandelson at the WTO talks would have put 50,000 farmers out of business and wiped out at least another 50,000 jobs in food processing and services to the agricultural sector in Ireland alone. Agricultural proposals at the WTO would have benefited large ranchers in Australia, Brazil and the US. There were few if any benefits for the poor farmers of the Third World.

The loss in jobs to the Irish economy and devastation of rural Ireland would have far outweighed any potential gains in some industrial and service sectors. Indeed some Irish service jobs are now moving to India-such as Hibernian Insurance. So much for the security of service jobs in the financial sector.

The 100,000 jobs that Ireland stood to lose are based on indigenous natural resources.
We have had too much of the live horse and you will get grass approach-too many half-baked promises. To sacrifice 100,000 jobs would be economic lunacy.
Thankfully Nicolas Sarkozy galvanised opposition to the proposals. Ireland now owes him a huge debt of gratitude.

Mandelson sell out at WTO talks supported by some Irish businessmen and academics

Irish apologists for a sell out quote press releases on farm incomes from Teagasc (The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority). Even in the worst years for Irish farming Teagasc comes out with a positive spin in relation to Irish farming incomes. Teagasc figures tell half the story. Where for instance is there a reference to rocketing costs? Interest rates, electricity, gas and diesel prices have spiralled out of control. Farm maintenance, insurance and building costs are prohibitive. Government/EU imposed regulation hinder agriculture. Many farmers can no longer afford to purchase fertilizers. That is the reality. It is not spin.

Academics such as Alan Matthews seek to explain away the negative effects of any WTO deal. Matthews needs to get out of his academic ivory tower. His livelihood is not on the line. Irish supporters of the putative WTO deal make references to EU farm subsidies. They conveniently omit to state that these subsidies are paid as a quid pro quo for production cuts. And now Mandelson is supporting more EU agricultural production cuts.

The IFA assessment of the loss of 100,000 jobs is correct. Not alone will many thousands of farmers go out of business, but thousands of jobs in food processing and other spin off industries will go. Rural Ireland will become a desert. Those 100,000 jobs exist at present. So why should we should throw them away for half baked promises of service jobs that we may secure in the future on the back of a new WTO agreement. It is time to get real. Mandelson wiped out the sugar beet industry. Dairying, beef, poultry will now go the same way.

Academics such as Matthews and certain business elements are prepared to throw away food security for cheaper food imports that often lack traceability. No mention of the health of consumers. The majority of Third World farmers will gain nothing from the proposed WTO deal. The ranchers in the US, Brazil and Australia will benefit. Meanwhile the US increases its subsidies to a handful of ranchers whilst EU farmers will be put out of business.

There is no guarantee that Ireland will continue to increase its service employment on the back of a revised WTO deal. Much of this-within the next 10 years-will start moving to countries such as India. Also there is a strong likelihood that the 12.5% Corporation Profits Tax will be neutered by the EU. I say hold what jobs we actually have. These farming jobs are based on our natural resources. An Irish failure to veto Mandelson's proposals -as currently constituted -would be the ultimate in political folly. Prior to the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty Brian Cowen promised Padraig Walshe of the IFA that he would use the veto if necessary. It is time for the VETO.

Mandelson's WTO cuts: Time to use the veto

Mandelson's WTO cuts would result in:

• €4 billion per annum loss to the Irish economy


• 50,000 farmers put out of business


• 50,000 job losses in food processing and agricultural services


• Beef prices of €2/Kg (70p/lb)


• 1 million suckler cows slaughtered


• Milk prices of 24c/litre


• Sheep industry decimated by imports from New Zealand and Australia


• Damaging losses in pigs poultry and grain


• WTO has wiped out the sugar beet industry


• (Source:IFA)

As these statistics indicate Mandelson's concessions at the WTO will destroy rural Ireland and seriously damage the Irish economy. It is time for the Irish Government to use the veto. The Government must not fudge the issue. Failure to block the Mandelson proposals will result in the destruction of Fianna Fail in rural Ireland. Brian Cowen promised to use the veto if necessary in the run up to the Lisbon Treaty referendum.
The arrogant Mandelson has continued to plough ahead oblivious to the needs of the Irish economy. Put manners on him. Use the nuclear option.

Is Nicolas Sarkozy listening to the Irish electorate?

Today Nicolas Sarkozy visited Ireland ostensibly to ascertain the reasons for the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty. In reality he was testing the waters in relation to a second referendum. It was a cosmetic exercise which was designed to varnish his push for a second vote with a lick of consultation. His comments to a party meeting last week - that Ireland would have to vote again- angered NO campaigners and a sizeable proportion of the Irish electorate. His utterances smacked of arrogance.

Apparently he now has a better understanding of the reasons for the NO vote.
NO campaigners such as Declan Ganley and Patricia McKenna took a very hard line with him.
Even YES supporters such as Enda Kenny and Eamon Gilmore outlined clearly that this imbroglio cannot be resolved quickly. Enda Kenny stated that a second referendum prior to the European Elections would not lead to a clear-cut result.
Apparently Brian Cowen explained the difficulties in rushing into a second referendum. He spoke about analysis and consultation. Mr Cowen also stressed our solidarity with other EU member states and emphasized the desire to secure a resolution to the impasse which would satisfy all 27 members.

So Sarkozy has been appraised of Irelands difficulties with the Lisbon Treaty. The question arises as to whether he will take these on board or not.

As a first step Peter Mandelson should be reined in. The Commissioner for External Trade is prepared to sell out EU farmers to secure a deal at the WTO negotiations. This arrogant individual is not amenable to reasoned argument from farmers. EU food security is to be jettisoned. Similarly he is prepared to accept that the EU will be flooded with cheap food, often lacking traceability. He is prepared to wipe out Irish agriculture. 50,000 farmers are likely to go out of business and another 50,000 will lose their jobs in spin off industry-if Mandelson succeeds. He behaves like a dictator. He personalises all that is wrong with the Commission. He resembles a Czar speaking down to his subjects.
If Mandelson persists with his current approach, a rebellion by the rural electorate will dwarf the previous rebellion in the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. (Are you listening Mr Sarkozy?) Who controls Mandelson? To whom is he accountable?

The Commission is undemocratic and lacks accountability. It must be reformed. That is the wish of the overwhelming majority of EU voters. Today Sarkozy made the startling admission to Declan Ganley that if a second referendum were held in France, it would be defeated.

The threat to Irelands 12.5% Corporation Profits Tax is real. It comes from countries such as France and Germany. This is a major issue for employers and employees and has the potential to wipe out large segments of Irish industry. Sarkozy favours harmonisation of tax rates. That is the reality.

Many coastal communities face extinction as Irish fish stocks are plundered by trawlers from other EU countries.

Rural Post Offices are closing due mainly to the liberalisation of postal services by the EU Commission. Often the local postman is the only visitor to elderly isolated rural dwellers. Thanks to the EU Commission this is disappearing.


In addition abortion and neutrality are other major issues, which must be resolved to the satisfaction of the electorate.

Verbal commitments on all of the major issues are insufficient. Watertight guarantees are a sine qua non.

Somehow I suspect that Sarkozy is not listening. Waffle and charm mixed with the stick and carrot is not sufficient. It is highly unlikely that the impasse between Ireland and the EU will be resolved during the French Presidency. 90% of the Irish electorate is pro EU. Hopefully Mr Sarkozy will not turn us into a race of Eurosceptics with unhelpful comments. Show us the colour of your money Mr Sarkozy.

Irish No vote:Unhelpful comments from Mandelson and d’Estaing hinder resolution of difficulties

Today the King of spin EU Farm Commissioner Mandelson made a slashing attack on the Irish Yes campaign. He said in reference to the debate in Ireland “All of those fears should have been addressed all those misrepresentations should have been corrected. Frankly, the untruths that were put out by some of the propagandists should have been rebutted right at the beginning of this campaign. [By the Yes campaign]
If you don't defuse it and demolish it instantly, it gets its skates on and it's around the country and everyone is assuming it's right before the other side get up on their soapbox."

Peter Mandelson should look closer to home. His behaviour at the WTO talks triggered a massive rural backlash and protest vote at the polls. This came not alone from farm families but from small businessmen dependent on farming and food processing workers. Has he forgotten the destruction of the sugar beet industry? He appears well on the way to destroying Irish agriculture. Spin Mr Mandelson does not put bread and butter on the table.
Mandelson could show his bona fides at the WTO talks and desist from lecturing the Irish electorate.

Today former French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing said that Ireland must either hold a second referendum on the EU reform treaty or negotiate a special accord with the European Union in the wake of its No vote last Thursday.
Giscard d'Estaing was the chairman of the Convention that drafted the EU constitution, which collapsed when French and Dutch voters rejected the text in 2005.
He said in an interview to RTL radio. "A country that represents 0.7 percent of the European population...cannot decide for the others." Once more he is dictating to the Irish.
This intervention is unhelpful and displays arrogance typical of an out of touch liberal. This is par for the course with d’Estaing who was critical of “mistakes” made by French and Dutch voters when they rejected the EU Constitution in referenda.

Whether elitists like it or not a large segment of the Irish electorate has major concerns with the Lisbon Treaty. It is time to address them now. Cast iron guarantees from the EU on Corporation Profits Tax, neutrality and abortion-with no loopholes Mr d’Estaing- are essential, allied to a change in policy by Mandelson or his successor at the WTO talks. Otherwise this crisis will persist. It is time to put d’Estaing and Mandelson out to pasture.

Reflections on Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty-Some lessons for EU Commission

Just been listening to Newstalk’s discussion on Ireland’s rejection of the Lisbon Treaty.
Journalist Michael O’Regan took a very hard line on some of the No voters. However I thing that it is necessary to delve into the mindset of NO voters.

Critics of the No vote in common with the major political parties and the EU Commission have failed to get the message been sent out by voters in countries such as Ireland, France and Holland.
The No vote is not a rejection of the EU. However it is a message to integrationists to slow down. Many in Ireland see the EU Commission as remote undemocratic and at times dictatorial. Comments from Jose Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission and some French politicians cemented this view.

Farmers labouring under increased EU induced bureaucracy and quotas have begun to realise that their way of life is under serious threat. The destruction of the Irish Sugar beet industry by the EU Commission has alarmed farmers and struck a psychological blow. Whilst it may have slipped from public consciousness it was at the back of many farmers minds. The fear is that the dairying, beef, poultry and pig farming sectors will disappear in a similar manner.

Yet the Commission is perceived in rural Ireland as not taking a hard line with on foreign food imports which lack traceability. EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson’s antics at the WTO negotiations where he appears prepared to sell out agriculture struck terror into farmers. There is a feeling that Commissioners are too powerful and not accountable to the electorate.

As farming declines large numbers of small businesses dependent on farming are under pressure. Many small businessmen, shopkeepers et al voted No for this reason.
Many workers in food processing voted No fearful for their jobs.
As EU inspired liberalisation of the postal service comes about the rural Post Offices have come under increasing threat.
The coastal communities hammered by EU regulation-specifically fishermen- are on the verge of revolt.

The reality that much of the productive sector in rural Ireland is increasingly hampered by EU Commission induced regulation.
Many people’s backs are to the wall. Elites in the Pale have failed to take cognisance of the the economic stresses building up in rural Ireland

Others voted No because the 12.5% Corporation Profits Tax is under threat. This is not a groundless fear. France and Germany appear determined to destroy Ireland’s competitive advantage. Ireland must defend this tax rate at all costs. There can be no surrender on this issue.
There is a strong fear that the EU Court of Human Rights would impose abortion on Ireland.
Working class voters-many of whom had begun too see living standards rise- have seen a rise in unemployment.

In summary the EU Commission has scored an own goal. It comes across as arrogant and out of touch not just to many Irish voters but many voters in France, Germany, Holland and Sweden. It needs to listen. It must be made more accountable. It must become more democratic. If it persists in ignoring large numbers of EU voters it runs the risk of spawning new extreme right wing and left wing parties.

Cast iron guarantees on issues such as Corporation Profits Tax, Social legislation and Irish agriculture are a sine qua non in any new negotiations to salvage the Lisbon Treaty. A little humility from the EU Commission mightn’t go amiss either.

Questions and Answers debates Irish Agriculture

Maeve Dineen Editor of the Farming Independent and Presenter of RTE’s rural life programme Ear to the Ground was the star panelist. She was articulate and direct in her answers. She displayed a clear insight into farming problems and the threat posed to Irish farming by the WTO.

Journalist Eamon Delaney is apparently a strong supporter of Brian Cowen. He emphasized that Ireland has benefited immensely from free trade. This is fine as far as it goes. He obviously supports free trade in food. Unfortunately he failed to refer to the dangers posed by imports -of food products such as beef from Brazil- which often lack traceability. Is he not concerned with the health implications? Is he not concerned at EU hypocrisy on the environment? Apparently the EU is determined to reduce Greenhouse Gas emissions. Yet it is prepared to increase beef imports from Brazil. Much of these will come from the destruction of the Amazonian Rainforests. The burning of the forests will increase the levels of CO₂ in the atmosphere. Eamon Delaney's support for free trade in food fails to take account of the necessity to ensure security of supply.

Padraig Walshe of the IFA emphasized the dangers poised by the WTO. He stressed that 50,000 farmers would disappear and that a further 50,000 off farm jobs would go.

Eamon Gilmore and John Gormley were largely supportive of Irish farmers. Will John Gormley push for the use of the veto if necessary? Will the Government use the veto to rein in Peter Mandelson who appears to have gone beyond his brief at the WTO.

Lisbon Treaty: Sunday Business Post/Red C poll on Referendum indicates an electorate in a state of flux

• STATE OF THE REFERENDUM (Since last poll)

• Yes 41% (+3)
• No 33% (+5)
• Don’t Know 26% (-8)

The high level of dont knows indicates a large degree of confusion amongst a sizeable segment of the electorate. However this may not be the whole story. Increasingly there is unease within the country with what is perceived as meddling by EU bureaucrats in the internal affairs of Ireland. There is a suspicion that the EU will tamper with the 12.5.% Corporation Profits Tax. There is a fear that abortion will be foisted on the country. The WTO threat to Irish farming is a huge issue. There may be a temptation to make a protest vote. Many of the don’t knows may be unwilling to declare their real intentions of voting no. This would be a nightmare scenario for the Yes campaign.

It might be helpful if pollsters attempted to elicit more information from the don’t knows. The Yes campaign powered by FF, FG and Labour will in all probability succeed in convincing the electorate to accept the Lisbon Treaty. However many voters are highly suspicious. The electorate wants clear-cut answers on the range of issues alluded to above. Failure to address the electorate's concerns could be very costly for the Yes campaign

Luckily for the Yes campaign the Anti campaign has failed to use articulate spokes persons such as Caroline Simons very effectively.

Latest Sunday Business Post/Red C poll shows FF down 4% on 2007 General Election.

Since the March Poll another was taken in early April in the immediate aftermath of the resignation of Bertie Ahern. The latest figures must be judged against the poll taken in the first week of April.
The following is the outcome of the latest poll taken from Monday 21st April-Wednesday 23rd April. In brackets are the percentage changes since the early April poll.

• FF 38% (-2%)


• FG 29% (+1%)


• Labour 10% (NC)


• Greens 8% (NC)


• Sinn Fein 7% (-2%)


• PD 2% (+1%)

FF support is down 4% on the 07 General Election. Meanwhile the Government is faced with 5% inflation, a 30,000 rise in unemployment in the last three months, a shambolic health service, a likely deficit of €5/6 billion and an increasingly disaffected rural electorate disenchanted with the WTO. Harsh decisions will undoubtedly erode Government support further.

FG at 29% is up 2% on the 2007 General Election. With economic storm clouds gathering FG must aim to drive its support up to 35% to ensure that it will participate in the next Government.

Labour has remained static having secured 10.1% in the 07 General Election. Sinn Fein has undoubtedly eaten into the potential Labour support base.

The Greens at 8% are up 3.3% on their General Election result and are in all probability a temporary abode for dissatisfied FF voters. If we add 3.3% to the FF poll result of 38% we are quite close to the FF General Election outcome of 41.6%

Sinn Fein is static having secured 6.9% of the vote in 2007 General Election.
Sinn Fein appears in recent years to be a refuge for disaffected FF voters who return home in a General Election situation. In previous Sunday Business Post/Red C polls Sinn Fein trended higher when FF dipped to the mid 30’s.

The PDs at 2% are down 0.7% on their 07 election result.

World trade talks: the reality for Ireland if Mandelson's proposals are accepted

In a myopic article in the Sunday Business Post titled Trade about more than farmers Cliff Taylor swallows the José Manuel Barroso and Peter Mandelson line on the WTO, hook, line and sinker. He blithely glides over the effects on Ireland and gives the impression that only farmers are affected. This is arrant nonsense.

Taylor omitted to state the following:

• At least 50,000 jobs are at stake in agriculture, food processing, agricultural engineering, farm insurance and other services. The last four industries were ignored in his article. These jobs would disappear in the short term.


• Food security would be jettisoned. Have we learned nothing?


• The EU would be flooded with cheap food often lacking traceability. Are not EU consumers entitled to high quality food? It is not acceptable to put consumers health at risk.

He speaks about gains in software, business and financial services. Of course there would be some gains. Nevertheless it would be a case of live horse and you get grass.
These gains would not compensate for losses in agriculture, food processing and services linked to agriculture.
Perhaps Cliiff Taylor might care to view the advertisement from the IFA on page 23 of the Sunday Independent.-Message from Rural Ireland Stop Mandelson WTO Sell-Out. This features the businesses affected. This is not just about farmers. Consumers health,food security and spin off industries linked to agriculture come into the picture.

Obviously Cliff Taylor would prefer to buy a pig in a poke.

Speech by Fine Gael Agriculture Spokesman, Michael Creed TD, during Private Members' Motion on WTO

Irish farmers and the food processing industry face an appalling vista as Commissioner Peter Mandelson prepares to sacrifice their interests at the WTO talks. Today in Dublin, European Commission President Jose Barroso attempted to obscure the realities with the smugness and arrogance of a man out of touch with reality. Indeed he displayed no small degree of condescension as befits an unelected bureaucrat.Below Michael Creed outlines the stark realities. Make no mistake about it , Irish agriculture teethers on the brink of destruction. Mandelson must be stopped.

Fine Gael Private Member's Motion: WTO Negotiations
Speech by Deputy Michael Creed
Fine Gael Spokesperson on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

"It is difficult to recall a moment in our economic history when so much stands to be lost from the failure of this Government, and indeed its predecessor to defend a vital National Interest. The failure of the Minister for Agriculture, the lead Department in this fiasco to even quantify the consequences of failure is troubling in itself. It is matched only by the "pass the parcel" approach in Government, with the new Taoiseach-designate - Brian Cowen refusing to engage on the matter until his appointment is confirmed. Mr Cowen leaves the Department of Finance in a precarious state, unemployment and inflation on the rise, competitiveness slipping and tax revenues slumped. A word of warning to any "wannabe" Minister for Finance - if the proposals for Agriculture on the World Trade Organisation Agenda by Mr Mandelson become a reality, then the picture will get a lot bleaker. Thousands of jobs at farm gate and in the agri-business sector will be lost and farm incomes will fall significantly. We are most definitely in the last chance saloon and the signs are not encouraging.

Before dealing with the specifics of the motion, there are a few general observations that need to be made to put the debate in context.

(1) Over the course of the last 20 years the E.U. has slipped significantly as a trading block in agricultural commodities. Our share of world imports of virtually all agricultural commodities is increasing far faster than our share of exports. Nowhere is this more evident than in the meat sector where the EU share of trade is down in volume terms from 12% to 9% whilst actual trade in meat doubled over the same period (in volume terms). The latter is no surprise when you consider Chinese consumption per capita grew from 20kg to 50kg between 1980 and 2008. The same is true for the dairy sector with EU share down from 31% to 17%.

What this clearly proves is that the EU and Commissioner Mandelson are systematically exposing its citizens to increased dependence on imports of dubious quality and preventing us from capturing emerging markets, especially in China & India which will be left to those who out manoeuvre and outsmart us in negotiations - the USA, Brazil, Argentina, New Zealand & Australia.

(2) This decline of the EU position has occurred at the same time as the EU cost base for primary producers increased significantly. Reforms of the CAP and other initiatives this period have seen consumer concerns move centre stage with food quality, animal welfare and environmental policy at the core of every farmer's daily life.

(3) It is worth pointing out at this stage that the 2003 CAP reforms were widely believed to be the EU's contribution to the World Trade Deal. The radical changes farmers had to make to meet the reform requirements were the quid pro quo for a WTO deal.

Reality of current offer on WTO table
The reality of the predicament we find ourselves in is that we have now been negotiated into a situation far beyond what was asked of the agricultural sector under CAP reform. Concession after concession has left our beef and dairy industries in peril, our consumers exposed to unacceptable levels of risk and cost hikes and the future viability of the family farm as we know it in jeopardy.

I have asked you Minister to lay the facts before the House, to openly admit to agriculture producers and consumers what kind of impact the current WTO proposals will have on the Irish economy. However, you are either unable or reluctant to divulge to the House any kind of substantial evidence of economic analysis undertaken by your Department to assess the situation.

What we have seen however, are figures, undisputed by you, from those working in the industry and those figures are stark;

- €4bn lost to the economy on an annual basis
- 50,000 job losses in manufacturing and services
- 50,000 farmers put out of business

This is not just an agricultural issue, beef and dairy industries together contribute an estimated €6bn to the economy in terms of goods and services. How is this revenue going to be replaced if the current WTO proposals make their way to the finish line?

Non-trade issues
Apart from the obvious economic carnage in the countryside and the job losses in the food processing & agri-business sector, there are a number of other non-trade issues which have not been taken into account in the current negotiations. Where we are at now in a nutshell is legalising large volumes of imported food from outside the EU that it would be illegal to produce on Irish or EU farms. We are also in one fell swoop undermining the bio-security of the agric-sector and exposing consumers to salmonella, antibiotic resistance, hormone fed meat, avian flu, FMD and a whole host of dangers as yet unknown.

Thanks but no thanks, Minister. Thanks but no thanks, Commissioner Mandelson. This is a time, when the interests of farmers and consumers are at one and a time when that alliance needs political expression which is totally lacking to date.

Non trade issues, including climate change, and food security, should be centre stage at the WTO negotiations. We have received warnings from the IMF, the World Bank and the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the UN in the last few days relating to food security. Food riots, export bans and national inquiries have been introduced to try and maintain local supplies of food but yet this week, Minister, was the first time I heard you speak about food security and its importance in the context of WTO negotiations.

It is your failure, Minister, and that of your Governments that has us where we are now and no amount of bonhomie with farmers can mask that fact. This happened on your watch and whilst you might be preparing for pastures new, many farmers and others are facing annihilation of their livelihoods. Shame on you.

Have you ever bothered to meet Commissioner Mandelson?

Have you thought about the huge challenge ahead to feed the world - a world that is growing by 80 million per annum?

Have you raised with the Commissioner the challenges and consequences of climate change - food miles, CO2 emissions, desertification, increasing consumption, water shortages, record low levels of global food inventories, famine, death?

All of these issues feed into the proper defence of Ireland's and the EU's Common Agricultural Policy from the WTO. Or maybe your understanding of Climate change in this context is taken from Minister Gormley's pronouncements about the twin evils of the "Cow" and the "Car". It certainly looks like this and Minister Gormley could yet have his way as these proposals will decimate the Suckler Cow herd and in one giant leap allow the Government to meet its now legal obligations to reduce the CO2 emissions from agriculture. Somebody on the Government side of the house needs to nail this issue immediately.

Mandelson's WTO Brief
Much has been made by the Minster of the fact that Mr Mandelson is exceeding the brief given to him by the Council of Agricultural Ministers in October of 2005. This raises three questions

1. The 2003 CAP reforms were said to be the EU contribution to a World Trade Deal. Why should EU and Irish farmers have to pay twice for a World Trade Deal?

2. We are now reaching a crisis point in negotiations - what exactly have you done Minister in the last two and a half years to prevent us getting to this point? What have you done to put non-trade issues on the negotiating table?

3. Have you as yet managed to unearth any economic analysis of the consequences of the 2005 brief or is that as hard to come by as figures for the impact of the current proposals?

The answer to the second question is obvious. Nothing has been done. For all your talk about groups of 5, 10, 15, 20, you and your colleagues in the Council of Ministers have not reined in Commissioner Mandelson. That's a political failure - and you can't hide from that!

The consequences for Ireland of 2005 have never been laid before the House by the Minister. I am appalled that the Minister has no homework done on these matters and equally appalled that the Minister finds some sort of high moral ground in the 2005 brief. The 2005 brief mandated Mandelson to offer 50%-60% tariff cuts on Beef, Pigmeat & Poultry tariff cuts of 35%-50%. Butter and SMP 50% tariff cut. That you could find comfort in this sell-out raises questions about your judgement and that you now do nothing when what's on the table is substantially worse than 2005 can lead to only one conclusion. It is blatantly obvious why you have failed to publish a sectoral analysis. You know the consequences and hope to run from the problem in a reshuffle. Shades of Micheal Martin and the nursing home scandal.

Last week when asked whether or not your Department has prepared estimates on the impact of the World Trade deal you replied - and I quote - "We do not have a final analysis completed". How convenient for you Minister. No front page headlines to highlight the extent of the potential damage. No Prime Time Investigates into the death of Irish Agriculture. No public humiliation on radio talk shows.

Fortunately those involved in the industry have taken it upon themselves to assess the effect of Commissioner Mandelson's generosity. Mandelson's proposals will devastate the agri-sector and have a disastrous knock-on effect on associated industries. It is predicted that a 70% tariff cut on beef imports will see prices plummet to €2 per kilo or 70p per pound.

Do you think Minister that Irish farmers can survive on such a price - with the high cost of production in this region? Do you expect businesses to run on a loss? Minister, the future of the Irish beef industry - the fourth largest exporter of beef on the globe, 100,000 jobs, worth €4bn to the Irish economy, and a way of life on family farms from Malin to Mizen - is what is at stake. From the vantage point of this side of the House there appears to be an indifference to the consequences on the Government side at best, or at worst a lack of political will to face the issues concerned. Rumour has it Minister that you are preparing to fly the coop for pastures new. You may run but you will never be allowed to hide if this deal is your legacy to Irish agriculture.

This Government it seems views rural Ireland as the Achilles heel in our economic development. The reality is an estimated 25% of jobs outside of the Pale still depend on agriculture. Will your cabinet colleague Minister Gormley be pleased when we are forced to turn off all the lights, park the tractors and take the trains to the capital? Your Government has ensured infrastructure and employment has been focused on the east coast, while neglecting the rest of the country and you now stand poised to deliver the final nail in the coffin of rural Ireland by consigning 50,000 farmers to the dole queues.

Final Negotiations
And so Minister we are nearing end game in this process. With the possibility of a WTO Ministerial meeting next month - the time for talking is almost past.

You repeatedly say Minister that you are not prepared to accept an 'unbalanced deal' for Irish agriculture, that you are not prepared to allow Irish agriculture to be sacrificed for the sake of a deal going through. This begs the question, what exactly are you prepared to accept? Are you prepared to accept the agreement in its current format? Because if this is the case, that is an unbalanced deal, that is a step too far, Irish agriculture will be sacrificed, and for what? What are we getting in return?

Here is a clear example of how this Government has taken its eye off the ball, focusing on other issues while a vital part of our economy and heritage is slipping away. Surely the Taoiseach, in his final lap of honour should be using his remaining clout at European level to make contact with as many leaders as possible in an effort to call a halt to this deal, which is like a runaway train fast careering in the wrong direction? It is time for you Minister and your Government to show your mettle, to push for unanimity as a prerequisite in order to reject this deal. You have often spoken of a Group of 20 Agriculture Ministers opposed to the deal - you need to now ensure these Ministers are united against these proposals.

One of the objectives of this Private Member's Motion is to compel you and your Government colleagues to do the right thing for Irish agricultural interests. I call on you - to put it on the record of this House - that you will veto this World Trade Deal as it stands. If you refuse to do this Minister I call on you to look the farmers here present in the gallery in the eye and explain to them why you and your Government refuse to stand by them.

Article 39 of the treaty of Rome outlines the aims of the European Union in terms of agriculture. It seeks to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, increase the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture, stabilise markets, and assure food supply and reasonable price. Now Minister - in a year where all EU eyes are upon us - you have a responsibility to protect the rights enshrined in the founding document of the European Community. You jeopardise the commitment to the European project, of those who have been its most ardent advocates, by not showing honest and courageous leadership on this key issue. By saying no to WTO, you can allow the EU to sleep easy in the knowledge that the Reform Treaty will be ratified. You are allowing the waters of the Treaty debate to be muddied by your indecision and evasiveness on this Trade Deal.

Today Minister is an exercise in Parliamentary accountability. You need to be brought out of the comfort zone of Cabinet Governance and lay before this House once and for all where you stand on this World trade deal.

This is essentially about undue risk;

- You are putting the livelihood of primary producers at risk - farmers across the country who have stepped up to the plate so often to meet EU requirements.

- You are putting the food processing industry at risk, which will crumble and collapse in the face of cheap imports.

- You are exposing consumers to the risk of potentially unsafe products from throughout the world

- And finally, you are jeopardising the safe passage of the Reform Treaty.

Minister, you have failed this House by not putting before it the nature and extent of your intentions on this World trade deal. You have a final opportunity to redeem yourself. Take it and accept the motion which I commend to the House. "

Govt must move strongly to rein in out-of-control Mandelson - Creed

Since EU Commissioner Peter Mandelson assumed the mantle of EU Trade Commissioner he has pursued a policy of liberalisation of world trade at the expense of EU agriculture. EU farmers are hammered by increasingly strict environmental regulations and EU induced red tape.


Meanwhile a halfhearted effort is made to ensure that Brazil adheres to the same conditions imposed on EU farmers. Recently the EU introduced a ban on imports of Brazilian beef on the basis of lack of proper traceability and other irregularities in beef production methods. This was for the optics and was a cynical ploy to give the impression that the EU was really serious about the irregularities in beef production. No sooner was the ban introduced than it was dropped.
The EU appears to have an agenda to wipe out beef and poultry industries in member states to ensure increased access to Brazilian markets for industry. As a quid pro quo Brazil can flood the EU market with cheap meat produced to low standards. To hell with health risks for the consumer. To hell with food security. It is time to remove Mandelson.

The EU is prepared to import beef from Amazonia. It has no scruples about the burning of the rainforests to facilitate an increase in Brazilian beef production. The resulting huge increase in CO2 from the burnings is of no concern to Mandelson. Has he never heard of the Greenhouse Effect? What hypocrisy.

Today FG spokesman Michael Creed issued the following press release. It is highly apposite:

During Dáil Statements on the WTO today (Thursday), Fine Gael Agriculture Spokesperson, Michael Creed TD, called on the Taoiseach and the Minister for Agriculture to rein in EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson, through establishing a special intergovernmental conference if necessary.
"There is a growing frustration at the fact Mr. Mandelson is acting significantly beyond his negotiating brief from the Commission. He should not be allowed to sell out the interests of European agriculture, and Irish beef producers in particular, to get a deal. It is the responsibility of the Taoiseach and the Minister to rein in Mr. Mandelson. If necessary let us have a special intergovernmental conference where a telling message can be sent to the EU Trade Commissioner.
"The issue of Brazilian beef, which is now available here again, arises in this context. If Brazilians want access to European markets then, in the context of the WTO, let us have non-trade issues on the agenda, such as animal health, that will ensure their products are produced to the standard European consumers expect and European producers have to meet.