(Limerick West) asked the Minister for Agriculture the proposals now before the Council of Ministers in regard to the quota restrictions on milk production; when it is likely that decisions will be taken by the Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

36.

(Limerick West) asked the Minister for Agriculture in regard to the proposals for further quota restrictions on milk production which were considered by the Council of Ministers, and in view of the very clear statement about the veto contained in page 33 of the Government's explanatory guide to the Single European Act, the reason he did not use the veto as in 1984; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

I propose to take Questions Nos 27 and 36 together. In the recent negotiations on the reform of the EC milk policy, I strongly emphasised the special position of the milk sector in Ireland and I opposed the adoption of the final compromise package. However, I did not consider that recourse to the provisions of the Luxembourg compromise was justified because the final outcome contains a recognition of our special position through extra guarantees for Ireland in relation to intervention for butter and because the reductions in quota will be achieved with the benefit of generous compensation. Furthermore, failure to tackle the imbalance in the milk sector would have meant even more serious consequences for our milk industry.

(Limerick West): Has the Minister recokoned the cost to the country which will result in the decision taken by the Commission and the Council of Ministers regarding milk?

I imagine that it will be of benefit.

(Limerick West): I ask first from the point of view of the loss of employment in the processing sector and in the sectors supplying farm requisites which has been reckoned by ICOS at 2,500.

Is the Deputy annoyed because there has been such a favourable reaction and such a welcome for the proposal?

Where? Quo vadis?

There is no question of cost to the country. There could well be a considerable benefit because of the very generous nature of the compensation being allowed.

(Limerick West): Is the Minister categorically saying that?

As regards employment——

It is little the Minister knows about agriculture.

Nobody has been able to quantify any figure regarding employment. People have mentioned figures from the top of their heads, but it is quite likely that there will be little or no effect on employment.

I shall hold the Minister to that.

I ask the Minister to please be realistic.

(Limerick West): Could the Minister give us an estimate——

Deputy Lenihan should not interrupt.

(Limerick West):—— of the losses which will surely follow an 8½ to 9½ per cent quota cut and consequent losses in calves to the beef industry?

Not necessarily. People by using different methods of feeding, more grass feeding, can easily offset that.

There will be more calves.

Remember that 5½ per cent of the 8½ per cent — not 9½ per cent — is of a temporary nature. It is for a two year period. The people will be heavily compensated during that two year period. The whole system will be reviewed at the end of that two year period.

That is what is called a sell-out of the nation.

Deputy Byrne must be very disappointed with the reviews which have been most favourable. We did not hear a squeak out of him over the last two days.

The media have done a good job for the Minister.

As I said earlier, we will be snowed under with applications for this cessation scheme. People will welcome the compensation for the 4 per cent cutback in 1986 or 1987 and the 1½ per cent cutback in 1988. They will quite welcome it.

With all the benefits, one would think agriculture would be in a better position.