Latest news with #TadhgBuckley
The Age
25-06-2025
- Business
- The Age
Don't sacrifice us for beef deal with Australia, Irish farmers warn
London: Irish farmers have issued a blunt warning to European Union negotiators not to sacrifice rural livelihoods in the rush to strike a long-awaited trade agreement with Australia amid fears over unequal standards and pressure to deliver a geopolitical win. With formal negotiations between Canberra and Brussels restarting this month after a lengthy freeze, Irish farming leaders and political figures are demanding strict conditions on agricultural imports – particularly Australian beef – to ensure the deal does not undercut EU producers. 'We can't be anti-trade as Irish farmers – we export 90 per cent of our beef and 95 per cent of our dairy – but we need equivalence,' Irish Farmers' Association policy director Tadhg Buckley said. 'But we can't have a situation where products coming in ... didn't have to put up with the same level of regulation that we had.' The proposed trade pact, launched in 2018, stalled in 2023 over access for Australian beef, lamb, dairy and sugar to the European market, as well as EU demands around geographic labelling protections and environmental safeguards. But officials on both sides are returning to negotiations after US President Donald Trump's global tariff war began. Buckley said Irish farmers accepted the importance of global trade but rejected any deal that left them exposed to unfair competition, particularly hormone-treated beef from Australia. 'We do know … a significant chunk of Australian beef is hormone beef or has used hormones. I'm not saying it's unsafe ... but we can't see that coming into the EU because simply it would give that product a competitive advantage over Irish values,' he said. An estimated 40 per cent of cattle in Australia is treated with growth promotants to boost weight gain in the animals, which can improve the efficiency of meat production by about 15 per cent. Using growth hormones in beef production has been banned in the EU since 1989. 'We just want equivalence of standards. We cannot have a situation where our EU negotiators just decide to sacrifice beef farmers for getting access to services in Australia or whatever.'
Sydney Morning Herald
25-06-2025
- Business
- Sydney Morning Herald
Don't sacrifice us for beef deal with Australia, Irish farmers warn
London: Irish farmers have issued a blunt warning to European Union negotiators not to sacrifice rural livelihoods in the rush to strike a long-awaited trade agreement with Australia amid fears over unequal standards and pressure to deliver a geopolitical win. With formal negotiations between Canberra and Brussels restarting this month after a lengthy freeze, Irish farming leaders and political figures are demanding strict conditions on agricultural imports – particularly Australian beef – to ensure the deal does not undercut EU producers. 'We can't be anti-trade as Irish farmers – we export 90 per cent of our beef and 95 per cent of our dairy – but we need equivalence,' Irish Farmers' Association policy director Tadhg Buckley said. 'But we can't have a situation where products coming in ... didn't have to put up with the same level of regulation that we had.' The proposed trade pact, launched in 2018, stalled in 2023 over access for Australian beef, lamb, dairy and sugar to the European market, as well as EU demands around geographic labelling protections and environmental safeguards. But officials on both sides are returning to negotiations after US President Donald Trump's global tariff war began. Buckley said Irish farmers accepted the importance of global trade but rejected any deal that left them exposed to unfair competition, particularly hormone-treated beef from Australia. 'We do know … a significant chunk of Australian beef is hormone beef or has used hormones. I'm not saying it's unsafe ... but we can't see that coming into the EU because simply it would give that product a competitive advantage over Irish values,' he said. An estimated 40 per cent of cattle in Australia is treated with growth promotants to boost weight gain in the animals, which can improve the efficiency of meat production by about 15 per cent. Using growth hormones in beef production has been banned in the EU since 1989. 'We just want equivalence of standards. We cannot have a situation where our EU negotiators just decide to sacrifice beef farmers for getting access to services in Australia or whatever.'
Agriland
14-05-2025
- Business
- Agriland
Mooted ‘merging' of CAP payments to impact vulnerable sectors
A potential major overhaul of the EU's budget, which could see significant changes to how the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) works, would 'make it very difficult' for vulnerable sectors. That's according to Tadhg Buckley, the chief economist and director of policy for the Irish Farmers' Association (IFA). Buckley was speaking at an event on the future of CAP, organised by the IFA, which took place yesterday (Tuesday, May 13). Buckley outlined several permutations on what the budget for farm payments will look like over the course of the next long term budget for the EU, the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), which will cover the period 2028 to 2034. The meeting heard that a formal proposal on both the CAP and the MFF is likely to be put forward by the European Commission in July. It is understood that, as part of that, the commission is planning that its various funding programmes will be merged into a smaller number of funds, which would be allocated all together to member states. Member states would then outline how they plan to use the funding, which the commission would then approve. This could not only see the merging of funding for both pillars of CAP, but potentially also the end of ringfenced funding for CAP. Buckley told yesterday's meeting: 'There is increasing speculation that the commission is going to come with a major reform of the way they allocate funds from the EU budget to member states. 'What is being mooted, even though there is no formal budget as of yet, is that we move away from a programme-based approach to a policy-based approach,' he said. He explained: 'Under the last CAP, member states had to submit a CAP strategic plan to the EU for approval. [In] this proposal, effectively that would happen for all of the EU budget. 'As well as that, there would be a plan to centralise funds and condense them into a much smaller number of funding pots.' 'There is a lot of talk that the plan could be to merge 'work' funds, so you approach a position where you wouldn't have a dedicated CAP fund if that happened. And there are very, very substantial drawbacks should that happen,' Buckley said. He added: 'Potentially, depending on what happens, there may be no specific dedicated agriculture budget. Although you could have a situation where they still bring in the single fund, and you ringfence CAP as part of it.' Another concern, according to Buckley, is how payments under pillar I will be made. CAP pillar I is, at present, funded through the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF), to cover payments under the Basic Income Support for Sustainability (BISS) and the eco-scheme. While this funding comes with conditionality requirements, the funding, as the name of the fund suggests, is considered a guaranteed farm payment, and not dependent on results based actions like pillar II schemes. However, Buckley raised concerns that the commission's plans would give it stricter control on budget allocations, which may undermine the 'guaranteed' nature of the payments. He also said that, if there is considerable variation among member states as to how they allocated their merged funding pots, this may distort the market for agricultural products. 'The other thing that could happen is you have a significant difference in the level of direct payments and supports that are available per member state.' 'That could have a market distorting impact where one member state [puts] a lot of funding into agriculture, increasing direct payments to farmers, and another member state decides not to. Then you have a potential market distorting impact across the single market,' Buckley said. He also said that a situation in which funding for the two pillars of CAP are merged into one fund could have a particularly negative impact on farmers in less profitable sectors, and who therefore relay on pillar II schemes for a considerable portion of their income. 'They may merge pillar I and pillar II, and if that happens, that would make it very difficult for vulnerable sectors in Ireland who get a huge amount of their income from pillar II schemes,' the IFA chief economist said. Buckley told the meeting that the mooted single fund approach is 'not the way to go'.
