Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank Mr Savage for moving the motion, and I should also like to support him in his early retirement scheme. If not that scheme, then some form of grant should be introduced to encourage young people to take up farming; good, strong education and training would also help. Mr Douglas mentioned low-cost loans. I do not support these as the farmer is under enough pressure without having to pay back loans. However, I fully support the early retirement scheme.

I welcome the many actions and recommendations in the 'Vision for the Future of the Agri-food Industry'. However, there are challenges to be faced in bringing together producers, processors and retailers to ensure that all sections of the production line receive a fair return for profit. The actions and recommendations on strengthening the food chain, protecting our animal health status, developing people and safeguarding heritage and environment are all worthwhile. The challenge for the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development lies in achieving the part of the vision report that states:

The number of people involved in farming continues to decline. Young people fail to enter the industry, as it is regarded as low status, and there are better paid jobs available outside farming. The British Government's policies as well as Europe's red tape are drawing farmers out of the industry.

Present policies work against the interests of the farmer in the North's changing economic environment. Factors such as the euro/sterling exchange rate, BSE, the common agricultural policy (CAP) reform and the World Trade Organisation are stated as reasons for decline.

The foot-and-mouth-disease outbreak continues to pose a significant threat and has highlighted the vulnerability of the industry. That outbreak has served to divert attention from the long-term issues that affect the industry. It is vital that that focus returns to them as soon as possible.

The Minister should apply her approach and should identify the problems and opportunities in the rural economy over the next decade. She should develop the 'Vision for the Future of the Agri-food Industry' to map out a proper strategy. There is mistrust and hostility throughout the food chain, as producers, processors and retailers do not operate as a sympathetic supply chain but work against one another. They are working to a narrow agenda, within the constraints of British Government policy, following globalisation trends and policies of large-scale production at world prices. That policy will not be sustainable economically or environmentally in this part of the island.

If we are to take seriously the problems facing the farming industry, and if we are to sustain the viability of agriculture, we must work together on an all-Ireland policy, producing a quality product, North and South.

We must remember that farmers have been the backbone of this nation, North and South. It is right that we support them by tackling the issues so that we can become a major player in the world market, providing a strong, healthy product. Go raibh maith agat.

Our farmers are the custodians of the countryside; they have looked after and maintained our land for hundreds of years. Their work has been taken for granted by those who visit the countryside at weekends or during the summer.

After the second world war, we were encouraged to supply an excess of products to support other European countries that were unable to maintain their own people. Northern Ireland now has to compete against these EU countries for markets for our products.

Under direct rule in Northern Ireland no one made specific plans for our health, education or agriculture. It is only since the formation of the Assembly and since our present Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development took up her post that better decisions are being made to improve the situation for the Northern Ireland agriculture industry.

Our farmers need relevant guidance, and a 10-year agriculture plan is essential. Farmers have always been at the mercy of the buyer to provide products at the lowest cost possible. However, they continue to try to realise a moderate income for their family. Profits are at an all-time low, and our farming families are suffering. Over 60,000 people worked on our farms in 1999-2000. That includes 32,000 full-time job equivalents, 90% of which are provided by family members. That shows how families have been dependent on a decreasing farming income.

Farming is no longer an appealing industry in which to be involved. There is no encouragement for the younger generation. The family farm - a heritage that we are proud of - will soon be a thing of the past.

Recently farmers have had the highest rate of suicide of any occupational group in Britain. Farmers do not benefit from a 35-hour week, nor do they get a minimum wage. The industry has long been neglected from protective legislation, but not by red tape and bureaucracy. Farmers have been exploited for the gain of supermarkets and other organisations.

Many farmers plough through tough times in anticipation of a bright future. It is only through the Assembly and the commitment of the Executive and the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development that the industry can move forward with any optimism. Our agriculture industry requires a major regeneration scheme. As Mr Savage mentioned, ways must be found to encourage young farmers to remain in the industry, so that mature farmers can retire knowing that agriculture will survive.

Thanks to the work of agricultural colleges, young people with enthusiasm and new ideas wait on the sidelines, but there is no incentive for them to go into agriculture, because of low profit margins and an average wage of around £7,000 a year.

Diseases that were unknown here before we joined the EEC - not least the latest epidemic of foot-and-mouth disease - have endangered the health of our animals. If the industry is to survive, more emphasis must be placed on support for farmers with regard to environmental issues. Our farmers are conscious of the environment, and the Government must ensure a reduction in the red tape and bureaucracy and an increase in rural development funding for major capital grants schemes to support biodiversity and address source pollution. That will help us further key environmental objectives.

The development of a sustainable energy system, such as biogas and the use of anaerobic digesters, must be pursued. The creation of model farms in highly productive areas would be one way of achieving that. The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development must work with the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and the Minister of the Environment to promote the means of converting waste products into heat and power, so that the majority of waste is no longer an unwanted and unusable surplus but a valuable component vital to the production of energy.

I urge the Minister to recognise that farmers produce good, wholesome, healthy food and, in doing so, they are the custodians of the countryside. With that in mind, she must encourage agriculture to make it a profitable and sustainable industry, which will attract young professionals.

I support the motion. I would like to make some quick points, because I realise that time is limited.

It is time that the Department used its imagination to create innovative ideas and examine positive methods to help the ailing farming sector. We are familiar with the catalogue of ills suffered by the industry in recent years. In particular, the problems of the last six years have contributed to the hardest times that I can remember. Farmers have had to deal with BSE, foot-and-mouth disease, supermarket changes, competition and the difference in the exchange rate between the pound and the punt, to name but a few of the problems.

Those matters have combined to effect a downturn in the profitability of every holding in the Province. They have resulted in people moving from the countryside into the towns. There has been a dramatic change in the countryside. I live on a farm on the Ards Peninsula, so I have some idea of what that means. For example, there is one remaining pig farm on the Ards Peninsula - there used to be about a dozen.

The poultry industry has been decimated. Those who were involved in the poultry industry on the Ards Peninsula have abandoned it. There have been dramatic changes in every sector, such as beef, sheep, cereals, and, as Mr Poots said, dairy products.

The industry's confidence has been knocked, and the future looks bleak for many people. The Department must take stock of changes in the rural community. At the weekend, I read in one of the newspapers that a tourism course for farmers has been advertised on the Scottish Agricultural College's web site. The Department must develop imaginative initiatives to promote tourism as an alternative to farming. It must provide incentives and help with planning regulations and allow diversification and the advertising of countryside holidays.

All such initiatives would help. However, only so many people can take advantage of such opportunities. EU Directives on setting aside land and retaining the countryside will encourage them to do so.

The Assembly must ensure that finance is available for farmers and landowners. Many need to make their farms more viable, and one way of doing that is to set land aside. It may not be worked, but farmers get an allowance for ensuring that that happens. That should be encouraged, through financial or other means. Advantages and incentives have been slow to come, and that has resulted in land being lost at a crucial time.

Another worrying issue is the drifting away from farms of the sons and daughters of landowners. I refer to the previous point about planning regulations. That cannot be allowed to continue. More flexible planning regulations are needed. I am aware that that is not the direct responsibility of the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development. However, her Department could make some overtures to the Department of the Environment and to Dermot Nesbitt.

Those who are born on farms and live at home with their parents may want to move on when they get married. In this difficult economic climate it is important that changes be made to enable them to stay on the land. There have been changes in the methods of farming. Many people are now part-time farmers who supplement their incomes through jobs in towns and elsewhere. The regulations must be changed to ensure that sons and daughters - those who want to stay on the land - can farm part-time and also earn income elsewhere. Flexibility is needed, or the rural community will become a desert, a wasteland with few people. That must not be allowed to happen.

I want to make a final point about supermarket chains and the prices that are paid to farmers. I was astounded when I heard last week that a supermarket chain was claiming that it gave fair and equitable prices to farmers for their products. That is not what I have been told by farmers who are unhappy with the prices being paid, which do not reflect the hours that they work or the high-quality goods that they produce.

Does my hon Friend agree that there needs to be a level playing field with the rest of Europe? Northern Ireland's farmers are made to comply with welfare standards and so on that are set by Europe, but other European countries do not seem to adhere to the same standards. That is a financial burden on our farmers.

The Assembly wants Northern Ireland's farmers to get fair play, but that is not happening. I thank the Member for his comments and ask the Minister to take those points on board.

The motion calls on me to consider the implementation of measures to sustain the viability of the agriculture industry in Northern Ireland. Members are aware of the many problems that have beset the industry in recent years and the impact that those have had on farmers, their families and the rural community.

Almost without exception, those problems have stemmed from events beyond the influence or control of farmers or, indeed, of anyone else in Northern Ireland. That point has been recognised in the debate by some Members. Moreover, the problems are not unique to Northern Ireland. Given the situation, it is clear that a strategic approach is vital to addressing the problems and challenges that exist now and that will exist in the coming years. It is simply unrealistic to hope that a piecemeal approach or one single initiative will solve the problems of the industry and underpin its future viability.

I agree with many of the points made by Mr Savage and, indeed, have already taken forward initiatives in most of the areas that he mentioned. I thank Mr Bradley for his recognition of that and assure him that I will continue to advance those initiatives. However, I take issue with some of the detailed facts and figures quoted by Mr Savage. Nevertheless, I agree with him on the need for a 10-year plan with which to chart the way forward for the industry.

Indeed, the development of such a plan has been a priority of mine since day one. Members will be aware of the vision exercise that I initiated immediately after I took office in December 1999. The progress of my work was interrupted by a two-and-a-half-month suspension and then by the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease last year. Nevertheless, the direct result of the exercise was the publication in October 2001 of the vision group's final report, which made over 200 separate recommendations covering the actions and responsibilities of both the Government and the agriculture industry.

Since then, my Department and I have been engaged in an extensive consultation process with interested stakeholders. In addition, I have held bilateral discussions with almost 30 stakeholder organisations. My Department received over 80 written responses during the consultation process. I would like to record my disappointment that Mr Savage's party, the Ulster Unionist Party, did not respond in any way to the recommendations contained in the vision group's report during the consultation process. Moreover, it is surprising that Mr Savage made no mention of the vision exercise in his opening remarks, yet he spent some time dealing with the recommendations of the Curry Report - a report which deals specifically with England and not with Northern Ireland. The vision group's report, however, deals exclusively with the needs and priorities in Northern Ireland.

During the vision consultation process, the vision approach was generally accepted, although there were several differences of opinion on specific recommendations, some of which I will have to attempt to resolve. Taking account of the consultation, I am now working on an action plan. The full plan will be published in June, but I have decided to accept for implementation now several measures that gained broad support in the consultation exercise and which can be implemented within existing departmental resources.

These measures include setting up focus farms to facilitate farmer competence development; information and communications technology training and development; and off-farm training and reskilling to address underemployment in agriculture, which deals with Mr Shannon's point about the need to skill farmers to enable them to take up other employment.

In addition, there will be group-based learning approaches; a commercial horticulture strategic review; and enhanced controls to prevent the introduction of animal diseases. An all-Ireland animal and plant health policy will also be taken forward. That is already an agreed aspiration for animal health under the North/South Ministerial Council, which will consider plant health shortly.

Enhanced resources will be devoted to the detection and prevention of fraud, and there will be an individual animal standstill policy, based on 30 days rather than the 21 days recommended by the vision group. A working group will be set up to assess the need for a food body, as recommended in the report. Finally, there will be an independent evaluation of the Erne Catchment Nutrient Management Scheme.

Mr Douglas mentioned nitrate-vulnerable zones (NVZs). Those are a matter for the Department of the Environment, not for my Department. The evaluation will enable us to assess how we can bring forward further plans to deal with other areas. Those areas will be decided on in the light of advice from the Department of the Environment as to where the greatest dangers of pollution are.

My Executive Committee Colleagues endorsed those proposals at their meeting on 28 February. That is precise evidence of the collective approach endorsed by Mr Savage in his opening remarks.

By the end of June, I hope to launch the complete vision action plan, which will provide a road map for the strategic development of the industry over the coming decade. It will also form the centrepiece of my Department's ongoing programme to assist and promote the sustainable development of the agrifood industry and the rural community that it underpins. However, I must emphasise that the vision exercise is a joint exercise between the Government and the agriculture industry. Almost 40 of the recommendations are for the industry itself to implement, and I will be expecting it to respond to them.

There is a significant amount of interest in the EU's early retirement scheme and the new entrants scheme as a means of bringing about structural change and introducing new blood into the industry. Mr Savage raised that, as did Mr Armstrong and several other Members. I have certainly not ruled out the possibility of running such schemes in Northern Ireland.

However, questions have been raised about the ability of such schemes to deliver tangible and significant benefits for the efficient development of the industry. With the limited funds at my disposal, I must be satisfied that an early retirement scheme or a new entrants scheme would deliver value for money and that they would represent a better investment in the future of the industry than would alternatives. On that point, Mr McHugh and Mr Douglas placed a question mark over the early retirement scheme.

An initial review by consultants of the operation of the early retirement and new entrants schemes in other EU member states was inconclusive with regard to accruing structural improvements. For that reason I commissioned research into the potential economic, social and environmental benefits that might flow from such schemes. The results of that research will be available in the summer, and I will then be in a position to make an informed decision on the merits of introducing any such schemes into Northern Ireland. The Danish scheme to which Mr Savage referred is geared to meet Denmark's specific problem of farm succession. My understanding is that successors must purchase holdings from their parents or compensate siblings who are entitled to equal shares of their parents' assets. There are no such inheritance restrictions in Northern Ireland; the Danish scheme is therefore not appropriate to our circumstances.

I noted Mr Kane's assertion of a defeatist attitude. I absolutely refute the suggestion that my Department or I might be defeatist in our approach to the problems of the agrifood industry. Were that true, I would not have embarked on the vision group exercise, which is geared to meeting head-on the challenges to which Dr Birnie referred. They are outside our control, but must be met proactively, as must the opportunities they also represent.

Mr McCarthy raised several specific questions about the vision group exercise and my response to its recommendations. I have already indicated the areas that I intend to progress immediately. I still have to consider many more recommendations, including budgetary demands. I will be in a position to publish my full action plan in June. Meanwhile, I thank Mr McCarthy for the initial remarks in his speech.

The vision group exercise is not the only initiative that I have advanced to help the agrifood industry. The rural development regulation plan represents a substantial investment in the future of the agriculture industry in Northern Ireland. More than £266 million will be spent between 2000 and 2006 on sustaining farming in less favoured areas, on supporting agrienvironment measures, including organic farming and on grant-assisting the afforestation of agricultural land. That presents a significant opportunity for farmers and landowners and is a further example of my Department's commitment to underpinning the sustainable development of our agriculture industry.

With regard to agrienvironment schemes, Mr McHugh raised the issue of environmental sustainability. In the rural development regulation plan, my Department commits considerable resources to such measures as environmentally sensitive areas schemes, an organic farming scheme and a countryside management scheme. Over the seven years of the rural development regulation plan, expenditure on those schemes will total some £88 million, which is double the amount spent in the preceding seven years.

Mr Douglas raised the issue of E-Plan funding for the environmentally sensitive areas scheme. I will keep that area under review, and if funding can be secured, I will reopen the issue at the earliest opportunity.

Mr Douglas also referred to nitrate-vulnerable zones. The Department of the Environment must implement the requirements of the EU's anti-pollution Directives, and that implementation is many years overdue. The legislation has already been implemented in GB. I appreciate fully the concerns of farmers, and particularly their wish to avoid disproportionate costs. My officials are in close contact with their counterparts in the Department of the Environment to seek proportionate implementation in line with good science and objective data. I am briefed fully and in discussion with ministerial Colleagues on this.

Mr Douglas mentioned agricultural pollution and its prevention; DARD is committed to reducing pollution of that nature. The Department provides advice and training on good farming practice and has secured £6·1 million from the Executive programme funds for a farm waste- management scheme that is currently awaiting EU state aid approval.

Mr Douglas also raised the matter of agrimonetary compensation. I have always pressed - with considerable success - for the full payment of all available agrimonetary compensation. However, the compensation mechanism expired at the end of December 2001, so there is no possibility of further compensation packages being triggered as a result of currency movements. There is, however, a possibility that residual second and third tranches of previously triggered compensation packages may be available in the dairy, beef and sheep sectors. We will not know the position on this until the EU makes its assessment, which is expected in April.

Mr McHugh and Dr Birnie raised the common agricultural policy (CAP). The forthcoming mid-term review of the Agenda 2000 agreement is yet another of the many challenges that the farming community faces and a further source of uncertainty. We do not yet know the extent of the changes that the EU Commission will propose later this year. The CAP is facing significant pressures arising from events such as the enlargement of the EU and the World Trade Organisation (WTO) talks, to which Dr Birnie referred.

We cannot simply ignore those matters in the hope that they will go away. Nor can we ignore the fears, needs and aspirations of the agriculture industry and the rural society that it underpins. My officials and I are engaged in discussions with our counterparts from the other devolved Administrations and Whitehall on the UK's approach to the forthcoming mid-term review. Northern Ireland's interests are being clearly articulated, and we are stressing the importance of keeping the needs of agricultural and rural communities to the fore.

We cannot prevent change, nor should we want to, but we must manage it in such a way that the industry has the time and help that it needs to adapt to and exploit the opportunities that change inevitably brings. We must avoid marginalising and alienating sections of the rural community and undermining the stability and viability of the rural economy.

Mr McGrady and Mr Poots mentioned brucellosis, and Mr McGrady spoke about tuberculosis (TB). I am fully aware that brucellosis and TB continue to be serious problems in Northern Ireland. A review of all aspects of the control measures for both diseases is currently under way and should be completed soon. The review group is considering what additional or different measures might be deployed to reduce the incidence of those diseases. As Mr McGrady noted, economic viability and economic and environmental sustainability demand that the industry adapt to reflect the changing demands of the market place and the farmers' increasingly important role as custodians of the countryside.

Because of the continuous need for change, investing in and developing the skills and education of people in the industry must be a key part of any strategy for sustainable development and viability for the agrifood industry and rural economy. Therefore, through the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development colleges, I have continued to invest in developing education programmes and facilities, with a particular emphasis on lifelong learning for those who already work in the industry. I noted Mr Armstrong's comments on biomass, and I agree that there is potential for a cross-departmental approach to waste.

Mr Shannon spoke about initiatives to promote tourism. He will be aware of the natural resource rural tourism programme, which is now on-stream, and of the support that is available for developing rural tourism. He also raised the issue of planning regulations. The vision group's report recommends that planning regulations be examined. That too is a cross-departmental issue, as the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development does not have sole responsibility for them. However, I am very conscious of the matter.

The UK Government are working hard to ensure that other EU countries comply with welfare standards, thus creating a level playing field.

I hope that I have given some indication of the broad range of measures that I am already pursuing to enhance further the future viability of Northern Ireland's agriculture industry. It is important that those measures are integrated into an overall strategy, and that is what I hope to achieve when I launch my full vision action plan in June.

As I have already said, there is no point in reacting to issues as they arise or in dealing piecemeal with the industry - strategic action is required. The vision action plan will be a strategy devised to develop the industry over the next 10 years. It will maintain the viability of rural areas and the farming community in a way that meets the challenges and the opportunities ahead. Rather than ignore those challenges, we must manage and exploit them to our advantage. It is only through working together to a common strategic agenda that the industry can secure its future survival and prosperity.

I thank the Minister for giving up her afternoon to participate in the debate. As with all agriculture debates in the House, there have been many valuable contributions from all sides. The Minister has already dealt with many of the issues raised, to which I shall add my contribution.

As Mr Bradley also said, I emphasise that I in no way denigrate the Minister's efforts. I have the greatest respect for her, and I shall support her in any way that I can. However, taking action in one area does not meet the need for action in other areas. The Minister has done a good job during a crisis, and her management and skills, and those of her officials, leave us confident in and satisfied with her work.

I welcome Mr Kane's support. His analysis of the powerful world pressures on commodity prices and his call for the Department to devise a recovery strategy are issues that we must all bear in mind, issues that are near and dear to our hearts.

I welcome Mr McHugh's support for the motion and his constructive remarks on the pressures that drive young people off the land and on the future of localised markets. I also welcome his realistic approach to the failures of the scheme that operates in the Republic. We do not want to go down that route, although I emphasise that our proposed scheme is very different from that in the Republic. Our scheme is modelled closely on those employed in other countries that are part and parcel of Europe. We are also part of Europe, so we have much in common with those other countries.

I cannot accept Mr McCarthy's comment that the motion is premature. The Minister will respond to the vision group's report in her own way. She will respond to that report alone, not to the early retirement scheme proposal. I have warned of the dangers of adopting a bitty approach to our agriculture problems. The Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development deals with pressing issues from week to week, and the Assembly must take strategic decisions and look at the bigger picture.

I welcome Mr Douglas's support and his remarks on the use of modulation money to advance many of the schemes. My Colleague Dr Birnie made useful comments on the relative economic importance of agriculture to our economy and on the need for common agricultural policy reform. It is especially welcome when an Assembly Member who does not represent a rural area speaks in an agriculture debate. Farmers sometimes feel that our Assembly and Parliaments are cold houses for them.

Sometimes people do have much time for these debates, because they think that farmers are only interested in getting their own ends. I assure Members that farmers only want to produce the best in whatever sector their outlets might be.

The House needs to get a handle on these issues if it is to implement the schemes. As the Minister realises, people are coming through our agricultural colleges. There is no use educating people if you have no job for them, and the Department has to take this seriously. If there is no agriculture industry here, there is no call for you people. This is one thing that we are serious about.

I remind the Member that when he says "you people", he is referring to the Speaker. It may be that he does not want to change the remark.

I apologise, Mr Speaker. I do not mean to denigrate you in anyway.

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Member might have been accurate in what he said.

No doubt, there might be plenty of support for it in the Chamber.

I welcome the comments of Mr Poots and especially his demand for innovative thinking, which is at the heart of the matter. I acknowledge Mr M Murphy's comments of support. I welcome the comments of my Colleague, Mr Armstrong, on a 10-year agriculture plan for recruiting young people into farming by developing alternative income sources and the need for the Assembly to take the lead in developing that policy. Mr Shannon's account of the decline in farming from real life examples is right, and it is time to take stock. Now is the time to act, when we have a period of relative calm without an immediate crisis.

Although acknowledging all these contributions, it is important not to lose sight of the real reason for the motion. Many serious points have been raised here today, and I know that the Minister is a listening Minister. She takes on board what we try to put across, and I am putting things to her as I see them. We must take things seriously.

When we emerge from this period of recession I would like to see a thriving agriculture industry. As the Minister said, this can only come about with everybody's help. Although my party may not have responded to one point that she made - and we may have overlooked that - I assure her that it is very much in the thoughts of all our people.

Another important matter that was raised today is the health and safety of our industry. If we can keep Northern Ireland disease-free, we have a future, and everybody has to play a part to ensure that happens. I thank the Minister again for giving up her afternoon. We may not see eye to eye on many issues, but ultimately we have something in common - we want to see a thriving agriculture industry in Northern Ireland. I thank Members for their support. I hope that the points raised will bear fruit in the days to come.

Adjourned at 5.34 pm.