The Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers’ Association (ICMSA) has voiced concerns over developments in the case taken by An Taisce against Ireland’s Nitrates Action Programme (NAP).
In a decision last week, Justice Humphreys referred nine key questions raised during the legal challenge to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
However, in a judgment delivered this week, Justice Humphreys indicated agreement with An Taisce on several of these issues. Although the judge’s comments are not final decisions and are only proposed answers, they have sparked concerns for the ICMSA.
On the ninth and final question, the judge said that “the conclusion that would follow from the proposed answers to the earlier questions would be that the NAP was adopted in breach of [EU directives]”.
“The critical point is that the [European Commission] decision is predicated on the adoption of the Irish NAP…and thus implicitly on the valid adoption of a NAP in compliance with [EU] law… Any legal inadequacy in the NAP would therefore flow through into the decision.”
The decision the judge referred to is European Commission decision 2022/696. This is the commission’s implementing decision that granted Ireland the current nitrates derogation.
Commenting on this development, ICMSA president Denis Drennan said that it is “of huge concern to Irish farmers, and most certainly should be for the Irish government”.
According to Drennan, the case “brings into stark relief the question that more and more people in Ireland are asking about the role and effective ‘veto’ that our politicians and civil service have seemed satisfied to grant to various NGOs (non-governmental organisations) and quangos (quasi-NGOs)”.
“There is no point in the Irish government spending years consulting the data and the stakeholders to develop a serious multi-faceted policy that addresses all the issues and then instructing our civil service to implement that policy if…they are happy to hand over millions to quangos who are only concerned with one aspect of these complex questions, namely the environmental aspect,” the ICMSA president said.
According to An Taisce, its educational unit receives state support (among other funding streams), while its advocacy unit is funded through membership fees, and philanthropic and commercial income. These two units account for An Taisce’s activities, apart from its general administration.
According to Drennan, the motives of An Taisce in the case are “understandable, if wrong”.
“But the motives of the government and civil service and their shameful abdication of authority and responsibility is beyond understanding. It is absolutely essential that the Irish government defend this case and that commitment has to come from the very top,” he added.