Vol. 1070 No. 4
74. Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine for an update on the most recent discussions between the Government and the UK Government on reinstating access for Irish fishers to their traditional fishing grounds at Rockall; if he is considering taking the matter to international arbitration, given the illegality of this long-standing blockade; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36288/25]
I am asking this question on behalf of my colleague Pádraig Mac Lochlainn.
As the Deputy knows, Rockall is a small, uninhabitable rock located approximately 160 nautical miles west of the Scottish islands of St. Kilda, and 230 nautical miles to the north west of Donegal. As the Deputy is aware, Ireland has not sought to claim sovereignty over Rockall. The UK claimed sovereignty over Rockall in 1955 and sought to formally annex it as part of Scotland under its 1972 Island of Rockall Act. The consistent position of successive Irish Governments has been that Ireland does not recognise Britain’s claim of sovereignty over Rockall. Accordingly, Ireland does not accept that a 12 nautical mile, 22 km, territorial sea exists around Rockall.
Ireland’s long-held view is that a rock incapable of sustaining human habitation does not allow for the creation of a territorial sea. Therefore, the agreement under the trade and co-operation agreement, TCA, relating to access to the UK 12 to 200 mile zone should apply inside the 12 nautical mile zone around Rockall. We understand that the UK takes a different view.
Irish vessels have traditionally fished for haddock, which is subject to a quota limit, and squid, which is not subject to a quota limit, in the waters around Rockall. Haddock may be caught both within and outside 12 nautical miles of Rockall, but squid is caught within six nautical miles of Rockall. Other stocks caught in the waters around Rockall, both within and outside of the 12-mile area, include monkfish and megrim.
I assure Deputy Mac Lochlainn that reaching an agreement on issues relating to Rockall remains an important issue for the Government. The Government continues to be in regular contact with the relevant Scottish and UK authorities on the issue of Rockall. Through this engagement, the Government is seeking to address the issues involved, reflecting the long-standing fisheries patterns in the area. I am committed to finding a way forward and will continue to work closely with the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Harris, on this issue. The Deputy will be aware that both the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach have raised this issue at diplomatic levels and will continue to do so. It is a matter that we would really like to resolve at the earliest possible opportunity.
I apologise for being a little late and thank my colleague, Deputy Conor McGuinness, for introducing my question.
I appreciate that the Minister of State is new to his role but my difficulty is that what he has just read out was said to me again and again by the previous Minister for agriculture, Deputy McConalogue. This is an uninhabited rock and there is just no basis under international law for what the British are doing. It has cost millions of euro every year, not just for fishermen in Donegal, Greencastle and Killybegs, but all the way down to Castletownbere. Fishermen from around Ireland are affected. It is outrageous action. Basically, there is a blockade around the rock and threats to people's livelihoods for fishing in their traditional grounds. At some point, if the British Government will not do what is right, we have to look at international arbitration. It is outrageous that this has gone on for so long.
I note the Deputy's personal interest in this, as well as that of others in the area who have raised it consistently with me. It is a position that goes back to the 1955 situation and, obviously, Brexit then had a really negative effect from a fisher's perspective.
On Wednesday next, I am meeting the UK Minister with responsibility for fisheries, Mr. Daniel Zeichner, and I intend to raise this in the context of a broader discussion around challenges facing our respective fishing industries. There will be other issues discussed too, and I do not want to give the impression to the House that the meeting is just about Rockall because it is not. I also intend, in the course of other meetings with the Scottish Minister and others, to discuss this matter at every available opportunity.
I note the Deputy's interest and his suggestion that arbitration may ultimately be the solution, or at least a pathway towards a solution. I will continue to work on this and keep the Deputy informed of any developments that arise in this area.
I am mindful that the previous Scottish First Minister, Ms Nicola Sturgeon, according to reports in The Guardian newspaper, was trying to resolve this issue. Ultimately, it is a jurisdictional issue and the British Government has probably been let off the hook on this. The fisheries element of the TCA was recently extended by 12 years. That is very problematic because it locks down the loss of fisheries. I know the Minister of State is going to work to improve those quotas as a result but I would have thought this issue should have been resolved as part of that agreement at the time. This is bad faith, particularly by the Whitehall Government, but the Scottish Government has been a disappointment on this issue, too. They know these are our traditional fishing grounds and are very important to a fishing industry that is struggling. It is really long overdue that they did the right thing. I ask the Minister of State to strongly convey the view, with which both sides of the House would agree, that this has to stop and be resolved.
I will not be found wanting in conveying the feelings of this House. We are united on this issue. We are not always united on issues here but we are very united on trying to find a resolution to this. I am conscious that it has to be done through the diplomatic channels. I am also conscious that there are significant legacy issues and that, notwithstanding the view of some in this House that the securing of access to UK waters for the next 12 years is positive, we still have to recognise the loss of quota and the negative impact of that on our sector. I am also conscious that, on the other side, the British fishing sector believes it has lost significantly as a result of reciprocal access. There appear to be two losers in this debate. I recognise the British Government's difficulties in that regard. However, recognising that does not and will not preclude me from fighting the case for Irish fishers who have lost very specific quota in the first instance, not to mention the squid fishery, which was a really important part of their economic activity at a particular time of the year but is no longer available to them. We have to do everything we can to try to address that.
75. Deputy Robert O'Donoghue asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine how he proposes to increase the tillage area, as outlined as a key desire in the programme for Government; when a tillage incentive scheme will be introduced to support tillage growers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36299/25]
I thank the Deputy for raising this important issue. The tillage sector is an integral part of Irish farming and makes a really significant contribution to overall agricultural output. This Government recognises the importance of the sector and wants to grow the area under tillage crops in the years ahead.
The report of the Food Vision 2030 tillage group, which was set up to set out a roadmap for the growth and development of the sector, identifies opportunities to grow the sector and to further improve its environmental footprint. My Department continues to engage with stakeholders to progress the actions in the report through collaboration with all stakeholders.
My Department has provided significant support to tillage farmers in recent years. The budget for protein aid has increased to €10 million annually since 2024. Applications for over 66,000 ha of cereals and oilseed rape straw were submitted for chopping and incorporating in 2025 under the straw incorporation measure. I have committed to paying all farmers who have applied under the scheme. I have made this decision early to give certainty to farmers while also giving them an economic boost.
In financial terms, €10 million per year was budgeted for straw incorporation as part of the CAP strategic plan, CSP, but the applications this year amount to over €15 million. It is not an insignificant decision for me to make in regard to managing my budget, but I wanted to do it to be able to provide that certainty and support. I am a major supporter of straw incorporation. I believe it does great work and provides a number of great benefits to our farmers.
In February this year, I announced €32.4 million of payments under the tillage and horticulture support scheme, which was the Government’s response to the difficult position tillage and horticultural farmers found themselves in due to exceptionally poor weather and continued high input costs last spring. This exceeds the €30 million provided for in last year's budget. I had to try to find extra money within my budget and made that decision to prioritise because I was anxious that we be able to make the payment on every hectare of eligible ground. The extra €2.5 million was part of that.
I thank the Minister and acknowledge his response. As he knows, tillage is a vital part of our food security. Given what is happening globally and the uncertainty that prevails, a reliable and viable tillage sector is required to ensure a food supply. It is also important to speak to the fact that tillage is effectively a carbon-neutral, if not better, area of agriculture and, as such, can play an important role in reducing the carbon footprint of the agriculture sector, if fully supported. In June 2023, the then Minister for agriculture committed to achieving the target of increasing the tillage area to 400,000 ha by 2030. However, figures from the industry at that time suggested that the tillage area was set to decline. In 2012, an estimated 355,000 ha of land in the country were under tillage but by 2024, that had dropped to 334,000 ha. Tillage plays a vital role in the agricultural economy, particularly in the context of food sustainability. It is essential that we increase the tillage area as a matter of urgency because we cannot depend, as we have already seen, on others due to the global uncertainty that prevails at this time.
I concur and agree with the Deputy that we want to see growth in the tillage sector. After two really hard years, I am very heartened to see a slight increase on last year in the area under arable and tillage crops. In the face of two horrendous years, it has stabilised. This year is difficult. Futures prices for the sector are still very challenging. It is the one sector of agriculture that has not seen a big uplift in commodity prices. At the same time, the crops are looking good. We have had a good year as regards weather. The winter crops in particular are looking very clean and full. We are very hopeful for a good harvest. Spring crops are obviously always somewhat more variable but a lot more winter crops were sowed in the back end of last year because of the weather. We will keep a very close eye on it from that perspective.
The tillage sector is supported under other schemes, including the tillage capital investment scheme, the organic farming scheme and ACRES. There are many farmers who are glad to be in ACRES this time. The water quality European Innovation Partnership, EIP, is also open to them. There is, therefore, a range of measures to support our tillage sector.
I acknowledge that we may have a better year this year but the tillage sector has suffered crippling losses over recent years. We have seen fertiliser prices increase by up to 300% since the war in Ukraine began. We have seen tillage farm incomes plummet. In 2022, the average tillage farm income was €76,600. In 2024, it had plummeted to €30,000. Tillage farmers cannot take any more of these losses. They need assistance and assurance. Counties like my own county of Wexford are taking a serious hit. The IFA tells us that the economic viability of the sector is very precarious for 2025 and that the sector will be extremely vulnerable in the coming years. Forward barley prices for harvest in 2025 are €185 per tonne. This is well below the cost of production for many farmers. It is unsustainable and the sector must be supported if we are to see people remain in it and see incomes rise. It is vital that the sector receive the absolute commitment and support of the Minister. I acknowledge that, in his contribution, the Minister said he is supportive of the sector but it is crucial that a new tillage incentive scheme is introduced to support tillage growers and that we begin to be more self-sufficient when it comes to the supply of our own native grain.
At the end of the day, we continue to have those supports in place. There is strong co-operation, €10 million for the protein aid scheme and the allocation of money for the intervention earlier this year. While that was to recognise last year's hardship, it came out of the budget for this year, which I have to manage for tillage and all other sectors. I will continue to work with the sector. I absolutely recognise the challenges. The latest Teagasc income figure is €38,000. When you consider input costs relating to the long-term leasing of land and the price farmers are paying in that regard if they are farming more than their own land, the input costs of machinery, depreciation and the very high cost of replacing machinery, and all of the other input costs, you will see that the risk-reward ratio in respect of that investment is very challenging. That is why I will continue to work with the tillage sector, provide targeted support given the importance of the sector within the wider agriculture industry and deliver on the commitment in the programme for Government to invest significantly in the tillage sector over the next five years.
76. Deputy Martin Kenny asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when his Department will implement the new measures to tackle TB; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36040/25]
I raise with the Minister the situation as regards TB, which is at crisis point across the country. I know the TB forum has set out a number of measures that have yet to be enacted. I would like to get an update on when these are going to happen. Many of these actions are difficult for farmers. When they have a reactor or their farm is locked down as a result of TB, the last thing they need is a more difficult and strenuous situation that will cause them an even greater loss. We need clarity on many of these issues because farmers are very distressed at the prospect of having to enter into a new situation where they will be further disadvantaged by losses related to TB.
I thank the Deputy for raising this important issue. To answer his question directly, the last thing farmers need is a further increase in the spread of TB. That is the root cause of all of this stress and concern, which the Deputy has articulated very clearly and on which I completely agree with him. My job is to provide leadership and to bring farmers with us. Everybody is going to have to do a little bit more here. That includes my Department and its officials as regards my budget. We are all going to have to do a bit more as we change our approach to TB.
As the Deputy will know, bovine TB is a very challenging disease to control and eradicate. Levels have continued to deteriorate in recent years. Herd incidence has increased from 4.31% in 2022 to 6.04% in 2024, resulting in a 36% increase in the number of herds restricted between 2022 and 2024. As of 22 June of this year, over a 12-month period we had a herd incidence of 6.43%. In 2024, it was 6.04% and it is now 6.43% with over 43,455 reactors. This disease is having an impact on farmers and their families both financially and emotionally throughout rural Ireland.
As the Deputy will know, following extensive discussions at the TB forum, I met with TB stakeholders on 8 May and farming organisations and key stakeholders on 22 May with a view to agreeing an action plan for bovine TB based on the most effective ways to mitigate the impact of bovine TB on farm families and to reduce herd incidence and spread of the disease. At these meetings, I presented five key pillars to address the current rates of bovine TB. The first was to support herds free of bovine TB in remaining free. The second was to reduce the impact of wildlife on the spread of bovine TB. The third was to detect and eliminate bovine TB infection as early as possible in herds with a TB breakdown to avoid future breakdowns. The fourth was to help farmers improve all areas of on-farm biosecurity and the fifth was to reduce the impact of known high-risk animals in spreading bovine TB. I will provide further answers in my supplementary responses.
To get to the issues that are of most concern to many people in the agricultural community, one of the issues farmers are concerned about is the proposal that a sign be put up at marts where there is a reactor in a herd. This would be there for quite a long time and would restrict farmers in getting a decent price for their animals. That is an issue that needs to be dealt with very sensitively. We do not want farmers to be at a disadvantage because they have had the misfortune of having TB in their herds, something which, in most cases, is not their fault. That needs to be dealt with.
One of the other issues is the restrictions as to where and to whom farmers can sell their cattle. In many cases, the only option they will have is to sell to the finishing lots or the factories. This restricts the market, which will be bad for farmers. We need to understand whether there will be some way of mitigating those disadvantages for farmers. Clarity also needs to be brought to the rates of compensation farmers are going to get under this new regime so that we know exactly where we stand.
On the control of animals at high risk, we understand that there are going to be restrictions and further testing. In effect, it will probably be three years after a clear test that farmers will be back to normal. I would like clarity as to where we stand as regards all of that.
While trying to bring people with us and minimise the impact on farmers, who are already extremely stressed, I have to ensure that we have a science-based approach and that what we do is backed up by science. There are three very clear causes of the spread of bovine TB: cattle-to-cattle transmission, residual transmission and wildlife. If we do not have a suite of measures that, when layered over one another, give us a level of cover that addresses all three of those areas, we will fail. That involves difficult decisions for all of us. It also involves a change of practice in how my Department operates, in how testing operates, in how we deal with herds and in what is identified as a high-risk herd because what we have been doing has not worked and has left gaps. That is because we do not have 100% foolproof testing. The skin test has 80% efficacy. I want to introduce a lot more blood testing in high-risk categories. The efficacy rate of such testing is over 90%. Ultimately, there is more TB left in herds that we have to identify. We have to identify it early and get it out rather than waiting and finding it later on because that is where the disease is seeding. There is a range of measures we can take to address that.
I appreciate all of that. To give credit where it is due, something is being done. A crisis has been allowed to evolve over the years. What we need this morning, if we can get it, is a commitment as to when this is going to happen and clarity on those issues I raised regarding the difficulties farmers going to the market are going to have and so on. We need to see that clarity. We also need to see where the budget for this is going to come from. From a departmental point of view, it will obviously cost more to bring in these new rules and regulations and implement them properly. If they are only half-heartedly implemented, they will not work. All of us, including the Minister, understand that. That will require more resources but it will put farmers in a position where they can have confidence in the scheme. The problem we have at the moment is that farmers do not have confidence in it. They see feedlots and other things that are hit-and-miss in how well they are run and they have difficulty understanding why all the emphasis has once again been put on the farmers who find themselves in a situation where TB has spread to their farms, often through wildlife.
They are the ones who feel they are being punished for it. We need clarity and we need to ensure the budget is there to ensure people can have confidence in this new scheme.
I want to provide that clarity as soon as possible and to restore confidence in this scheme. The final set of proposals I bring forward will be the biggest change in our approach to TB in the 75 years the disease has been in this country. I have held discussions and meetings that have fed into the TB plan, which I intend to finalise the details of and publish shortly. At a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, 24 June, I received approval and support from my Government colleagues to address the current high level of bovine TB with this plan. The Deputy is dead right to say this will be expensive. It will cost more money in the short term. I believe it is a strong business case because I am front-loading expenditure to save money in the long run. That is definitely a case I am making, but a significant amount of money will be required. If we are successful, it will not necessarily identify more herds affected, but will identify earlier more reactors within the herds affected. We need that to happen to get them out and to stop them seeding the disease out. These new measures will require significant changes to the existing TB programme. There will be significant funding and other implications. We are currently working through the necessary preparations to implement these changes as soon as possible.
77. Deputy Jennifer Whitmore asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will direct the Marine Institute to undertake a formal stock assessment of sprat, with a view to introducing a total allowable catch; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36041/25]
Will the Minister direct the Marine Institute to undertake a formal stock assessment of sprat, with a view to identifying a total allowable catch, and will he make a statement on the matter?
I thank the Deputy for her question. Sprat is a small pelagic schooling fish that occurs inshore. Sprat is a short-lived species and an important prey fish for many marine species, those vital to the ocean food chain, as well as an important source of income for inshore fishermen. The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, ICES, considers sprat to be a data-limited stock, which means that more detailed data is required to form a full understanding of the state of the stock. However, the Marine Institute has been actively involved in work on sprat through research surveys and fisheries catch sampling. From this work, it has data and information on the biology, population dynamics and stock structure of sprat around Ireland. Studies have not to date shown evidence of separate stocks in the Celtic Sea, and the ICES considers sprat in ICES divisions 6 and 7 to be a single stock. Sprat around the Irish coast is known to perform seasonal migrations between winter feeding and summer spawning grounds.
The latest acoustic survey for sprat in the Celtic Sea and the south Irish Sea was conducted by the Marine Institute in October 2024 as part of its annual survey series, ongoing since the early 2000s. The survey results are available on its website. This survey shows no evidence of sprat moving northwards and no collapse in the abundance of the species over the scale of the surveyed area. At this time, there is no proposal from the European Commission for a total allowable catch, TAC, and quota management arrangement for fodder fish such as sprat in the waters around Ireland. Ireland will, of course, have regard for a possible TAC and quota regime or other appropriate conservation measures going forward if recommended in the scientific advice to support the sustainable management of these stocks.
I thank the Minister of State. Sprat is not economically important. It is quite a low-value fishery but it is ecologically valuable. Everything feeds on it, from fish, whales and dolphins to seabirds. If we do not have sprat, we do not have those other species. Unfortunately, we are in a situation where, because it has not been deemed economically valuable enough, we do not have stock assessments. There has not been a TAC conducted on sprat. That is now causing huge problems because we do not have sufficient data to manage this important species. While I know the Marine Institute has been doing some analysis, it is not sufficient. This is a short-lived species, living for only four years. If there is major overfishing, which it is indicated is happening in some areas, that stock will collapse in the areas in question. It is really important that we have the data available so we can make decisions, not just fisheries decisions but ecological and environmental decisions.
I am aware of the Deputy's knowledge and experience in this area, and I take that on board. She is right to identify sprat as an important feeder stock for mammals, birds and other fish species in those areas she has identified. I will continue to engage with the Marine Institute with regard to the information it has and data it is capturing as part of its overall assessment of stocks in the region generally. The Deputy will be familiar with an effort made by a previous Government to look at the capture of sprat in a manner that is not so much based on the reduction in or concerns about the stock volumes, but more to try to support the inshore fishing sector. For that sector, with its smaller operations, sprat provides an economic dividend for their livelihoods. It is important to coastal communities. I know there will be a further question on this matter later. Time permitting, I will address the current position in a more holistic way.
I ask the Minister of State to provide some information on the point that process has reached. I am interested in hearing when a decision will be made. The reality is that, in the absence of data, the fundamental approach to take with any stock is the precautionary principle. That essentially means working on a risk-averse basis. We are not doing that at the moment, and it is important we do. Depending on the outcome of the Minister of State's consultation and decision, I am very concerned that even with that decision in place, we do not know enough about this stock to ensure sustainable fishing of it. Would he consider a moratorium on the entire stock on a short-term basis until we have the data and evidence to show we can protect the species for future fishing, and not just from an ecological perspective? If sprat are not there, other pelagic fish will not be available either.
The overall catch of stock has grown significantly in recent years. That indicates that there is not a major threat in the short term to the supply of sprat. However, it is my view that to continue to fish at those levels would certainly lead to a significant negative impact. I will get into the process that is under way a little later. I have to be mindful, in whatever decision is ultimately taken, that it is a proportionate response to the threat and risk to the stock and to the economic viability of the inshore fishing sector. We must take all of that into account when a decision is being made. I am hopeful we will not just have reviewed the upwards of 5,500 submissions that have been made in the latest consultation period. I have also sought from the Marine Institute the latest scientific information available and general economic data to assist me in making a decision about how we move forward in the next phase.
78. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will outlaw teeth-clipping, tail-docking and castration in pig farming and regulate sow stalls and farrowing crates to have an area of not less than 5 sq. m, so as to improve animal welfare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36640/25]
Last Tuesday, I introduced a Bill to ban pig mutilation, sow stalls and farrowing crates, which the EU has already committed to phase out and for which the Minister is already giving grants to farmers to move away from. The question is whether he will take a lead on this, as the Government did under pressure from campaigners on fur farming, where it moved ahead of the rest of the European Union to ban fur farming. Will the Minister act now to ban the most inhumane practices in the pig industry?
I thank Deputy Murphy for raising this important topic. There is EU and national legislation in place to protect the welfare of pigs. It sets out detailed requirements for pigs, including, for example, requirements for minimum space, feeding and watering of pigs, environmental enrichment, lighting and noise levels. Regarding sow stalls and farrowing crates, the legislation allows for sows and gilts to be confined in stalls and crates for a defined period and currently both are used on most Irish pig farms for management purposes. My Department has implemented specific actions to help reduce the need for routine tail docking of pigs. These include the delivery of a free animal welfare risk assessment tool for commercial pig farms in collaboration with Animal Health Ireland and Teagasc.
The tool enables farmers to work with their vet to identify their risk factors for tail-biting and to develop an action plan to deal with those risks. More than 1,300 assessments have been carried out across 400 pig farms to date. My Department also carries out risk-based inspections on a number of pig farms each year to check compliance with the legislation. Tooth reduction in piglets is currently necessary to prevent injuries to the teats of sows and to other piglets when they suckle. However, the castration of pigs is not routinely carried out in Ireland.
Under the farm to fork strategy, the European Commission committed to revising the EU animal welfare legislation, including the pig welfare directive. The Commission has also indicated that a phasing out of the use of cages for animals, including sow stalls and crates, is being considered. It is important that any new welfare legislation is based on science, with reasonable transition periods and supports given to farmers. I will continue to closely monitor developments at EU level.
What provoked me to introduce this Bill was undercover investigations carried out by the National Animal Rights Association and Animal Rebellion Ireland. There were two separate investigations on six different farms, chosen at random. Video evidence was produced, which I watched. It was horrendous. The Department has been sent the footage but I do not know if the Minister has had a chance to watch it. I encourage him to do so.
Sick and dying pigs with open wounds and weeping open sores were left to suffer and die in filthy conditions. "Enrichment" was just a metal bar and the pigs were clearly starved of any real enrichment. Pigs had their tails painfully docked or cut off right up to the root, although tail-docking is supposed to be banned, other than in limited circumstances. Up to 95% of Irish pigs still have their tails docked. The farrowing crates and sow stalls are so narrow that the sows cannot turn around or move more than a few centimetres. They are in there for long periods to ensure they never get a moment's break from suckling the 15 piglets that are now regularly born in each litter. Has the Minister seen the footage and how does he respond to it?
The Government strongly condemns any cruelty or mistreatment of any animal. It is my Department's policy to investigate all allegations of illegal or criminal behaviour and to prepare files for appropriate action. We have very robust animal welfare legislation in this country. The welfare of all animals, in particular those in intensively reared systems such as pigs, is a priority for my Department. In the case of pigs, there is sector-specific legislation in place based on existing EU rules.
Some of the measures the Deputy talks about are unpleasant in nature but they also involve animal welfare measures. A large sow rolling over on very young piglets could cause their death, which would not be positive. The purpose of the crate around farrowing time is to prevent that happening. For that reason, we must look at animal welfare measures in the round. It is the same with the point about piglets' teeth and the impact they can have on other piglets or the sow.
Pigs are highly intelligent, sociable creatures. The farms were selected at random and all of them demonstrated horrific conditions for pigs. They were in a desperate state. Dead pigs were just lying there, as were pigs that were severely injured and heading towards death. Pigs were trapped in very small spaces. They are in grim indoor spaces and they never go outside in their whole lives. Some 3.5 million pigs are in conditions like that and are slaughtered in Ireland every single year. Pig farming takes place on a very small number of farms. There are approximately 260 pig farms in Ireland.
What we have is a mixture of breaking existing laws and laws that are inadequate and allow poor conditions to persist. The Minister might tell us what is being done about that. Every time I raise such issues or there is an "RTÉ Investigates" programme, the Minister says he is looking into the matter but nothing ever seems to happen in regard to actions against the farmers who are guilty of abuse or in terms of improvements to the legislation.
I repeat that the Government strongly condemns any cruelty or mistreatment of any animal. We carry out risk-based assessments. We also carry out investigations into any allegations of illegal or criminal behaviour and we prepare files for the Director of Public Prosecutions, as appropriate. That is a strong priority of my Department. We take that responsibility very seriously. I want to be very clear on that.
My Department recently published an updated specification for new pig housing under TAMS 3, with requirements including more space, more comfortable flooring, more feeding space and farrowing pens of 6.5 sq. m. Sows can only be kept in a crate for a few days around farrowing, and the rest of the time they must be loose in the pen. Housing constructed in line with this specification will enhance pig welfare and enable farmers to move towards rearing pigs with long tails. We are working on that in a very clear direction. We take a very serious approach to any infringement of animal welfare laws, which is our role. We continue to engage at a European level on the future direction of policy regarding the points Deputy Murphy raised.
79. Deputy Mattie McGrath asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide a full explanation for the ongoing delays in issuing ACRES payments to participating farmers; the number of applicants still awaiting full or partial payment under all streams of the scheme; the urgent steps being taken by his Department to resolve system bottlenecks and ensure timely payment to farmers who have met all compliance requirements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36922/25]
I want to ask the Minister about the ongoing delays in issuing ACRES payments. Farmers signed up to these schemes in good faith. There are delays in payment even in cases of full compliance. The issue is an inability to pay. I want answers as to what the Minister is doing about it. What is the reason for the delay? Is it merely that the Department does not have the funding to pay the farmers? This is totally unacceptable. I expect a good response from the Minister.
I hope the Deputy always expects a good answer, not just to one question. I thank him very much for raising the agri-climate rural environment scheme, ACRES. The scheme is very important. I accept that there are challenges in regard to it for some farmers.
ACRES is the flagship environmental scheme provided under the 2023-27 CAP strategic plan, with €1.5 billion in Exchequer and EU funding allocated over the course of the scheme. There are currently just under 54,000 participants in ACRES.
Payments in respect of ACRES continue to issue on a weekly basis, as cases pass all required validation checks. A total of €512.2 million has now issued since ACRES payments commenced at the end of 2023. That is more than half a billion euro in a couple of years paid directly to farmers to support them in the measures they are taking.
In the case of the 2023 scheme year, almost 99% of participants have been paid in full. As regards 2024, 97% of participants have received their advance payments and almost 94% of participants have now received a balancing payment.
My Department is committed to resolving as soon as possible the issues that have been delaying the remaining payments. Additional resources have been deployed and we are systematically working through the remaining issues associated with the outstanding cases. These issues can range from internal departmental matters, such as the processing of changes of ownership and the finalisation of payment calculation processes, to external, applicant- or adviser-related matters such as the submission of documentation.
While we continue to work on those internal issues, I take this opportunity to remind farmers who have further information to submit to do so as soon as possible. My Department will continue to issue regular online updates in the coming period on the progress being made. I am not happy that some farmers are not being paid on time and when they expected to be paid. It was a top priority for me to address this issue when I came into this office at the end of January. I will not rest until the situation has been resolved for every last farmer. We have made very significant progress in recent months to get the number down to the current very low level. It is a top priority for me and my officials to continue to work until the situation has been resolved.
The Minister calls ACRES a flagship scheme. I wonder about that. The ongoing and completely unacceptable delays in the issuing of ACRES payments is a matter of deep concern to farmers across the country. It is just not fair. Farmers who entered this scheme did so in good faith, on the understanding that they would be paid in a timely manner. Yet, here we are, halfway into 2025, and thousands of farmers are still waiting. I must be the only person in the country meeting farmers who are unpaid in County Waterford, County Tipperary and other places. Farmers are even waiting for partial payments. Many have received nothing at all. This is not a technical glitch or a minor inconvenience; this is a serious cashflow crisis for farmers who have bills to pay and who have engaged contractors in good faith. They expect to get the money as they have been compliant.
Many of the delays are due to errors on the side of the Department. One example relates to a constituent who was due to receive his 2024 payment. He received a partial payment in November 2024, which was totally due to an error by the Department. He was told he would be provided with a corrective payment in 2025.
Now in July he has received a payment of just €300 when he was due €5,000. A dodgy car salesman would do better than this. The Minister said recently that due to staffing issues, the payments could not be paid. That would not be acceptable in any Department or for anybody else.
I did not say that.
It is not good enough.
I did not say that. The Deputy should not attribute comments to me about staffing issues. I have been very clear here; we have had a very significant challenge with processing and working through all of these issues. Some farmers were not paid on time. When I came into this job on 23 January, 14,500 farmers who were due to be paid had not been paid because of challenges we had in processing their applications. That was not acceptable to me. It is still not acceptable to me that there is a couple of percent of farmers left unpaid. However, the progress we have made from 14,500 farmers unpaid when I started this job less than six months ago to getting that down to 1,586 farmers, of whom 514 are from 2023 so are counted twice in that measure, is significant.
We have made very significant changes to our structures in Johnstown Castle. We have brought about a number of changes in how we process these. I have put extra resources in there from a departmental perspective to get those farmers paid with the promise that these challenges would not recur. The resolutions we found to these problems took time because we did it in a systematic way and dealt with the cohorts group by group and designed the IT functionality around that, so that this problem would not recur every year and that we could restore confidence in this really exceptional scheme that has put more than €500 million into farmers' pockets.
I accept the Minister's bona fides. He is a farmer. I am a businessman. No one could operate in this manner, with farmers still waiting for payments from 2023 and hearing every excuse in the world. A man expected to get €5,000 of a corrective payment and he got €300. As I said, a dodgy salesman or a man at a fair who would spit in your hand would do better than that. In this day and age, this is shocking. I accept the Minister's bona fides but I want to know how many farmers are still waiting under each stream of ACRES and how many farmers are suffering through Department errors. This is not acceptable. What concrete steps is the Department taking? The Minister said he has made efforts but what kind of a lethargic or inept mindset got into the Department?
I respect the Department officials and have done for decades. I have met them and dealt with them. In this day and age, it is just not good enough to blame IT and blame anything he likes. Farmers entered into these schemes in good faith and where they are compliant and honour the terms of the scheme, they must be paid. They have contractors to pay. They have feed suppliers to pay. They have families to raise and kids to put into education. No other sector would put up with this.
The Department issued a statement some months ago - I heard it myself - that there were delays with payments again and the new deadline would not be met due to lack of staff. If the Department officials were told they would not get paid next Thursday, or if that statement was made in any Department, that would not last for long. The farmers need fair play here. Fair play is fine play for me and it is not happening for the farmers of Ireland.
I believe we have made progress. I cannot be any clearer; I will not rest until every last farmer is paid. I will continue to push my officials and push the system as hard as possible to work through those last issues. The last issues are also the most difficult. To be at 99%, 97% and 94% of payments through the different cohorts is significant progress. We have made a commitment that problems will not recur on this scale.
The Deputy asked for a specific breakdown, so let us make it specific to Tipperary. In Tipperary, of the applicants in 2023, 1,559 have been fully paid and only 14 still have challenges we are working through. There are 14 outstanding and 1,559 have been paid. In 2024, 1,842 received advance payments for 2024 and 1,797 received the balancing payments on that as well, with 63 of the advance payments not paid and 113 of the balancing payments not paid. Those farmers still have to be sorted. They are my focus and I continue to do that while making sure we can restore confidence in the sector. However, the vast majority of the Deputy's farmers in Tipperary and farmers in other parts of the country have had those problems resolved. They are finding great benefits and delivering benefits through ACRES, which has delivered more than €500 million into our economy and into farmers' pockets over the last couple of years.
