Vol. 1076 No. 4
104. Deputy Malcolm Byrne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will consider introducing an insurance scheme or a guarantee of a basic income for the tillage sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66245/25]
I thank Deputy Byrne for raising this point because under the current proposals for CAP post-2027, there is a mandatory requirement for member states to put in place risk management tools. Risk management tools were optional in the current CAP strategic plan, running from 2023 to 2027, and the case for inclusion of crop insurance was examined in its preparation. However, its inclusion was not supported by stakeholders. The issue of risk management has since been discussed by the Food Vision tillage group, which included a recommendation in its final report to promote existing risk management tools and examine opportunities for an Irish model of crop or price insurance. My Department will consider potential risk management measures as part of the strategic planning for the next CAP strategic plan.
In recognition of the tillage sector’s importance, my Department provides substantial direct support to tillage farmers. In 2026, €50 million will be made available through the protein aid scheme, the straw incorporation measure and a new tillage support scheme. Having secured this additional funding in budget 2026 to further support the sector, I intend to consult stakeholders on how this funding will be utilised. My Department has also provided significant direct supports to tillage farmers in recent years. This year, the budget for the protein aid scheme is €10 million, having increased from €7 million to €10 million annually from last year. Applications for approximately 66,000 ha of cereals and oilseed rape straw were submitted for chopping and incorporating under the straw incorporation measure this year. I made the decision to pay all eligible applicants under the scheme.
In February of 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 horticulture farmers found themselves in due to exceptionally poor weather and continued high input costs in the spring of 2024. The tillage sector is also being supported under other schemes, including the tillage capital investment scheme, ACRES and the organic farming scheme and, indeed, tillage farmers have availed of the water quality EIP, with significant areas committed to cover crops, which are a really effective tool. I will continue to work with the tillage sector and provide targeted support where possible given the strategic importance of this sector to the wider agriculture community.
I thank the Minister. He and I do not need to discuss the challenges facing the sector; I know he is very much aware of them. What farmers are looking for is a guarantee of a basic income. Obviously we already have the BISS scheme in place. I welcome the fact that as part of the CAP negotiations the Minister is looking at trying to provide some floor for farmers. It is not just important for the sustainability of farming, as the Minister mentioned, it is also important to us being able to tackle climate change and meet our environmental obligations. It is critical to be able to support farmers in those areas. We can certainly look at linking payments to food security and sustainability goals. That would be a very positive measure. It is critical that guaranteeing a basic level of income to tillage farmers is core to the CAP negotiations the Minister will enter in Brussels.
There are many different tools in our armoury to be able to support the tillage sector as part of the CAP negotiations. I attended a meeting with the Irish Grain Growers and the IFA in Killashee Hotel to which more than 1,000 tillage farmers turned up. Deputy Byrne and I know tillage farmers do not protest much or in those kinds of numbers but they did on this occasion, such is the level of desperation after three really difficult years. After that meeting, it was very clear to me that there was a need for short-term financial support to give farmers the confidence to put seed in the ground again next year. That is not the long-term solution, however. The long-term solution is the value-added piece. The dairy industry has been very successful in identifying product such as whey proteins as the value-added piece. Unfortunately, our tillage sector is currently at world market prices and that is really hurting it. What we need to do, while having the short-term financial support I have committed to for next year and on the design of which I will work with farming organisations to make it most targeted, is to work on the value-added piece around our native grains, which I am happy to expand on in my next answer.
The Minister is aware that in the US there is a federal crop insurance programme which was introduced during the time of the depression. I was with the Canadian ambassador when he spoke to the IFA about guarantees, insurance and a basic income scheme that operate in Canada. It continues to be a concern that 1,400 tillage farmers have left the sector in recent years. I know the Minister is committed to this and I very much welcome his support for flour production in Ireland, bringing that back and diversifying markets. There are all of those measures. However, until we can guarantee our tillage farmers that if they plant in the autumn, they will get a reasonable income when they reap in the spring, it is going to be a big challenge for the sector. I know the Minister is aware of this but it is critically important to address it as part of the CAP negotiations.
We absolutely need to design this scheme and make sure the €30 million I have secured for budget 2026 is targeted at the farmers. I want to do this differently from the last scheme. The last scheme provided a much-needed €100 for every hectare that had seed in the ground, with no capping or conditionality around it. We can be more targeted with this €30 million, get it to those who need it the most and increase the value of it for those farmers as well. That scheme will buy us some time.
The broader issue is that I want to work with the farm organisations and industry to identify how we get that value-added piece. There are things we can do in respect of native grains in our feed. The Irish whiskey file needs to be examined in terms of how we use our native grains in that or what its requirements are. The use of quality assurance schemes in other sectors has been really successful. It is challenging, it is not simple and it requires leadership from stakeholders. I want to work with people on that. We will get certainty into the sector in the medium term and beyond by moving to a value added-piece and not being dependent on world market commodity prices, which is a very vulnerable position for our tillage sector to be in.
Finally, as to the efforts I am making on nitrates and other issues, land availability is a key issue, as is the price of rented land for tillage farmers. It is not an island or a silo. Irish agriculture is all interlinked. The success of how I get on with nitrates will determine and have an impact on the tillage sector as well.
105. Deputy Séamus McGrath asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the number of tests his Department’s laboratories have carried out for suspected HPAI H5N1 since 1 September 2025; and, of these tests, the number that were positive for HPAI H5N1; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66460/25]
With the increasing incidence of bird flu in the wild bird population and, more recently, a fourth turkey farm, it is a concern for flock owners and people who have an interest in wildlife.
Will the Minister give an outline of the level of testing that is being conducted and the support that will be there for people whose livelihood has been impacted by the restrictions and the outbreaks?
I thank the Deputy for raising this very important point. Since early November, there have been four outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza, HPAI, caused by the H5N1 virus in turkey flocks in counties Carlow, Meath, Monaghan and, most recently, unfortunately, Laois.
My Department has been implementing disease control and eradication measures in line with the EU animal health law provisions and national legislation. This includes the placing of 3 km radius protection zones and 10 km radius surveillance zones around each holding where an outbreak has occurred, and implementing surveillance and disease control measures within these zones. Prior to this, an outbreak of HPAI occurred in a confined establishment in Cork in October. That establishment was closed while disease control measures were implemented in line with the legislation.
The H5N1 virus has been circulating in wild birds throughout the country during 2025, as we know, creating a serious and ongoing risk of infection to poultry and captive bird flocks. My Department's laboratories have completed 821 avian influenza PCR screening tests for suspected HPAI, H5N1 in poultry, captive birds and wild birds, since 1 September. Of the samples tested, 199 tested positive for some form of avian influenza.
My Department carries out avian influenza surveillance testing throughout the year in targeted dead wild birds to understand if avian influenza is circulating in the wild bird population. Strict biosecurity measures remain the best way for poultry and captive bird keepers to protect their flocks from the disease. Flock owners should remain vigilant of any signs of the disease and report any suspicion to their local regional veterinary office without delay.
I work closely with the Minister in Northern Ireland, Andrew Muir MLA. This is one epidemiological island. The virus does not recognise invisible borders. Introducing a housing order and strict biosecurity measures together is important, particularly when we consider the importance of our commercial poultry flock in the Border regions.
Poultry farmers are obviously concerned. Where there are outbreaks, even where there are restrictions, it is challenging and very difficult for poultry farmers. There needs to be a realistic support or compensation package in place.
As the Minister said, Fota Wildlife Park has been closed since October. It is losing out on income. It has also lost some of its birds. The impact on staff, people around there and the wildlife is significant. Has the Minister engaged with them? What kind of support will be available and relevant to the likes of the wildlife park? I know that a lot of the emphasis on compensation packages up to now has been on situations where a cull has taken place in a commercial setting. What level of engagement has the Minister had? What opportunities will be there for the likes of Fota Wildlife Park?
In terms of compensation in general, the Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013 provides that compensation to owners of animals may be payable if a cull of those animals is directed by the Department of agriculture in the event of an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza. The compensation may relate to the animal that is culled, or to an animal product, animal feed or similar item that is destroyed in relation to the outbreak. The compensation may not exceed the open market value of the animal or item. My compensation scheme is very much targeted towards the commercial sector. My responsibility is for the commercial sector. We monitor the wild bird population, but it is the responsibility of the National Parks and Wildlife Service.
The Deputy asked a specific question about Fota Wildlife Park. I share great sympathy with those involved and the impact this has had on them. This virus is obviously very easily transmitted. We could not possibly have members of the public walking into an area where the virus has been and taking it out on their shoes or whatever else. When we talk about strict biosecurity measures, this has been reflected in the process across government.
Since 2017, my Department has employed the services of an external consultancy firm with specialised knowledge of the poultry industry to develop valuation tables relating to the most common species and types of poultry in Ireland. As I say, compensation, from my perspective, is for the commercial and forestry side. The Government is, however, very much aware of the challenges for Fota.
The compensation package is very focused on the commercial sector where a cull has taken place. The example I outlined of the wildlife park does not fit neatly into that situation. Thankfully, a minimal number of birds will be lost there. However, there are many other instances where the restrictions themselves are putting a cost on the likes of poultry farms. They have to keep a house warm when they do not know how quickly a new flock will be coming in. There are costs associated with the restrictions. The Minister needs to look beyond the immediate package that is there for compensation where there is a cull.
Four instances have emerged on turkey farms. There is the obvious question that so many people want the Minister to reassure them about. Will there be turkey available for Christmas?
I confirm it is very possible that the Deputy will be able to eat turkey on Christmas Day. I very much hope that will be the case. We all know how important that is. I do not jest. This is important to our turkey farmers. I have huge sympathy for the four flocks that have been impacted. It is a devastating blow to an individual flock owner. On the broader scale, it is important to reiterate to the public that it is safe to eat properly cooked poultry and egg products. The measures being taken are to stop the spread. I commend the four flock owners because their actions and those of the affected owners in the surveillance zones and restriction zones are for the greater good of the country so we can get back to disease-free status as soon as possible. We in the higher-risk period and there is no doubt about that. It starts in November with migratory birds coming in. This has been a bad start to what is a high-risk period that will run until approximately next April. Through the enhanced mandatory biosecurity measures, the implementation of the housing order, which helps, and the strong vigilance of our industry and flock owners, in close consultation with my regional veterinary officers, we can stay on top of this so fewer people are impacted into the future.
106. Deputy Edward Timmins asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if there is a strategy for succession planning for farmers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66716/25]
I offer the Minister my best wishes for his role, which is not so new anymore. His is a very important role, particularly at this critical time. We are in different constituencies but are near neighbours where south Kildare meets west Wicklow.
Agriculture in Ireland is ageing fast. Currently, the average age of a farmer in Ireland is 59. Only 4% are under 35. This imbalance poses risk to long-term food security and to this important sector, which exports 90% of what it produces. The programme for Government commits to a farm succession scheme. Is there a strategy for succession planning for farmers?
I thank the Deputy for raising this point. While he is in a different constituency, he is the TD who lives closest to me, as we straddle the border between Kildare and west Wicklow.
The challenge of generational renewal in farming has been widely recognised at both national and EU level. The programme for Government prioritises supporting intergenerational farm succession. Food Vision 2030, our shared strategy for the agrifood sector, states that generational renewal in farming is critically important to ensure the future viability and social sustainability of the Irish agrifood sector and of rural Ireland.
Ireland provides a range of supports, including initiatives under the current CAP strategic plan, a suite of strong taxation measures and access to finance, as well as advisory and education and training supports. Despite this support, the average age of farmers continues to rise. The most recent figures show that only 4.35% of farmers are under 35 years of age and some 37% of farmers are over 65.
In September, I launched the report of the commission on generational renewal in farming. Generational renewal, including farm succession, is a complex issue and there are many factors involved. The commission on generational renewal in farming was established to examine this issue and has produced a thorough analysis and made 31 recommendations across a wide range of areas, including CAP supports, pensions, taxation, access to finance, access to land, collaborative arrangements, advisory services, education and training, the important issue of gender balance and the overall attractiveness of the sector. These recommendations will be carefully considered. They are contained in a report that runs to 180 pages. The recommendations will be considered by an implementation group in my Department who will engage with agricultural stakeholders and the relevant public bodies. While some recommendations are for consideration in the context of the next CAP, it is hoped that others can be progressed in a shorter timeframe. Some of the taxation recommendations have already been considered and progressed in budget 2026, with those extended for a longer period than had been requested or anticipated.
I have read most of that document and most of those 31 recommendations are very worthy.
I would like to see a lot of them being implemented.
On a slightly related matter, I worked most of my life in small and medium sized businesses. The thing that strikes me most about farming is the huge fluctuation in prices from year to year. Most businesses face increases in costs or sales prices in single digit percentage changes. It is not so in farming. This makes it difficult to plan and means people have to build up large reserves to be confident of being able to continue to trade or else they will run out of cash. We need to take measures to make it financially attractive to run a farm business. We need to reduce red tape, which is a turn-off for many farmers, and make all schemes much simpler. Many of the recommendations of the commission on generational renewal in farming will help.
I agree with the Deputy in many ways. The question I am most often asked about generational renewal is whether there will be a scheme in the next CAP or what it will look like. I want to be able to develop a succession scheme and I hope to have the resources to do that, but young trained farmers will not make life-long decisions based on whether they get one grant in 2028 and put everything on hold until then.
Generational renewal gets to the heart of everything I do. The efforts we are making to try to ensure we have a derogation for nitrates for the next few years is critical to giving certainty to young trained farmers to invest and take the plunge into full-time farming. My new bovine TB plan is a massive issue for the Deputy's constituents in west Wicklow, as it is in Kildare and across the country. Having certainty that we will get on top of that perennial issue, which has been around for 75 years, with a new approach is a key measure. My support for the tillage sector is a key measure in giving confidence for generational renewal, as is making sure farmers have a good solid income. When we talk about sustainability as a three-legged stool, the economic sustainability is every bit as important as being able to deliver the environmental and societal sustainability.
I bring the Minister's attention to another matter related to generational renewal. I will highlight an unfair flaw in the operation of the fair deal scheme relating to land transfer, for example to a grandchild, which is causing huge financial hardship for families. I will explain how it operates. This rule must be changed. If a family transfers land within five years of the owner entering a nursing home, this land is valued. If the recipients lease the land, they must pay the nursing home 7.5% of the value of the land on an annual base, with no three-year time limit like there is for the family farm. This could go on for 14 years until the total value of the land is paid over. This is completely unfair.
There is no possibility of deferring the payment, as there is for the family home. It is therefore a huge financial burden. Where is the family to get the funds? I know of a case in which a family or young person is being assessed to pay €23,000 per year and the income the person is getting from leasing the land is only €5,000. The person has nowhere to find the cash and it is putting them under huge financial hardship. I am sure the Minister will agree that this is totally unfair. I would like it to be looked at and changed immediately.
The fair deal scheme has had a specific impact on farmers. While it is not under my remit or that of the Department of agriculture, I have engaged with previous Ministers for Health on it and I would be happy to work with the Minister, Deputy Carroll MacNeill, on this area as well. The last Government made changes around it and we want to be able to give certainty, clarity and comfort to people who are planning the transition of land in the most difficult of circumstances. We want to make sure the fair deal scheme is fair in how it does it. I will be happy to work with the Deputy and colleagues across the House on that issue, because how it affects farmers and how it affects small businesses more broadly is a key consideration.
107. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will report on his engagements with his European counterparts regarding food safety and public health. [66730/25]
I am taking the question on behalf of Deputy Carthy.
This goes back to my question at the beginning about food safety and public health. The Mercosur deal is at the core of this but it is broader than that. We have an issue across Europe in that we are importing a lot of product from different parts of the world. In particular, the question about grain earlier was interesting because a lot of feed comes into the country from tropical climates. A situation could happen in the future - it is one of the things we need to be vigilant about - where we could bring in a parasite, or whatever it is, that causes a problem for our native species of grain or other products. That is one example. There are a lot of other examples of it.
It is important that the Minister reassure the public that the quality of food we get in Europe is up to the standard and is not being contaminated by food from other countries that is of a lesser quality.
I thank Deputy Kenny for raising an important point. It gets to the heart of what we do. From a food safety and public health perspective, a lot of the conversation in Ireland has tended to be about sustainability in recent years, what our farmers are doing, producing food sustainably and profit. When we travel abroad on a trade mission, the first thing that is mentioned, particularly in places like Asia and beyond, is our safety credentials. They are second to none and it is something the Department never takes for granted. However, as farmers we might. We almost never mention it any more because food safety is not an issue unless there has been a scare. In countries that do not have confidence in food safety, it is the number one priority. That is why we will never be complacent about this. It is the number one selling point of Irish agrifood products and as a country we export 90% of the food and drink we produce.
Food safety and public health are fundamental to Ireland's agrifood industry, as I said, and to the protection of consumer health and safety, but also consumer confidence. My Department plays a central role in implementing and enforcing EU food safety rules across primary production, processing, official controls, imports and exports. As Minister, I routinely attend the European Council in its agriculture and fisheries formation to engage directly with my European counterparts on food safety, public health and other issues. My Department also regularly attends EU meetings on issues regarding food safety and public health to present the Irish position on the legal and technical issues under discussion. This ensures that Ireland remains compliant with and, in co-operation with other member states can shape, European Union legislation in this area.
Reports of the Irish Farmers' Journal investigation into the sale of hormones and antibiotics in Brazil raise important issues and merit careful examination, as I said previously. Brazilian beef already enters the EU market, and it is therefore important to ensure that none of the unregulated products referenced in the investigation are used in its production. While there is no evidence that this is the case, these reports reinforce the need for further vigilance.
The Minister mentioned in a previous reply that quite a small amount of beef from Brazil comes into Ireland and that there is no evidence of this issue. Is the evidence being looked for? What kind of investigations are we carrying out into that, from an Irish and European perspective? Similarly, we have a large amount of poultry coming in under the Mercosur deal. I think it is 180,000 tonnes. We need to be vigilant in respect of that. We have a large poultry industry in Ireland and we eat a lot of poultry so we need to ensure it is of the highest quality.
I will go back to the issue raised earlier about feedstuffs. A lot of feedstuffs are imported into this country from Latin America and other tropical climates. That is displacing Irish grain and feed and if we are to be authentic about the quality of our food, we need to ensure that the authenticity can be stood over. For example, people were before the committee recently to speak about growing grain and, in some cases, the only thing that is Irish in Irish whiskey is the water. That is a very bad situation. We need to be authentic about the products we produce and to do so not only from the point of view that they are what they say on the label, but also that we can guarantee their quality. The only way we can guarantee their quality is if we produce the ingredients as well as the finished product here.
Trade is two-way. In response to the Deputy's original question, I said clearly that we are in a space where we need to have absolute confidence that any food that comes into the EU meets our standards. Our sanitary and phytosanitary, SPS, food safety standards are non-negotiable. They are the standards to which we expect our farmers to produce food in the EU and we do not accept secondary standards for anything that comes in from outside the EU. Should we produce everything here? That is a different argument in a way. We could get very protectionist. There was a time when Ireland tried to be self-sufficient in its food production system. We were a poor country back then. The highly integrated nature of trade around the world is here to stay.
It is balance.
It is about balance but we benefit largely from it because we export 90% of the food and drink we produce. We absolutely need it to be a level playing field. We need to make sure those standards are there, that there is confidence in our products, whether the food is produced in Europe or comes in. We will reiterate those points, but the checks and balances are there. This is non-negotiable for the EU. It is strong on that and we will look for further assurances to make sure our consumers, as well as our farmers and primary producers, can be reassured about it.
I accept that. I understand the point that we cannot produce everything in Ireland. That goes without saying. However, there is an issue regarding the authenticity of the product that we produce if we are labelling it and selling it as Irish and as having that authenticity around it, yet everything that goes into it is coming from somewhere else. We need to find that clear balance in respect of that.
Regarding Mercosur, safeguards have been put in place. They have been voted through. There were no amendments made to those safeguards, yet a lot of countries, including Ireland and others of like mind, have expressed sincere difficulties with how far those safeguards go. That raises a red flag for a lot of people out there. How genuine is this Government and the other governments that it is meeting with around Europe in making sure that we block this trade deal and find a way forward to protect consumers and farmers in Europe?
I cannot be any clearer than I have been. At every AGRIFISH Council meeting, I have raised Mercosur and our concerns about it. I am not the lead Minister with responsibility for that; it is the responsibility of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, who has that key consideration. I take my role at the Cabinet table seriously. I use my role as a representative and custodian of our farmers and food producing industry to highlight points. I recognise that the vast majority of trade deals benefit Irish agriculture, our farmers and our rural economy, but that does not mean we have to accept every single part of every single trade deal that is put forward. We have continuously highlighted and raised our sensitivities around the Mercosur trade deal. In line with the programme for Government, I have continuously worked with like-minded countries. Most recently, on 17 November, I had bilateral meetings with the French and Italian ministers for agriculture. Previously, I have met the Austrians, Latvians, Polish and many others. I continue to have that level of engagement where we discuss our mutual concerns and engage in the process as it is ongoing.
108. Deputy Tom Brabazon asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if his Department has received applications for compensation for the loss of animals, or animal products and animal feed, in relation to the current strain of avian flu circulating in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66456/25]
Deputy Cleere is taking this question on behalf of Deputy Brabazon.
I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. Unfortunately, there have been four outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza in turkey flocks since early November, one each in counties Carlow, Meath, Monaghan and, most recently, Laois. I express my sympathy to the flock owners concerned. I acknowledge the worry this situation is causing to all those in the poultry industry in Ireland. These outbreaks follow the detection of the H5N1 avian influenza virus in wild birds across the country throughout 2025. It is this ongoing circulation in wild birds that is posing such a risk to poultry and captive birds. Biosecurity is the most effective way to prevent the virus infecting flocks, and this is why I implemented mandatory poultry biosecurity regulations on 1 November and a housing order for poultry and captive birds from 10 November.
The Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013 provides that compensation to owners of animals may be payable if a cull of those animals is directed by my Department in the event of an outbreak in that herd or flock of certain diseases, including highly pathogenic avian influenza. The compensation may relate to the animal that is culled, or to an animal product, animal feed or similar item that is destroyed in relation to the outbreak. The compensation may not exceed the open market value of the animal or item. Since 2017, my Department has engaged an external consultancy firm with specialised knowledge of poultry to develop valuation tables relating to the most common species and types of poultry in Ireland to be used to determine compensation payable in the case of an outbreak of poultry disease that necessitates a cull. These valuation tables are updated on a six-monthly basis.
It is important that this be taken on a case-by-case basis because no two cases are the same. The impact on the financial viability and valuation of the birds at a set time is continuously upgraded. It means that, where a flock owner enters the worst case imaginable of having to have their entire culled, there is a process there for them to engage with that is fair and up to date. My Department is engaging with owners impacted by recent poultry outbreaks in assessing the compensation due to them where depopulation of their flocks and destruction of related material has been directed to control the spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza.
The Minister will be aware that the financial loss will not just be limited to those farmers who have unfortunately had their flocks culled. As these outbreaks are confirmed to be highly pathogenic avian influenza, there are restrictions on poultry, poultry products and eggs from within the 3 km restriction zone and 10 km surveillance zone in respect of both the EU and UK markets. A total of 94% of our poultry exports by value - around €280 million - are to the EU and UK markets. Will the Minister make provision for compensation to be payable to farmers who lose access to their export markets in this current outbreak? The currently held advice is that consuming poultry or eggs from an infected animal once cooked does not pose a risk to public health. That said, consumers may now be reluctant to buy poultry products, given what has been said in the media.
Has the Minister considered that there may be a decline in the number of consumers buying poultry or a fall in the numbers of Christmas turkeys ordered this year? Will the Minister consider a compensation scheme for those farmers who are impacted by this?
To reiterate, the Animal Health and Welfare Act provides that compensation to owners of animals may be payable if a cull of those animals is directed. It is specific. It has clear criteria, and rightly so. If a flock owner or farmer is being asked to remove their entire herd or flock for broader national reasons in the best interests of stopping the spread of disease, that is the most important thing. We do all of that as well as a mandatory biodiversity measures and housing measures to get ourselves back to a disease-free status as soon as possible. The 3 km restriction zone and 10 km surveillance zone remain in place for three months after a positive case. At that point, we can get back to having disease-free status in that area. We are lucky that the vast majority of our product that is exported goes to countries that accept regionalisation. They will only ban the export of product from that restriction zone and surveillance zone, not for the whole country. Some markets ban it for the whole country and do not differentiate. That is a broader challenge. The compensation model that is set out in the Act from 12 years ago is very much targeted at those flock owners.
This morning, I was fortunate to have the opportunity to meet Commissioner McGrath. I welcome the positive news that the European Commission has recommended the extension of the nitrates derogation. I acknowledge the Minister's role in fighting for Ireland. I said numerous times that we as a country were going to have to go into the trenches on the nitrates derogation, and we did. The devil will be in the detail. That will be made available over the next couple of weeks. However, this gives a bit of clarity and certainty to farmers. We do not know the specifics yet. It has been well received out in the community and by farmers whom I spoke to this morning. It is important to acknowledge the Minister's role, the Commissioner's role, the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach. It has been a united effort. Everybody has been on the same page. This is a positive day for Ireland. Hopefully, we can get it through in the next couple of weeks.
I thank the Deputy for his remarks. Ultimately, it is an important step in a process. The process now is with the technical committee that meets on 9 December. It was always our intention and ambition in all of our negotiations to get the best possible proposal agreed by the Commission and then put that on the agenda for the 27 member states and that technical committee to hopefully vote on. We still do not have a derogation. As of now, we do not have a derogation on 1 January. It is in the hands of that committee. I negotiated in good faith. There was detailed engagement between my officials and EU officials. I pay tribute to Commissioner Roswall, who came over at my invitation to visit an Irish farm - the Durkin's farm just outside of Kilcullen in County Kildare - to see at first hand the intergenerational work that was at play. The engagement of her officials who have been over here and I have met in Brussels numerous times has been important. It is fair to say that their starting point and our starting point were two different positions.
We have a proposal now that I have confirmed to the House is for an extension of the existing derogation for a three-year period, with other new conditionalities that I will confirm closer to the time. All of my focus now is on engaging with colleagues across the member states so that if there are any concerns or issues ahead of that vote, we give ourselves the best chance possible. This is not done yet. It is at a sensitive point. I look forward to the engagement.
I also recognise the constructive role that the stakeholders, farm organisations and industry have played throughout this process and their patience at a stressful time for everybody involved.
109. Deputy John Paul O'Shea asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when outstanding farm payment issues under the ACRES scheme will be resolved; the steps being taken to ensure timely payments in future cycles; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [65229/25]
I thank the Deputy for raising the important matter of the agri-climate rural environment scheme, ACRES, which 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 53,700 participants in ACRES.
ACRES payments issue on a scheme year basis, with 2023 being the first scheme year for tranche 1 participants and 2024 being the first year for those who are in tranche 2. Almost €250 million has issued in respect of the 2023 scheme year, with over 99% of participants paid. A total of €268.4 million has issued in respect of the 2024 scheme year and over 98% have now received the payment. Finally, 2025 advance payments have now commenced, with €179.6 million issuing in the first two payment runs. These payments will bring the amount paid in respect of ACRES since its commencement in 2023 to almost €700 million. This reflects the Government’s commitment to achieving a range of environmental, biodiversity, water quality and climate objectives by supporting farm families in their environmental journeys.
ACRES is an ambitious and complex scheme, and there have been challenges as a result. We are overcoming those challenges through the commitment of all those involved in the scheme, including farmers themselves, ACRES advisers and the ACRES co-operation project teams. The main issues that have impacted on the making of payments have been identified and they include contract and ownership or partnership issues, issues with scorecards and the alignment of ACRES data with basic income support for sustainability, BISS, scheme information. My Department is actively resolving the remaining issues through, for example, the development of the required IT functionality and the investigation of issues associated with specific contracts.
In cases such as change of contract, my Department is unable to progress the payment claim until the legal requirements have been resolved. We are working through these issues. We have identified and addressed the issues that arose at the start and the system is functioning much better now. I am happy to expand further in my supplementary response.
I thank the Minister for his continuing engagement on this matter. As he knows, a lot of farmers in Cork North-West are involved in ACRES. I know the Minister inherited a lot these issues when he moved into his new role but he has made great strides to ensure that we are now up at over 90% in terms of payments for many of the schemes from 2023 and 2024.
ACRES is not just a scheme but a partnership between farmers and the State to protect our environment, enhance biodiversity, improve water quality and ensure that sustainable farming remains at the heart of rural Ireland. Across the country, farmers are delivering real, measurable benefits, planting hedgerows, restoring habitats, managing grasslands, reducing emissions and protecting our natural heritage for future generations but for farmers to continue this essential work, the Government must ensure that ACRES payments are made fully and on time each year. Farmers plan their finances around these payments. They rely on them to meet costs, invest in their holdings and deliver the environmental measures expected under the scheme. Delayed payments can create uncertainty, cause cash flow pressures and undermine confidence at a time when farmers are already facing rising input costs and increased regulatory demands.
I completely agree that it is important to get this right. When I got this job on 23 January, there were 14,500 farmers who had signed up in good faith but had not been paid. The problem was on my Department's side through systems failures that had happened. We worked really hard and put extra staff on it. I visited the team in Wexford. We looked at the systems and tried to change them around. There was a lot of overtime and a lot of people put their shoulder to the wheel to get the momentum back up.
At that time, no regular payments were being made but the issuing of payments has gathered considerable momentum this year, as knowledge and experience of the scheme has improved and as functionality has been deployed to address the challenges that were encountered. I appreciate the patience that has been shown by participants as we resolved these issues.
My Department has been developing solutions to solve issues permanently rather than applying quick fixes. It is really important that any solutions developed avoid the same issues and the very concerns that the Deputy has outlined. ACRES has paid out almost €700 million to farmers in this country since 2023. It is a really positive scheme that has delivered massively for our environment and that is what I want to get back to focusing on. We are in that space now.
I very much concur with the Minister on the importance of having permanent solutions in place rather than temporary measures. That is very important. A few prepayments were made previously but getting permanent payments is what it is all about. Timely ACRES payments are not a luxury but a necessity. They uphold trust, recognise the efforts of farmers and allow the scheme to achieve its full environmental and economic potential. There is strong support for the scheme in the farming community of Cork North-West and I will continue to work with the Minister to push for a system that delivers payments swiftly, efficiently and predictably each and every single year.
I thank Deputy O'Shea and colleagues across the House for their support as we worked through the challenges on ACRES. I am committed to having permanent fixes in place so that we can get back to talking about the good things that ACRES is delivering for our environment. More than 54,000 farmers are delivering more than 9,000 km of watercourse protection through buffer strips on areas adjacent to rivers, streams, lakes and wetland riparian zones. More than 500,000 native trees and more than 2,300 km of new hedgerows have been planted. The scheme has seen 14,000 barn owl nest boxes installed and 57,000 hectares of grassland left undisturbed to support overwintering geese and swans. These are the types of measure that are having a real impact and 54,000 farmers put their hands up for that additional environmental conditionality, proving that they can continue to produce top-quality food and supplement their incomes by taking measures that have made a real difference to their areas. That is what I want us talking about and focusing on in ACRES from next year onwards.
Again, I thank the Deputy for his support in this area.
110. Deputy Cathy Bennett asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will report on his engagements regarding the Common Agricultural Policy post 2027. [66741/25]
130. Deputy Séamus McGrath asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine for an update on his work in relation to the negotiations for the Common Agricultural Policy post 2027; if he has had meetings with his ministerial counter parts in other EU member states on the matter; if he has had meetings with the European Commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66461/25]
146. Deputy Colm Burke asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to provide an update on his recent meeting at the European Agriculture and Fisheries Council (AGRIFISH) in Brussels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66669/25]
164. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the progress to date at EU Council discussions in relation to the need to ensure that adequate funding is provided for CAP in the next Multiannual Financial Framework; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66609/25]
Farmers are extremely worried at this time and believe that the Minister is going to cut the CAP budget by up to 25%. I ask for reassurance today that the Minister will not do that.
I propose to take questions Nos. 110, 130, 146 and 164 together.
I thank the Deputies for their questions. If what Deputy Bennett talked about is done, it will not be me who does it. I am fighting to try to avoid that happening. I am working really closely with the EU institutions and my counterparts in other member states to influence the negotiations for the next CAP and the next Common Fisheries Policy, CFP. I am continuing to meet my counterparts at monthly meetings of the AGRIFISH Council and having bilateral discussions on the sides of those meetings as well as separately with individual ministers in order to understand their priorities for the next CAP and to explain Ireland's priorities. It is important to note that there is a long way to go in these negotiations and the Commission proposals published in July are a starting point only. There will be ongoing, regular engagement with the Commission and with other member states as the negotiations progress.
My priority is for a CAP that provides stability, fairness and predictability for farmers and rural communities and one that simplifies rather than complicates. At the most recent AGRIFISH Council meeting, held in November, I took the opportunity to underline the importance of a strong CAP budget in delivering on economic, social and environmental objectives and expressed my concern about the proposed degressivity measures. I emphasised that the CAP must remain a policy that balanced fairness and competitiveness, thereby ensuring adequate support for smaller farms while sustaining viable production at all levels. I also highlighted the need for the careful design of possible measures to address food security risks and the need for reserves to be designed carefully and to remain exceptional, transparent and market oriented. Finally, I sought further clarity on the proposed integration of CAP within a wider national and regional partnership plan structure and expressed my concerns on the level of the CAP budget.
The CAP must remain a distinct, fully funded policy with clear governance, capable of sustaining farm incomes, food security and rural resilience. That requires an adequate and fully funded budget. On the margins of the Council, I have held many bilateral meetings with my ministerial counterparts and have engaged with nearly all member states at this point. These discussions have provided a valuable opportunity to exchange views on the Commission’s proposals and to emphasise our shared priorities for a strong, well-funded and workable CAP that supports farm incomes, food security and rural resilience. I am having all of these bilateral meetings and engaging with colleagues to explain Ireland's priorities as well as to understand theirs. From 1 July next year, Ireland will have the Presidency of the EU and if I am still in this role, God willing, I will be in the chair and have the Presidency of the AGRIFISH Council, which will give us an opportunity to really shape this.
At the same time as these discussions are happening, discussions are happening around the overall budget, the multiannual financial framework and where that is at. I am working with colleagues across all levels of Government to make sure that we get the best possible return. The CAP is critical for our overall economy, our farmers, our rural economy and beyond.
Our farming families produce the highest quality food in the world while also adhering to some of the highest environmental and animal health standards in the world. If there is a proposal to reduce the CAP budget, I ask that the Government fill in the vacuum.
I thank the Minister for his reply. It goes without saying that in the negotiations on the multi-annual financial framework, we must ensure that there is robust and ring-fenced CAP funding. As we all know, this is essential for farm incomes. It is essential for investment in rural Ireland and it is also essential for food security. Far too often, we do not talk about protecting food production in western Europe. As the Minister referenced earlier, the Common Agricultural Policy was devised to ensure the citizens of Europe had a secure supply of safe food. We should never lose sight of that aim and that strategy. That is the reason we need a CAP that is properly funded.
I took the opportunity yesterday to meet with Macra na Feirme to discuss its concerns around the new CAP and the impact it would have on farmers and on rural communities. Its members were particularly focused on generational renewal and knowledge transfer, and the CAP was key for funding generation renewal plan. Will the Minister give members of Macra na Feirme assurance that funding will be available for generational renewal and that action will be taken on implementing that plan?
Will the Minister give a short reply?
I thank Deputies Bennet, Smith and Moynihan for raising what gets to the heart of the CAP - having enough money it in. What has been ring-fenced is 80%. It is not enough. I agree with Deputies Smith and Moynihan in terms of the importance of generational renewal, the next generation and certainty for all farmers. In direct answer to Deputy Bennett's point around the NRPP and the national regional plan, what Europe is saying is that it has less money than it had the last time and we should go back to our country and fight it out over here. We are all saying there is not enough from Europe. I have sharp elbows and I can assure everyone in the House that when the time comes to fight the corner of agriculture at the Cabinet table, I will do that. However, if I do that now, Europe will say we are grand as we got the money locally. We get as much out of the pot in Europe as we can for our farmers because Ireland is a net contributor to the overall multi-financial annual financial framework. Some 75% of our receipts for the entire Exchequer come back through the Common Agricultural Policy. If we allow that to be reduced, the overall economy, urban dwellers as well as rural dwellers across Ireland, suffers.
Therefore, I am continuing to fight. It is really important that the CAP negotiations continue in line and in tandem with the multi-annual financial framework negotiations as well. We will continue to work across government, as will the Tánaiste as Minister for Finance, the Taoiseach and everybody, to get the most into the Common Agricultural Policy as we can because that matters to Ireland overall. Then discussions at national and regional levels will be down the line. I will do everything in that regard at that point but right now, it is about getting Europe to recognise the importance of food security, as Deputy Smith has said. It is an integral part of everything we do. The EU was a peace project.
I thank the Minister.
At its heart was food security. The Common Agricultural Policy has been really successful and we cannot lose sight of that.
So the farmers have no need to worry.
