Noel McCarthy
Ceist:94. Deputy Noel McCarthy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the measures being taken by his Department to encourage farm safety; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [55024/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraFarm Safety
Ceisteanna (94)
Freagraí ó Béal (5 píosaí cainte)
I thank Deputy McCarthy.
Farm safety, health and well-being is a priority for this Government. The Department is implementing a range of initiatives this year on farm safety, utilising dedicated funding of €2.5 million secured in budget 2025. I was pleased to secure an increase in this dedicated funding for farm safety, health and well-being to €3 million in budget 2026. In relation to 2025 funding, I have approved funding for 40 projects following an open call for farm safety, health and well-being projects earlier this year. More recently, we announced contracts for the delivery of children’s and young person’s farm safety awareness initiatives.
A number of key schemes under the CAP strategic plan also ensure a focus on farm safety. The TAMS 3 farm safety capital investment scheme continues to provide grant aid for a wide range of farm safety related investments. Health and safety guidelines are included in all building specifications for the construction of agricultural buildings and structures. All TAMS applicants are required to complete a half-day of farm safety training.
Farmer health and safety training is also included in other Department schemes, such as the suckler carbon efficiency programme, the ACRES training scheme and the knowledge transfer programme. The accelerated capital allowances scheme was expanded in budget 2025 to cover a broader range of farm safety investments in addition to the existing range of eligible farm safety equipment and adaptive equipment for farmers with disabilities. The additional farm safety investments are eligible for both TAMS and the accelerated capital allowances.
This year, my Department partnered with the Health and Safety Authority to deliver targeted media campaigns focusing on farm safety risks due to livestock and farmer fatigue. In addition, the HSA's guidance on managing fatigue with farm work was included in the 2025 basic income support for sustainability, BISS, packs distributed to over 125,000 farmers.
The increased funding in 2026 will enable me to continue to deliver initiatives to support the safety, health and well-being of farmers, and everyone working and living on farms.
I thank the Minister of State for his response. We all agree that the health and well-being of our farmers are of vital importance. That is why I am pleased that the Minister of State and his Department are taking farm safety seriously. Nobody wants to hear of accidents or, heaven forbid, fatalities at work. Our farmers do an important job, sometimes in very dangerous circumstances. I, therefore, welcome the measures outlined by the Minister of State. I acknowledge that the farm safety capital investment scheme measure in TAMS 3 saw County Cork farmers receive the highest funding allocation of over €348,000 in 2024. This will allow farmers to improve their own safety and that of their farm. With that in mind, I ask the Minister of State if it is likely that this measure will continue next year.
As I said at the beginning, this Government considers farm safety of the utmost importance. I highlight that farm safety continues to be one of the most critical issues that need to be addressed on farms today. Statistics show that over the past decade, farm incidences account for almost 40% of all workplace fatalities, while accounting for only 6.1% of the working population. In addition, there are approximately 4,500 non-fatal incidents each year on Irish farms, some of which result in life-changing injuries. Very sadly, 16 farm fatalities have been confirmed this year. There has also been one in the marine and aquaculture sector. We are fighting a battle. The Deputy is right to raise the issue. Everyone, on all sides of the House, wants our farms to become what building sites became. We must remember that at one time, building sites were not safe places to work but that changed thanks to the work of the HSA and stricter regulations. We all might have given out about that at times when we were adapting, but we grew into it. Our building sites have become far safer places. We want to do the same for our farmyards, farm machinery and farms in general. If we can model our farms on the way building sites changed, we will reduce the deaths and the non-fatal accidents.
I acknowledge the work of the Minister of State and the Government on farm safety. I note that the Department has looked for proposals that focus on farm safety, health and well-being, and enhancing farmers' awareness, and that studies are being conducted. I also appreciate that a physical and mental health awareness programme is being funded, together with the Department of Health and the HSE, and that a media campaign focused on farmer fatigue has been run in partnership with the Health and Safety Authority. These are all important and welcome steps in ensuring farmer safety. Is the Department considering any other specific safety measures aimed, in particular, at younger farmers? Will the Minister of State please confirm the exact amount of dedicated funding for farm safety measures outlined in budget 2026?
I confirm that, as I said, there will be an increase in funding for safety this year to €3 million. I have been visiting schools. An agri-aware safety programme is running in our schools. It is excellent. This great work was started by our senior Minister, Deputy Heydon. He took it upon himself to focus on safety for young people, in particular. In the programme for Government, Securing Ireland's Future, the Government has set out its commitment to continuing to prioritise improvements in farm safety, health and well-being through strengthened supports. It places a specific focus on farmers' mental health and well-being, recognising the unique challenges faced by the sector. It also promotes positive mental health and well-being across the farming sector.
From the Taoiseach to the Tánaiste, our senior Minister and everyone else in the House, including the Opposition Deputies, every one of us wants to improve farm safety. If we all work together, we will, I hope, be able to reduce the number of deaths.
Animal Diseases
Ceisteanna (95)
Albert Dolan
Ceist:95. Deputy Albert Dolan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the current cost of the bovine TB eradication programme; if he will address the concerns regarding funding shortfalls in the bovine TB compensation scheme for affected farmers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54860/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (13 píosaí cainte)
Bovine TB is an ongoing challenge for Irish farmers. I am acutely aware of the emotional and financial impacts of bovine TB on farmers, their families and rural Ireland. In recent years, we have seen a significant increase in bovine TB levels nationally, with over 6,000 farm families affected by a bovine TB outbreak in 2024, and herd incidence at 6.04%. The primary driver of the cost of the bovine TB programme is disease levels. In 2024, the bovine TB programme cost €100 million, which was an increase of 35% on 2023. For this year up to 30 September, just under €80 million has been spent on the TB programme.
I secured an increased allocation of €85 million for bovine TB in budget 2026, providing a total budget of €157 million. This additional funding is vital in addressing the disease and I am confident that it will help to drive down bovine TB levels in the coming years. I published and got agreement on the bovine TB action plan, addressing bovine TB in Ireland, on 9 September. I do not believe I would have secured the extra €85 million for a business case that proposed business as usual. I had to take a new approach. This is the biggest step change in the history of the State in how we address bovine TB. The action plan follows extensive discussions with stakeholders in recent months. It is based on scientific research and veterinary expertise.
My Department provides a range of financial supports that focus on compensating farmers for both direct and indirect losses incurred as a result of a bovine TB outbreak on the farm. The primary support scheme is the on-farm market valuation scheme, and this is augmented by the income supplement scheme, the depopulation grant scheme and the hardship grant scheme. The new plan looks to direct investment to the key drivers of the disease and to stop its spread. Compensation is absolutely critical so that farmers can continue with their livelihoods, but I must direct the new money to reducing or stamping out this disease. We will see a spike in the first two years and a downward trend thereafter. That will allow me to free up money in the budget for other areas.
The escalation in expenditure for the TB programme over the last number of years has been nothing short of phenomenal. There was €37 million in 2019, €43 million in 2020, €52 million in 2021, €57 million in 2022, €74 million in 2023 and €100 million in 2024. I attended a meeting of the agricultural committee last June where it was predicted that we were on track for €130 million for 2025. If the trends continue, we are on course for €160 million or €170 million in 2026. The expenditure by the State on the TB programme is massive but the herd incidence rate is also massive.
I acknowledge the additional €85 million that will go towards the initiative in 2026. It will enable the roll-out of the TB action plan. It is, however, imperative that while some of the extra funding is allocated to bovine TB management to tackle the disease, some of it should go to additional compensation schemes for farmers as the current scheme, with the values included in it, has outgrown its time. It is not financially acceptable or fit for purpose in the current economic environment.
As part of the work of the TB forum, which has done extensive work down the years, a dedicated financial working group was established to review the financial modelling of various elements of the bovine TB eradication programme. Agreement was reached within the group in the past two years and there were rate enhancements to the income supplements scheme, the hardship grant and the depopulation grant, as well as enhanced ceilings for selected animals being removed as part of the on-farm market valuation scheme. In addition, the financial working group also expanded the eligibility criteria under the income supplement and hardship grant schemes.
The figures outlined by the Deputy are very stark, though. It is true that the new action plan will, if it is working, see an increase in the number of reactors next year, not necessarily the number of herds impacted. We have too many residual reactors going undetected and seeding the disease by being sold on to other farms. With increased gamma interferon testing - the blood testing - layered on in high-risk herds, we will identify more of those reactors earlier. The modelling predicts 62,000 reactors next year. That is why we need €157 million to address that. In two years' time, the reactor levels should plateau and we should see them coming down.
Irish farmers and agrifood companies produce world class products to the highest international standards of food safety and quality. Our food safety and traceability systems continue to be recognised as among the very best in the world and are critical to supporting the export of our produce across the globe. In my part of the country in counties Carlow and Kilkenny, I have spoken to many concerned farmers and representatives of farming organisations. Like in other parts of the country, we have seen significant increases in TB detection. Herds have been impacted right throughout the island. These are very dramatic figures but it is also a very emotive issue. The Minister says that a confirmed case of TB brings emotional turmoil, but also financial turmoil to farmers who have contracted TB in their herds. I ask that the Minister and his Department take into consideration the financial side but also the emotional side to make sure the correct supports are in place for farmers who have a positive indicator and TB in their herds.
I am working with the Minister of State, Deputy Healy-Rae, on farmer mental health and well-being. This really is a key stressor and when somebody can have a significant breakdown. We want to support farmers through that journey. As the senior Minister with responsibility for the approach to bovine TB, the best way I can do that is give light at the end of the tunnel to those farmers who are in that cycle of continuous reactors and follow-up tests to show them there is a clear pathway out of this; and for those 94% of herds not affected, to give them a reassurance they have a good chance of avoiding being affected in the future. That is why all of the additional resources I am getting have to be focused on stopping the spread of the disease, nipping it in the bud, addressing the key causes of the spread of this disease, supporting farmers with increased biosecurity measures, investing more heavily in the wildlife response - one of the five key pillars - and having blood testing layered on high-risk herds. All of the key measures layered on one another give us a great opportunity to, once and for all, get on top of this disease, which is a very dynamic one in how it is acting at present, and get it back to a point where it is under control and going in a downward trajectory.
Deputy Burke wants to come in for a supplementary question.
I will be brief. I thank the Minister, the Department, the vets and all involved in this for all the work they are doing. One issue that has come to my attention is the additional compensation that is available. It is available on the basis that the total number of reactors is 9.5% or above. That is fine in a situation where it is 9.5% of 50 animals but if it is 9.5% of 300 animals and the number of reactors does not reach that even though there is a huge loss, for instance, 27 out of 300 animals, there are no additional supports. At the same time, they are also locked up for a considerable period of time so there is a substantial loss there. Will that issue be reviewed as well because it has a huge effect on a farm, no matter what size, but in particular where there is a substantial loss of animals?
I thank Deputy Burke for raising this point. I know it is a big issue in County Cork, as it is throughout the country. The income supplement scheme he referenced has been reviewed and there have been increases in thresholds across the hardship grant, depopulation grant and others. At the heart of all of these grants and supports is the fact that we have a disease that is wreaking havoc and causing great stress and strain to our farming families, and a huge financial strain to my budget. I could think of so many better ways of spending €157 million next year supporting our farmers across a whole host of areas than having that money drained. Deputy Cleere outlined that, in 2019, the total spend from my Department's budget on the eradication of bovine TB was just €37.5 million. Think about that. In six or seven years, the spend has gone from €37.5 million to €157 million. We have to crack this nut once and for all. I am determined to lay the foundation, during my time in this role, so that we get on top of this disease and get back to being able to talk about eradication in a clear way. We have been talking about generational renewal. One of the key things for generational renewal is being able to give certainty for the future. If we can get on top of bovine TB, I believe our action plan, properly funded and resourced now and with the buy-in of all sides, will deliver in the medium and long term.
Deputy Kenny has a supplementary question.
I welcome the movement and commitment to deal with bovine TB, which is a huge problem throughout the length and breadth of the country. A lot of family farms are locked up and there is a whole crisis around that. I gave an example last week, or maybe earlier this week, of a farmer who had written to me. He had seven cattle who went down with TB. The compensation was based on 2023 prices, so he was only able to buy four replacements for those seven cattle with the money he got. That is a big problem for a lot of the farmers out there, in that the level of compensation they get is not able to match their loss because they have to go to the mart the next week or the following week and buy cattle to replace what they have lost. The way prices are at the moment, they cannot afford to do it. We can talk about the level of compensation and all of that but unless farmers are getting equal, like-for-like compensation, they are having serious problems. That is one of the biggest worries people have, namely, that when they have reactors in their herds and get the compensation, the compensation is not able to replace what they have lost. That is the one point I wanted to raise with the Minister and is something that really needs to be dealt with.
I cannot stress any further that I am absolutely aware of the financial impact on farm families who have continuous reactors, whose herds are locked up and all of the strain that brings. That is why the additional money I get and the significant resources I now have must go into tackling the spread of the disease. It is pivotal. I do not want future generations of families to go through that same stress, financial turmoil and everything that goes with it. This action plan, which is now fully funded, is about addressing the key causes of the spread of that disease and targeting the money at spaces that will stop the spread of the disease, nip it in the bud and get the disease back under an element of control. To be successful, that plan means we need to find additional reactors next year and the year after, and that is what we will do. We will find them earlier. We will stop those reactors being undetected, going out and seeding the diseases out further. By doing that, fewer farmers will be impacted. I will keep a close eye on the compensation rates and where they are at-----
Compensation has to be key.
-----but I have to direct the financial resources I have to stopping the spread of the disease. That is my clear focus here.
Question No. 96 taken with Written Answers.
Fishing Industry
Ceisteanna (97)
Naoise Ó Cearúil
Ceist:97. Deputy Naoise Ó Cearúil asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the planned financial supports for pelagic fishers and processors following the proposed 70% cut to mackerel quotas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54999/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (6 píosaí cainte)
My question is to ask the Minister of State with responsibility for the marine about the plans he has to address the Commission's proposals to reduce, drastically, the pelagic total level catches.
I thank Deputy Gallagher for his interest in this matter. It is something he has been in regular contact with me about both in advance of the scientific advice being released and since then. I know, in particular, of his interest in the Killybegs area and the significant shock this will bring to the community of Killybegs, not just to those directly involved in the processing and catching sectors but also to all of the ancillary businesses that make up the ecosystem around the sector.
In the first instance, I have raised this matter with the European Commissioner to examine what framework could be put in place to address the significant cut. I had a preliminary conversation with the Taoiseach, and with the Minister for public expenditure, Deputy Chambers, to put them on notice of the scientific advice and the impact that will have on the sector. There are medium-term and long-term situations that have to be addressed. I have begun that conversation with other member states and with the Commission about how we address the significant level of overfishing that has taken place as a result of the unilateral allocation of quota by third countries, particularly those in the coastal states outside the Union, principally Norway, Iceland and the Faroe Islands. With colleagues across the Government and across member states, we will have to look to other tools outside of what would be in the Common Fisheries Policy, CFP, or within the preserve of Directorate General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, DG MARE, to see how we can ensure Norway shows a much greater level of respect for the necessity to conserve stocks in line with the total allowable catch that is identified by ICES. This continued unilateral allocation of quota that is not based on scientific evidence is damaging, in an existential way, the future of our fishing sector.
An indication of the urgency was the Minister of State travelling to Killybegs last Sunday week to meet representatives of the sector from all parts of the country, from Donegal to Cork. There is no need to outline the utter devastation that will result from the reduction of the mackerel quota by 70% and blue whiting by 41%. Thousands of jobs in the sector will be lost. This is the same sector that paid the price to get Brexit over the line and listened to Michel Barnier telling us fish would not be affected and would be inextricably linked with trade. Of course, he threw the sector under the bus. I attended many Council of Ministers' meetings over the years, but this is the worst ever. Even if the reduction is less than 70%, it will make little difference. The Hague preferences will add very little. The Minister of State mentioned other countries. I make a charge that Iceland, Norway and the Faroe Islands acted irresponsibly in not accepting the advice of ICES. They are responsible for this, as is the UK now as well.
I fully concur with the Deputy's analysis and vast experience. His name is regularly mentioned at the Council and in the European Parliament regarding the interest he has had not just for the Irish fishing sector but also for the sector at a wider European level. His insights were of particular importance. He is right in identifying that the fishing sector paid a particular price with the transfer of 26% of the mackerel quota for continued access to EU waters. There was a cut based on scientific information last year of approximately 20% in terms of our quota. There was 26%, followed by 20% and now a proposed cut in line with scientific advice of over 70%. By any yardstick, that is devastating. What gives me the energy to keep going is that we got support through the Brexit adjustment reserve with the cut of 26%. We will have to find a way to support the sector through a 70% cut until such a time as we see the biomass improve and stocks recover in line with the conservation methods set out in the scientific advice.
At this stage, it is not compensation we want; we want fish. The Minister of State will have to get the European Council to assist him. This is the first time this has happened. I go back to the days of Commissioner Damanaki, who was more in favour of Iceland than the European maritime states. The Minister of State's problem is that he will go into a Council of Ministers meeting and there will be ministers there from non-coastal countries. They will accept the advice of the Commission. He will have to work on them as well. He has to highlight to them the serious implications of this drastic cut. We think of fisherman and factory workers, but there are ancillary industries upstream and downstream that will lose out as a result. It is not compensation; it is fish we want. I wish the Minister of State well. He has the support of the sector and of a very active fisheries committee in his endeavours.
I am conscious of the economic impact on our coastal communities. In successive programmes for Government, we set out a desire to continue to support coastal communities. The Deputy is right; it is through allowing fishers to catch and process fish that we support those communities. I will have to be guided by the scientific advice, as other Ministers have been previously. I know the sector does not want handouts or supports. We will have to look at a framework by means of which we can support the communities and sectors to work through what is without doubt the most difficult challenge it will have faced in its existence, and certainly since the introduction of the Common Fisheries Policy and our accession to the European Union. I am particularly conscious that the pelagic sector is one which the Irish fleet and Irish entrepreneurs and fishermen have really developed over the years. It is a credit to them, their ingenuity and hard work when you look at what Killybegs has become. I do not need to tell the Deputy that, particularly as he was born and raised in that region and has seen how it has been transformed. It has allowed people to work there and for a younger population to regenerate and not be scourged by the emigration that bedevilled the communities around Killybegs back in the fifties and sixties.
Question No. 98 taken with Written Answers.
Food Security
Ceisteanna (99)
Robert O'Donoghue
Ceist:99. Deputy Robert O'Donoghue asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will commit to developing an integrated national food security strategy that strengthens local production, addresses food poverty and ensures that our food system is both environmentally and socially sustainable (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [55119/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (4 píosaí cainte)
Farmers are under pressure and families are struggling with food costs. Communities want to see more local produce on shelves. Is it not time we had a new joined-up national plan to make this happen?
Ongoing geopolitical tensions have meant that food security is increasingly at the forefront of the political agenda both at EU and global level. Ireland is among the most food secure countries in the world. As part of the EU Single Market and the Common Agricultural Policy, Ireland benefits from robust mechanisms that underpin food security across Europe.
There is a series of instruments embedded in the EU policy framework to ensure food security. Safeguarding food security and reinforcing the resilience of food systems, an EU publication, sets out actions in the areas of security, stability and sustainability. The EU Agriculture and Fisheries Council of Ministers, of which I am a member, will continue to focus on these core areas. This includes supporting the work of the European food security crisis preparedness and response mechanism, EFSCM, which monitors and responds to threats to EU food security and supply.
Ireland already has an integrated national framework for food systems sustainability. Food Vision 2030 was developed adopting a food systems approach with an ambition for Ireland to be a world leader in sustainable food systems and sets out four high-level interlinked missions for the sector to work towards. Each of these interlinked missions has ambitious goals rooted in a strongly practical approach to what needs to be achieved for future environmental, economic and social sustainability. To achieve these ambitions, we continue to support farmers through the €9.8 billion CAP strategic plan, which helps fund the transition to more sustainable practices while maintaining farm incomes. Environmental measures include the agri-climate rural environment scheme, ACRES, increased funding for organic farming and the suckler carbon efficiency programme, SCEP, which is helping farmers to improve carbon efficiency in livestock production.
My Department participated alongside other Departments in the food poverty working group and developed the 2024 action plan on food poverty, a cross-sectoral response to that issue. Ireland’s food security is underpinned by strong national and EU frameworks, continuous policy integration under Food Vision 2030 and targeted actions to strengthen local production, reduce food poverty and build a sustainable and resilient food system.
The recent Irish Country Living feature on Talamh Beo's Gorse Farm and Hinterland highlights what food security should mean in Ireland, namely farmers and communities working together to grow healthy, local food and keeping value in the local economy. These groups are doing that with little or no Government support. They call for exactly what is missing, which is a joined-up national food security strategy that supports local production, tackles food poverty and builds resilience within the system. We cannot keep relying on imported food or cheap prices that come at a high social and environmental cost. Will the Minister commit to backing these communities and ensuring that food policy in Ireland starts putting people and the planet first?
I meet individuals from Talamh Beo at different events. It has a role to play. We need to get a handle on why Ireland is one of the most food secure nations in the world according to key metrics. It is not because we produce every bit of food that is consumed on the island; it is because of the highly integrated nature of our food supply system around the world. It means from an environmental perspective, food should be produced where it can be produced most efficiently.
If we look at our livestock system, we can see that our beef, sheep and dairy produce are part of a pasture-based system. It is a much better system for that produce to be raised with our livestock animals like cows and sheep out on grass for the vast majority of the year, looking at the sky, eating green grass and not in a shed or an intensive system. We produce it more efficiently here. We export 90% of the food and drink we produce. That is of a highly integrated nature. The high-protein, nutrient-dense rich food is of great value and feeds millions of our population.
Succession Act
Ceisteanna (100)
Colm Burke
Ceist:100. Deputy Colm Burke asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the engagement his Department has had with relevant stakeholders in relation to generational renewal policies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54722/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (6 píosaí cainte)
The commission on generational renewal in farming has published its report. I ask the Minister what engagement the Department has had with relevant stakeholders on generational renewal policies and whether he will make a statement on the matter.
I thank Deputy Burke for raising a critical issue for the future of our sector. The programme for Government prioritises "Supporting inter-generational farm succession". Food Vision 2030, our shared strategy for the agrifood sector, states generational renewal in farming is critically important to ensure the future viability and social sustainability of the Irish agrifood sector and of rural Ireland. There are a number of supports for generational renewal currently available to farmers under Ireland’s CAP Strategic Plan 2023-2027. These supports are complemented by a suite of strong national taxation measures and access to finance supports, as well as advisory and education and training supports. Farm succession is a complex issue and there are many factors that impact farmers’ decisions. The Commission on Generational Renewal in Farming was established to examine these issues. In the course of this work a public consultation was carried out. As part of this consultation, 31 written submissions were received and the commission subsequently met a number of stakeholders, including the main farming organisations. Further details of the consultation can be found in the published report, which runs to 180 pages.
The commission 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, gender balance and the overall attractiveness of the sector. An implementation group within my Department will carefully consider these recommendations. This group will continue this collaborative approach and will engage with agricultural stakeholders and the relevant public bodies. Attracting the next generation of farmers is critical to ensure the agrifood sector remains vibrant and sustainable into the future and the analysis provided by the Commission on Generational Renewal in Farming ensures we have a comprehensive, well-considered foundation for future policy on generational renewal.
In my engagement with Commissioner Hansen of DG AGRI, he took a great interest in our report. He wanted to wait to publish his own policy until he saw our point of view and it is an area he has a huge passion for.
I thank the Minister. As he will be aware, the report clearly sets out that only something like 4% of farmers are under 35 and 37% are over 65. This means we have a major challenge. It is also about the demands of farming. In dairy farming especially it is a seven-day week and people are on call all the time. There are jobs outside the agricultural sector that are very attractive. Only 3% of CAP supports are going to young farmers and I think one of the recommendations is to push that as far as 8%. That is one simple area. The other issue with the 31 recommendations is the timeframe for trying to deal with that issue. If 37% of farmers are over 65 then within the next five years there will be a far bigger number. We need to make sure we put in a timeframe for the implementation of the report's recommendations.
Yes, and that is why we established the interdepartmental group within my Department on its implementation. The implementation piece of this report is so important because ultimately, it is about clear action. Some of these measures require the structure of the next CAP post 2027 to be able to implement. A national budget is not going to deliver the type of succession scheme that would previously always have been in the structure of a CAP. That is not to say there are not a lot of structural things that can be done now. As I said, the commission report recognises families still have these discussions. As for the impediments to generational renewal, there are challenges, in that our next generation is better educated than ever before and people have vastly more opportunities in a country with full employment to generate a good income from off-farm working that may involve fewer hours and less hard work, but there are an awful lot of farmers who want to farm in this area and we have to support them in that transition.
I am a solicitor and if we go back 25 years there was a lot of succession planning, whereas I find the same level of planning is not there now. I am wondering how we can encourage that, talk openly about it and ensure there is a plan in place. In one case, in order to do a proper transfer of land we had to transfer the land to the daughters-in-law because that was the only way we could do proper planning in relation to transfer of land. We are not looking carefully enough at succession planning. There is also a proposal that €25,000 be made available to the retiring farmer. How fast can we put in place some of those measures if we plan them before the next budget?
Very clearly there is not the bandwidth in a national budget to deliver very big succession schemes that would run to hundreds of millions of euro but the design of the next CAP is already under way, as is the fighting over the multi-annual financial framework or the overall budget for that area. I spoke earlier about how I funded a locally led initiative in Mayo in my previous role as a Minister of State. The Béal Átha na Muice Project, which was based out of Swinford, identified farm families and 30 local families signed up to this scheme, 15 of which had no succession plan in place at all. In the review afterwards of how they were handheld and supported through that process of dealing with a solicitor, a tax adviser, a counsellor, consultants and everybody else, it emerged the fear they had beforehand was greatly lifted when they spoke to the tax adviser. They realised it would be terrible to have a crisis where somebody drops dead all of a sudden and there is no plan in place. Taxwise, it would possibly be much worse than if a set date had been picked to do the transfer when everybody is trained, we know what people's qualifications are and what their provision for the future is as well. It is about taking the fear out of this and looking at ways we can support that conversation to happen. I do not believe everybody is going to sit around for three years for the opportunity of one grant. This is a life-changing decision and we need to support all the family in that decision.
Questions Nos. 101 and 102 taken with Written Answers.
Animal Welfare
Ceisteanna (103)
Robert O'Donoghue
Ceist:103. Deputy Robert O'Donoghue asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will outline the measures being taken to strengthen existing animal welfare laws and enforcement mechanisms; if his Department intends to engage with campaign representatives to progress the aims of Stout's law (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [55118/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (7 píosaí cainte)
Deputy George Lawlor on Question No. 103
This question is to ask whether the Minister will outline the measures being taken to strengthen existing animal welfare laws and enforcement mechanisms and whether his Department intends to engage with campaign representatives to progress the aims of the proposed Stout's law and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I thank the Deputy. Neglect of, or causing unnecessary suffering to, animals is not acceptable in our society in any circumstances. The programme for Government places a positive emphasis on animal welfare and specifically commits to the continued robust enforcement of the Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013, which provides a modern framework for regulating and applying standards in the area of animal health and welfare. In my first term as a TD between 2011 and 2016, I was a member of the agriculture committee. I remember the many weeks of work on that comprehensive legislation. It brought together so many historical items of legislation under one Act.
My Department has lead responsibility within the Government for animal welfare and takes the matter of animal welfare most seriously. I am committed to the policy that animal welfare standards are vigorously applied in a fair and even-handed manner. All reports of alleged animal neglect or cruelty are investigated and appropriate action is taken. My Department, and authorised officers appointed under the Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013, including, but not limited to, An Garda Síochána, customs agents and local authorities, undertake appropriate enforcement action, where breaches or shortcomings are identified. My Department keeps the Act under review in light of key developments in the area of animal welfare, the legislative environment more generally and having regard to the practical lessons learned from operating the Act.
Policy and legislative responsibility for dog breeding establishments transferred to my Department on 1 August 2025. Local authorities retain responsibility for all operational implementation and enforcement matters. A high level stakeholder group was established last year to consider policy and legislative matters, specifically the Control of Dogs Acts and the Dog Breeding Establishments Act.
The stakeholder group's remit includes considering the need for legislative change. This requires in-depth analysis and consultation to ensure that amendments are not just robust, fit for purpose and implementable but also deliver the best outcome for communities.
I thank the Minister for his supportive words. This proposed campaign was inspired by a young pup called Stout who suffered from severe health difficulties arising from malnutrition, poor breeding practice and the unsanitary conditions that he was kept in. The campaign is led by two people in Wexford - Tara O'Connor and Kevin Keegan. They are proposing some reasonable legislation and that the legislation would be amended to place a more exacting standard on dog breeders. They believe legislation must mandate a firm commitment on the part of dog breeders to safeguard the welfare of the animal with an explicit reference to freedom from discomfort and freedom to express normal behaviour. In the legal context, pets currently fall under the definition of "personal property". Stout's law aims to redefine pets as beings with intrinsic needs. Backyard breeders tend to escape oversight and potential incidents of mistreatment can only come to light where, for instance, neighbours raise concerns. There is no dedicated Garda unit to deal with animal cruelty. Dog breeding establishment guidelines deal with important issues, including animal housing, hygiene, exercise and registration, but it is important that the enforcement of the guidelines is in place. Local authorities, despite their best efforts, are not in a position to ensure enforcement as much as we would like.
My Department is committed to reviewing all legislation relating to dogs, and in this regard it will be guided by the recommendations of the dog control stakeholder group. I expect the group to revert to me with recommendations on the matter in due course. In the meantime, I am fully committed to progressing the work in this area. My Department is also aware of the campaign the Deputy references and will consider all views when reviewing legislation. It is very important that if members of the public are aware of any issues of suspected abuse or neglect, they contact my Department. We have a helpline phone number and a direct email address through which any fears people have are dealt with in a very confidential manner and are investigated and followed up. That is very important for people to know as well.
Regulations for cats and dogs are being worked on at present on an EU-wide level. My Department is currently engaged in consultation with other member states on new proposals on European regulations on the welfare and traceability of dogs and cats. This includes provisions to ensure the breeding strategies do not include genotypes that have a detrimental effect on the health and welfare of dogs and cats. When that regulation is passed, it will be applicable to all member states, including Ireland.
I welcome what has been said about the high level group. As it stands, the 2010 Act permits upwards of 300 breeding dogs on a site. It also outlines that one full-time staff member to 25 breeding bitches is sufficient. We are looking for a more sensible number of breeding bitches and we believe that 15 is a sensible cap that would enable breeders to run a proper sanitation programme and perform regular welfare acts on all the animals. The staff-to-dog ratio should be set at 1:15 and this should be set out in the legislation as opposed to being contained in dog breeding establishment guidelines. The cap on breeding bitches that is specified should only increase in tandem with the staff headcount, to guarantee that minimum standards of animal healthcare are met.
We have a serious problem in Ireland with animal welfare in breeding establishments. This is something we simply have to grab by the scruff of the neck and tackle. I welcome the Minister's comments in that regard.
We are reviewing the legislation. This is a responsibility that has come into my domain in recent months. As a Deputy who was part of the negotiating team for the programme for Government, and having been a Minister of State in the Department of agriculture, I was really keen for this to come under the remit of agriculture. I thought it was the right fit and that it is the right place for it to be. Mindful that I might be in this role, this is something I was very keen to see in the Department's remit. I am glad it is there and I want to work on it and progress it during my time as Minister.
Deputy Lawlor referred to the sale of pets. My Department previously introduced a statutory instrument, the Animal Health and Welfare (Sale or Supply of Pet Animals) Regulations. The regulations put into law certain requirements for sellers and suppliers of pet animals, including the minimum age for the sale of certain mammals, record keeping, registration with my Department and the provision of specific information about pets in advertisements. Under these regulations, anyone who sells or supplies six or more pet animals in a year must register with my Department and must submit an inspection report signed by a private veterinary practitioner as part of the registration process. We will review every measure and make sure that, if it is not as robust as we would like, we will change it and make it more robust. I look forward to working with Deputy Lawlor on this.
Trade Agreements
Ceisteanna (104)
Cathy Bennett
Ceist:104. Deputy Cathy Bennett asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will report on his engagements on the Mercosur trade agreement. [54967/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (7 píosaí cainte)
The Minister knows there has been huge concern for many years about the potential impact the Mercosur trade agreement would have, in particular for Irish farmers. I would appreciate if he could outline to the House the engagements he has had at an EU level in respect of the Mercosur trade agreement.
Along with the Tánaiste, who has lead responsibility for trade policy, I have actively engaged with both the European Commission and other member states across the EU to voice Ireland's concerns on the EU-Mercosur agreement. Ireland has serious concerns on the preferential access being given to Mercosur if South American farmers are not subject to the same sustainable farming standards as our own farmers. We have repeatedly emphasised that beef in particular is a very sensitive sector which is vulnerable to negative impacts from the Mercosur agreement. During these engagements, the Tánaiste and I have also repeatedly emphasised Ireland's requirements for credible, legally binding commitments on matters relating to trade and sustainable development, including climate, biodiversity and deforestation protections.
Since my appointment as Minister earlier this year, I have raised these concerns at AGRIFISH Council meetings and with like-minded member states through bilateral meetings on the margins of Council meetings. In recent months, I have met with my French, Austrian and Latvian counterparts, in addition to Polish and other counterparts, to exchange views. The Commission recently announced its proposed approach to ratification and its proposal for a regulation implementing the bilateral safeguard clause within the agreement on agricultural products. Our officials are currently examining these proposals in detail to see if they provide any of the additional assurances required.
Pending that examination, Ireland's position on the EU-Mercosur agreement remains as clearly outlined in the programme for Government: "[To] Work with like-minded EU countries to stand up for Irish farmers and defend our interests in opposing the current Mercosur trade deal." That is what we continue to do.
The difficulty is that a predecessor of the Minister's agreed at European Council level to opening the negotiating mandate. It was at that point that the original sin in respect of Mercosur was committed because, since then, we have been on the back foot. Even now, as the Minister rightly outlines, he has to work with others across the European Union. There is a very real threat his voice will be a minority one and, because of the qualified majority voting rules, he will not be in a position to block this.
There has been a Commission proposal for a regulation to strengthen protections for farmers. I do not believe it does what it says on the tin because it requires that there be a threat of serious injury to the sector before an investigation is even launched. This is after the Mercosur agreement comes in. Is the Minister using any other leverage? There are other things countries that might not be as concerned about Mercosur might want and need Ireland to vote with them on other issues. Is the Minister using those levers to ensure that we kill this deal dead?
It is very clear, as I sit on the AGRIFISH Council, that some of my colleague Ministers for agriculture speak glowingly of the Mercosur agreement and what it would mean for their farmers and agricultural sectors. There are some countries that are very strongly of the view that this an agreement that should have been agreed ages ago. Not every country is opposed to it.
We work with like-minded countries. I will be the chair of the AGRIFISH Council from 1 July next year when Ireland takes over the Presidency of the EU. I am meeting with many colleagues in bilateral meetings on what their priorities are for renegotiating the CAP and other issues. In all of those meetings I am highlighting my specific concerns around Mercosur. Because of the fact that we will be in the chair next year as a country, when they tell me what their priorities are, I will take the opportunity to highlight what our priorities are on the CAP, how we have to maintain the nitrates derogation and our serious concerns on the Mercosur deal. The fact is that a minimum of four countries is needed for a blocking minority for the Mercosur agreement, if and when it comes to a vote. There would not be a vote at the AGRIFISH Council. It would be either a vote of the trade or of the ambassadors. We know what qualified majority voting means as well.
I would love to hear an argument being put forward by an agriculture Minister anywhere that would suggest that the Mercosur trade agreement would benefit farmers in any part of Europe.
This is more about auto parts and the car industry rather than anything else. In terms of what it means for Ireland, this allows Mercosur states, which do not adhere to anywhere near the same level of regulations and restrictions with which our farmers must comply, to import 100,000 tonnes of additional beef into our market. We know the impact that would have on the Irish beef sector, which is trying to diversify and find new markets post Brexit. It also allows for 180,000 tonnes of poultry. That will have a big impact on my constituency, which has a vibrant poultry sector. I am not sure where there would be a net export from any particular region. Some wine regions may see some benefit in it but the truth of the matter is the economic rationale for supporting Mercosur is not based on support for farmers. In fact, it is counterintuitive from an environmental perspective and also in the context of a situation where the CAP budget itself is under threat. This could be existential for the family farm model as we know it.
I will ask one short supplementary question in that regard. One of the key problems with Mercosur is that we are bringing product into Europe that does not meet the same standards as European farmers have to meet, and are happy to meet because of the high quality of the product we have in this country.
Is it true that, as part of the deal, the European Union will pay Mercosur countries quite large sums of money, which would normally go to farmers in Europe, to bring their farm produce up to the standards of the European farmers? Is something happening in that respect behind the scenes to try to ensure that the product coming from the Mercosur countries will meet the standards?
The other issue I want to raise relates to the inspections that will take place. How and when will they happen? Will the European authorities have inspectors in the Mercosur countries? Will they be checking the product before it leaves those countries? Will it be checked on farms or in abattoirs when it comes to beef and chicken? We need detail in respect of that.
I will not waste lots of time talking about it. A number of EU countries, such as Spain and others, and their ministers for agriculture speak glowingly of Mercosur. That is a fact. Those meetings are public and open for people to see. I do not need to list the countries in question. We are in the minority at that Council in terms of continually raising concerns around this space. However, we do it because of the sensitivity for our beef sector and others. Previously, others that were in that space with us were the French and Polish, while the Austrians and Italians also have concerns. It requires at least four member states working together as a bloc and that combined they would constitute at least 35% of the population of the EU. If that falls away, there is not that ability to block in that space.
In relation to points made about standards, we should recognise there are two different types of standards here. The SPS standards are our food safety standards which are absolutely non-negotiable. We do not allow hormone-fed beef into Europe. It is the environmental standards that are going to be at odds, and that is what we raised the issues about.
Questions Nos. 105 to 107, inclusive, taken with Written Answers.
Forestry Sector
Ceisteanna (108)
Matt Carthy
Ceist:108. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the amount of land afforested in each of the years 2020 to 2024 and to date in 2025; his target for afforestation in 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54991/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (12 píosaí cainte)
In respect of afforestation rates and the amount of land that has been afforested in the years 2020 to 2024 and to date in 2025, what is the target for this year and how does the Minister of State intend to increase substantially the level of afforestation in line with Government commitments?
Forests have an important role to play in mitigating climate change by sequestering and storing greenhouse gases. This can be achieved through the expansion of our forests and the increased use of timber products. In 2020 we planted 2,234 ha, followed by 2,016 ha in 2021, 2,073 ha in 2022, 1,651 ha in 2023 and 1,573 ha in 2024, and so far this year we have planted 2,297 ha. I have personally contacted a large number of those landowners who have valid licence approvals and have not as yet planted, encouraging them to take that next step. I am confident that we will reach nearly 3,000 ha by year-end.
I am sure the Deputy will praise me highly when I reach that target and, instead of shouting at me, he will be my biggest advocate and backer to say that I achieved such a thing.
I will not.
My Department will therefore have delivered significant growth in 2025 and will continue to build on this success. In 2025 we launched a communications plan promoting the options available to farmers and other landowners through advertising on radio and in the national press, the targeting of information through social media channels and text messages and direct engagement with farmers and landowners through local and national events such as the National Ploughing Championships. We also fund stakeholder organisations, through promotion projects and training, to support the development of forestry sector networks.
In 2025 we launched the planting on public lands initiative and are actively engaging with public bodies with land to encourage them to plant. That is an initiative that was not taken before. In addition to this proactive engagement, we provide extremely generous grants and premiums for 20 years for farmers and 15 years for non-farmers across a wide range of schemes, positioning forestry as an ideal complementary income stream for any farmer or landowner, with options available to suit all farming types. I am committed to continuing to promote this valuable land use option for farmers and other landowners in every way that I can, and to continue to grow the forestry sector into 2026 and beyond. I hope I will have the Deputy's support in doing so.
The Minister of State can be absolutely assured he will have my support if he implements a policy and a strategy that actually deliver on the ambition that is required. The previous Government set a target for 8,000 ha per annum over the lifetime of the Government. It did not come close. It did not even reach half that in any single year, despite the fact that we had a Green Party Minister telling us it was a priority. The Minister of State and I were on this side of the Chamber lambasting the target of 8,000 ha and the failure to reach it. Now, the Minister of State is asking me to cheer him on when he tells me he has a target this year of 3,000 ha. Perhaps he can outline-----
Will the Deputy not acknowledge it is double the figure from last year?
Of course it is.
Has the Deputy anything positive to say?
Yes.
Thank you.
I can say it is better this year compared with the worst year ever on record. I absolutely welcome that things are not further deteriorating but we are basically back to where we were in 2020 in terms of afforestation rates. My question and my appeal to the Minister of State is to be ambitious and not just set a target which should be set, but meet it and work with members of the Opposition. Let the Minister of State not fall for the old trap of his predecessors and think that he knows everything just because he is on that side of the House. Work with us and let us deliver the forestry they have worked-----
The Deputy will be glad to know I do not need to be told to be ambitious by anybody on any side of any House.
Is féidir teacht ar Cheisteanna Scríofa ar www.oireachtas.ie.
Written Answers are published on the Oireachtas website.