Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 14 May 2026
97. Deputy Naoise Ó Muirí asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the rationale for the exclusion of domestic dwellings from the TAMS solar scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35778/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraMy question is about the removal of domestic dwellings from the TAMS solar grant process. What is the rationale for the exclusion of domestic dwellings from that solar scheme and will the Minister make a statement on the matter?
The targeted agricultural modernisation scheme, TAMS 3, provides grants to farmers to build, improve, or both, a specified range of farm buildings and equipment on their holdings. The solar capital investment scheme, SCIS, is one of 11 schemes within TAMS 3. The number of applications and the level of funding provided to date under a number of TAMS 3 schemes, including the solar capital investment scheme, have far exceeded expectations. To date, a substantial proportion of the total TAMS budget, more than 20%, has been spent on SCIS alone. In order to ensure that the available budget for TAMS is distributed fairly over the remainder of the CAP strategic plan programme period, it is necessary to limit the number of approved applications in recent tranches by applying ranking and selection criteria. In addition, in respect of SCIS, it is also necessary to concentrate the funding on on-farm consumption only. However, it is important to highlight that farmers can seek support through the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, for the installation of solar systems in respect of their domestic dwelling. The SEAI business grant is also available to the agricultural sector, including farmers, which is a further option for those keen to explore renewable energy generation.
In simple terms, I negotiated an increase in my capital budget last year and got €88 million for TAMS this year and next year. It is for the entire CAP strategic plan, so I have to manage the budget available to the end of 2027. I could accept every application that comes in now and not have any TAMS available in 2027. I cannot do that to farmers who need increased slurry storage or who want to invest under farm safety measures. There is a lot more than just the solar element to it. You see the significant drain on resources. I would love to be able to change that percentage and make it bigger if it were there, but this is about policy priorities and trying to design them. The SEAI is there from that perspective as well.
It is positive that there is such demand for TAMS 3 and all the measures in it. It shows farmers are doing their bit in terms of energy and the future. Uptake of renewable energy programmes and mechanisms is hugely positive. Putting them through the SEAI for domestic is an opportunity lost. Maybe the solution is for the Minister to get his hands on some of that budget from the SEAI and move it to TAMS. Farmers are busy men and women. They have a lot to do. One application to cover all of this is still probably the most efficient way to do it. I go back to the fact that there is huge demand. It is positive that farmers are engaging and taking up the scheme. I ask it to be considered that a bit of that budget be moved across to fulfil that.
People will think I put the Deputy up to that question because he is singing my tune. The Department of agriculture and farmers have proved there is a demand to try to make their farms less dependent on fossil fuel energy. We have proved that if I have more money, I can spend it on that. This is in the context of an increased capital budget. The reason more people are disappointed now is that more people have applied. The average number of applications under TAMS 2 was approximately 3,000 per tranche. In the most recent application it was over 8,000, which was a massive increase in demand. You can see how resource heavy it has been on the overall TAMS budget. A total of 6,000 applications were received under SCIS and 3,425 approvals were issued allowing farmers to proceed with their investments. A total of €31.5 million was issued to farmers since payments commenced in June 2024. It is attractive and that is what made it very popular. There is no doubt that if we had more money we would spend it. If the SEAI wants to give me a slice of that budget or any other, we would spend it in that area.
That would be positive. I have heard from farmers that the farm home can account for nearly 70% of electricity used, particularly those who are farming dry stock. Removing their homes from the process effectively means the TAMS system does not fulfil their needs. Another way to do it might be to get the SEAI to earmark some of its own budget or have a clear heading for solar PV for farmers or a little more than the €1,900. In reality it is probably more for a farm building. I ask that we encourage ongoing uptake of TAMS and try to make sure domestic is covered in it, so it is efficient for farmers to get their entire job of work done at once rather than having to go through two processes.
The challenge is that if everything is a priority then nothing is a priority. I have 11 headings under TAMS and I have to try to manage that. It is the targeted agricultural measures scheme. When demand far outstrips supply something has to give. On that basis it felt fair to me that a residential house be taken out as opposed to farming activity. The intensive energy user on a farm benefited most from being able to apply for TAMS. It is a targeted agricultural measure. There are other ways for residential houses to get in there. I take the point that it would be better to have one central application process. I like that we were able to support farmers in reducing their energy requirements. TAMS is aligned to our climate and sustainability targets. That is renewable energy, but it is also low-emission slurry spreading, support for organic farmers, farm safety, increased slurry storage and improved water quality. All of those things are in the mix with TAMS, so it makes it competitive when demand is high.
