Vol. 1028 No. 3
70. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine further to Parliamentary Question No. 71 of 17 July 2022, the status of the establishment of the wool council; if the promised €30,000 for initial set-up costs has been drawn down to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53219/22]
Following the publication of the review of market opportunities for Irish-grown wool-based products carried out for the Department by the Agile Executive on 1 July, much later than promised but we got it, which was welcome, what is the status of the establishment of the wool council? Has the €30,000 that was promised by the Department been taken up and how much of it has been drawn down? More generally, will the Minister of State give a statement on the matter?
I thank the Deputy for her continued interest in this matter. As she outlined, an independently compiled review of the wool sector, which was a programme for Government commitment, was conducted and published in July. The review contained findings and recommendations, including potential funding streams, market opportunities for wool and multiple areas for additional research and development. One of the main recommendations of the review was the establishment of an independent wool council, which was widely welcomed by all stakeholders. The council will be industry-led and contain multiple stakeholders from the wool sector including primary producers, farmers and commercial enterprises. Once established, it is intended the council will lead the development and promotion of Irish wool both domestically and internationally. It will also act as a forum to bring together multiple stakeholders to foster collaboration, innovation and the scaling of activities in the wool sector.
I am fully supportive of the establishment of this independent, industry-led wool council, which can use the findings of the wool review as a roadmap to develop pathways towards maximising the true potential of Irish wool. I understand stakeholders in the wool industry have taken the initial steps towards the formation of the council. Once it has been established, my Department will commit to providing €30,000 in financial assistance towards the initial set-up costs. Given that has not happened, there has been no drawdown of the funds as yet but it is my hope the report and the council can help chart a roadmap for the industry to help drive increased returns for the great and sustainable product that is wool.
I do not know how we can turn a good news story into a bad one. The possibilities of what we could do with wool are all set out in this report, which is quite good in parts but in others, if you will excuse the bad pun, is quite woolly. It is both concise and good as well as being vague, but it is not vague on the recommendations, one of which relates to a wool council. Nothing has happened since the report, which was delayed, was published. It is now almost November and still there is no wool council.
What about all the other recommendations? Have the Government and the Minister of State examined the possibilities and the recommendations that were set out, aside from the establishment of a wool council, such as the creation of an apprenticeship model for the wool sector, data collection, a feasibility study, the establishment of wool co-operatives and so on?
There is a major role here for the Government in terms of the possibilities for the use of wool for everything from fertilisers to insulation. I would like to know what the Minister of State is doing with regard to this good news story.
I totally agree with the Deputy that there is much potential in wool. It is not fair to say that nothing has happened, however. After the study was completed, it was over to the sector itself to establish a wool council. It is not for the Department or for me to establish that. That was one of the most significant parts, the establishment of the wool council. However, I received a letter from representatives of a group of stakeholders seeking to form the wool council. I responded to them requesting that they engage with farm organisations, which had not been the case, to ensure the sector's primary producers are represented on the wool council. That is essential.
Certainly, we have also committed to putting aside supports for research into what wool can be used for. There are a number of potential uses, some of which the Deputy indicated. First and foremost, it is essential that we get this wool council established. As I said, however, it is now up to the industry itself and the stakeholders involved. It is not an issue for the Department to set up.
It certainly is an issue for the Department and for the Government. One of the things that is lacking is a well-framed policy roadmap. That must be done by the Government and by the Minister. Previous questions have been asked with regard to fishing and task forces. Where is the task force with regard to the wool industry and the potential that is there? The possible uses include horticultural packaging, insulation, textiles, cosmetics, field products and composites. I am only listing out some of them.
The Government carried out a report that cost €100,000 and then left it sitting there, waiting for the industry to do something. The clearest thing about wool is that the farmers are simply not getting the prices. The key economic concern for producers is that the price achieved for farmers is less than the cost of shearing. We know this. We now have a report that cost €100,000. We have set aside €30,000. We are going to do a Pontius Pilate on it and say it is absolutely nothing to do with us, and that we will wait for the council to be set up and ignore all the other recommendations. However, the best part is the wonderful opportunity for local industry.
I can assure the Deputy that we are not forgetting about any of the recommendations in the wool feasibility study. It is of precedence that we get the wool council established, which is what we are endeavouring to do. As I said at the start, however, it is not for the Department to establish it. It has to be industry-led and that was the agreement.
I know full well about the price of wool. I am a sheep farmer myself. Market forces and market demand dictate the price of wool and it is, unfortunately, at a terribly low baseline price. The price at the moment really is quite appalling. When it is established, however, the wool council is where we will have the opportunity to explore that and have a collective voice to reach out and seek out the opportunities for wool. The sooner the council is established, the better. I will certainly try to urge the stakeholders to get that established as quickly as possible.
71. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the measures that have been put in place by his Department to support the mental health and well-being of farmers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53221/22]
This question concerns the mental health of farmers. It flows from some recent reports that found that almost one in four farmers was considered to be at risk of suicide, 50% experienced moderate to extreme depression and 40% experienced moderate to extreme stress and severe anxiety. I know the Minister of State is very concerned about this issue. I would like to know what he is doing about it and what supports he needs to address the problem.
I thank Deputy Stanton for raising this critically important issue. As Minister of State with special responsibility for farm safety, I have always considered farmers' mental health and well-being to be inextricably linked to farm safety. We know that a farmer is seven times more likely to lose his or her life in a workplace incident on his or her farm than in any other profession in the country, making it by far the most dangerous workplace in the country.
In that context, the results of the recent University College Dublin, UCD-HSE study are particularly stark when we look at their research project into farmers and developing a suicide prevention intervention for farmers in Ireland. That study found that between 2014 and 2019, in five of those six years, more farmers died by suicide than they did in farm safety incidents. That puts in context exactly the challenge with which we are dealing. The extent of the challenge we face in the area of supporting farmers whose mental health is suffering is really clear. Anecdotally, it is very much the case, having dealt with a number of different groups and organisations and with farmers, that the challenge has been in identifying where farmers are struggling and signposting the supports to them. It is not that the supports are not there. We have to do better in identifying where farmers are struggling, however, and identify where they pull back from society and are not having that social interaction or where they maybe feel things are getting on top of them. We are taking a number of measures in my Department and working with colleagues and other Departments as well.
Government has placed a huge priority on farmer mental health and farm safety. We have a €2.5 million allocation in this year's budget. I have a number of initiatives that support increased awareness around the importance of mental health and helping farmers. I was very happy to launch and now look to expand the On Feirm Ground proposal, in partnership with the Department of Health, the HSE and the Men’s Development Network, which sees farm advisers who are very trusted in the farm set-up being trained in identifying and signposting the supports for farmers. There are other initiatives as well, which I will come to in my supplementary response.
I thank the Minister of State for his response. I give credit to him for his huge interest in this very important area. Does the Minister of State agree with me that loneliness is a huge issue at the moment among the farming community? Farmers are on their own much of the time during the day. They are under much stress, and many changes in policies are also happening. Much bureaucracy and red tape is coming at farmers with many forms to be filled out and so on. If they get it wrong, then they do not get payments. There is misrepresentation in the media with farmers being blamed for climate change, even though the farmers I meet really want to save the environment.
Does the Minister of State agree that these are many of the issues and that there is much worry, stress and anxiety? Can we ensure that when people deal with and work with farmers, they treat them with respect and keep in mind that these issues are out there? As the Minister of State said, more farmers lose their lives through suicide than through farm accidents, which is a really horrific statement when we think about the families and people who are involved. I thank the Minister of State for his work in this area.
I completely concur. All those challenges are there, from concerns about the price of inputs, the weather, inspections, prices for their products, overall economic sustainability to all the pressures resulting from a narrative out there that farmers are to blame for many of the challenges. The real risk here for farmers is isolation. They spend all their time on their own and may live in isolation in the evenings. When their work is done, they bring those pressures back home with them. We all know a problem shared is a problem halved. That is why we are looking at developing a number of initiatives around the whole mental space and those in the community helping each other.
I want to expand the On Feirm Ground proposal out beyond the farm advisers, who are very trusted, to anybody who has interaction with farmers during the day, from veterinarians to the person who drives the mail van or creamery lorry and goes into that yard. They might be the only person a farmer sees from one day to the next. They should take that opportunity to be trained and become skilled in how to deal with it. A number of locally led projects and initiatives are also really exciting and interesting.
I agree with everything the Minister of State said in respect of engagement and help and support. Has he engaged with HSE counselling services where farmers are concerned? This is bearing in mind that he said farmers very often work long hours. They come in very late at night when their families have maybe gone to bed. They might see nobody from one end of the day to the next. I would really urge the Minister of State to take as much action as he can. I am sure colleagues here will support him in this work, which is hugely important. The counselling services in the HSE are something at which we should also have a look.
We are working with the HSE and working closely with Department of Health and other State agencies such as the Health and Safety Authority, HSA, where we have a number of initiatives and literature on that area as well. We are also funding further research. The Dublin City University, DCU, farm health study has a very important role to expand our information and knowledge in this area. In the locally led initiatives, I have supported funding of €1.8 million to eight projects around the country, four of which are directly linked with the area of mental health. The farm accident trauma response group from Embrace FARM does such great work. The mid-Leinster farmer well-being project is working on peer-to-peer support, which is a key element to this.
The Government cannot fix everything but we can support communities to help themselves and make sure they identify those people in isolation who are most at risk. I refer to the farmers' health and well-being alliance for FarmConnect and the farm succession well-being project in Mayo. The area of succession is another major cause of stress for farmers and in farm families in respect of how they deal with that. Those locally led initiatives are giving us very good feedback on how we handle these issues and support farmers better in the future.
72. Deputy Martin Browne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his proposals to ensure an adequate supply of horticultural peat to the mushroom sector, with reference to the recent report on the horticultural sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53173/22]
We have come around to this again today. I want to express my own frustration as well as that of people in the mushroom industry, producers and the wider horticulture industry at what they see as the inaction of three Departments on the issue of horticultural peat. There seems to be a continued failure to even acknowledge some of the recommendations within numerous reports or to ensure access to the minimum amount, 1%, while alternatives are being developed.
I thank the Deputy for the question. Last year, as he is probably aware, I commissioned a KPMG report to identify the challenges and opportunities for the horticulture sector. The report referred to by the Deputy in his question, Opportunities for the Irish Horticulture Sector, was published in July this year. The report identifies the sector's dependence on peat as a threat in the SWOT analysis and the research challenge to finding alternative growing media. The report also proposes actions to address this and other cross-cutting challenges to the sector.
Additional actions were taken to address peat supply in horticulture, arising from a working paper published on 20 January 2022 by my Department in conjunction with the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. This working paper outlines a series of actions to support horticultural growers who are dependent on peat as a growing medium. The aim of these actions was to address the short-term issue of supply, the medium-term issue of future access to peat and also the longer term issue of replacement with alternatives for all sectors within horticulture, including mushrooms.
In terms of short-term action for my Department on peat supply, Mr. Séamus Boland was commissioned to carry out a report on peat supply. A final version of his report has just recently been received by my Department and is due for publication shortly. On medium-term action relating to access to peat, Mr. Des Johnson and Mr. Padraic Thornton were commissioned to carry out a report on the planning requirements for peat extraction on sub-30 ha bogs. A final report of this work has also been received by my Department and will also be published shortly. The longer-term action for my Department requires research into alternatives to peat. Some €1.69 million was awarded by my Department for a research project, Beyond Peat. The project is co-ordinated by Teagasc, with project partners across Ireland. The project aims to identify full and partial replacements for peat within professional horticulture. The project is progressing well and to schedule. Separately, research projects on peat alternatives continue to be approved by my Department under the EU producer organisation scheme for fruit and vegetables. Trials are ongoing in this area.
Part of the problem is that all these reports, surveys and the whole lot are going no place. I am quite sure the Minister of State will have watched the committee meeting on 7 October or someone will have informed her what happened there. There is deep frustration in the sector because of the lack of the three Departments working together. We have been looking for months for the three Departments to come in front of the agriculture committee and we still cannot even get a meeting with them. The Minister of State can imagine the frustration of those in the industry who are depending on them to come together. There are thousands of jobs at risk. There just does not seem to be any rush with the Government.
The Minister of State can quote the KPMG report but the report said that in the short term there is still need for domestic peat until alternatives are available. There is another report just sitting on a desk that is no good for anything. At the same time, we have a Green Party in government that is allowing 200 trucks load a ship 3,000 miles away, bring the peat across and allow another 200 trucks to unload it here and distribute it around the country. So much for the carbon footprint.
I would like to assure the Deputy that we are fully aware of the issues in respect of horticultural peat and the difficulty it is causing the sector. It is worth saying that currently there is no indication that supplies for the domestic horticulture sector will run out for either amenity horticulture or the mushroom sector. As the Deputy is aware, they require two distinct types of peat. Supply is being sourced within Ireland and is also being imported. It is worth drawing some attention to the CSO figures in respect of peat imports and exports. While they do not differentiate between the types of peat, between January and December 2020 we imported about - I cannot work it out - 10,000 or 10 million tonnes of peat - and we exported nearly 990,000 tonnes of peat. We exported 90 times more than we imported. In 2021, we imported 46,000 tonnes of peat and exported 579,000 tonnes. This year between January and July we imported 26,000 tonnes of peat and exported 260,000 tonnes of peat.
The Minister of State can give me all the figures she likes. We have had committee meeting after committee meeting with the sector and they are telling us they are in trouble for lack of peat here. The Minister of State talked about the sub-30 ha bogs. There has been no action there, according to the stakeholders. What can the Department do? Without the co-operation of the three Departments involved, everything is at a standstill. Where we are looking at it as a committee and from listening to the stakeholders, everything is at a standstill waiting for the three Departments to bang their heads together. Is it now the policy that instead of the three Departments working together, the mushroom sector and horticultural sector will be forced to continue to import peat? Imported peat from the Baltic states is now €26 per cubic metre whereas last year it was €16. Even the cost involved is going to drive companies out of business and the sector is a major employer in this country. There needs to be an awful lot more done.
I will allow Deputy Carthy to come in before the Minister of State responds.
Just to say to the Minister of State in respect of the export figures she is quoting, a large proportion of that includes all-Ireland trade which is not actually quantified because the Government does not identify it. If the Government has a real issue with exports, ban the export of peat from the island of Ireland. It will have the full support of my party in that respect. Here is the crux. Every player in the sector has told us that they are facing an existential crisis. I welcome the works that have been ongoing trying to identify alternatives to peat. The very fact that the Government is investing money in trying to find those alternatives is an acknowledgement in itself that the alternatives are not currently there. The only alternative that exists is the importation of peat from other parts of the world where we have no oversight in respect of the regulation. I have to say to the Minister, Deputy McConalogue, that he has to take ownership of this issue. The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage is playing games. The Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications is playing games. It will require a ministerial lead in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to grab this issue by the scruff of the neck.
My Department and my role as Minister of State with responsibility for horticulture is to the horticultural growers of this country.
They are telling us they are in crisis.
We have no jurisdiction on planning. We have tried to extend out supports in terms of recruiting planners to help across the board and maybe get that collaboration that is so needed across the Departments. The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine has no role in the extraction of peat whatsoever. What we do have a role in is supporting-----
Tell that to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage because it pointed to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine.
I appreciate that and agree that we need a collaborative approach across the Departments. However, it is not as straightforward as just allowing a free-for-all extraction of peat.
Absolutely.
All the more reason that the three Departments have to come together. The sector is in serious trouble.
The sector at the moment, as I said in my second answer, is not under direct pressure and there is no indication that supply of peat for domestic horticulture is due to run out in the short term.
Does the Minister, Deputy McConalogue, stand over those comments?
73. Deputy Neale Richmond asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will report on the way that the Russian war in Ukraine has impacted the Irish agricultural industry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [52961/22]
This question concerns the impact of the Russian war in Ukraine on the Irish agriculture sector.
We were concerned about this when the war broke out. What has been the impact on energy, grain availability, food prices, fertiliser availability and so on and what is being done to support the sector?
As I am sure the Deputy will agree, the people of Ireland have shown great support for Ukraine and the Ukrainian people following the illegal invasion by Russia. The Government remains resolute in its solidarity and support and will continue to co-ordinate a humanitarian, economic and diplomatic response to the crisis. Significant implications are being seen across all sectors, including the agrifood sector. As well as the immediate humanitarian crisis, which takes priority, we need to take the necessary steps to ensure food security is maintained for EU citizens, for the Ukrainian people and in the wider global context.
Significantly higher production costs are a feature across all sectors in 2022, with higher fertiliser, feed and fuel prices leading to an increase in agriculture input costs. According to the most recent agricultural price indices release by the CSO, agriculture input costs rose by 38% in the 12 months to August 2022. Fertiliser costs are up almost 130%, feed is up 36% and energy is up 41% over the past year. These three farm inputs accounted for almost half of all farm inputs in 2021.
While farm output prices have also increased in the past year, the increase is lower than the rise in input prices. Output prices have increased by 31% in the 12 months to August 2022, with milk up 52%, cattle up 22%, pigs up 27% and sheep up 5%. Following a solid year for farm incomes in 2021, with average family farm incomes up by 26% to more than €34,000, Teagasc has forecast a decline in 2022 is now likely across most farm systems, apart from dairy farming, as output price increases will fail to offset the rise in production costs.
There are currently no signs of fertiliser prices easing much in the short to medium term as prices are being driven by a number of factors, including global demand. As Russia and Ukraine are significant sources of global cereal exports, accounting for approximately 30% of world wheat and barley exports before the invasion, availability of cereals globally has been impacted.
I am substituting for Deputy Richmond in putting this question.
I am sure the Minister will agree the figures he has outlined are quite stark. There was an effort made at the start of the year to encourage more grain growing. What has happened in that regard? Has it worked, how many more hectares of grain have been produced as a result and what has been the impact of that?
Is the Minister concerned about the availability of fertiliser next year? Many farmers buy ahead, which means they may be okay this year. What is the position for 2023? Is he concerned about the cost and availability of food? Will we be under pressure if production goes down?
Our assessment is that there are sufficient supplies of animal feed at present and importers are actively competing on the global market to ensure supply continues uninterrupted. However, prices are high. I meet with stakeholders on an ongoing basis to discuss the impact of the crisis on supply chains. As the Deputy knows, I established a rapid response team in my Department, along with the national fodder and food security committee, which I tasked with the preparation of a response to the emerging crisis in feed, fodder, fertiliser and other inputs and the development of contingency plans and advice to assist farmers in managing their enterprises.
Since the invasion started, we have taken a number of measures, valued at €91 million all together, to assist the sector, including €56 million for the fodder support package, €20 million in two separate packages for the pig sector and €12 million for the tillage sector. Regarding grain growing, the assessment is there has been a 6% to 7% increase this year, which will make an important contribution.
Will the Minister outline the supports he is putting in place in respect of energy costs? I am particularly interested in the targeted agricultural modernisation scheme, TAMS, and the condition that energy cannot be paid for if it is exported onto the grid. Any progress made in that area would be a huge help. The number of TAMS grants this year is down. I contend this is because of the possibility of participants not being paid if they export to the grid.
Regarding energy and solar panel supports under TAMS, there is a requirement and conditionality where we are using EU funding that any energy produced be for on-farm use as opposed to export onto the grid. We are establishing a separate funding stream for energy production to the grid to ensure there is no impact on other TAMS applications. This scheme will allow for battery storage capacity, which will help farmers whose usage goes up and down at different times of the day. TAMS will be positive in supporting farmers to generate and use their electricity at farm level and in matching their needs in that regard to the level of TAMS-supported solar investment. Alongside these schemes, the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications is bringing forward a feed-in tariff to pay for energy that is coming off solar panels into the grid, which can be done separately.
74. Deputy Brian Leddin asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on whether the current environmental impact assessment, EIA, regulations are fit for purpose as a deterrent against the removal of hedgerows and other on-farm vegetation; if he will revise the regulations to provide for greater environmental protections for rural landholdings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53243/22]
Will the Minister outline whether the current EIA regulations are fit for purpose as a deterrent against the removal of hedgerows and other on-farm vegetation? Does he intend to revise the regulations to provide for greater environmental protections for rural landholdings?
The EIA agriculture regulations cover three different types of on-farm activities, including the restructuring of rural landholdings, which relates to the removal of hedgerows. The thresholds for proposed hedgerow removal where screening applications are required under the regulations are any length of field boundary above 500 m proposed to be removed or any proposed removal of field boundaries to create a field area greater than 5 ha.
Any landholder who wishes to carry out field boundary removal that exceeds either of these thresholds must apply to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine for screening under the EIA regulations. All applications received are subject to an on-site inspection and a final decision is based on whether the proposed activity may have a significant effect on the environment. More significant works or activities likely to have a significant effect on the environment require a full EIA assessment. The Department has commenced a review of its procedures for dealing with screening applications under the EIA agriculture regulations. The Department is also committed to conducting a full review of the regulations, which will take place shortly.
In addition to the EIA regulations, the new Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, strategic plan has a stronger focus on the environment through a combination of new land eligibility rules, enhanced conditionality, the eco-scheme under Pillar 1 and an environmentally ambitious agri-climate rural environment scheme, ACRES, under Pillar 2. The new definition of the "eligible hectare" will avoid the incentive to remove features that are beneficial for climate or the environment. Under conditionality, farmers will have to devote at least 4% of their land to biodiversity. For the first time, this will place a direct financial value on hedgerows. The standards for the maintenance of land in good agricultural and environmental condition, GAEC, will also require farmers to retain landscape features, including hedgerows. There is also space for a nature option in the eco-scheme to recognise farmers who commit a higher proportion of their land to biodiversity. Under that scheme and ACRES, there are hedgerow and tree planting options that will further incentivise farmers to plant trees and new hedgerows.
While I welcome the reviews the Minister referenced, will he indicate the timeline for their completion? I also welcome his comments on the changes in the CAP, which have been well flagged.
Under the EIA regulations that are in place, if one is removing a hedgerow with a length of 500 m or more or removing a field boundary, one must apply for screening, but there is otherwise no requirement to apply. This leaves out a lot of hedgerows straightaway and is a fundamental flaw in the current regulations. In the UK, there is an interim measure whereby the limit is 20 m rather than 500 m. I understand the Minister has the power to make the same reduction here. Notwithstanding the limitations of the rule, is there a sense of adherence to it? Could it be the case that many hedgerows that are greater than 500 m in length are being illegally removed? Has the Department done an analysis of illegal hedgerow removal?
I take the Deputy's point that the thresholds are high. Across our agricultural policy and under the new CAP strategic plan, the whole thrust of what we are doing is about trying to increase the number of hedgerows on farms and incentivise and recognise their good maintenance and protection.
Therefore, the various schemes, including CAP, the eco-schemes and the environmental schemes, are very much about increasing and improving the quality of our hedgerows as well. Certainly, there is a very strong understanding among farmers themselves, and there has been a change of culture about the value of hedgerows. Going back ten or 20 years, it was about removing them and having bigger fields. Farmers now are very much geared in the other direction and see the value of having them from a stock point of view and also from an environmental point of view. The approach we are taking in CAP of recognising that financially is going to be important too. We need to seek to continue that.
I agree with the Minister's thoughts. There is a completely new thinking, but we need to go a lot further. It is the case that all applicants, as the Minister said, receive an on-site inspection, but it is also the case that 95% of landowners who seek approval do get full permission. All that adds up to 2,000 km of hedgerows being removed every year, which is a conservative estimate made by the EPA. Hedgerows Ireland, an organisation that I would like to commend has produced research on the issue. It has done brilliant work. As Deputy Carthy will recall, representatives of the organisation appeared before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine, who have said that it is much greater than 2,000 km, citing research from Monaghan. Ultimately, our hedgerows are incredibly important. They are important for biodiversity and carbon sequestration. We really need to get on top of it, and advance and accelerate that new thinking that the Minister has talked about. I accept that the Minister is reviewing the regulations. We need to accelerate the completion of the review and reform the regulations overall.
I would say that 500 m is a fair size of a hedge to be removing. There must be bigger fields in County Donegal than I previously thought. The removal of hedgerows is an issue, but management is also an issue. We all know the value that hedgerows have and we talk about the potential for carbon sequestration and for promoting biodiversity, but are we seeking to promote the management of our hedgerows, and not just their removal? There are some fantastic traditional techniques that help rejuvenate hedges and make them much more stock-proof, while also promoting those biodiversity elements and really adding to the carbon sequestration potential. I know we are moving more towards a results-based model in our agri-environmental schemes. That is most welcome, because with the green low-carbon agri-environment scheme, GLAS, in some cases there was something planted, then removed, then replanted for the next round of GLAS. I know that we are moving to a more long-term view of results-based schemes. That is welcome. Hedgerows offer a huge opportunity in that regard.
There are measures in the new ACRES for encouraging and rewarding the improvement of existing hedges and how they are managed, and keeping them at a higher height to encourage wildlife and birdlife, in particular, to use them. There has been a whole step change in farmers' understanding of hedges and what they contribute. That is really important. Certainly, it is a long time since I have seen a hedge removed in County Donegal. I am seeing them being put back and restored increasingly. How we can encourage that further is something we should look at. The thresholds should be considered as part of the review that is ongoing. We will have a look at it. I think the thrust of what we are doing is very strong, as is the response. Farmers deserve recognition for the change in culture that we are seeing here.
75. Deputy Holly Cairns asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the progress that has been made in the programme for Government commitment to "support the small food producer, providing support for on-farm diversification enterprises and investment in local processing facilities, allowing farmers to sell their products into the local and wider domestic markets". [53207/22]
The programme for Government commits to supporting small food producers with "on-farm diversification enterprises and investment in local processing facilities". The reality is that small farmers, fishers and producers are very vulnerable to the prices set by the larger retailers and the processors. They are being squeezed between rising operating costs and fluctuating prices, then they are getting prices that in no way reflect the expenses and the work that goes in to producing food. When will producers see the benefits of the commitment in the programme for Government?
I think supporting small food producers is an important programme for Government commitment, as the Deputy outlined. Both the programme for Government and Food Vision 2030 acknowledge and underline the importance of our food producers, particularly our farmers and small food producers, and their importance in maintaining vibrant rural and coastal communities. Support is available to local small food producers and businesses in a variety of ways. Bord Bia has recently commissioned research, which examined, among other things, how other countries have been successful in developing premium markets for family farm produce from small producers. One of the issues outlined in that report was the barriers faced by producers. While there are lots of supports available to our smaller food producers, access to them and information on how to access them was found to be a barrier. Food producers were not aware that supports are available. In terms of supports provided, my Department administers the rural innovation and development fund, which includes an agrifood tourism initiative. For initiatives such as the development of farm shops, niche products and ecotourism, and for market development, competitiveness and innovation, support continues to be made available through the LEADER food initiative, which is funded by my Department through CAP and operated by the Department of Rural and Community Development. The new CAP strategic plan will provide supports to farmers and rural communities. The LEADER programme is a key element of that. My Department has also provided funding of almost €10 million for the equipment provided to the Prepared Consumer Food Centre, which is based in Teagasc in Ashtown. I will get to the other issues in my follow-up.
Government policy needs to recognise the unique role of small farmers and producers, who provide incredibly high-quality food but are highly vulnerable to economic forces. While we pay lip service to this model of agriculture, as in the Minister of State's response, the reality is that farmers are being forced into fewer and fewer areas - mainly dairy - because it is the only way to make their farms viable. It is so short-sighted. Crucially, in terms of food security, greater diversity creates greater resilience. There are additional benefits that the Minister of State touched on in her response, including the fact that it helps create produce that can be marketed and used to attract tourism. I think west Cork is a really good example of what can be done there. However, this type of approach is at serious risk without any supports. Rather than just paying lip service to it, we need to really look at a return to practical local processing facilities, such as small abattoirs. As the Minister of State said, we need to look to other countries. In France, for example, producers can go to the Rungis International Market in Paris and trade themselves, giving them greater control. We could also look at Irish examples of that with some of our farmers' markets.
I concur with all that the Deputy has said. The value of small food producers has perhaps been ignored. That is why we fought to include the commitment to recognise that and do what we can to support local food producers in the programme for Government. Indeed, having local access to food processing is one part of that. Over the last number of decades, we have seen the demise of parts of rural Ireland in towns and villages that have lost their butchers, greengrocers and creameries that were there in years gone by. Reverse engineering out of that is going to be difficult, but we need to do what we can to support those smaller local producers. I have visited a number of small producers. Some of them might have a micro dairy on their own farm. They are able to pasteurise, bottle and perhaps sell from the farm gate. That has proven to be quite lucrative for those involved. There are also excellent examples of people direct selling their own meat. We need to support local producers and we are committed to supporting them.
In relation to small food producers, inshore fishers are important and often overlooked food producers. They offer guaranteed fresh fish that is sustainably caught. Those are the basics of the unique culinary landscape in places like west Cork. One of the issues that is really affecting them at the moment is rising fuel costs, which is having a severe impact on the inshore sector. I know that other countries are supporting the sector specifically in terms of fuel.
Is the Department considering that option?
The seafood task force has called for increased processing capacity on offshore islands and major investment in public marine infrastructure. It was great that investment was secured through the Brexit fund but €10 million will still be required for the next four years. I am seeking clarification as to how budget 2023 will help to address that target.
Also of major concern to the inshore sector, and many others, is the position on the forthcoming Common Fisheries Policy because it favours the big players. It does not even pay lip service to the inshore sector.
I will pass to my senior Minister to answer the Deputy.
I thank the Deputy. There is a fuel challenge at the moment. I put in place an extra one-month tie-up scheme at the request of the sector to support the fuel challenge that is there as a result of the illegal invasion of Ukraine. That scheme has been in place since June and will run until the end of November. I monitored fuel prices closely during the summer and there has been a lot of volatility in that regard. Prices peaked in August and dropped thereafter but have since increased again. I am reassessing the situation with regard to the need for support.
The European Commission has provided the capacity for member states to use some of the funding in the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, EMFF, for fuel support if-----
With the time limit, perhaps the Minister will respond to my question about the Common Fisheries Policy.
Excuse me.
With the time limit, perhaps the Minister will respond on the Common Fisheries Policy, which barely mentions the inshore sector. It is all for the bigger boats. That will obviously be Ireland's position as it goes into negotiations in Europe.
A significant part of the Common Fisheries Policy focuses on quota species whereas much of the inshore sector is concerned with non-quota species. The Common Fisheries Policy itself deals in large part with quota management.
They were ripped off with the mackerel quota, for example.
I am afraid we are over time. We may have time for one or two more questions.
78. Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when the prohibition on fur farming will commence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53245/22]
This question simply asks when the prohibition on fur farming will commence. Will the Minister make a statement on the matter?
I thank the Deputy. I will try to be brief to allow for another question. The Animal Health and Welfare and Forestry (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2022 will provide for the statutory prohibition of fur farming. A commencement order is being drafted, which will include the commencement date for the prohibition on fur farming. We are working in close collaboration with the farms affected by the Bill. This is a significant change to their enterprises and how they have operated for many years. We are treating the farmers with the respect they have earned and deserve. While societal norms have changed towards the practice of fur farming, these farmers have always carried out their businesses to the highest of standards. For operational and practical considerations of the fur farming businesses, we are hoping to conclude discussions with the fur farmers in the coming weeks.
This is something we are anxious to see done. It is a programme for Government commitment that I want delivered. There are clearly animal welfare issues involved. Even if they are well kept, we know what end is in store for these animals. There is also an escape issue and mink, for example, are a non-native animal that wreak havoc among our native wildlife if they escape from farms. I acknowledge there is a just transition issue around structuring the exit of people who are currently fur farming from the industry. They were told for a long time that what they were doing was absolutely okay. The Government has now decided to move in a different direction. I fully accept that we must have a timeline for those in the industry to help them structure their way out of the business. That said, this was a commitment in the programme for Government. It is something I and the Green Party want delivered as soon as possible.
I accept it is a programme for Government commitment. It has also been a strong commitment of the Deputy and the Green Party. We will bring the matter to a conclusion as soon as possible.
80. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the discussions he has had with both the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and the European Union in relation to the rewetting of farmland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53127/22]
I wish to ask about the Minister's engagement with the European Commission and the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications in respect of the rewetting of land. There seems to be some misinformation circulating in that regard. Perhaps the Minister could make a statement on the matter.
I thank the Deputy. As part of the climate action plan process, I am in regular contact with the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications with regard to establishing pathways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the agriculture and land use sector. Measures to reduce emissions from our organic soils form part of the sectoral commitment and a target of 80,000 ha for reduced management intensity by 2030 of grasslands on drained organic soils was included in the climate action plan 2021 land use targets.
I continue to fund, among other initiatives, two locally led European Innovation Partnership projects on reduced management intensity of farmed peatlands operating in the midlands. These projects have been providing lessons learned to scale up innovative actions and measures into larger agri-environment measures. As a result, organic soil grassland measures are included in the new ACRES, which recently opened for applications and is due to begin in January.
Separately, the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage is responsible for co-ordinating Ireland’s response to the European Commission’s proposals for a nature restoration law. The proposals set out legally binding targets in the form of a regulation which will have direct effect across a broad range of ecosystem types, both land-based and marine. I continue to engage with my ministerial colleagues in those Departments as this proposed law progresses.
I am aware that farmers and their representatives are concerned about the potential of these proposals but I will work closely with them, as I always have done, to ensure they are fully involved in the discussion and that their voices are fully heard at European level in respect of the proposed regulation.
I thank the Minister. We must ensure balance in respect of any decisions made at European level. We are producing food in an environmentally friendly manner in this country and we must ensure that is at the forefront of any discussions. The deliberations the Departments of the Environment, Climate and Communications and Agriculture, Food and the Marine have with the European Commission must involve a sensible proposal. We must ensure we are not curtailing lands and food production. We must ensure the people of the planet have food that is produced in an environmentally efficient manner.
The Deputy's point is well made. It is important that we have balance in the steps we are taking. We must bring down our emissions and reduce our carbon footprint because we have to deal with the climate challenges. Alongside that, we must ensure food security because there are challenges in respect of food production. Food is becoming more difficult to produce in many parts of the world, specifically as a result of the climate issue. We must consider both of those aspects when it comes to any proposals we are considering.
