Vol. 1053 No. 1
58. Deputy Claire Kerrane asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide an update on the proposal to bring forward a solution for the group known as the "forgotten farmers", given he has advised that his Department has been working on establishing systems for the roll-out of a scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18241/24]
I ask the Minister about the long-awaited scheme for the group known as the forgotten farmers. In our last round of questions back in February, the Minister advised that his Department was looking at establishing a system, but there is still no detail about what that scheme would look like. I have met with farmers who are part of this cohort known as the forgotten farmers. They are really at the end of their tether and are wondering if they should continue with their farms, so this is something that is urgently overdue.
I thank Deputy Kerrane. As she knows, I have committed to supporting the group known as the forgotten farmers. I have made a clear commitment to them that I will deliver support to reflect the impact their missing out on certain payments had on their farming enterprises. This is a group of farmers whose members were under 40 in 2015 when the situation first came to light. At that point, they had already been actively farming for more than five years, meaning they were ineligible to access the national reserve in the previous CAP programme in 2015 to obtain an allocation of payment entitlements.
My Department carried out analysis on this grouping in 2015 and again in 2019 to determine the number of farmers affected and the cost of the supports required. These analyses showed that between 3,500 and 7,000 farmers could be in this category. The fact remains these farmers had met all the criteria regarding eligibility for schemes but they were unable to apply when regulations changed in 2015 regarding the maximum length of time since the farmer commenced farming.
In the 2015-2022 CAP programme, a farmer needed to hold payment entitlements to obtain the basic payment scheme payment and the associated greening payment. This payment formed the core of the Pillar 1 payments distributed to farmers annually. While some of the rules and dependencies on holding payment entitlements have changed in the new CAP we are currently in, they still form a central part of a farmer's payment in any given year.
Since this issue came to the fore back in 2015 and 2016, many of these farmers have already bought or rented entitlements, which is a key factor in eligibility for payments in the outgoing CAP programme and today. Although they now hold these entitlements, it remains that they were required to pay for them, in most instances, on the open market.
To assist these farmers, my Department developed a preliminary outline of a proposal to provide support to the forgotten farmer group. The support that was initially requested by the group was for access to the national reserve, but at this point, many of these farmers now hold entitlements already. In this regard, work continues on addressing a number of issues, such as the requirements for the type and level of supports that are required, the funding required and consistency with public expenditure and state aid considerations. I am committed to stepping this out and delivering for these farmers within the term of this Government.
I appreciate and acknowledge that the Minister has committed to this group of farmers that he will come up with a scheme that will financially support them, given they did lose out. At one point, the scheme was to be prepared in the first quarter of 2023. It was then to be published in May 2023. The system was being put together in February, and it is now April 2024. In a number of weeks, we will be going into summer recess. We will be coming back for the budget. By the sounds of things, there is no detailed scheme in place with regard to what this will look like. There is no funding in place either, and the Minister has committed that it will be done before the end of this term of Government, which is now a matter of months away. This cohort of farmers needs certainty. Is the Minister committing here today on the floor of the Dáil that the scheme will be in place and that they will be able to access it between now and February of next year?
It is a legacy issue that goes back to 2015 and I am committed to addressing it. Obviously, a key focus in the past year has been getting the current CAP programme up and running, making sure the schemes are running smoothly and putting the systems and structures in place for that. That has been a big area of emphasis and priority within the Department. All these farmers, as well as all other farmers, very much depend on the current CAP for their family farm income. The continuing work on ACRES and the delivery of support through TAMS, for example, as well as the many other schemes has been the big priority over the past year.
Many of these farmers have now been farming for up to 15 to 20 years. They had been farming for five years previous to 2015. I believe we need to recognise that they were not able to access particular supports in previous CAP programmes. I am continuing that work to bring clarity about how it will work. We will do that over the course of the coming months and bring further clarity to that. It is a commitment I will deliver on, but it has been affected by the work undertaken to roll out the existing CAP, which is very important for these farmers too.
As the Minister has said, this issue was identified back in 2015 and 2016. It has now been nearly a decade since then. In the past ten years, I do not believe it is fair or makes much sense, given this Government has now been in place for four years. If the Department was going to establish a system in February, it is now April. Given there are no details of the scheme or what it will look like and given there is no funding in place, is the Minister committing here today that, between now and the end of this term of Government, which will be in February of next year, a scheme will be put in place for the forgotten farmers and that they will be able to access that scheme between now and February? If the Minister is going to make that commitment, he should make it here today. It is concerning that, ten years after the fact, there is still no scheme and no detail of a scheme. A system was being built two months ago, but there does not seem to have been any mention of that here today. There is no funding to support these farmers either. Is the Minister committing that the scheme will be put in place between now and February of next year, which is a matter of months away?
I have very clearly committed to delivering a solution and outcome for these farmers. A number of considerations are being fully explored, for example, state aid considerations, the capacity to deliver it, and how it could be delivered within state aid constraints. There is also the budgetary aspect of it as well as the building out of the IT system which would be needed to identify all the farmers accurately and to deliver the final scheme. That work is ongoing and it will take a number of months to work through that. This is something I have been clearly committed to and have given a clear commitment to bring it to a finality. These are farmers who have been farming for 15 to 20 years and who are affected by it. As I said, over the past year a big focus has been on delivering this current CAP, making sure it is delivered well and that it supports farmers. This is a legacy issue that goes back more than ten years, that I am committed to finalising, and that I will do over the course of this year.
59. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the number of farms in Ireland in each of the past ten years. [17665/24]
In 2011, 73,000 people declared their occupation to be farmers. In 2016, this had fallen to approximately 69,000 people who declared their occupation to be farmers. In the 2022 census, this had fallen again to 61,000 people who declared their occupation to be farmers. This is an 11% decrease and an acceleration in the number of people who are no longer self-identifying as a farmer because farming is becoming a smaller element of their occupation. I want to get the up-to-date numbers for where we are at with farming at the moment.
My Department monitors the information on farms and the wider agrifood sector. We do that in collaboration with Teagasc and the Central Statistics Office, and that is ongoing at all times.
The number of farms in Ireland is recorded every ten years in the CSO census of agriculture, most recently in 2010 and 2020. In addition, the CSO undertakes farm structure surveys periodically between censuses. Those happened in 2013 and 2016.
The total number of farms recorded in the 2010 census of agriculture in Ireland was 139,860, with a similar figure recorded in the 2013 farm structure survey. The 2016 farm structure survey recorded 137,500 farms, while the 2020 census of agriculture shows the figure standing at 135,000. There was, therefore, a reduction of approximately 4,800 farms between the 2010 and 2020 censuses, representing a decrease of 3.4% in the decade. This is a slight reduction overall in farm numbers and this was matched with a steady increase in the average size of agricultural holdings.
According to the latest census of agriculture, over 96% of the 135,000 farm holdings in Ireland are operated as family farms, representing more than 130,000 farms in 2020. The CSO defines "family farms" as farms which are operated as family-based enterprises.
I remain fully committed to the family farm model. Food Vision 2030, our shared strategy for the sustainable development of the sector, is clear in laying out the importance of the family farm model to social sustainability. The design of the current CAP strategic plan and the significant funding we are putting in, including the record 50% increase this Government has delivered in national funding of the CAP, reflects the fact we want to support family farms, the continuation of farming and the number of those participating in it.
It is interesting there is such a disparity between the numbers the Minister has quoted, which are correct according to the census, and the number of people who are declaring as farmers. Fewer people are declaring as farmers because they must have another occupation when they cannot make enough money from their farms. In the census, they declare they are not farmers but are something else. That shows us that something is changing in the sector behind those figures.
What is the average age of farmers? Some 33% of farmers are now over the age of 65, which again shows the direction in which Irish farming is moving. Farms are getting bigger. We have a system of managed decline of the farming sector by this Government. If it is not managed decline, then the Government is failing to stop the decline. It is either managed decline or the Government is failing in its objective to stop the decline in farming. There are many threats. Farming is in a sea of threats at the moment. Those issues include cost increases, the structure of the food market, the Green Party and regulation from the EU. All of those issues are creating significant difficulties for farmers at the moment.
I do not agree at all with the Deputy's portrayal of the situation. The Government massively supports the family farm structure and family farmers. Over the past generation, we have seen a growing number of part-time farms. Farms may not be able to compete with the employment opportunities in the wider economy now, but the fact those family farmers stay farming is a reflection of the considerable commitment they have to keeping farming enterprise as a part of their income and a reflection of the Government's commitment to supporting them. As I say, we have increased by 50% the funding to this CAP, with €200 being delivered per suckler cow. I have doubled support for the sheep sector to €20 per ewe from the €10 that was in place. I have accepted everyone into the agri-environmental scheme. The largest ever number of farmers are now taking part in that scheme. That is something we want to continue.
If we go back 30 or 40 years, a 30-acre farm would have meant a full-time income in Ireland. The state of the wider economy meant we were not as wealthy a country and farmers did a lot more of their produce at farm level. Indeed, farm produce that is exported is tied to world export prices, and that remains the case. Farming does not compete as well with the job opportunities that are available in the wider economy because we are now a very developed economy. We want to ensure every family farm that wants to remain a family farm does so. That is why we are investing massively and it is why farmers are continuing to take up the farm enterprise. That is something I, as Minister, will continue to support in every way possible.
The Minister's answer is, to an extent, an admission that farming, in comparison with other income streams, is falling. He said that because the income in farming is now lower than in much of the rest of the economy, people are getting out of farming. Why is income lower in farming? Why do we have a food sector that is phenomenally profitable but where the profit lands in the factory and supermarket and not in the farms? It is because the structure of the market is an oligopoly, which has been allowed to happen by the lack of competitive protections from the Government. That is the main element. Cost and regulation increases are affecting farmers radically. It is not worth it for farmers to remain in the sector, and that is the bottom line.
The Government creates many schemes, which is like welfare for the managed decline of farming. Farmers would rather not have to have all these schemes. They would rather be able to make a decent income from the factories and supermarkets for their products. I urge the Government to focus. How do we ensure farmers are properly paid for all their produce? How do we ensure the factories and supermarkets are not making enormous profits and paying taxes in, for example, Luxembourg. Why do we allow that system to happen?
As the Deputy knows, we are the first Government ever to set up an agrifood regulator to ensure fair play for farmers in the marketplace. This is the first Government do to have done that. It was a commitment I made to farmers and we have delivered. I do not think the Deputy understands the farming sector very well. The key piece of legislation of Aontú-----
The Minister supported that legislation when he was in opposition.
-----is intended to set a price and allow for intervention. We export 90% of our food but the Deputy feels it is simply a matter of passing legislation to set what that price should be and all will be well with the world. That is the sort of fairytale he peddles. I grew up on a family farm, the income from which was our sole income. We milked our own cow every morning and grew our own vegetables, including potatoes. We killed a heifer and a sheep every year. The income and lifestyle we had growing up on our family farm was comparable with what was happening in the country because we were not as wealthy a country at the time and there were no other job opportunities. You were lucky if you were able to grow your own produce. We still have that family farm at home but it is now a part-time rather than a full-time farm. That is the situation on many farms and reflects the commitment that families have to those farms. As Minister, I am committed to ensuring that even if a farm is being farmed part time or full time, we make it worth the time of the farmer to farm it. We have done that through the schemes and funding we have put in place. We have also done so through the agrifood regulator, which is working to ensure farmers get fair play in the marketplace. The Deputy must remember that we operate in a world marketplace that sets the price. No matter what legislation he might make up or whatever fairytale he might be peddling, there is no way he will change that.
May I come back at that? That is a shocking thing to say.
It is not.
The Deputy can take up the matter with Minister.
61. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will outline the potential of a carbon farming initiative in the transformation of the sustainability profile of the farming sector. [18080/24]
The Minister knows that farmers worry that their transition to a sustainable model of farming will not sustain prosperous family farms into the long term. There are many in this House and outside it who want to fan the fears of farmers. I believe a clear pathway to a carbon farming approach could reassure many farmers. To date, the detail in that regard is scanty, which creates uncertainty.
My Department has committed to the development of an enabling framework, which can potentially reward farmers and landowners partaking in emissions mitigation and carbon removal activities. However, we are awaiting direction from Europe on this. On 20 February 2024, the European Parliament and the Council of the EU reached a provisional agreement on the carbon removals and carbon farming, CRCF, regulation, establishing the first EU-wide voluntary framework for certifying carbon removals, carbon farming and carbon storage in products generated in Europe. The European Parliament voted to approve the draft CRCF regulation on 10 April 2024. The final legal text must now be formally adopted by Council before being published in the Official Journal of the European Union and entering into force.
Discussions will continue on the implementation. The Commission intends to adopt the first set of certification methodologies within one year from the entry into force of the CRCF regulation.
My Department will continue to monitor developments closely to guide and inform Ireland's policy direction on carbon farming.
In tandem with developments at the EU level, there is a commitment to develop a national framework for carbon farming here. In September 2023, my Department held a public consultation on carbon farming, and positive feedback was received from stakeholders regarding the opportunity to diversify farm incomes. Stakeholders were supportive of an approach that included carbon removal, greenhouse gas reductions and biodiversity measures in a national carbon farming framework. Furthermore, stakeholders considered it important that the framework supports and compliments the environmental measures within the Common Agricultural Policy strategic plan.
In parallel with the public consultation, a carbon farming working group was established to oversee the development of the framework. Nationally, there are knowledge and data gaps - we are aware of those - that will need to be bridged to support carbon farming. In response, a number of key research and demonstration activities have been identified and funded in this regard.
First, I welcome what the Minister of State has said, but so long as there is no clear picture of what a revenue stream from sound environmental farming will mean in ten or 20 years' time, this uncertainty and unease will continue. We know, for example, that raising water levels on certain lands has huge carbon dividends. We know that benchmarking and reducing emissions by sequestration or altering methods can have very substantial dividends.
However, the Minister of State put her finger on it. We continue to be hidebound by data gaps. Is it not the case that at this point we need to just take a best endeavour approach to rewarding these changes? Okay, we may overpay some farmers but it is an important long-term national endeavour. I fear we are waiting for data that will never come, and we need a strategy that outlines a future before that point.
I thank the Deputy and agree with him. We have a sense of what we know we should be doing. On the data piece, I agree that we could wait forever for exact data, and it is continually evolving anyway in some regards. Even recently, data from Teagasc last year showed that we have overestimated some of the figures regarding emissions from organic soils and that some of the soils are in fact wetter than we had given them credit for. In one sense, there is a comfort there in that farmers have been able to farm on those lands. I know there are fears with regard to what any sort of rewetting proposals might look like. It is important we communicate that there are opportunities here to continue farming, maybe in a less intensive way, on certain lands.
I agree with the sentiments that we should just do our best effort to engage on this. I suppose we are through some of the schemes we have out there already. I think there is already engagement from farmers in measures that support not only carbon in soils but the wider biodiversity piece, and that is to be welcomed.
Is it not the case that if we are to see a significant scaling-up of activity, and I think that is necessary, there are going to have to be substantial rewards linked to them? Surely, on a no-regrets basis, we should be making those substantial rewards available so that a step change can be considered by people who want a long-term commercial and prosperous family future. We need to take a slight step of imagination in the approach we take to this.
One of the challenges is being able to measure it and being able to reward farmers appropriately for their actions, and what actions they might take on their own land. As I said, we are supporting farmers in different ways through different schemes to manage their lands in different ways. There are two projects in the midlands related to farm peat and farm carbon and, again, it is working with farmers. We are getting information from that. It is certainly giving some confidence to farmers and helping them get over some of those challenges. There is a concern among farmers as to what this will mean. They do want to be rewarded but they do not want to potentially see their farms being left in a state where they cannot continue to farm. There are data gaps we need to fill but I accept we know roughly where we need to be going. We know enough and we should be moving more swiftly in those directions. That is certainly something we should be looking into and examining further to deliver for farmers.
62. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if the Government has considered the reclassification of Magheraroarty pier in County Donegal as a pier for landing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18300/24]
I know we have done this through parliamentary questions, and so has my colleague Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn, but I want to ask the Minister about the designation and reclassification of Magheraroarty pier in County Donegal as a landing port for UK-registered vessels, similar to other piers and harbours in the county. This is something that would be transformative for the area and which the local community and businesses have sought for a long time due to the implications of Brexit. It is absolutely necessary, particularly for younger fishermen who have used that pier forever, and now because of the insistence on not reclassifying it, they are now discommoded in having to go to other piers, resulting in some cases in three hours of an additional journey for them.
As the Deputy knows, last year I designated three new ports in County Donegal - Bunagee, Glengad and Malin Head - as well as Dunmore East in County Waterford for landings from UK-registered Northern Ireland vessels. I also extended the opening hours in Greencastle. That brings the total number of ports designated for UK-registered Northern Ireland vessels to 11, seven of which are located in County Donegal.
Irish-registered vessels are obviously permitted to land at Magheraroarty pier. However, there are no current plans to include Magheraroarty harbour as a designated port for UK-registered Northern Ireland vessels given the significant extension in the number of designated ports in recent years and the levels of commitments and resources required and available. For a vessel to operate as a UK-registered vessel, the operators of the boat have to be based and addressed in Northern Ireland. That is one of the requirements for having a UK-registered vessel. That is why we saw prior to Brexit, and indeed still, some UK-registered vessels in different parts of Donegal. After that, UK-registered vessels were much more difficult to land in without designation. I moved to facilitate that by designating seven ports across Donegal. I did that based on where UK boats were landing into those harbours prior to Brexit and where there was an aspect of that.
For example, off north Inishowen, we have some Republic of Ireland-registered vessels that, post Brexit, cannot fish in the six to twelve-mile zone now. That is an impact of Brexit. Some of the boats that would be fishing off Inishowen in particular, for example, would be fishing in that six to twelve-mile zone and therefore need that designation. Those designations were based on where UK-registered vessels were landing into and where there was a track record of that.
Obviously, it is something I have monitored and looked at very closely. I believe the response I have put in place accommodates those vessels that are there. It is important that where there are new vessels, they are Republic of Ireland, ROI-registered. However, it is important we facilitate, where there is a track record of it, those that were UK-registered before, and I have moved to do that.
The Minister knows this case well because they have been in correspondence with him. He knows there is a vessel that has always been going in and out of Magheraroarty. He knows it now holds a UK licence and that the infrastructure it relies on is in Magheraroarty, the sheds and all the rest. He knows that the crew who are on that vessel are also from that area around Magheraroarty, and he knows that because he will not put pen to paper, he is forcing them to travel an extra three hours by boat around to Burtonport.
The Minister talks about additional resources that are required. Let me tell him this: that vessel was boarded three times by the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority, SFPA. There was nothing seized and absolutely nothing untoward with it.
It was boarded at the weekend, on a Sunday, on each occasion - three times - between the hours of 5 a.m. and 9 a.m. There was no problem with resources when the SFPA wanted to board a vessel and found nothing untoward about it. When someone who is fishing off the coast of Scotland wants to bring their product into a Gaeltacht area in west Donegal - into the community where they were born and are from - the Minister prevents them from doing so. It makes no sense. In a week when the Minister refused to listen to a 14-year-old, Muireann Kavanagh, who is being prevented from fishing pollock with a line at Arranmore - she had to go to the European court in Strasbourg because her own government would not listen to her - the Minister needs to listen to fishermen in my community and designate that pier.
I will take the Deputy’s second point first. He talks a lot of hot air. He has no policy and no proposals. When he mentions young Muireann Kavanagh and the issue of the hook and line pollock fishery, the Deputy does not understand what he is talking about in terms of the wider policy environment. I have engaged with that young fisher lady - it is great to see her passion for it - but I have seen no proposals from the Deputy except that he is trying to exploit the situation. He and his party have come forward with nothing. I have seen nothing from them by way of proposals there. He may go over and back and issue press releases but it is vacuous. I look forward to seeing anything of substance from him on that and on the pollock fishery. As he knows, that fishery is closed on scientific advice to protect it and to allow it time to restock around Ireland, in the waters on the west coast of Britain and in all the waters to the north of France and Spain. It is closed for all pollock fishing, whether by hook and line or by net. We had about 550 tonnes of that last year and we have 70 tonnes this year as a by-catch. I look forward to anything of substance from the Deputy but I would not hold my breath.
The designation of ports for UK-registered vessels is something I have looked at very closely and continue to assess very closely in terms of genuine need. I have designated seven ports across Donegal to reflect the need that has been identified.
Young Muireann Kavanagh has shown the Minister up for what he is. He is the person with hot air. He should tell the truth to the Dáil now. The only time he reached out to Muireann Kavanagh was after she went out on the media - that very morning. That is the reality. She wrote to him twice. A young 14 year old fisher woman from the island of Arranmore watches from her bedroom as the supertankers sweep up fish and the Minister prevents her from fishing with a line. He will not carry out the reassessment we want of the evidence for the closure of that area. He will not allow for a heritage licence. His Government has blocked legislation that we put forward in that regard. Let us call a spade a spade. The Minister is the one who is blocking this.
Let us move to Magheraroarty. Only one thing is stopping this. The Minister talks about need. The need is there. The boat is there. Young fishermen are fishing from there. The infrastructure is there. The only person who is standing in their way as they seek to land fish in the community where they were born and raised, and which they want to support, is the Minister. He is deciding not to put pen to paper to designate that pier as a landing pier for UK-registered vessels. He says he is doing this because the resources are not there. That vessel will have to notify the SFPA when it is coming onto shore. It is not that it will be on shore every single day. The Minister has decided to put his face against the idea of them travelling a couple of extra miles because he just does not understand what is happening in his own community. There is absolutely no reason for him to do it.
Thank you, Deputy.
The SFPA had no problem going to Magheraroarty in the early hours of the morning on a Sunday on three occasions to board that vessel. When that vessel wants to bring product and land it in Magheraroarty, the Minister for fisheries tells us that the SFPA does not have the resources to make the journey to Magheraroarty. That is hot air.
Thank you Deputy. Minister -----
I appeal to the Minister, on behalf of fishermen in my community, to take out his pen and sign the document to reclassify Magheraroarty as a designated pier that will support that community and vessel and could also support other jobs in that community as well.
I always tell the truth. Deputy Doherty is not telling the truth about the response I gave young Muireann Kavanagh. I wrote her a handwritten letter -----
After she went on radio.
No, before that. Again, the Deputy is not telling the truth here. He might like to portray it otherwise, but he is not telling the truth. I wrote her a handwritten note explaining the situation. Unfortunately, on that issue, as on many other issues on fisheries, Deputy Doherty and his party are an empty vessel.
The Minister has created many an empty vessel.
Deputy Doherty has come forward with nothing of substance. All he tries to do is exploit the situation and make it sound like he has something to offer when he has nothing to offer. I have seen no proposal from the Deputy on the hook and line fishery for pollock. He has done nothing other than try to exploit the situation. That is the reality we see from him on many issues. I explained the situation there. I explained that I designated 11 piers and seven of these are in Donegal. To have a UK-registered vessel, the owner and operator of the vessel needs to be addressed and based in Northern Ireland. I believe the system I put in place and the seven ports I designated in Donegal are meeting the needs there at the moment. We put the resources in place for that. We responded very promptly to address the particular need caused by Brexit and the new regulations that came in place after that.
I think it is important that the Minister does not mislead the Dáil. Muireann Kavanagh wrote to the Minister in December.
The Deputy is an empty vessel. He is a bluffer.
Do not try to spin a lie. She is a 14-year-old girl. She wrote to the Minister a second time. When the parents were going on radio, the Minister sent a handwritten note to her at that point in time. Do not try to mislead the Dáil. This is a young person who is standing up not only for her own rights but for fishing rights across the community. She is currently in Strasbourg because the Minister is not doing his job.
The Deputy has nothing to offer but hot air. He is an empty vessel.
The Deputy is out of order.
63. Deputy Claire Kerrane asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide an update on the women farmers' capital investment scheme under TAMS III; if there has been, or will be, a review of eligibility criteria for the scheme, given concerns raised; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18242/24]
My question is on the capital investment scheme for women farmers under TAMS. Will the Minister of State give an update on the number of applications approved to date. Given the issues that have been raised about locking out women farmers from accessing the scheme in the first place, will she review the eligibility criteria?
The women farmers capital investment scheme is one of ten measures in the targeted agriculture modernisation scheme, TAMS 3, which provides grants to farmers to build and-or improve a specified range of farm buildings and equipment on their holdings. The women farmers scheme opened for applications on 21 June 2023. A total of 867 applications was submitted up to 12 April, when tranche 3 closed for applications. The fourth tranche is currently open for applications. To date, 333 applications submitted in the first two tranches have received approval, with further approvals issuing daily. A standard grant rate of 40% is provided for all eligible investments in TAMS 3, with an enhanced 60% rate available to women farmers who meet the eligibility criteria under the scheme.
Eligibility criteria for women farmers include being aged between 18 and 66 years of age at the date of application; in the case of a woman farmer farming with others, a declaration is required that the woman farmer exercises effective and long-term control over the partnership or legal person in terms of decisions related to management, benefits and financial risks, either solely, or jointly with other members of the partnership; and in the case of a company or registered farm partnership, any or all women farmers must be a director and have at least a 20% shareholding. When farming with others, a declaration that they have effective and long-term control of the holding is required; the requirements must be met for the appropriate training and-or skills required at the time of applying; and in the case of a joint venture, both applicants must meet the eligibility criteria.
There are no plans to amend the eligibility criteria for the women farmers scheme. The CAP places a particular focus on generational renewal and on promoting the participation of women in the social and economic development of rural areas, with special attention to farming. Gender equality is also a key objective of the United Nations sustainable development goals and a priority for us as Ministers. I believe the scheme, in its current structure, is best placed to address the issues of both generational renewal and gender balance in farming.
Will the Minister of State confirm the figures, namely that 867 applications were received and that 333 of those were approved? Can she advise if any have been refused? She will be well aware that the women in agriculture stakeholder group has raised concerns about the eligibility criteria. Last summer, when it was introduced, it flagged its fear that it would lock some women out of accessing this really important support.
The Minister of State should listen to the concerns of the likes of the stakeholders group. We should draw on their expertise and review the eligibility. I know it was also raised at point 8 of the recommendations under the new national women in agriculture action plan, which reinforced that eligibility needs to be looked at in these schemes.
I confirm that 867 applications have been received with 33 in the first two tranches and it is increasing all the time. I do not have the figure for rejections. I can find that and get it to the Deputy. This is a generous scheme which supports women in farming. The eligibility criteria are broad, covering almost all female farmers. We have to be careful that it is not subject to abuse with people saying that they are female farmers when they are not in fact one of the primary people who exercise long-term control over the farm itself. That is why the eligibility criteria are there in the first place. It is good that female farmers are engaging with it. The three tranches have shown a healthy application rate with female farmers and I hope that continues.
It will be important to see how many, if any, of the 867 applications made have been refused for whatever reason to allow us to understand if there is an issue there. If a stakeholder group of women farmers set up to represent women farmers is raising an issue of access to this scheme, it would be worthy of consideration by the Minister of State. Perhaps when this fourth tranche closes, she might agree to look at the eligibility criteria given that women farmers, who set up a group represent the women farmers, are the ones who have raised the issue and have done so in good faith.
I again reiterate that point 8 of the national women in agriculture action plan raises the scheme eligibility. Clearly, there is an issue here. It would be interesting to see the number that have not been approved and I would appreciate if the Minister of State could provide that to me. The Minister of State should at least look at the eligibility criteria. If there is an issue there, it should just be resolved. It is not a big deal and I imagine that it could be addressed quite easily.
We will engage with the stakeholders group on its concerns, as we would have done up to now. I imagine that the small number of women farmers who do not meet the criteria under this TAM scheme may apply for any of the other TAM schemes. There is grant aid of between 40% and 60% there, including the young farmers scheme. There are about ten schemes available under TAMS that they could look into if they fall out of the women farmers scheme. I hope there have not been too many refusals but if there have been any, I will get that information to the Deputy.
64. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he is concerned about negative environmental impacts from the CAP simplification process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18332/24]
A range of farmers and environmental groups have raised serious criticisms about negative environmental impacts and negative impacts for farmers from the so-called CAP simplification which the European Parliament voted for yesterday. They say that it will increase farmers vulnerability to extreme weather events, that it guts environmental standards and that it is a race to the bottom. MEPs, including from Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Sinn Féin, rejected an amendment that sought to cap payments so that 80% of payments to farmers no longer go to just 20% of beneficiaries. Does the Government have any concerns about all of that?
The proposed amending regulation presented by the Commission is focused on simplification to reduce the burden on farmers and to provide flexibility to member states to address issues affecting farmers arising from climatic conditions or other adverse weather events.
While there are changes to the good agricultural and environmental conditions, GAECs, my Department, like all ministries across Europe, must apply these standards at an appropriate level for our own national situation to protect our natural resources, including soil health, air and water quality, habitats and biodiversity. The changes proposed include moving the requirement to have a minimum share of land devoted to non-productive features, from GAEC 8, into eco schemes. That was one of the proposals approved. Already in Ireland we build on the basic GAEC 8 standard requirement in our eco scheme and we have implemented a more ambitious space for nature requirement than the minimum required. The majority of farmers chose to back this ambition, picking an enhanced space for nature as their eco scheme practice. Over 100,000 farmers chose to go to a full 10% devoted to space for nature on their farms. Other changes proposed include adjustments to GAECs 5, 6, 7 and 9 allowing member states more flexibility in order to address specific problems in the application of those GAEC standards. On GAEC 7 on crop rotation and diversification requirements for the tillage sector, flexibility is required given the weather conditions.
While an exemption for farmers with less than 10 ha from controls and penalties under conditionality is also proposed, it is crucial to understand that all the legal obligations on these farmers would still apply. Any breach of the laws regarding pollution, habitat destruction and hedgerow removal will continue to be prosecuted by the competent authorities. The experts in my Department have carefully considered the proposed changes and I believe the proposal will provide more flexibility for farmers, while still maintaining the objectives of those standards. Irish farmers have demonstrated their commitment to the environment and have committed themselves to a range of environmental actions including through eco schemes and our results-based environmental scheme, ACRES. It is my intention to ensure that Ireland’s CAP strategic plan continues to back farmers and support them to meet their environmental commitments.
I presume the Minister knows and agrees that we are in a climate and biodiversity crisis and yet the European Commission with the support of the Irish Government and the support of the three big parties in this Dáil has just agreed to delete, weaken or make voluntary several of the GAECs. The Minister listed some of them. They include minimising tillage to prevent soil erosion, ensuring minimal soil cover, crop rotation, areas to enhance biodiversity and protection of permanent grassland Natura 2000. Bird Life Europe has stated:
Today, the European Parliament paved the way for anti-democratic, anti-environmental, and above all, anti-farmers legislation, yielding to a powerful agri-business lobby that serves only a few. Food security, the future of farmers, and citizens were sacrificed for the sake of short-term profits and political calculations.
The Government seems to agree with that.
The Deputy does not seem to recognise the great work happening in farms here in Ireland. He should give proper recognition to the real commitment that family farms across this country are demonstrating to the environment and indeed to tackling the biodiversity challenge that we have, not just in this country but also in many other countries as well. In 2022 there was a reduction in emissions from Irish agriculture. I am confident that the figures for 2023 will also show a reduction in emissions. That is a reflection of the work that farmers are undertaking at farm level.
The Deputy may not be aware of this because I have never heard him refer to it. Over the last two years, there has been a 30% reduction in the use of chemical fertilisers. That has been achieved alongside maintaining food production and has contributed to emissions reduction. That is a reflection of the massive work that is happening at family farm level. We have family farms in this country. I regularly hear the Deputy refer to industrial farming. That is not what we have in this country. We have family farms which are which are run with the help of families and which produce food in a sustainable way. Some of the steps being taken at European level in recent years provide the appropriate flexibility to farmers to address the weather challenges we have seen not just here but across Europe over a period of time. The work continues to ensure we are contributing to the climate change challenge.
I give considerable credit to the work small farmers are doing - people who are struggling and are not supported by the Government. I do not give any credit to the Government, which simply does the bidding of the agribusiness lobby at the expense of the environment and at the expense of small farmers. The Minister likes to hide the reality of farming behind the phrase "family farms". Obviously, the vast majority of farmers in this country struggle and are genuinely small family farms.
Let us consider where CAP money goes. The top eight recipients of CAP in Ireland received over €200,000 each. Is Larry Goodman a family farmer?
Are John and Peter Queally, the owners of Dawn Meats who are receiving €191,000, family farmers? Is that who the Department is representing? Does the Minister agree with the fact that 80% of the money goes to 20% of the farmers? He pretends to represent the interests of ordinary farmers. He does not. He represents the interests of massive farms and big agribusiness. That is who the Department serves, not ordinary family farmers who are failed by what it is doing here. According to organisations representing 50% of farming organisations:
The proposed simplification rules will ultimately only exacerbate discontent in the farming community as they neither support farmers in increasing their resilience nor do they address the real issues that farmers face, which is the lack of fair prices for their products and lack of a decent income.
Deputy Murphy likes to portray that. He peddles the story that somehow Irish agriculture is industrial and not the family farm as we portray it. That is totally false.
The biggest part of it.
The reality has been-----
Most of it is not.
If the Deputy had been paying any attention to what I have been doing as Minister over the past five years-----
I have.
-----he would have seen I have delivered a CAP programme which has increased by 50% the funding we are giving to farms, and we are directing that particularly at smaller and medium-sized farms. For example, I have introduced front-loading of the payments that farmers get in respect of the first 32 ha. We are reallocating funding specifically to smaller and medium-sized farmers to encourage farmers to stay in farming. The Deputy has probably not picked this up either but I have also reduced the maximum payment that any one farmer can get in CAP payments from what would have been over €150,000 in the outgoing CAP to €66,000 now under this CAP. No farmer at the conclusion of this CAP will be able to get a payment of more than €66,000. This is because we want to back and sustain what we have in this country which is family farming and which the Deputy, in his portrayal, constantly tries to misrepresent and do a total disservice to.
65. Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on the recent report completed by Teagasc and submitted to his Department about the impact on farmers following damage to their farmland as a result of recent flooding on the Cooley Peninsula in November 2023; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18433/24]
Will the Minister give his views on the recent report submitted to his Department by Teagasc about the impact on farmers following damage to their farmland as a result of the flooding on the Cooley Peninsula in November 2023? We have discussed this a number of times. We spoke about the fact that there is not an off-the-shelf support scheme. I am very glad this piece of work was done. I would like to think we would come up with something that can compensate farmers and even deal with some of these circumstances into the future as they are sure to happen.
I thank Deputy Ó Murchú for raising this matter, which we have discussed on previous occasions. I have been working very closely with Senator Erin McGreehan on stepping this out, getting a full assessment of the impact of that particular weather event and stepping forward a response to it. As the Deputy knows, there was exceptionally heavy rainfall in October and November, with two back-to-back storms occurring between 18 October and 1 November. That later storm, on 30 and 31 October, saw high winds and unprecedented rainfall on already saturated ground, which resulted in localised flooding in the Cooley Peninsula. During this time, the River Flurry and other smaller streams burst their banks and washed away field fencing and gateways. The heavy rain also caused landslides from the Cooley Mountains which deposited large rocks, gravel and debris on agricultural lands in addition to loss and damage to stored fodder and fertiliser supplies. In these cases, land users have not been able to utilise agricultural lands without carrying out remedial works and some have reported fodder shortages. Access to affected lands has been restricted for farmers too and activities such as conserving fodder cannot be carried out in the normal way. These farmers have also seen the same poor weather conditions as other farmers across the country with exceptional rainfall over several months and the challenges that brings.
In order to assist these farmers, and working particularly with Senator McGreehan, my Department requested local Teagasc staff to carry out a survey of the affected areas. These reports have been received in my Department and they detail the impact of flooding on individual land holdings situated in the Cooley Peninsula. The Department is currently analysing these surveys to fully assess the damage done to individual farmers and land and it is something on which I will be following through after that. I will update the House on this and no doubt Senator McGreehan will be in a position to clarify as well when I have brought it to a conclusion.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. I welcome the fact that work has been done. Obviously, we need that analysis to happen as soon as possible. I welcome the fact that the Minister says he will be following through. I will take that as his expression of support for the scheme that is needed by these farmers. Along with many Oireachtas Members and local councillors including Councillor Antóin Watters, I attended a number of meetings with farmers and one in particular. A huge amount of their worry relates to the remedial work that is needed, even if a scheme comes in. I spoke to the Minister about the fact that they had no choice but to carry out some remedial works. As the Minister said, they could not access a huge amount of their own farmland and they needed to do certain things to mitigate the possibility of future flooding. They need to make sure they will be able to get compensation if these works, which could not wait, fall under the ambit of any future compensation scheme.
I thank Deputy Ó Murchú. It is something we have been monitoring closely. It has had a significant, very localised impact. Unlike the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Department of Social Protection, we have no shelf-ready scheme in instances where there might be particular damage to farms, which tend to be more robust and obviously not as impacted as towns and villages by events like those we saw earlier this year in some parts of the country. In this instance, I recognise the damage that was done. I am working with Teagasc and with my own officials to get a full assessment of that. I have spoken to the Deputy on this. I am speaking on an ongoing basis with Senator McGreehan. We will be stepping it out in assessing the full report and identifying the next steps in that regard.
I appreciate that. We need to see this happen as soon as possible. If I could get further clarity on the timeline, I would appreciate it. We all understand the significant damage that was done by the storms to these particular farmlands. In doing this piece of work, maybe it will be possible to put together something that could provide an off-the-shelf support scheme that will be necessary, unfortunately, when dealing with the type of weather events we are having more regularly now. We need to make sure we can provide those sorts of supports to ensure we can maintain sustainable family farms into the future. This needs to be done quicker, better, faster and as soon as possible. If the Minister has any detail on the timeline, I would really appreciate it.
The report is being finalised and assessed and I hope to have further detail shortly. I thank the Deputy for raising the issue today.
Has Question No. 66 been taken?
I can introduce it. It is about dairy farmers.
I do not mind what it is about. On you go.
It is just, given yesterday, the Ceann Comhairle might be interested. We would at least get the answer.
66. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the reasons for his decision to rule out introducing any compensation scheme for dairy farmers who wish to reduce the size of their herds; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18334/24]
The Minister said last week that he is taking the voluntary dairy cow reduction scheme off the table. Will he explain why this is being done? Was it because Dairy Industry Ireland, which describes itself as the most influential business representative organisation in Ireland, threatened to sue the State if milk volumes for processors dropped as a consequence?
This is another example of Deputy Murphy looking to portray somehow that there is a big industrial ethos and personality to our agricultural sector whereas the opposite is the truth. We have family farms across this country working in a co-op structure, thankfully, in the dairy sector. Under this structure, as much of the return as possible is returned to the family farms and the dairy farms that are doing it. The reason I took that scheme off the table is because my objective is to back farmers and family farms in the work they are doing to reduce emissions. We have seen emissions reduced in 2022. I am confident that when the 2023 figures come out, we will see those reduced further. I want to back these farmers in food production because producing food is massively important and that is what I want to see happen. That is what I want to back farmers to continue to do. In backing them to continue to produce that food, we will also support them with the work they are undertaking, and the work we are supporting to be undertaken as well, regarding reducing emissions and working to support the environment. That is the approach we are taking.
As regards the particular scheme and measures we are taking to meet our 25% reduction in emissions by 2030, I established a food vision group with all stakeholders as part of that in 2022 to advance actions in the dairy sector that were identified in the Food Vision 2030 strategy and to feed back to me the different steps we could take which would see that 25% reduction or the equivalent of a reduction of 5.75 megatons of carbon dioxide equivalent by the end of the decade. One of the recommendations the group made that should be considered was the potential for a dairy reduction scheme. I have reflected on that recently. I have also assessed what is happening as regards the various steps and the progress being made on reducing emissions. I have spoken to the Deputy before today about how we have seen a reduction of 30%, which is very significant, in the use of chemical fertiliser over just the past two years. That is a reflection of what is going on in this sector and the work farmers are doing, so I do not see a need for this scheme. Also, there are particular complications with how any such scheme would be operated, which were considerations as well.
