Matt Carthy
Ceist:122. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he intends to reopen the fodder scheme to new applicants. [61130/22]
Ceisteanna Eile - Other Questions
Question No. 121 taken with Written Answers.
Agriculture Schemes
Does the Minister intend to reopen the fodder scheme to new applicants? The purpose of the scheme is to incentivise farmers to have enough fodder for the coming winter. Would it not be prudent to take measures to maximise participation by not restricting it to those in the scheme last year? Why was the scheme devised in a manner that excludes so many farmers?
Yes, I will open up to new entrants next year because I want to ensure everyone who makes fodder or hay next year has the additional costs involved in that supported by the Government. As the Deputy will be aware, I launched the 2023 fodder support scheme on 2 November. The 2022 scheme proved to be successful with more than 71,000 applicants, with each of them due to receive an average payment of €735 - the maximum payment was €1,000. These payments began issuing to farmers over the past week.
The 2023 fodder support scheme is a continuance of the 2022 scheme and aims to incentivise farmers, in particular dry stock farmers, to grow more fodder - silage and hay - next year to ensure we do not have any animal welfare issues during the winter of 2023 and spring of 2024. We are planning well ahead to ensure we head off any issues while supporting family farms in the process.
The scheme is a reflection of the significant increase in input costs such as fertiliser, energy and silage wrapping. That is why I moved to put the scheme in place this year. It has been successful; I have outlined the number of applicants. Thankfully, it has been successful in ensuring good supplies of fodder in the country this year. Farmers have stepped up to the mark to ensure they have been productive and that we have good stores. We do not know what next April and May might bring. The ground might be frozen hard as happened ten years ago leading to a fodder crisis. If that happens, I want to ensure there is enough silage and hay in the sheds. That sits alongside the tillage incentive scheme we introduced this year, which resulted an increase of 6% or 7% in our overall grain supply.
I wanted the money out by the end of this year for farmers to help as many of them as possible next year to buy fertiliser ahead to ensure they have it to grow grass and to be productive next year. To administer it effectively, as a starting point I made it open to all those already in system and all those who applied this year so they could have a handy process of reapplying for 2023. For those who did not apply this year, it will open up for new applicants in the spring. I wanted to ensure we could drive on as quickly as possible now and that is why we have done it for the existing applicants ahead of time.
The Minister has made it clear that it will be open for people who did not qualify last year. For example, someone who took over a farm would not have submitted the application in time. They may apply in the spring. I agree with him that the majority of farmers plan ahead and ensure they have enough fodder for their animals. Did he say that payments went out this week and the new applicants need to wait until spring? Can that not be brought forward? Is it possible that those who lost out last year might be able to get payments from the start of the year, rather than in spring? At what stage in early or late spring will they be paid?
There will be a great deal more work involved if we open up the scheme to new applicants to be paid by the end of the year because there was a great deal of work involved in getting the scheme up and running for the 77,000 applicants who applied for it. The details are all on the system. We opened up the system again and we take it they are applying for next year. It is very straightforward and needed to be so to have it done quickly.
Bringing in totally new applications would slow down the system and make it more difficult to administer for all of those whose applications are already in.
I expect a very small number of new entrants or applications next year. Those making fodder next year would all have been making it this year as well.
There will be new entrants to the scheme and there will be some who, for different reasons, did not apply and I want to accommodate them. I said on budget day that the scheme would be open to them in the spring and they can plan on the basis that they will be able to apply. We will process the applications in the springtime, and certainly in advance of the fodder-making season because they need the help in the same way as everybody else needed it this year.
There is just one other category on which I would like to get the Minister's thoughts, namely, dairy farmers and hill farmers who would have lands classified as category 1 under the areas of natural constraint. They also fall outside the new peer group. This group is also not immune to the increases in fodder, feeding costs, etc. They are also food producers who are trying to make a living. The Irish Natura and Hill Farmers Association, INHFA, estimate that a very significant number of dry stock farmers could find themselves ineligible. Will this group be eligible for the scheme or do those whose lands are classified as category 1 stay outside the scheme?
I will deal first with the dairy farmers and then I will deal with the dry stock or livestock farmers who do not make hay or silage themselves.
With regard to dairy farmers, my core objective for the scheme was to ensure that, as a country, we produced enough fodder to ensure we are fodder and food secure this autumn, winter and spring, and that every farmer would be supported in the making of hay or silage.
The evidence from Teagasc is that, thankfully, dairy has had one of its best years ever for incomes, where milk is at a record price. The feedback on activity on dairy farms is that there was no issue in respect of making fodder. Activity levels were as good as ever and the increased income for farmers was out-stripping the increased costs of inputs. That is good to see.
The situation was different in beef and sheep and I brought in the scheme to support them with their additional costs to ensure there would not be a reduction in fodder making. That benefits everyone right across the system because if we have enough fodder in the country; every sector benefits, including the dairy sector. This keeps the price of fodder manageable.
On that very point, very briefly, those who do not make fodder themselves benefit from that being the case. If we can keep fodder prices manageable by having a good supply in the country, those who do not normally make fodder have access to it, and not at extreme prices because of supply and demand challenges.
Everyone benefits if we have enough fodder and I have directed the funding where it was most needed to ensure fodder is made.
Agriculture Industry
Kathleen Funchion
Ceist:123. Deputy Kathleen Funchion asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will commit to a public inquiry involving all relevant stake holders regarding the issue on the farm of a person (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [61216/22]
I thank the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach and I am delighted this question has been selected. I am sure the Minister is well aware of this issue and I will expand on it in the further minutes I have, but this was the issue that was raised at the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine in the past week. It was not a new issue at that point; it has been going on for several years for Dan Brennan and his family. Dan himself gave evidence before the committee and I am asking for a public inquiry and to ensure all of the stakeholders who are relevant to this matter are included in such an inquiry.
I thank Deputy Funchion for her question. The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine was involved with other public sector bodies in an investigation of animal health and environmental concerns on the farm of the person to whom the Deputy has referred and has provided details.
I am aware of the case of the person the Deputy has referred to and I understand the burden the situation has placed on him. This inter-agency group, IAG, was convened in June 2004 and comprised my Department’s laboratories, the Environmental Protection Agency, as well as Teagasc, the HSE and Kilkenny County Council.
Two separate investigations and a review were undertaken. The first of the investigations was led by my Department's veterinary laboratory service, VLS. Extensive field and laboratory investigations were undertaken on the farm. Laboratory results were provided to the herdowner on an ongoing basis and supports for a comprehensive herd health programme were also provided. On the conclusion of the VLS investigations and as part of the IAG, the VLS reported its findings in June 2006. This report was provided to the herdowner and his advisers at that time. Subsequently, and on foot of a request by the herdowner and his advisers, University College Dublin’s Centre for Veterinary Epidemiology and Risk Analysis, CVERA, was commissioned to conduct further epidemiological studies of problems on the farm. That report was completed in August 2009. This was provided to the herdowner and his advisers.
The inter-agency group reviewed the findings of both investigations and published its final report in August 2010. This was also provided to the herdowner and his advisers. Both investigation reports and the report of the inter-agency group review referred to above detail all of the comprehensive studies of animal health and environmental health parameters undertaken on this farm and the interpretation of those findings by experts from the agencies involved. These reports have been in the public domain since the conclusion of the investigative process and remain available for review by anyone who wishes to access them.
With all due respect to the Minister, that is a sort of history of the situation as to where we are now but a great deal more needs to be done. For anyone who is unaware of this case or situation, or is watching these proceedings, when I first heard about it, it reminded me of the movie "Erin Brockovich" or the movie that was based on the company which made Teflon.
This man, who was an excellent farmer, was told time and time again by the State, which includes the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, that he was basically not up to standard as a farmer. He had been saying all along that it was to do with a premises and industry which was in operation right next to his farm in respect of the contamination of his land. It turns out he was correct about that because when the company closed up, everything went back to exactly as it should be on the farm. He was, therefore, correct and was made to feel I am sure, at times, that he was going crazy. He was ridiculed and was totally and utterly let down. That is an understatement. There needs to be an inquiry now with all stakeholders because there needs to be accountability. It is not good enough for people to say they are sorry to Dan Brennan and his family, that they understand there was a burden, and that they understand how difficult it was.
We need accountability. People were telling him for years he was wrong but in fact he was correct. What is going to happen now, what compensation or what is going to come of this?
I thank Deputy Funchion. The reason I outlined the background to the case and the various assessments and investigations which took place was to outline that this is something that has been looked at in great detail. The investigations through the inter-agency group were completed as far back as 2010. This has been an issue and has been under consideration for a long time now, a very significant investigation and assessment has been carried out, and had been reported to the farmer and his advisers. That is the backdrop to this matter and that is why I outlined it.
All of those reports are available for public assessment and viewing. There is not any proposal to reopen this matter and I believe there was a very thorough assessment and investigation at the time.
That reply will not be acceptable to Dan Brennan and to the other farmers in the area. They attended a meeting of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine last week and there was great support for Dan. He was present with his wife and family, together with other farmers from the locality, and local IFA representatives. Although I am not a member of the agriculture committee, I attended it last week and this committee was very much of one voice on this issue. This is a cross-party committee which includes Government as well as Opposition representatives and the sense I got from the committee is that there is an appetite for a public inquiry into this. We cannot allow a situation to prevail where there is no accountability. This happens so often in this State and the one point I made at the committee last week was that any investigation which takes place needs to have very good, strong, robust and strict terms of reference which will allow for accountability.
To say this man has been failed, while trying think of the correct language one can use in this Parliament, is an understatement. A great deal more needs to be done; this will not be the end of the matter. I am shocked to hear that the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine believes that is just it. That certainly will not be the case from the point of view of the people in the area.
I have outlined the comprehensive assessments, investigations and work that was undertaken by the inter-agency group, which completed its work and published its report in 2010. I welcome the fact that the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine considered the issue recently and, following that, l am interested in hearing the views and perspective of the committee on the hearing it had. I look forward to receiving that information and considering the matter. I outlined today the very comprehensive and in-depth reports and assessment, which were completed more than 12 years ago. The agriculture committee always keeps me up to speed with the work it undertakes, and I will certainly review any submission I receive from it.
Question No. 124 taken with Written Answers.
Departmental Reviews
Matt Carthy
Ceist:132. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when he intends to act on the recommendation of the wool feasibility study to establish an all-island wool council. [61128/22]
The establishment of an all-island wool council was a recommendation of the wool feasibility study. We are supportive of that. I understand the Minister of State, Senator Hackett, has reached out to stakeholders. Will she outline if she intends to follow through with this on an all-island basis? Will she also outline the timeframe she is setting for that?
I thank the Deputy for his continued interest in this matter. As he will be aware, the wool feasibility study report was published in July of this year. The review, which was compiled independently by The Agile Executive, contains a number of 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 by the industry, and this received widespread support.
It is intended that this council will lead the development and promotion of Irish wool domestically and internationally. It will also act as a forum to bring together multiple stakeholders in order to foster collaboration, innovation and scaling activities in the wool sector. It is envisaged that the council will be a forum where stakeholders can further examine and explore the potential uses for wool identified in the wool feasibility study. Once established, my Department has committed to providing €30,000 in financial assistance towards the initial set-up costs.
I have informed the relevant stakeholders that I am eager to see the formation of this stakeholder-led wool council as soon as possible. It is my understanding that a meeting of the relevant stakeholders is scheduled to take place next week. I welcome that.
It is my hope that the wool council, once formed, will use the findings of the wool feasibility study report as a roadmap to develop pathways towards maximising the true potential of Irish wool into the future and to help drive increased returns for this great and sustainable product.
I thank the Minister of State for her response. I suggest that the timeframes to date have been anything but satisfactory. A review of wool-based products was promised when the programme for Government was being put together, but it took until July 2021 for a tender to be put out in the first place. It was not until December 2021 that it was confirmed that a tender had been awarded and the report was published seven months later. Why has it taken nearly half the Government's term to commission and receive the report?
Has the Minister of State begun any work on the short-term recommendations contained in the report? How does she propose to address the medium and long-term recommendations? Has she set targets for the short, medium and long-term ambitions she feels can be realised?
I assure the Deputy that we have delivered on the programme for Government commitment. He will recall that we were in the midst of a Covid crisis for some time in the early part of the Government's term. We have come out of that well. I thank The Agile Executive, which went to great lengths to engage with stakeholders and put together this significant report, which contains a wealth of information on the wool sector and the potential direction to take. That is why we need the wool council to be formed as soon as possible. I am pleased to hear that the stakeholders are due to meet next week. Ultimately, it will be for them to decide the direction they take and to set short, medium and long-term objectives for the group.
I asked about the establishment of the all-island wool council. I note that in the Seanad the Minister of State spoke about stakeholder engagement, but there seems to be a lack of clarity on the all-island aspect of that. The Sinn Féin spokesperson for agriculture in the North raised the matter and was told that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, DEFRA, is considering the review and plans to engage with the Department here. What level of engagement has the Minister of State had with DEFRA and what stage are the discussions at? I ask this because if the recommendations contained within the report are to achieve the objectives, then we must ensure that all of the stakeholders are involved. I appreciate that the Minister of State says a meeting is due to take place next week with those involved in the all-island process who are ready and willing to get it under way but I seek clarity on what has been done and the proposed timeframe in which she proposes to achieve the spirit of the study itself.
I thank the Minister of State for her reply, which frankly contained a lot of jargon. What I would like to know is what concrete actions are happening, in particular in terms of interdepartmental efforts to investigate and move forward. One option is to develop wool as an insulation product. Insulating homes is a major priority of the Government, as it should be, although it might not be moving as quickly as I would like. No doubt the Minister of State will use Covid as the excuse, as it is used for every delay by the Government.
It does seem that wool has some possibilities to be used for insulation. Currently, wool is practically being thrown out or farmers are getting very little for it. The cost of insulation is rising exponentially. It is one of the issues that is making it most difficult for the Government to meet its targets. What is being done in particular in that regard? Is there any engagement with industry? With the greatest of respect, €30,000 is not going to cut it if we are trying to develop a new product with such a significant capability to impact the industry.
To clarify, the €30,000 is to help the establishment of the wool council. Once the council has been established, it is up to it, as the industry stakeholders, to come together with the ideas. Who knows what lies ahead? I urge the stakeholders to do that very swiftly.
I would welcome any all-island approach and support the council may well achieve and engagement with farmers and stakeholders in Northern Ireland also.
I acknowledge the potential benefits and uses of wool, of which there are many. Insulation is one aspect. We are engaging with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage on decarbonising housing, full stop. Timber has a significant role to play in that regard. If wool is an element too, that would be very exciting. However, we must achieve certain changes to aspects of building regulations in terms of fire safety and so forth. We are engaging on all sorts of aspects of housing.
Is the Minister of State engaging with DEFRA in the North? What stage are the discussions at?
Personally, no, but I will find out for the Deputy and let him know if my officials have engaged.
Will the Minister of State please do that and let me know what stage the discussions have reached?
We will know more following the meeting about the wool council next week. We need to get there and to move on from that point.
Farm Safety
Brendan Griffin
Ceist:125. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the way that farm safety efforts have fared to date in 2022; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [61309/22]
I thank the Acting Chair for his discretion. I want to ask about the very important issue of farm safety. Perhaps the Minister would update the House on the Department's efforts in that regard to date in 2022.
I thank Deputy Griffin for raising this important matter. He is aware that it is an area on which the Minister of State, Deputy Martin Heydon, has done significant work since his appointment two years ago.
Farm safety is a major issue and farming continues to be the most dangerous occupation in terms of fatalities in the workplace. Fatal incidents on farms account for just over two in five of all workplace fatal incidents. Unfortunately, this year to date, there have been 12 fatalities on farms.
Data from the Teagasc national farm survey, NFS, also reveal that there are approximately 4,500 non-fatal incidents each year on farms - this is a large number - and some of them result in life-changing injuries.
The Government has prioritised farm safety, health and well-being. This is reflected in the work of the Minister of State, Deputy Heydon, and the fact that the Government has assigned him specific responsibility for farm safety as part of his ministerial portfolio. He has done excellent work in this space and is playing a key role in driving a step change in our approach to farm safety.
The Department implemented a series of farm safety, health and well-being initiatives over the course of this year, utilising dedicated funding of €2.25 million. These initiatives include capital support to make farms safer, support for education and awareness by promoting farm safety practices and risk awareness to encourage behavioural change around farm safety from a young age, and support for those who have been impacted by fatal and non-fatal incidents. The measures include the investment of €1.5 million in agricultural machinery and equine simulators for use in agricultural colleges; the Agri Aware farm safe schools initiative, in which 450 primary schools and 19,500 pupils participated this year; the acceleration of wear and tear allowances for farm safety equipment; farm safety training; and joint promotional farm safety campaigns with the Health and Safety Authority, HSA.
I thank the Minister for that update. I commend the Department, the Minister and the Minister of State, Deputy Heydon, who has responsibility for this area, on their efforts to date. It is fitting that special responsibility be assigned to a Minister of State. Unfortunately, the 12 fatalities this year are 12 people who will not be at the Christmas dinner table with their families in a few weeks' time. My condolences go out to the families affected.
The statistic that two in five workplace fatalities occur on farms is concerning. That message should never be lost. I tabled this question to try to keep the matter on the agenda. It is crucial. Complacency is probably the greatest enemy of them all. No one at any level, be it in the Department or on the front line on farms, should be complacent about farm safety. I ask that the Department continue its efforts.
We will keep working on this. Under the suite of TAMS measures, grant aid has been provided for a wide range of farm safety-related investments, with health and safety guidelines included in all building specifications. This is an important step in supported on-farm investments. With the Minister of State, Deputy Heydon, I will be increasing the rate of grant aid for farm safety-related investments to 60% under the capital investment scheme in 2023, subject to European Commission approval. Dedicated funding has been increased to €2.5 million in next year's budget, which will allow existing initiatives to continue and new ones to be developed to build on our efforts to improve farm safety, health and well-being.
We can and are doing more on this front. The number of deaths and injuries on farms is too high and we need to continue taking steps to ensure that incident levels are reduced. Farming is the greatest and most rewarding profession in the country, so we must do everything we can to ensure that the farm is a safe place to work.
Questions Nos. 126 to 131, inclusive, taken with Written Answers.
Question No. 132 taken after Question No. 123.
Forestry Sector
Pearse Doherty
Ceist:133. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his response to the ongoing failure of his Department to meet forestry licence issuance and afforestation targets consistently. [61322/22]
We have dealt with this matter time and again at the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine. The Minister of State cannot deny at this stage that the Department's performance in forestry licensing is putting many prospective foresters off planting. While we may have problems now, we are facing into major ones down the road because of this. We have an annual target of 8,000 ha, yet afforestation stands at only 2,200 ha this week. This is coupled with the snail's pace of the reconstitution and underplanting scheme, RUS. The Minister of State needs to recognise that she and the Department are failing.
I thank the Deputy for this question. Contrary to his understanding, I am pleased to advise that, due to the continued high output in forestry licensing this year, we have seen considerable reductions in the backlog of forestry licences and a year-on-year increase in the number of licences issued. We have invested significantly and strategically in easing the licensing backlog. We are issuing more licences than applications received, which is leading to faster turnaround times for new applicants.
At the start of the year, we published a forestry licensing plan for 2022 that contained a target of 5,250 licences, an increase of 30% on 2021. By 2 December 2022, we had issued nearly 4,500 licences, which was 92% of our expected output by this point in the year. There are more than 1,000 approved afforestation licences, with just under 7,500 ha ready for planting. These improved outputs have been achieved through a commitment to continuous improvement as well as through a significant investment in resources. The positive impact of these measures can be seen in the increased number of licences issuing. This increase in licence output will remove one of the perceived barriers to planting.
I am acutely aware of the afforestation target of 8,000 ha per year set out in the Climate Action Plan and the fact that afforestation rates have been declining in recent years. As the Deputy may know, the current forestry programme provides supports for afforestation, including grants and premiums, and covers the cost of establishing a forest. Despite strong support for landowners over a period of 15 years, we have not achieved the level of planting anticipated. We hope that the new forestry programme will re-engage landowners, particularly farmers, and realise the necessary change in land use. This will be the best-funded forestry programme in the history of the State, with €1.3 billion committed to its implementation. It is a significant vote of confidence in forestry as a public good and in farmers in particular.
The Minister of State is in fairyland. The Government can congratulate itself all it likes, but its targets are not being met. Only 4,728 ha have been licensed this year. That is not an achievement, but a missed target.
This topic has taken up most of the time of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine since I have been a member of it. Time and again, we have been told that the system is not working. What is holding the Department back? Why are private licences faring the worst? This is being noticed and commented on by foresters, a growing number of whom are no longer choosing to plant. There is a problem in our forestry sector now, but this Government will be responsible for a greater problem 20 or 25 years down the road when no one will be planting. There is frustration in the sector no matter where one turns. Under the RUS, foresters have waited more than two years just to get letters from the Department seeking more information.
The Minister of State mentioned that the situation was going well. The Mackinnon report spawned other reports, but even it is not being adhered to.
I can only reassure the Deputy. The weekly figures on how many forestry licences are being issued, the areas involved, the road lengths in question and so forth can be accessed through our Department's website. There has been a significant turnaround in the two and a half years since this Government took office. The House will be aware that we ground to a halt because of European court judgments against Ireland. We were not doing what we should have been doing, resulting in our Department having to transform how it issued licences. We have done that well and we have made year-on-year improvements since then. With a new forestry programme in place from next year, a new forest strategy and more money than ever to incentivise and support farmers in planting trees, we are going to see a step change in the number of trees planted and farmer engagement with forestry.
I welcome the increased premiums and grants, but faith in the system needs to be regained among farmers and foresters. Lengthy delays in processing applications are resulting in many choosing not to plant. They foresee the same delays happening down the road as affected felling licences.
There is another area of discontent. Coillte's felling licences are above target. If we are to see a resolution to the crisis and to avert it dissuading potential new entrants, a new statutory period within which a decision is provided to applicants needs to be established. The Mackinnon report needs to be implemented in a fashion similar to Scotland. We need movement on reports, not more reports on reports that end up sitting on shelves. Targets are being missed today, the impact of which will be felt years down the road.
I hope this is the last conversation we have on missing targets.
I appreciate the progress the Department has made but the reality is that while there is an increase and it is an improvement, it is from a very low base which nobody could possibly defend. The question is whether the Department is meeting its targets. The last time I was in this Chamber with Deputy Fitzmaurice the Minister of State accused him of being very negative. People cannot be legitimately accused of being negative for pointing out the obvious.
I very much welcome the new forestry programme and the additional funding. With inflation running at 10%, the failure to index-link it is a problem. For the ten years that inflation was low, it was not a problem but the position is different when inflation is as it has been for the last 12 months. The Minister of State will know better than I do, from sitting at Cabinet, what the predictions are for inflation for the next decade. A sizeable number of economists believe we have entered into a new cycle of interest rates and inflation will remain very high. That will eat into the additional money provided.
I acknowledge that confidence is low in the sector and we need to work towards regaining that confidence. I would like to think that the new forestry programme will help with that in a significant way. Unfortunately, I can do nothing about the base, which was there before I started. We can only move in one direction, as I believe we are doing, and that is improving and delivering licences like never before, or certainly not in recent years. We are at 92% of expected output, which is a good place to be. Coillte tends to get more licences because it supplies 60% or 70% of timber to the sawmill sector. That comparison is continually made but it is about the supply chain and ensuring there is an adequate supply of timber into the saw mill sector. That had ground to a halt when I took office. There are improvements across the board in forestry.
The issue is with speed.
I hope they will continue.
Question No. 134 taken with Written Answers.
Agriculture Supports
Bernard Durkan
Ceist:135. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the extent to which he and his Department continue to monitor the cost of farm inputs, including fuel and fertilisers, with a view to identifying how best to meet the challenges of issues arising from the war in Ukraine; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [61278/22]
I seek to ascertain the extent to which the Minister monitors the cost of inputs to farms, how it affects farm income and what efforts can be made to ameliorate these issues.
I am acutely aware of the impact rising input costs has on farmers, their families and businesses. This is a period of exceptional challenge and uncertainty for our farm families and I have been working to support them through this period.
The rise in feed and fertiliser prices in the last year has been significant. There are a number of factors at play in the market, including energy prices which remain well above January 2021 levels, and increased global demand, particularly from the big grain-producing countries. Controls of fertiliser exports from large fertiliser-producing countries, increased transport costs and EU-imposed tariffs and duties on certain third country imports are all impacting on prices for feed and fertiliser for farmers. Higher production costs have been an unwelcome feature across all sectors in 2022, with price rises for all the main farm inputs.
To support farmers with appropriate advice, earlier this year, I set up a national fodder and feed security committee under the chairmanship of Mr. Mike Magan, working very closely with Teagasc and its director, Dr. Frank O'Mara, and all the key farm leaders to bring all stakeholders together and ensure appropriate guidance to farmers. Teagasc have also been active in providing advice to farmers.
Over the past year, I have announced a series of targeted interventions for farmers, including support to increase the production of native grain from the tillage sector, as well as a multi-species sward and red clover sward initiative, which thrive with little or no fertiliser application and which, combined, had a total budget allocation of over €12 million to support farmers. In addition, I launched a €56 million fodder support scheme in June to which over 70,000 farmers have applied and which generated payments in the order of €54 million last week. In addition, an advance payment under the 2023 scheme of the order of €30 million will issue before Christmas.
I, along with my officials, will continue to actively engage with the animal feed and fertiliser industries, as well as farmers on this issue over the next period. I will also raise concerns with my European counterparts and the European Commission to ensure there continues to be an adequate supply of fertilisers available.
Has an audit been done on the impact of the various price increases on farm inputs, including energy? What can be done specifically in each and any case to reduce the impact? How much of a positive impact has been noticed in the agrifood sector as a result of these interventions?
We are closely monitoring this matter. My Department, working closely with Teagasc, is assessing the impact of costs on farm incomes. That is why I stepped forward with the fodder support this year to which farmers have responded very strongly. It is also why I brought forward the payment for next year to enable farmers to plan ahead and equip them with additional funds to purchase fertiliser ahead for next year. I also introduced the tillage incentive scheme of €400 per hectare to try to improve the production of feed domestically. That is an important scheme which I want to develop in the time ahead. Another significant change we made in the recent budget was to recognise the impact of energy costs at farm level by ensuring farm families were eligible for the energy support scheme. That was an important ask from stakeholders and we delivered it.
Planning ahead and making ourselves more resilient are important. I have spoken about the multi-species sward and the liming grant for next year. We are also making a significant step change around solar investments by providing up to 60% grant aid for investment of up to €90,000 of solar investment for each farm.
I congratulate the Minister on the tillage incentive which is hugely important. Based on the information available to the Minister and Department, what are the most likely areas of difficulty in the coming 12 months? How can the supports the Minister has introduced be redirected, if necessary, to ensure the maximum benefit for those who depend on the farm for their income?
The Minister talked about acting in conjunction with his EU counterparts. Previously in this Chamber, he expressed what I would call hope that there will be some joint action on fertilisers. Is he happy with the EU’s response on fertilisers? Did he advocate something greater than that which the EU ultimately decided to do or, rather, not do?
To respond to Deputy McNamara’s question, I have been advocating for the anti-dumping tariff to be removed. That has not happened at EU level. It is a small proportion of the very high cost of fertiliser at the moment but it would have been a help nonetheless. I am disappointed that did not progress at EU level.
I know Kildare, where Deputy Durkan comes from, has a great tillage sector and it is one we want to continue to support. On the pressures in the year ahead and risks around cost, I foresee that the risks will be similar to what they were this year. We do not know how matters will evolve. We do not know if the pressures will be the same but it is a volatile time and we have to be prepared and try to support farm families through the next year. That is why we have made a forward payment on the fodder scheme and will run the tillage scheme again next year. It provides a €400 payment for each extra hectare grown next year, as well as a €200 maintenance payment for each extra hectare grown this year. The multi-species sward grant will be in place next year and, for the first time ever, there will be a liming grant to support farmers to reduce their costs, become more productive and reduce emissions. We have this suite of measures in place and the energy support scheme is also available to farmers to insulate them from the pressures in the year ahead.
Questions Nos. 136 to 145, inclusive, taken with Written Answers.
Renewable Energy Generation
Ruairí Ó Murchú
Ceist:146. Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his proposals to increase the adoption of rooftop solar energy generation on farms. [61185/22]
We all know that with climate change and the energy crisis, we have to deliver rooftop solar energy. It is the low-hanging fruit. We have many buildings on farms and farmers are looking for opportunities. It is just a matter of meeting them halfway. I assume I will be delighted with the Minister’s answer.
The Deputy will be absolutely delighted because this is a big priority for the Government. He will warmly welcome how the Government is delivering on this and many other issues. Solar has considerable potential. We want to back farm families in developing it, availing of it and benefiting from it.
To encourage on-farm renewable technology uptake and usage, grant aid is provided through grants made available by my Department under the targeted agricultural modernisation schemes, TAMS. Grants are currently available for solar photovoltaic, PV, technology and solar PV rechargeable batteries, and also solar panels, or solar thermal, for water heating under the pig and poultry capital investment scheme. An on-farm solar PV survey must be completed and submitted to avail of a grant.
I was delighted recently to announce, as part of the budget, that the electricity consumption of a dwelling house can now be included, with immediate effect, on the solar survey as part of the holding for sizing the solar PV installation. The dwelling house must be occupied by the herd owner or family member and situated on the holding. The scheme is now open for applications.
The maximum panel size eligible for grant aid under the pig and poultry scheme is 62 kW, and it is 11 kW under other eligible TAMS II schemes. To encourage further uptake, I am proposing further changes to the scheme. I will be increasing the number of kilowatts for solar applications under TAMS III to 30 kW from 11 kW. This is a very significant increase that will bring in more energy-intensive farms and cover their electricity usage through on-farm generation.
We all welcome the fact that the work that needs to be done is absolutely necessary. I would imagine that the Minister has been at more IFA meetings than I have, but at several of them I have seen a large number of people who are ready for change. Some of the complaints, particularly those over recent years, relate to the fact that people did not believe the solar panel grant scheme was where it should have been and that it was not fit for purpose. I am hopeful about the changes the Minister is proposing. I am aware that there have been difficulties in that we have not got anaerobic digestion to the point where we need it. We need to get all the pieces together.
Could the Minister give me a general notion of the timeline for the changes? Could he give us information on the number of farmers availing of the grants? Can anything be done to ensure we get the best bang for our buck for both the farmers and wider society?
Subject to getting approval from the EU Commission, the new TAMS will be kicking off next January. A significant thing I am doing to drive uptake among farm families is providing a separate €90,000 allocation under TAMS specifically for solar. It is separate from the €90,000 allocation for other on-farm investments. There has been a bit of a drag regarding the uptake of solar under the last TAMS because the money all came out of the one investment and people had to choose between solar and something else. I do not want people not doing solar because they choose something else; I want everyone to do it. With 60% in grant aid to cover solar panels, plus batteries, which are really important, and given that the funding is entirely separate from that associated with other TAMS investments, every farm family needs to consider solar. It makes financial sense. We want to drive it on. The two Ministers of State, Senator Hackett and Deputy Heydon, and I want to see farmers availing of this opportunity. They will save money and make themselves more profitable through it. It will also make a genuine difference in respect of emissions reductions. I foresee a big step change.
In fairness, we would all like to see a drive regarding the uptake. I welcome the separate allocation for batteries and solar panels, because we want people to opt for every means of electricity generation given the circumstances we find ourselves in. Could the Minister indicate the sorts of numbers we are looking at? Uptake is vital because we really need to ensure we are operating at scale and we address any faults in the grant scheme as the changes are being made.
Could the Minister outline the general position on microgeneration and anaerobic digestion? I realise these are partly beyond his direct remit.
It is hard to know the numbers but everybody should be considering solar. I want everybody to do so.
With regard to microgeneration, I am engaging with the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications, Deputy Eamon Ryan, on his plans to develop a feed-in tariff, separate from TAMS, that farmers will be able to use to generate more solar energy – for example, by having solar panels in fields. This would allow them to feed into the grid, be paid and make money on a purely commercial basis.
On anaerobic digestion, we have a lot of work to do to realise our potential. We have seen great progress. Ireland is now one of the leading countries in Europe in wind energy generation. There has been a major focus on that over the past decade. There is also a considerable focus now on solar. We will also focus significantly on anaerobic digestion. Our plan is that, by 2030, 10% of our total national gas consumed in houses and businesses will come from farms through anaerobic digestion. This will require a big step change and significant investment. It will also require a renewable heat obligation tariff to drive the investment.
Questions Nos. 147 and 148 taken with Written Answers.
Forestry Sector
Bernard Durkan
Ceist:149. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the extent to which he hopes to mitigate carbon reduction requirements by way of enhanced sequestration, thereby ensuring the viability of the agrifood sector while at the same time meeting carbon-reduction targets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [61277/22]
My question seeks to ascertain the extent to which tree-growing can contribute to sequestration, despite the concerns or expressions to the contrary to the effect that it is an important feature of the energy and forestry industries.
I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. Forestry is the largest tool in our armour to achieve climate action and sequestration. We know it is essential. Our new forest strategy is all about planting the right trees in the right places, under the right management and for the right purpose. This applies across the board, regardless of whether the planting is for timber, the local economy, amenity value, biodiversity or water quality. With that in mind, we have come up with an innovative forestry programme to encourage farmers. Ultimately, we will be largely reliant on our farmers to plant the trees of the future. We have adjusted old programmes, put in place new measures and are considering more supports for practices such as agroforestry, which allows farmers to grow crops or have animals graze between planted trees. This will be a really attractive option for farmers here. The practice is fairly widespread in other countries but not so much here.
We have changed legislation to allow farmers to plant up to a hectare of native woodland on their farms without the need for a licence. Again, this is another mechanism by which we recognise the importance of tree-planting and some of the difficulties around licensing. It is an acknowledgment of the need that we absolutely have to increase our afforestation targets. We have been off target, as we all acknowledge and have known for several years, and it is really time to turn that around. I really hope the new forestry programme will help in that matter.
To what extent will the Minister of State continue to encourage the use of specific species of trees for certain purposes? There is quite a difference between some of the hardwood trees and some of the conifers. The much-maligned Sitka spruce has been consigned to the waste bin in most cases, wrongly in my opinion. It has a huge contribution to make, particularly in shelter. In forests, the outer ring should normally be of a sheltering variety that ensures the species on the inside enjoy the right growing conditions. It would be helpful if the Minister of State were more specific in advertising what is best in these kinds of environments so the farming community can consider tree-growing on ordinary farmland and headlands, and also in corners that are sometimes not suited to farming.
Such land could be used for tree-growing.
I take on board what the Deputy has said. We anticipate that foresters, with whom farmers must engage in order to avail of any of our programmes, would have a role as part of that. I would like to think that foresters would impart that advice to farmers.
Certainly, I appreciate the balance we need. Last week, Green Party Senators proposed a motion in the Seanad on the use of wood in construction. It emphasised the need to ramp this up if we are to try to decarbonise our construction sector. There are many wonderful examples from across Europe and the UK of aspects of this activity we do not engage with here. We will need soft woods, such as our fast-growing conifers, for these purposes. It would be nice to think that in years to come, instead of exporting maybe 70% of our timber products, we will use more of them here. I am absolutely cognisant of the need for soft wood and conifers.
I will make another suggestion. I am seeking to ascertain the degree to which this can be expanded. Certain tree varieties, such as apple trees and pear trees, can be used for three purposes: for decorative purposes at certain times of the year, for food purposes, and for wood purposes when their lifespan has dissipated. Has any evaluation been done of the utilisation of wasteland, headlands, corners of fields or otherwise inoperable situations from an agriculture point of view? How can such lands can be utilised beneficially?
I do not have the figures on that, but it is a good point. We are in the process of a land use review. Maybe part of that might identify some of these inaccessible corners. There are plenty of them. There is a good example from County Clare, where such an area is called the hare's corner. They have engaged with farmers. It can be about putting in a pond or planting trees in more inaccessible areas. This brings biodiversity onto the farm without taking much from productivity.
On the question of fruit trees, orchards are not classified as forestry and neither are Christmas trees. Those plantations do not get categorised like that. In our new agroforestry proposals, which are classified as forestry, farmers can plant up to 15% of fruit or nut trees. That is an exciting proposition. We can review it if we get a good uptake and if we get feedback from farmers on it. I think it is a step in the right direction.
Questions Nos. 150 to 158, inclusive, taken with Written Answers.
Agriculture Schemes
Michael McNamara
Ceist:159. Deputy Michael McNamara asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the purpose of the discrimination between the funding available to male and female applicants aged 41-55 years under the targeted agricultural modernisation scheme, TAMS; the steps he will take to enable all applicants to access the higher level of funding regardless of their gender; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [61352/22]
I ask the Minister to set out the purpose of the discrimination between the funding available to male and female applicants aged 41 to 55 years under the TAMS. What steps will he will take to enable all applicants to access the higher level of funding regardless of their gender? Will he make a statement on the matter?
The Deputy will be as well aware as I am that we have had a massive cultural challenge over the years around women not being treated equally with men when it comes to farm inheritance because of cultural perceptions. It has been the case for too long that a son or nephew is often preferred over a niece or daughter regardless of interest levels. This has led to a situation where only 13% of our farm holders are women, even though the latest census figures show that 70,000 women in the country are involved in farm management and in actual active farming. I want to address this. Obviously, the Minister of State, Senator Hackett. wants to address it. The Government very much wants to address it. To help to break down this cultural barrier, we have taken the unprecedented step of allocating 60% grant aid for female farmers as part of a CAP initiative. We want to encourage that. We want to get the message out there that it is not acceptable to have such a low level of female farm holders. We want to improve that and this measure can help to do that. It is not a silver bullet but it is a very clear message.
In other areas of the agrifood sector such as the food business, and in the educational courses provided around the country through Teagasc, further education providers, institutes of technology and universities, the representation of women is fantastic alongside men. There is great participation. If one calls a vet to come to the yard for an animal in need, it is more likely that a female vet will arrive than a male vet because there are more female vets emerging from our colleges. It is not yet being seen at a farm level within the farm gate. We want to address that and change that to get the message out there that we want to see more female farmers. It is great to see and we will support it.
Of course it is welcome that more female vets are coming out of the agricultural colleges, but the reality is that it is to do with the points system. When one looks at the very top achievers when it comes to third level entry points, one sees that they are often women rather than men. Just because a person has obtained an excellent number of points - regardless of being male or female - it does not mean that he or she will become an excellent vet or doctor. I do not want to digress.
I am glad the Minister referred to messaging. This is about tokenism rather than any actual impact it would have. The idea that when a farmer is deciding who to leave his or her farm to, he or she will decide to leave it to his or her niece rather than his or her nephew because she would get a better TAMS grant is ridiculous. What is not ridiculous - it is very real - is that if a farmer has a son and a daughter who are interested in farming, and both of them inherit the farm and are over a certain age, one of them will get a far greater grant rate than the other if they apply under this scheme. Not alone is this a little ridiculous, but it may not be lawful. I presume the Equal Status Act applies to the activities of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine as well.
If Deputy McNamara has any more ideas about what we can implement, the Ministers of State, Senator Hackett and Deputy Heydon, and I are very open to them. We want to change things to see more women coming into farming. We want to support it. This is why we are pushing the barriers out, getting the message out there strongly, and actually doing it in terms of supports. If there is anything else we can do, we will certainly look at that and be very open to it.
I wish to update the Deputy on the appointment of a former Tánaiste and Minister for agriculture, Mary Coughlan, who was the first Minister for agriculture in the country, as chair of the dialogue on women in agriculture.
The first female Minister for agriculture.
Of course, the first female Minister. It is great to be serving alongside the Minister of State, Senator Hackett, as the first female Minister of State in this role at Cabinet level. We have appointed the former Minister, Mary Coughlan, to chair the dialogue on women in agriculture, which will take place on St. Brigid's Day, 1 February. This will bring together all stakeholders and farm representatives within the country to gather more ideas and proposals on how we can make a difference in this regard. I look forward to that. If the Deputy has any proposals or suggestions, our ears are fully open and we will look at driving them on.
The first suggestion I have is that the Minister would end the discrimination, regardless of its motivation. I believe the times are gone when a farmer would leave his farm to his eldest son regardless of whether he wanted it, or indeed would leave it to a son over a daughter. Most farmers now are relieved if any of their children are interested in farming, or, if they have no child, any nieces or nephews are interested in farming. That can be a relief to them because it is a difficult life and it is not very profitable. Obviously, farming is hugely profitable in the dairy sector but that faces its own challenges. With the rest of farming, I suggest that commensurate to the hours that people work, there are far better incomes to be obtained elsewhere. Most farmers are very relieved if any of their children are interested in farming, or any successor is interested in farming. I think the days of primogeniture or leaving it to the eldest son are well and truly over. That is a good thing. Of course I welcome that the Department is bringing people together to discuss this, but maybe it is coming a little late. Farmers have moved on, frankly.
I would expect that the equality legislation would prevail in all assistance that is available, and that the equality legislation would enable equal participation of male and female farmers. If the grant aid varies between male and female applicants, obviously there is a slight challenge there to the equality legislation. I hope this can be overcome.
As a female farmer, I can say that there is not equality. That is the problem. There is not equality on the ground. Female farmers own 13% of the farms. There are cultural elements there and farms are not being left to girls, daughters and nieces, but it is difficult. There are amazing female farmers out there but it is difficult to be a female farmer. When one goes to the mart, it is 95% men.
It can be a difficult place to go to. One can go to a knowledge transfer group. That can be challenging. I have spoken to women who have gone to knowledge transfer groups who do not go any more. One element of that is that we are putting together female-only knowledge transfer groups because that is what we have heard female farmers would like. For us not to respond to what we hear from female farmers would be us not standing up for them. We are trying to make this a more equal space, and those are some of the many mechanisms we are trying to put in place to do that.
If the Minister of State puts her hand up at the Sixmilebridge mart next Saturday morning, I guarantee her there will be no discrimination. They will take her bids.
We might leave the last word to the female Minister of State.
We are trying to bring that equality into the system. That is what we are working hard to do.
Is féidir teacht ar Cheisteanna Scríofa ar www.oireachtas.ie.
Written Answers are published on the Oireachtas website.