I thank the Deputy for raising this important issue. As she will be aware, the independent Agri-Food Regulator, established under the Agricultural and Food Supply Chain Act 2023, performs two key functions: it enforces the law on unfair trading practices, and it performs a price and market analysis and reporting function. The regulator has, since its establishment at the end of 2023, been successful in delivering on these functions. On the price and market analysis function, over the past year the regulator has published welcome analysis on the egg and horticulture sectors. Such reports are important to assist food suppliers in their decision-making. However, while there has been much positive engagement with the regulator from operators who have voluntarily responded to requests for information, a few operators did not provide the requested data. As a result, the two reports concerned were published using only publicly available data. In light of its experience concerning these reports, the regulator has reported to me that it requires enhanced powers to compel businesses to provide financial information that is not in the public domain. The Act itself does not permit the regulator to compel the provision of such data; however, the Act provides that the Minister may make regulations on price and market information. As I have previously stated, I am fully committed to ensuring the regulator is equipped with the necessary powers to fulfil its statutory function subject to the necessary consultative and legislative process. This is necessary to ensure that the additional powers granted are proportionate. I have to strike a balance and be very careful in any key decision I make, having engaged with all key stakeholders and taken on board the points of view of businesses, while also having been very clear and determined to ensure that our Agri-Food Regulator can continue to carry out the work we set it up to do. I assure the Deputy that the process is under way and that it is a priority in my Department. The role in question is separate from the one associated with the very strong powers of enforcement the Agri-Food Regulator has in relation to unfair trading practices in the agrifood supply chain, in respect of which it continues to carry out work.
Sentiment score: 0.36
I want to do this as quickly as possible while also being respectful of a process that involves consultation, engagement with all sides and me listening to the concerns of the industry. The industry has concerns over how the information could be distorted by competitors abroad. The regulation applies only to our domestic market and we export 90% of the food and drink that we produce. These points will be made as well. I want to make sure there are no unintended consequences to giving the additional powers to the Agri-Food Regulator. I have engaged with the regulator on how it, as a controller of data, would handle data responsibly. This is serious, so while I want to give the powers, I want to do it right. I want to do it as quickly as possible but not at the expense of doing it the right way.
Sentiment score: 0.21
Section 12(3)(d) of the Act allows the regulator to seek data impacting on price and margins from businesses within the agricultural and food supply chain. The data include, but are not limited to, prices paid and received and margins. This answers the Deputy’s question in this regard. I do not want any suggestion to land that the Agri-Food Regulator is not able to operate. It is operating very well and I commend it on its work, which has been valuable to date. I acknowledge the fact that the regulator secured, in November of last year, a conviction of a meat processor in the courts for the non-payment of a cattle farmer in the west. It is getting on with its work. It has highlighted to me some of the frustrations it has found in the system to date. I am reflecting on these and will implement the programme for Government commitment to provide enhanced powers to the Agri-Food Regulator, but I am doing that in a responsible way.
Sentiment score: 0.17
The overall response to TB is to address all elements of its spread. There are three key contributors: wildlife, its control, and the interaction of wildlife with bovines; cattle-to-cattle transmission; and residual transmission in the herd. As we know, herd incidence has increased from 4.3% in 2022 to 6.04% in 2024, resulting in a 36% increase in the number of herds restricted between 2022 and 2024. As of 22 June this year, over a 12-month period we had a herd incidence of 6.43% with over 43,455 reactors. This disease is having an impact on our farmers and their families both financially and emotionally throughout rural Ireland. This cannot be allowed to continue. It is also having an impact on badgers and on the wildlife the Deputy talks about. It stands to reason that if there is more of it in the countryside, either among our bovines or among the wildlife, there will be more of it in each group. When incidence rises in our bovines, it is rising in the wildlife too. We want to stop the badger getting TB the same way we want to stop the cattle getting it. When we discover animals that have it, they are removed to stop its spread and for their own sake. That is an important intervention. In my engagement with all key stakeholders including the NPWS, ICOS and all the farm bodies, I have outlined a new approach that I want to take which would involve increased investment from my Department and would address all five key pillars of bovine TB, that is, to support herds that are free of it; reduce the impact of wildlife on the spread of TB; detect and eliminate infection as early as possible in herds with a TB breakdown and avoid a future breakdown; help farmers to improve all areas of on-farm biosecurity; and reduce the impact of known high-risk animals in spreading bovine TB. That would include deer as well as badgers.
Sentiment score: 0.07
If a badger is examined and tested and is found to have TB, then for its own sake it needs to be culled as well as to stop the spread of the disease to other badgers, bovines and others within the community. Vaccination has a role to play but the vaccination process we have used to date has not worked to the same extent. I will be very clear. There are three causes of the spread of this disease and wildlife is one of them. As the Deputy knows in her county and mine, deer are a significant contributor. We have had deer management units established that will play an important role. The Deputy is also right to say there are animal husbandry and other measures in here as well. That is why we have the five pillars of approach, which have 30 proposed actions under them. I said at the start that not all actions need to be implemented but we need a critical mass of them to layer over each other. They would include biosecurity measures like fencing off a badger sett. That makes a big difference. I want to communicate this better with farmers. They think it is kind of a strange thing as it will not stop the badger coming out of the sett. It is not about stopping the badger. The badger does not want to interact with the bovines. Bovines by their nature are nosey. They tend to go and nose in around the sett or the latrine in front of it. Badgers tend to urinate there. That is not what we want. We need to keep the cattle back from them and keep the division between them. Measures like this and raising water troughs are things I want to support farmers to do, as well as the other measures here, to stop that interaction.
Sentiment score: 0.12
A series of my proposals would be around changing how we deal with the current vaccination approach. The current approach has been vaccinating without testing the animal. We can now test a badger and have a result within about ten minutes. There are challenges to that on the bovine side. Where an animal tests positive, for its own sake and the sake of everyone else in the sett and the bovines, it does need to be removed, but otherwise it can be vaccinated. I also want to do a programme of vaccination of badgers that do not have the disease ahead of big projects. Badgers by their nature, if they are disrupted, tend to move significant distances not to have to be moved again. They are quite territorial. When they move, they will move about 1 km. When we know a forest is going to be felled, a new road is going to be built or a big infrastructure project is going to happen that will upset them, we need to be vaccinating them proactively beforehand. Then when they move, they will not be bringing the disease with them and spreading it out. The Deputy will see a number of measures in this approach. I would also be interested in the Deputy sharing that data with me that she said shows badgers are not spreading TB to bovines. By all means, I will consider that in the mix as well.
Sentiment score: 0.09
I thank Deputy O'Sullivan for raising this point on behalf of Deputy O'Connor. Deputy O'Connor has spoken directly to me on this point previously regarding his concerns in Cork. The programme for Government has committed to introduce planning guidelines for solar farms and to provide certainty in the development of solar energy. Issues regarding planning fall under the remit of the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage. The rights of farmers and other landowners are, of course, subject to the usual constitutional protections. As Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, I am committed to driving sustainable agriculture practices that underpin Ireland’s food sector and contribute more broadly to food security through an export market worth over €19 billion. My Department does also offer support for the production of indigenous renewable energy. This is primarily through the solar capital investment scheme, SCIS, under TAMS and the installation of mainly rooftop solar PV technology along with battery storage on Irish farms across the country. As of April 2025, over 3,000 farmers had received approval under the SCIS with 532 farmers having installed panels to date. It is important to provide farmers with opportunities to ensure they can maximise the income from their holdings, maintain viable holdings and protect our family farm tradition. Hence, my Department provides a wide range of supports for a variety of farming activities and sectors. My Department also has a specific role in ensuring that agricultural lands, as defined under the Common Agricultural Policy, are maintained to a high environmental standard as set out under the cross-compliance framework. Land submitted for payment under the basic income support for sustainability must remain under agricultural management for the duration of the scheme year. My Department also ensures that the required environmental and sustainability practices are implemented on agricultural land in Ireland.
Sentiment score: 0.33
I accept those valid points and the importance of the planning guidelines committed to in the programme for Government. It is why we have that commitment in there. That is a matter for the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage to introduce. As regards dairy farmers and concerns about the availability of land, there is huge pressure on availability as it is, be that for dairy, tillage, leasing, etc. Land use is under pressure from a variety of directions. The Deputy raised concerns about the dairy sector and I understand his perspective, but it has very high energy costs, so my Department supporting the implementation of solar panels on the roofs of sheds to offset those costs is a good thing for farmers. Solar has a place here. I realise the Deputy is not saying it does not. I am proud that we support farmers to have rooftop solar panels and reduce their energy costs. Whether the individual is a dairy, beef, sheep or tillage farmer, he or she can continue to do the core activity of producing top-quality food in that shed while having a sustainable and steady source of income every year from the shed's roof, which can help in years of income volatility when prices are low.
Sentiment score: 0.27
For fear anyone mistakes me for the Minister for climate or planning, I am the Minister for agriculture. I accept the points that have been raised in that context but I wish to put on the record I was very supportive of planning guidelines for solar in the programme for Government talks. It is the right thing to do; we need a bit of structure on that. I understand the concerns raised by Deputies representing their communities. I also recognise the right of farmers to get that blend right between playing their part for the environment, producing food and making sure they have a sustainable farm income. In general, there is a role for renewables to play in supplementing that income. I refer back to the point on rooftop solar. Irrespective of the price of the sheep, cattle or grain in that shed in any given year, the year that price is low, the solar panels on the roof will still give a return and a steady income. Income volatility is a huge challenge for our farmers. Renewables have a role to play in supplementing farm incomes and encouraging the next generation of farmers to take farming on, as there will be a more sustainable income there.
Sentiment score: 0.18
The CAP Strategic Plan 2023–2027 aims to improve the economic, social and environmental sustainability of Ireland's agrifood sector. It does this by supporting viable farm incomes and enhancing competitiveness by strengthening the socioeconomic fabric of rural areas and contributing to the achievement of environmental and climate objectives at national and EU levels. The CAP strategic plan, or CSP, includes 28 different schemes or interventions, as they are known. CSP interventions range from income support measures to environmental interventions and include targeted measures to support young farmers and female farmers. More than 120,000 farmers in Ireland receive CAP supports through a combination of direct payments and targeted rural development supports. A list of all CAP beneficiaries is published each year on my Department’s website, including information on geographical distribution. My Department also publishes an annual performance report, or APR as it is known, each year. The APR for 2023 is available on my Department's website and the APR for 2024 will be published shortly, following approval by the European Commission. It should be noted that the CAP financial year 2024 ran from 16 October 2023, which was World Food Day, to 15 October 2024. In the financial year 2024, over €1.9 billion was spent on the CAP strategic plan. This included €1.2 billion in CAP Pillar 1 direct payments, which are fully funded by the EU, and €700 million in co-finance payments under CAP Pillar 2, rural development and environment payments. Payments per beneficiary vary according to farm size, scheme participation and entitlement value for direct payments. Under the new delivery model for the CAP, there is a monitoring system for performance against each of the CAP objectives. Some 16 of the CSP result indicators relate to environmental objectives. The CSP monitoring committee meets at least once a year to review progress and includes representatives from the European Commission as well as a broad range of Irish stakeholders. With regard to funding uptake, I confirm that Ireland is ahead of other EU member states in drawing our share of EU funding in the CSP to date.
Sentiment score: 0.31
I am happy to provide the Deputy with the table in written form as a result of this question. It lists the total expenditure per county for all CSP schemes, the number of beneficiaries and the average per beneficiary. It is quite even. The Deputy's county, Tipperary, saw total expenditure under all CSP schemes of €112,091,305 to 6,652 beneficiaries. The average per beneficiary worked out at €16,851. That compares with Carlow, which is at €17,700; my county, Kildare, at €16,210; Kilkenny, next door to the Deputy, at €17,525; and Laois at €15,750. There is a uniformity in terms of the average per beneficiary, so it is quite balanced and quite fair. We have seen that movement to fairness progress over previous CAPs as well.
Sentiment score: 0.44
I wish the Deputy and the Leas-Cheann Comhairle the best of luck in the hurling at the weekend. As a proud Kildare man, we look forward to competing for the Liam MacCarthy with both teams next year, after our win in the Joe McDonagh Cup. The Deputy can stand up here and talk sentiment, mention the word "conglomerates" a number of times and so on, but the sentiment he displays is not borne out by the facts. The tabular breakdown, which I will provide to him afterwards, shows that, per county, the average per beneficiary works out at €15,585. In Tipperary, the average per beneficiary is €16,851, so there is not the big disparity he talks about. His next-door neighbour of Waterford is at €18,209 to 2,273 beneficiaries. That is the average per beneficiary. Leitrim is at €15,005. The Deputy spoke about the Golden Vale and different counties and farming models west of the Shannon. If one were to take the sentiment of what he said, there would be a big disparity between what is paid to farmers, but that is not borne out by the facts.
Sentiment score: 0.35
I thank Deputy McGuinness for raising this point. The statistic referred to by him is from the recently published Teagasc national farm survey, NFS, 2024 preliminary results. By way of context, in 2024, the NFS results were based on a sample of 818 farms with a standard output of €8,000 or more per annum, representing almost 88,000 farms nationally. Some 65% of farms in Ireland are represented in the survey and 96% of the livestock population is held on those farms. In 2024, average family farm income increased by 87% to almost €36,000. Year-on-year improvements were recorded for all sectors, with particularly strong results for sheep, dairy, tillage and cattle rearing. As the Deputy notes, 42% of farms were categorised as economically viable. This represents a 15% increase on 2023 and is one of the highest annual viability outcomes on record. When considering this categorisation, it is important to recognise that the NFS includes full-time and part-time farms and that the viability of farms varies across farming systems. Just over one third of NFS farms are classified as full-time farms and two thirds as part-time farms. Many of these part-time farms rely on off-farm income. In 2024, in addition to the 42% of farms categorised as economically viable, the NFS categorised a further 34% as sustainable. The Government continues to provide strong support to the sector, including through €9.8 billion of Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, supports and targeted sectoral payments. In 2024, income growth and, subsequently, viability were driven in part by additional support payments, which had a particularly positive impact on sheep and cattle systems. Across all farm systems, the average value of direct payments represented 60% of family farm income, with CAP support payments typically accounting for a larger share of income on cattle and sheep farms, and Pillar 2 payments a particularly important income source for smaller dry stock farmers.
Sentiment score: 0.29
I have to disagree with the Deputy, respectfully. I understand the point he makes about the impact on small-to-medium-sized farms. As regards ACRES payments, however, 99% of 2023 farmers have been paid fully, with 97% advance payments in respect of 2024 and 94% of the remainder having received their balancing payments for 2024 as well. It was not good enough when I came in. I put a lot of focus on and energy into it. There were 14,500 farmers unpaid, there are 1,500 left, and we are moving might and main to get their cases resolved. Significant progress has been made in this area. I did not say - nobody said - that there was no money left for TAMS. It is not factually correct for the Deputy to say that. I have talked about being responsible in my management of that budget because it is a budget of €440 million that has to be managed from 2021 to the end of 2027. I would not be responsible if I did not flag that I may need to introduce ranking and selection in the future.
Sentiment score: 0.10
TAMS has been hugely positive, so when the Deputy suggests that the Government is failing, I disagree with that. TAMS has seen a massive ramp-up and uptake and drawdown of money, and I continue to support that. It is important that the message go out there that if a farmer is considering buying equipment beforehand, he or she is not guaranteed that it will be covered if ranking and selection have to come in. We want responsible activity on the part of farmers and no farmer making an investment that does not meet the criteria afterwards. Ranking and selection are responsible things to do and I will absolutely defend that. Let me be really clear. The Deputy suggests that the Government is somehow failing farmers. When I came into the Dáil in 2011, the value of agrifood exports from this country was €8 billion. Last year, it stood at €19.2 billion. Successive Government schemes and programmes, like Food Harvest 2020, Food Wise 2025 and now Food Vision 2030, which are ten-year strategies, have delivered a marked increase in income for our farmers from the value of their produce. I travel the world on trade missions, selling our top-valued produce from the length and breadth of the country. There is a direct link between those extra markets - those increased higher-value markets - that I, along with my Department and An Bord Bia, work with on marketing our food companies around the world. There is a direct link between that and the fact farmers are currently getting record prices for their produce across a whole host of areas. They are not mutually exclusive and we must continue to work to support our smaller and medium-sized farms, but Government is delivering for our farmers not just in terms of supports but in getting the best price for their produce we can.
Sentiment score: 0.22