I thank the Deputy for raising this important matter, which is topical after last week's announcements. The proposals for CAP simplification were published on 14 May by Commissioner Hansen. I welcome any proposals that will simplify and reduce the administrative burden for farmers and for national administrations. However, as with any new legislation, we will need to carefully examine the details of the proposals and evaluate the potential impact for Ireland. My Department will analyse the proposals, and will engage with stakeholders through the forum of the CAP strategic plan monitoring committee once the possibilities are well understood. It is worth emphasising that the draft amending regulation will only take legal effect after it goes through the process of co-decision, with input from the European Parliament and the Council. This will take some time. Any changes proposed can only be introduced after that process has concluded. On my position on these proposals, my Department provided input to the Commission on options for simplification, some of which are reflected in the Commission's package. On conditionality, through my Department, I asked for the removal of GAEC 2 from the regulations on the basis of overlap between these requirements and other national and EU legislation. However, the removal of GAEC 2 has not been included in the Commission proposal so GAEC 2 will remain a conditionality requirement and will have to be applied from this year onwards. GAEC 2 is a mandatory condition of the payment of the basic income support for sustainability for farmers, as I know the Deputy is aware. The intention behind it is to protect wetlands and peatlands. EU regulations require all member states to have a standard in place from the start of this year. The simplification proposal provides that costs arising from GAEC 2 compliance can now be included in the calculation of costs for eco-schemes or agri-environmental schemes. It is important to note two points regarding the possibility of providing specific support measures under the CSP for GAEC 2 requirements. First, Ireland's CAP strategic plan funding is already fully committed under the existing schemes and no new funding is available as part of the simplification proposals. Second, the GAEC 2 standard for Ireland, as recently introduced, is based on existing national legislation and usual farming practices.
Sentiment score: 0.17
I have been on the record a number of times on this but I am happy to reassure farmers again that there is nothing to fear in the baseline rationality around GAEC 2. Farmers can continue to do all of their normal farming activity on a day-to-day basis. That is not going to be undermined by this. It is just a baseline requirement for the basic income support process, or what farmers would know as the single farm payment. I know there are a lot of concerns around this. We had to have a minimum controllable area, which we can justify to the Commission that we are able to monitor activity on. That was the land parcel identification system, LPIS. With that, we set a baseline figure using the Hammond Teagasc map from 2009 as the most accurate way of doing that. This was a baseline figure of at least 50% peat in the LPIS for it to come in under GAEC 2. That brought in some mineral soils - about 100,000 ha - but if we did not have that and if there had been any peat in the LPIS, it would have brought in 880,000 ha of mineral soils. I can expand on that further later.
Sentiment score: 0.17
I propose to take Questions Nos. 111 and 114 together. As Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, I am working closely with the EU institutions and my counterparts in other member states to try to influence the next Common Agriculture Policy. The CAP is central to the EU’s success in ensuring food security, supporting farm incomes and developing rural areas. The CAP also remains critical to the agrifood sector’s resilience and competitiveness, as it has since Ireland joined the EU more than 50 years ago. I recently set out my four key priorities for the next CAP. First, we need a CAP that is more straightforward for farmers. Second, we need a more flexible and responsive CAP. We need a CAP that has an appropriate balance between all elements of sustainability. Finally, and most importantly perhaps, an adequate and dedicated budget is needed for an effective CAP, as Deputy Kenny outlined and with which I am sure Deputy Aird will concur. I am determined that the CAP will continue to play a positive role in supporting Irish farmers, our food industry, rural communities and the wider economy into the future. It is a key responsibility of the Government to raise Ireland's concerns with our EU partners and to try to influence EU policy. For my part as Minister, I meet my counterparts in the AGRIFISH Council every month to discuss and shape agriculture and food policy in the EU. I will continue to engage with Christophe Hansen, the European Commissioner for Agriculture and Food, and my fellow EU ministers on the issues affecting the agrifood sector, including the CAP post-2027, at Council meetings, as well as in bilateral discussions that occur on every occasion. My next meeting of the AGRIFISH Council is next Monday in Brussels and I will travel there on Sunday evening. I will prioritise these engagements at a European level, particularly in preparation for Ireland’s Presidency of the EU in the second half of 2026 which will be a pivotal time. The point Deputy Kenny raised relates to the initial multi-annual financial framework, MFF, and the overall budget, which is obviously a critical part of this. That is why, as one of my top priorities in my role, I have set in train the process of putting the building blocks in place. Ensuring a foundation is in place means my 26 EU colleagues, the other ministers for agriculture, know what our priorities are. They want to tell me what their priorities are before we have the Presidency and before I take the chair as planned in July next year. I should note that the funding for the CAP forms part of the broader EU budget known as the multi-annual financial framework or MFF. This is ultimately agreed by Heads of State and Government at the European Council. The European Commission is due to set out proposals for the next MFF this July. Commission proposals for CAP post-2027 negotiations are likely to follow shortly after that, with negotiations on both the future MFF and future CAP running in parallel. Ensuring the CAP remains a priority in the next MFF is essential. While the EU faces rising demands in areas such as defence, security and competitiveness, we must ensure the social cohesion and stability of our rural communities is maintained. Achieving an adequate and dedicated CAP budget and retaining the full toolbox of support measures under Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 will be challenging, given the other pressures on the EU budget and proposals for new MFF funding structures. However, I am working closely with colleagues across the Government and with my counterparts in member states to underline the importance of food security to EU autonomy and security. We should not be talking about defence and security without including food security as part of that conversation. I will also underline the vital role farming and food plays in our rural communities and economies and the important contribution farming and food make to EU competitiveness, innovation and climate and biodiversity ambitions. As CAP and the MFF negotiations progress, Ireland will continue to advocate for a simplified, well-funded and adaptable CAP framework that supports farm resilience, environmental ambition and rural development. Ireland will play a key role in these negotiations in the run-up to and during our Presidency of the EU in the second half of 2026.
Sentiment score: 0.27
I thank both Deputies for their contributions. It is very important when we have questions on agriculture, food and the marine that CAP is at their heart because it really is so important to everything we are doing. To go to some earlier points about CAP and in particular, Deputy Kenny's, to have a longer CAP, a longer budget period would be needed because the budget drives the other. On the concerns, this night last week I gave an address at the IFA CAP conference held at the Kilashee Hotel in County Kildare. It was very well attended by more than 500 farmers. There was a lot of concern, as Deputy Aird outlined, but I made the point that historically CAP proposals have come after the MFF and that has not always served us particularly well. Some very big decisions can be made during the MFF process on the budget that CAP had to then deal with afterwards. Commissioner Hansen saying he will come up with proposals in July as well, at the same time as CAP, has concerned some people and farm organisations but it is better if we try to do them concurrently and try to engage. I look forward to meeting the Commissioner again next Monday and when we attend a number of events together in the coming weeks, I will convey those points back to him. One of my main points is the issued raised by Deputy Aird about taking food security for granted. Before the illegal invasion by Russia of Ukraine, we did take some things for granted in Europe. We did not in Ireland. Enda Kenny and previous taoisigh asked other European colleagues to pay more into the overall budget so we could protect the CAP. It should be remembered that after Brexit there was talk about the CAP being decimated by up to 30%. Environmental money was used to supplement it and with that came the conditionality that farmers have stepped up to the plate to achieve. Overall, we cannot have food security taken for granted, the same way energy security has been challenged, and the Ukrainian crisis has focused minds in that regard. I very much hope it will focus minds in these negotiations as well.
Sentiment score: 0.19
No pressure there. Thanks for that. I jest. The Deputy is dead right that it is that serious.
Sentiment score: -0.19
It absolutely is. We know how well Irish agriculture has been served down through the years and through successive CAPS and the Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 structure. I have grave concerns around any attempt to change that. Not only do I have concerns for the impact on farming, which is why I will fight so hard to articulate the Irish position very clearly, but I also have concerns about the impact on the Single Market. If we go into national policies where everything is in there together, countries will very much go back to doing what they are doing alone. While there has been a lot of frustration with some elements of the CAP, and some very valid points have been raised here, the CAP has served us well in many other respects in terms of delivery. The point around the broader overall envelope and how much money there is to do this ultimately comes down to the appetite of member states. If there is an increased ambition in defence and other areas, is the appetite there for member states to ask their citizens to pay more to be a part of Europe? It is very difficult to see how all of the additional ambition can be delivered in a meaningful way from a pot that did not have the same level of expenditure on the likes of defence the last time. We hear of a lot of European countries with this level of ambition and this will be the kind of conversation that will have to happen across member states. They will happen at prime ministerial level as well and at the Council of Europe where they are doing that overall budget. On Deputy Aird's final point about the focus and simplification of CAP, this really is two parts. The first part is about the budget and I am working with all colleagues across government to make sure we put our best foot forward on that one. The second is when we know the position we are in, we will continue to have that engagement across Europe but use the flexibility open to us to deliver the most focused, simplified CAP that works for our farmers and works for our agrifood industry.
Sentiment score: 0.17
I thank the Deputy for raising this very important issue. I recently met farmers from Timoleague and I visited the area previously when I was a Member of the previous Government. I am well aware of the great work that has happened down there, supported by Teagasc and others, how passionate farmers are and the pressure there is on land availability and how any changes can have an impact. I am very committed to the objective of improving water quality and ensuring the strongest possible scientific case can be made for a continuation of Ireland's nitrates derogation beyond the 1 January 2026. Those two things are connected. Ireland implements a robust action programme of measures under our nitrates action plan. As part of the additional measures introduced under the interim review of the fifth nitrates action programme, with effect from this December, the maximum derogation stocking rate reduces to 220 kg organic N/ha in certain areas. The Timoleague catchment is one of the additional areas moving to this lower limit, as the Deputy highlighted. This change is happening in areas where the EPA has identified the need for nitrate reduction measures to improve water quality but that were not considered under the European Commission’s criteria for the two-year water quality review. The measure becomes applicable from 1 December as it had to comply within the timeframe of the current nitrates action programme, which concludes at the end of 2025, so it was the latest point at which it could be brought in to count as a measure under this programme. This was necessary to best prepare for discussions with the Commission regarding Ireland’s next nitrates derogation. Within such a limited timeframe, the December date for implementation was selected to allow farmers in the Timoleague area, and indeed other areas affected, maximum time to prepare and manage their cows through the normal spring calving lactation cycle. In simple terms, derogation farmers in these additional areas will have an effective limit of 247.5 kg N/ha this year, rather than 250 kg N/ha. I will give the rest of the information in my supplementary response.
Sentiment score: 0.27
I absolutely recognise the great work happening in the agricultural catchment programme. The most recently published EPA data shows nitrates concentrations nationally have reduced in a representative sample of our rivers last year. It is acknowledged and welcomed that nitrate levels have also reduced in the Timoleague catchment. Nitrates levels recorded in 2024 in Timoleague were at their lowest level since recording began in 2009. However, the nitrates concentrations in the river leaving the Timoleague catchment are still approximately double what they should be to achieve good ecological status in the adjoining estuary. This is why the catchment was identified by the EPA as an area requiring a nitrate reduction measure. As committed to in the programme for Government, the Government is doing everything in its power to make the case at EU level to secure our next nitrates derogation, given our unique grass-based production system. Access to the derogation is contingent on improving water quality. The agrifood sector is engaging in significant, unprecedented and very welcome actions to reduce its impact on water quality. It is critical this good work continues and that it supports Ireland’s case and my case to retain the nitrates derogation post 2025, which is something I am actively working on and is of utmost importance to the Deputy's constituents and derogation farmers throughout the country.
Sentiment score: 0.36
I appreciate the Deputy's articulation of the concerns, the great work of his constituents and the frustration I know there is on the ground with this change. He talked about rewarding his constituents. The best reward I can get his constituents and the farmers in the Timoleague catchment area is to make sure there is a derogation beyond the end of this year, and that is not by any means guaranteed. In a way, I am a little bit concerned that there is complacency coming in around the country where people think we will have to get it. We know how important it is. This is absolutely critical for our rural economy, not just for the 7,000 derogation farmers. For a tillage farmer or some other farmer besides a derogation farmer, the impact on land availability if the derogation is gone or is reduced further will be really significant. We have a very strong story to tell because our farmers are making great efforts to maintain that derogation. That said, I cannot leave any weak spot in our case. It is my top priority in Europe to get a derogation beyond the end of this year. I have to implement all the measures we committed to in the previous action programmes, and this is a key part of that. It has been designed to have a minimal impact on the Deputy's constituents for this year, but the biggest reward I can get them is a derogation beyond the end of this year.
Sentiment score: 0.37
I thank the Deputy for raising a very important point, and he is not the only Deputy here this evening to raise points about bovine TB. It is a really challenging disease to control and eradicate. In recent years, bovine TB levels have continued to deteriorate here in Ireland. Herd incidence has increased from 4.31% in 2022 to 6.04% in 2024, resulting in a 36% increase in the number of herds restricted between those two years. As of 11 May 2025, over a 12-month period, we had a herd incidence of 6.3% with more than 42,200 reactors. This disease is having an impact on our farmers and their families, not just financially but also emotionally. It is a hugely traumatic time when this hits, and the Deputy knows that from his constituents, as I know from mine, and I know from lived experience as well. At the February meeting of the TB forum, it was agreed that all stakeholders would provide proposals on new measures for inclusion in the TB programme aimed at reducing TB levels in cattle against the backdrop of surging disease levels. At the TB forum on 26 March - the following month - all stakeholders were provided the opportunity to present proposals on draft measures to be incorporated into the TB programme to address the recent increase in disease incidence over the past two years. Following that meeting, the chair of the forum wrote to me in early April outlining discussions at the meetings. On 8 May 2025, I held a meeting of key stakeholders to address the deteriorating TB disease levels, where discussions were held on the most effective ways to mitigate the impact of bovine TB on farm families and to reduce herd incidence and spread of the disease. At that meeting, I presented 30 potential actions underpinned by five key pillars to address the current rate of bovine TB. Those five pillars were: to support herds free of bovine TB to remain free; reduce the impact of wildlife on the spread of bovine TB; detect and eliminate bovine TB infection as early as possible in herds with a TB breakdown and avoid a future breakdown; help farmers improve all areas of farm biosecurity; and reduce the impact of known high-risk animals in spreading bovine TB.
Sentiment score: 0.23
I reassure the Deputy that everything that is possible is being considered and everything has been looked at. I have started an engagement with the farm organisations and key stakeholders since I was appointed in January, and since the February meeting of the TB forum I have been back and forth with them looking to get their feedback and submissions, having proposals that have come back through my chief veterinary officer, and then taking on board their reactions to those proposals. I made significant changes ahead of the TB summit I had a couple of weeks ago, and I am going to meet those stakeholders again later this week with a revised set of proposals that has taken on board their points. This has been a very deliberative process, but I have made the point that this process cannot go on forever such is the level of incidence. I have proposals for very significant increases in investment in the wildlife programme and changes to the approach there. With respect to increases in blood testing, obviously we have the challenge with the skin test that there is only 80% efficacy, but it is very accurate. When it is right, it is right, but with the 20%, there are some that are missed. On the blood test side, that increases efficacy to over 90%. I will come back in a further supplementary.
Sentiment score: 0.13
I absolutely want to do this in partnership. I know the stress and strain of this. It goes beyond the financial but the financial is really significant. I want to provide a clear pathway for those 6,000 herds, their farmers and their families that are restricted and that have reactors. I want to give them a clear pathway to show that there is light at the end of the tunnel and a way out of this. Many of those who have multiple reactors really have a sense of hopelessness. I also want to make sure the 94% of farmers in this country who do not have it do not have to experience this. That is the partnership approach. On the earlier point around wildlife, in my initial response I highlighted how I have very significant proposals on changing the approach to wildlife management and significant further investment in it. However, let us be really clear here. Any suggestion, and I am not saying it is the Deputy's suggestion but it can be suggested at times, that wildlife is the only problem is factually incorrect. There are three drivers of this disease among bovines. One is wildlife, the second is cattle-to-cattle transmission and the other is residual left where there is a large outbreak in a herd. If we do not tackle all three, we will leave a gap in the fence for this to continue to seep through and I cannot let that happen.
Sentiment score: 0.05