I thank Deputy Aird for raising the important matter of TAMS and the specific case of a constituent he has come across. TAMS provides grants to farmers to build and improve a specified range of farm buildings and equipment on their holdings. All investments supported by TAMS 3 must be linked to climate, environment or animal welfare. To date, almost 2,500 applications for nutrient storage investments with a proposed grant aid value of €55 million have been approved. The investments made under this measure are an important tool to support the sector in improving water quality and underline the Government's commitment on this issue. For these investments relating to farm nutrient storage, applicants must provide details of their compliance with nutrient storage requirements as laid down in SI 588 of 2025, the European Union (Good Agricultural Practice for Protection of Waters) Regulations 2025. Accordingly, applicants who do not have sufficient storage capacity to comply with these requirements are not eligible under TAMS 3 for slurry storage related investments. In respect of applicants who have not had livestock previously, I confirm that they are eligible to apply under TAMS for storage facilities. I also confirm that new entrants to farming who, as a consequence, did not have any livestock over the winter prior to applying are eligible to apply for slurry storage, as they are currently compliant with the required minimum storage amounts. In addition, farmers who currently out-winter all of their stock, assuming they are compliant with out-wintering requirements, would be considered compliant and be eligible to apply for slurry storage. It should be noted that, from 1 October 2028, the slurry storage capacity requirement for dairy cows of 0.33 cu. m per week will be amended upwards to 0.4 cu. m per week. Farmers who currently have sufficient storage capacity on their holdings will continue to be eligible to apply under TAMS for farm nutrient storage facilities to bring their holdings into compliance with the amended regulations for a maximum of two years after 1 October 2028.
Sentiment score: 0.25
To answer the Deputy's question, and as I outlined in my original answer, there is provision for many of those new entrant farmers to be able to avail of TAMS in such circumstances. It is important to note that, at a high level, EU funds cannot assist in bringing a farm into legal compliance. It has to be legally compliant before it can access the funds. Where that deviates is where we have the agreed change around the increased ambition from 2028 onwards. As part of our negotiation on that, where the storage capacity for dairy cows is to increase from 1 October 2028, farmers who currently have sufficient storage capacity but will be ineligible because of that increased threshold will have two years where they will be able to avail of TAMS to support them in that space. There are plenty of caveats there to try to get around the issue. The particular issue the Deputy has highlighted is probably because it is a farm partnership, so it is not a new entrant farmer as such, which the Deputy described it as, but an entering into of a farm partnership. It is one I will discuss with the Deputy maybe offline afterwards.
Sentiment score: 0.24
I will talk to the Deputy about the specifics of this case afterwards because it may be the farm partnership that is the impediment here. New entrants to farming who did not have any livestock the previous winter are eligible to apply for the slurry scheme on that basis. That is probably an anomaly in one way. We have no shortage of farmers applying for TAMS. We had 8,000 applications in the last tranche. I got an increase in my capital budget for TAMS of €88 million for this year, but demand is off the charts.
Sentiment score: -0.09
From that perspective, it is there for the many who do and can avail of it. On a general level, you cannot have a situation where you are applying for TAMS to make yourself legally compliant when you are not compliant. That is the challenge of it, but new entrants can do it. If it is a partnership, maybe that is the challenge on this one.
Sentiment score: 0.05
I thank the Deputy. I am aware of the financial and emotional impacts and challenges for Irish farmers, their families and rural communities presented by a bovine TB breakdown. In recent years, there has been a significant increase in bovine TB levels nationally. To address these high disease levels, I have undertaken extensive engagement with stakeholders and farm organisations to agree measures to tackle them. I launched the Bovine TB Action Plan: Addressing Bovine TB in Ireland in September. It includes five measures and 30 actions underpinned by scientific research, evidence and veterinary expertise. Those five pillars are: to support herds free of bovine TB to remain free; to reduce the impact of wildlife on the spread of bovine TB; to detect and eliminate bovine TB infection as early as possible in herds with a bovine TB outbreak and avoid a future outbreak; to help farmers improve all areas of on-farm biosecurity, and only this week I opened and launched a €6 million scheme whereby farmers would be available to avail of practical supports around fencing off badger setts on their holdings and raising water troughs as well; and to reduce the impact of known high-risk animals in spreading bovine TB. The aim of the action plan is to reset the TB programme by putting in place measures necessary to tackle the current disease situation. On 13 April, a number of changes were introduced to animal testing and animal movement requirements under the bovine TB programme to reduce the transmission of bovine TB from cattle to cattle. I recognise that this is a big change farmers and is the first real manifestation they are seeing of the new plan in action. I thank in particular the marts, which have tried to help in communicating this new understanding. Those changes on 13 April include: the removal of the post-movement test option for all cows and for males over 36 months of age; all dairy cows moved into a breeding herd now requiring a 30-day pre-movement test; a 30-day pre-movement test for contract-reared heifers; the gamma interferon, GIF, test in large breakdowns of breeding herds; and a restriction on the sale of exposed cohorts where GIF testing is carried out in larger breeding herds for a period of time.
Sentiment score: 0.27
Being clear and concise is important. Change is a challenge for everybody but we had to change our approach. The approach needs to be targeted, and that is what this is. We have to recognise where the key challenge is. A reduction in bovine TB levels in breeding herds, especially in dairy herds, is a key element in driving down bovine TB levels nationally. I think of the constituency and the region that the Deputy represents, where it would be predominantly sucklers and not as much dairy. The purchase of breeding heifers from high-risk dairy herds and bringing them up to the Deputy's area, where there might be low-risk herds, has been a contributor in the past to the spread of this disease in a significant way. These changes are all based on science and are targeted. The Deputy is right, in that there was much criticism of some parts of the plan last year. I met a lot of resistance here to tackling the area of risk categorisation, but risk categorisation of the high-risk animal is the right thing to do. The simple fact that we started talking about that all last summer is indicative of the reduction of numbers we had, which I will outline in supplementary.
Sentiment score: -0.01
The helpline is up and running and has been since the middle of April. Communication has been a key part of everything I have done here. I will counter somewhat the Deputy's point that the message is not getting through. I refer to the encouraging progress of recent months in reducing bovine TB levels. Over the 12 months to 3 May, the herd incidence was 5.42%, down from 6.29%, the number of herds restricted was down by just over 5,400, or 14.8%, and the number of reactors was over 35,400, down 15.71%. We have seen significant reductions in herd incidence and reactor numbers in the past year. I believe that this reduction nationally is due to the combined efforts of all stakeholders in supporting farmers in reducing risk of bovine TB in their herds. I am confident that the changes I have introduced will help drive the disease down further but I have no doubt that the discussions we had last summer, notwithstanding all of the reaction I got to them, made farmers in low-risk areas ask questions about what the risk category of the animal they were buying was. That is a conversation that needed to happen and it has definitely fed into these numbers.
Sentiment score: 0.07
Ireland exported almost 458,000 metric tonnes of beef in 2025. It is an absolutely colossal figure when we think of the scale of the industry and what it is worth to our overall economy. Although the volume of exports was lower than in recent years, the total value of primary beef exports increased by €542 million, or 17%, to reach a record €3.6 billion, according to the Central Statistics Office, CSO. Whereas volumes to the UK were 6% lower in 2025 compared to 2024, the value of those shipments grew by more than €274 million, or 19%. Similarly, the value of consignments to other EU markets increased substantially by almost €313 million or 21% in 2025, while volumes recorded a modest 2% decline relative to 2024. The UK accounted for 46% of Irish beef exports by value and 42% by volume. Other international markets accounted for 11% of export volume but 5% of total value. Food Vision 2030, the industry-led strategy for the agrifood sector, aims to increase the value of agrifood products, including beef. The ambition is to build on sustainable value growth by supporting agrifood exports and continuing to develop market opportunities at home and abroad. The figures clearly indicate the success of Food Vision 2030 in achieving that. I have ensured that farmers can continue to improve the competitiveness and productivity of their suckler, dairy beef and mixed enterprises through a record level of national and EU co-funded supports. I am providing over €83 million in direct targeted supports for the suckler sector in 2026. In addition to the ongoing suckler carbon efficiency programme, which is worth over €51 annually to participants, the national dairy beef weighing scheme is currently open for applications and the 2026 beef welfare scheme will open in mid-August. The dairy weighing scheme, which supported 18,300 farmers last year, has a budget of €4 million in 2026. The beef welfare scheme, which supported 24,500 farmers last year, has a budget of €28 million in 2026.
Sentiment score: 0.43
I welcome the removal of Brazil from the list of approved countries. It is a result of the pressure that my colleagues on the Council of Ministers and I have been bringing to bear. In January, we had a meeting with Commissioner Šefčovič, the Commissioner for trade, Commissioner Hansen, the Commissioner for agriculture, and Commissioner Várhelyi, who is responsible for animal health and welfare. We made it very clear to them, and we have always said, that the sanitary and phytosanitary, SPS, food safety standards of beef coming into Europe are non-negotiable. The challenges around Mercosur were environmental in terms of our difficulties with the agreement. From the perspective of food safety, antimicrobial resistance and so on, that is non-negotiable in Europe. We saw products being found and recalled. We now see this move being made, which is very important and I strongly support.
Sentiment score: 0.36
The removal from the list has been done straight away. That is how that process works. It is a clear indication to the Brazilians that the standards of they have been bringing in, and that we have highlighted in terms of our concern with them, are not acceptable here. Product being found here that has traces of antibiotics and beyond is not acceptable to us and will not be into the future.
Sentiment score: 0.04
On the Deputy's question regarding the decline in the volume of beef exports to the EU and the UK, there are a few parts to this. It is a dynamic situation. Farmers vote with their feet in terms of the workload and the return they are getting for that work. Some of them change enterprises because they will get a better return for that. The increase in beef prices last year will make some farmers who had stepped back look at beef production again. I am determined to ensure that the good beef price, which increased last year, remains high for them so that they can continue to do that. The UK will always be a really important market to us. Almost 50% of our beef goes to the UK. Europe, our nearest neighbours after that, is obviously a key market as well. We have worked really hard in my Department to open new markets in third countries, with a particular focus on south-east Asia and beyond. The Deputy dismissed somewhat the early figures I highlighted showing the increase in the value of the return on that, but that is real for farmers because we have pursued the higher value markets. We do not want to be fighting with Brazilian beef on commodity markets around the world, and 90% of our beef that is exported is not. We go for the higher value markets because of our traceability and our Origin Green quality assurance scheme, which farmers and food processors have bought into. That is delivering the real return here and will continue to do so into the future.
Sentiment score: 0.23
I thank the Deputy for raising a really important issue which we all take really seriously. Animal welfare is a key priority for me as Minister and for the Government. My Department has lead policy responsibility within Government for animal welfare and we take it really seriously. I am committed to the policy that animal welfare standards are vigorously applied in a fair and even-handed manner and remain committed to the continued robust enforcement of the Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013, which provides a modern framework for regulating and applying standards in the area of animal health and welfare. My Department keeps the Act under review in light of key developments in the areas of animal welfare, the law and having regard to the practical lessons learned from operating the Act. Responsibility for all policy and legislation in relation to the Control of Dogs Acts and the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010 transferred to my Department on 1 June 2025 and 1 August 2025, respectively. This fulfilled a programme for Government commitment, on which I was part of the negotiating team. I was keen that we would get a more consolidated approach to this area. It was to bring a coherent approach to dog control issues by ensuring all legislation and policy in relation to the control of dogs, dog welfare and dog breeding establishments rested with my Department. Local authorities retain responsibility for operational and enforcement matters. Inspections of dog breeding establishments are carried out by dog wardens and by my Department. With the transfer of functions, I took over responsibility for the dog control stakeholder group, which Deputy Ó Muirí highlighted. It was established by the then Minister for Rural and Community Development in March 2024 to review the Control of Dogs Acts and the Dog Breeding Establishments Act. Its remit is to consider policy and legislative matters in relation to those Acts, including any need for legislative change. The stakeholder group comprises members with a broad range of expertise, including academics, veterinary surgeons, local authorities, farming interests, charities working in the field and animal welfare experts. I expect to receive the report from the group shortly.
Sentiment score: 0.20
I thank the Deputy. I will not fall into the trap of pitting the dog against the cat and which is more popular. I have Sammy, my collie, at home who keeps any cat away. The general public absolutely expects and demands of us the highest animal welfare standards. It is something I am passionate about. Coming from a farming background, I was raised, and I am raising my children, with the approach that if we treat animals well we will treat humans well. A society can be judged on how it deals with issues such as this. There are many different ways to do so. There is policy and enforcement, and the need to change policy as well. I look forward to receiving the stakeholder group's report. I am reviewing all legislation on dogs and I will be guided by the recommendations. At the same time, I am also due to bring the heads of a Bill on dog breeding establishments to Cabinet imminently. This is another area of work I am determined to progress.
Sentiment score: 0.22
A big change that happened with this Government, which was laid out in the programme for Government, is that all of the various elements of dog control have been centralised from previously being across three Departments, including in the former Department of Rural and Community Development. The programme for Government committed to taking this element from that Department and bringing it back to the Department of agriculture because we have responsibility for animal welfare. Local authorities are the employers of dog wardens and have the system in place. We work really closely together with them. I do not see an impediment to how we move forward and improve things further with the current structure. The dog stakeholder group was set up under the previous Government by the previous Minister at the Department of rural affairs. It has a body of work to do, which it has almost completed. There will be legislative change coming out of its proposals and I look forward to receiving its report. I am not waiting for that in the meantime. I will bring the heads of a Bill to Cabinet imminently to improve welfare standards and strengthen enforcement in relation to dog breeding establishments. I am continuing this work because animal welfare and the protection of our dogs are so important.
Sentiment score: 0.15
I thank Deputy Roche for raising this important matter. The bovine TB programme has been a key priority for me since I took office. I am very aware of the financial and emotional challenges for Irish farmers, their families and the communities in which they live when there is a bovine TB breakdown. It is a difficult disease to control and eradicate, as we know, but it can be done and has been done in other countries. I launched the Bovine TB Action Plan: Addressing Bovine TB in Ireland in September 2025, following extensive engagement with stakeholders. It includes five key pillars and 30 actions underpinned by scientific research and veterinary expertise. On 13 April, a number of changes were introduced to animal testing and animal movement requirements. These include the removal of the post-movement test option for all cows and for males over 36 months of age; all dairy cows moving into a breeding herd requiring a 30-day pre-movement test; 30-day pre-movement testing for contract-reared heifers; the introduction of mandatory gamma interferon test, known as GIF testing, in large breakdowns of breeding herds, which will apply to herds with a restriction on or after 13 April 2026; and a restriction on sale of exposed cohorts where a GIF test is carried out in larger breeding herds for a period of time, and this will apply to herds in restriction on or after 13 April 2026. These changes were introduced to reduce the transmission of bovine TB from cattle to cattle. A reduction in bovine TB levels in breeding herds, especially dairy herds, is a key element in driving down bovine TB levels nationally. In simple terms, every measure in this is there for a reason. It is backed by science and it is targeting where the spread of disease has been the biggest contributor. I also established a new bovine TB helpline for farmers who enter a new TB breakdown. This helpline will provide practical support and advice to farmers on the bovine TB breakdown process. This week a new on-farm badger biosecurity scheme has been opened for applications. I have put €6 million towards it to support farmers with simple practical on-farm interventions, such as fencing off badger setts and raising water troughs. These will have a significant impact and I am financially supporting farmers to make these interventions. It will put a bit of power back in their hands as well because farmers regularly feel pretty powerless when it comes to a potential bovine TB outbreak.
Sentiment score: 0.12
The difficulty is with identifying whether a vaccinated animal tests positive; animals that test positive and vaccinated animals cannot be differentiated. Some research has been done and we have collaborated with research projects on vaccination in the UK and beyond. Vaccination masks the presence of the disease and we need to find it to eradicate it. All of my measures are about identifying it and seeding it out. When I speak about the focus on breeding stock, it is because 6%, give or take, of our herds in the country have it. A lot of these young maiden heifers were sold to low-risk farms, so unbeknownst to those farmers they had brought in a high-risk animal, which was then seeding the disease. We need to identify these animals earlier in the initial herd and get them removed so they do not spread the disease. This is happening because we do not have one test that is 100% foolproof. The annual herd skin test that farmers are familiar with only has 80% efficacy. One out of every five that goes through that tests negative but is positive, and that has been a key contributor to the disease. When we layer on the blood testing it increases our efficacy to over 90% but we do not have something that is 100%.
Sentiment score: 0.15
I thank the Deputy for his comment on biosecurity measures. It is fencing off a sett and keeping cattle back. It is not about keeping the badger back in from the cattle. The cattle nose in around the latrine where the sett is and that has been a considerable cause of the spread of disease. Having that practical measure where farmers identify the sett and fence it off will make a difference as will new water troughs. It was important to support farmers in those efforts. We just finalised the tender process to increase staffing in the area of wildlife control. Most farmers affected by bovine TB only want to talk about wildlife. They are convinced that is it. This planned approach is identifying all elements of the cause and spread of infection. There is residual infection in herds as I referenced earlier. There is cattle and wildlife transmission, and we are addressing all parts of it. I received a record amount of money in the budget last year of €157 million for my new bovine TB plan. That was based on working towards eradication and turning the dial on the increased numbers and bringing them back. All of the focus of that money was to be on reducing the instances. It was not open to me under the conditions of that to open up compensation and ceiling caps. I would like to revisit it. I understand the challenge, but I have to focus the money I have on reducing that disease.
Sentiment score: 0.12
The targeted agricultural modernisation scheme, TAMS 3, provides grants to farmers to build, improve, or both, a specified range of farm buildings and equipment on their holdings. The solar capital investment scheme, SCIS, is one of 11 schemes within TAMS 3. The number of applications and the level of funding provided to date under a number of TAMS 3 schemes, including the solar capital investment scheme, have far exceeded expectations. To date, a substantial proportion of the total TAMS budget, more than 20%, has been spent on SCIS alone. In order to ensure that the available budget for TAMS is distributed fairly over the remainder of the CAP strategic plan programme period, it is necessary to limit the number of approved applications in recent tranches by applying ranking and selection criteria. In addition, in respect of SCIS, it is also necessary to concentrate the funding on on-farm consumption only. However, it is important to highlight that farmers can seek support through the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, for the installation of solar systems in respect of their domestic dwelling. The SEAI business grant is also available to the agricultural sector, including farmers, which is a further option for those keen to explore renewable energy generation. In simple terms, I negotiated an increase in my capital budget last year and got €88 million for TAMS this year and next year. It is for the entire CAP strategic plan, so I have to manage the budget available to the end of 2027. I could accept every application that comes in now and not have any TAMS available in 2027. I cannot do that to farmers who need increased slurry storage or who want to invest under farm safety measures. There is a lot more than just the solar element to it. You see the significant drain on resources. I would love to be able to change that percentage and make it bigger if it were there, but this is about policy priorities and trying to design them. The SEAI is there from that perspective as well.
Sentiment score: 0.35
People will think I put the Deputy up to that question because he is singing my tune. The Department of agriculture and farmers have proved there is a demand to try to make their farms less dependent on fossil fuel energy. We have proved that if I have more money, I can spend it on that. This is in the context of an increased capital budget. The reason more people are disappointed now is that more people have applied. The average number of applications under TAMS 2 was approximately 3,000 per tranche. In the most recent application it was over 8,000, which was a massive increase in demand. You can see how resource heavy it has been on the overall TAMS budget. A total of 6,000 applications were received under SCIS and 3,425 approvals were issued allowing farmers to proceed with their investments. A total of €31.5 million was issued to farmers since payments commenced in June 2024. It is attractive and that is what made it very popular. There is no doubt that if we had more money we would spend it. If the SEAI wants to give me a slice of that budget or any other, we would spend it in that area.
Sentiment score: 0.03
The challenge is that if everything is a priority then nothing is a priority. I have 11 headings under TAMS and I have to try to manage that. It is the targeted agricultural measures scheme. When demand far outstrips supply something has to give. On that basis it felt fair to me that a residential house be taken out as opposed to farming activity. The intensive energy user on a farm benefited most from being able to apply for TAMS. It is a targeted agricultural measure. There are other ways for residential houses to get in there. I take the point that it would be better to have one central application process. I like that we were able to support farmers in reducing their energy requirements. TAMS is aligned to our climate and sustainability targets. That is renewable energy, but it is also low-emission slurry spreading, support for organic farmers, farm safety, increased slurry storage and improved water quality. All of those things are in the mix with TAMS, so it makes it competitive when demand is high.
Sentiment score: 0.21
I propose to take Questions Nos. 93 and 143 together. My Department implements a number of measures annually to raise awareness of fire risks among forest owners, managers, farmers and other land managers. My Department monitors fire risk throughout the fire season in conjunction with Met Éireann and communicates high-risk fire weather phases in advance to the forest sector and other relevant stakeholders, including local authorities via fire danger notices. This enables preparedness and readiness of key equipment and personnel ahead of fire outbreaks. In the year to date my Department has issued two such notices. In 2025 my Department issued nine fire danger notices. Fire danger notices may be viewed on my Department's website. My Department maintains a website with relevant information on fire risks, prevention and specific guidance on responsible use of fire by landowners. My Department also provides specific wildfire safety advice to the general public via the whole-of-government Be Summer Ready campaign. My Department also co-ordinates on fire management with the European Union and other member states via the European forest fire expert group and also via the FORRISK forest risk facility coordinated by the European Forest Institute. It is an offence to cut, grub, burn or otherwise destroy any vegetation growing on any land not cultivated between 1 March and 31 August in any year. Landowners found burning illegally could face fines, imprisonment and single farm payment penalties, where applicable. My Department monitors for activity closely and fires on agricultural land are investigated in relation to basic payments, or BISS, eligibility. My Department has no role in prosecutions under the Wildlife Act 1976. That clearly outlines the work that comes under and the responsibility of my Department regarding wildfires and the challenges in that space. As I said, it is one of those issues that crosses more than just my Department.
Sentiment score: -0.20
I do not disagree. The Deputy articulated very clearly how her constituents in the Cooleys, and people in many mountainous areas countrywide, are deeply affected by wildfires that happen for a variety of reasons. Obviously some of what she described is criminal activity with very serious consequences for our wildlife, habitats and countryside and needs to be dealt with. It is important to recognise landowners may carry out controlled fires on uncultivated land from 1 September each year to the last day of February. This is only allowed if it is done in a controlled manner and provided the landowner follows the correct safety procedures. Uncultivated land is land that is not normally farmed or managed. That controlled burning is probably something that happens less now, for a variety of reasons. Farmers are older, there is less generational renewal on our hill farms and it is work for younger farmers but if that scrub and uncultivated land is not cleared it can be a tinder box at a dry time of the year. There was an official fire danger notice issued only a few weeks ago and I was struck this had been necessary after the wettest winter we have had, a very wet early spring and before we are even really in the summer. It goes to show how quickly, with climate change, our land can dry with a very drying wind and the risk that creates for the high-risk period we are in. It is about enforcement of very clear rules where there is bad practice but also about supporting people so they are aware of the rules and what they can do in that important period.
Sentiment score: 0.03
I again thank the Deputy for raising what is a really important issue. Sometimes we do not talk about these facts until after an incident when it is too late and the damage has affected our landscape, wildlife and farmers. It comes back a little to the relationship between landowners in the area and members of the public who maybe live in a more urban setting and love to share that amenity. That is where the Be Summer Ready campaign is really important. Obviously farmers are well aware, as custodians of the land, of what needs to be done, what their responsibilities are and what the penalties are if they are acting on the wrong side of the law but the public have to be acutely aware their actions have very real consequences. A lot of this is about communication and ensuring we communicate very clearly the risks and hazards people might not be as aware of, how quickly these fires can take off and, as the Deputy said, how they have a disproportionate effect on an area. I again thank her for raising those points.
Sentiment score: 0.27
I propose to take Questions Nos. 98, 125 and 126 together. Ireland is a relatively small market in respect of fertiliser sales and usage compared with many of our EU neighbours. No fertilisers are manufactured in Ireland, as the Deputy knows, and this results in indigenous fertiliser companies being price-takers. Those prices are dependent on global supply and demand. An estimated 35% of global urea trade passes through the Strait of Hormuz, plus 45% of sulphur exports and a significant volume of the ammonia used in nitrogen fertilisers. Overall it has been estimated 25% to 30% of global nitrogen fertiliser exports pass through the strait. The wider region is estimated to account for 45% of global urea exports, 27% of ammonia exports and 47% of sulphur exports. My Department continues to engage with fertiliser importers to monitor supply issues and concerns. Fertiliser product continues to arrive although challenges in supply exist, especially in the case of urea. It should be noted that many farmers and other fertiliser users forward-bought fertiliser earlier in the year. In addition, the Irish fertiliser industry purchased significant volumes of product in advance of the full introduction of the carbon border adjustment mechanism, CBAM. The national fertiliser database import figures show that fertiliser stocks increased significantly during the fourth quarter of 2025 with calcium ammonium nitrate, CAN, imports increasing by 55% and urea by 260%. Teagasc has a comprehensive information pack for farmers and their advisors, through a compendium of 20 fact sheets, to optimise the use of plant nutrients and to help farmers address the challenge of maintaining their farm outputs in the face of rising fertiliser costs and reduced availability. One of the answers to this question is that we are reducing our dependency on artificial fertiliser because that is what we need to do in order to make our farming and food production system more robust on this island, particularly as we do not have domestic production of artificial fertiliser. The fact sheets supplied by Teagasc cover issues of soil testing, lime application, nitrogen usage, organic manures, fertiliser spreading and many other topics that will be incredibly useful for farmers. It is not just about what we spread on our land but also about the phosphorus and potassium, P and K, levels, acidity and composition of our land such that it can best take up those nutrients and be in the best condition to do so. This is where soil testing and lime application can, in the right circumstances and on the basis of those soil test results, make a significant difference. Depending on the type of fertiliser, increases in prices have varied. The price of CAN is estimated to have risen by about 20% since the beginning of March, while the price of urea has increased by as much as 60%. My Department has no function in terms of fertiliser prices beyond the regulatory function of ensuring products placed on the market are in keeping with the fertiliser regulatory framework and that standards such as nutrient content are as described. However, I have continued to monitor the market situation given the negative impact that high fertiliser prices have had on farmers’ expenditure and profitability. I will continue to engage with my EU counterparts regarding the impact of the Middle East crisis on the supply and price of fertilisers. I have raised this issue on a number of occasions. The question was very much formulated on the basis of what we are doing to build our resilience and address the vulnerability we have in this space, but as a short-term measure, I raised the need to invoke Article 27a of the CBAM at successive AGRIFISH Council meetings. This allows for the suspension of certain elements under certain set criteria. I believe we are in this crisis period now where fertiliser should be set aside as part of CBAM. I had the support of a number of other member states on this request. We pushed for it but the Commission, to date, has not been minded to avail of it. What Commissioner Hansen has pointed to very clearly is the introduction by the Commission of a fertiliser action plan, and that is due to be published next week, on 19 May. I expect that fertiliser action plan to have a very significant series of proposals around the cost and availability of fertiliser and how that will impact us. That is something we await. The Commission is very clear on my views about the impact the conflict in the Middle East is having on the supply and price of fertiliser for our farmers and the knock-on impact that can have on food production into the future.
Sentiment score: 0.15
The geopolitical uncertainty in the Middle East is the key driver of this problem. It has put pressure on fertiliser prices and affected the likely availability of fertiliser over the course of the year. As I said, the EU Commission is bringing forward a fertiliser action plan next week. It is anticipated that this plan will focus not only on short-term crisis support but also on structural measures to reduce EU dependency on imported synthetic fossil fuel-based fertilisers. Turning to Deputy Aindrias Moynihan’s point, there definitely is not just a short-term reaction here. We need to learn from what is happening to ensure we are not back in this situation every couple of years whenever there is a conflict. In addition, there are proposals to provide a means of financially supporting farmers through targeted exceptional supports, which we also look forward to seeing the details of. It is expected that these proposals will contain measures to boost domestic production, promote sustainable practices and encourage the increased use of organic fertilisers and enhanced soil health to reduce dependency on synthetic products. In the context of the blockages Deputy Kenny outlined, I am happy to talk to him afterwards about them. I am in Armagh tomorrow morning for a sectoral meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council, where I will be meeting my counterpart, Minister Muir. If the Deputy gives me further details, I will be happy to raise this with him tomorrow to see what the issue might be. I am not aware of impediments, they have not been raised with me, but perhaps the issue is on the Northern side. We can see what the situation is. Deputy Moynihan referred to CBAM and that it is not the time to bring it in. Actually, inadvertently, CBAM has kind of been our friend in that because it was coming in on 1 January this year, importers front-loaded and this meant there was an extra stock of fertiliser in the country. The national fertiliser database gives us very clear information around where we are. Imports of CAN have increased by 55% and urea by 260%, so we are definitely aided by the fact that there is a lot more product in the country and the fertiliser industry continues to import more stocks. My Department is in very regular contact with the fertiliser importer to assess supply issues and address them. Obviously, we have made a point around Article 27a, which we will continue to articulate to the Commission as well.
Sentiment score: 0.19
The fertiliser database gives us good data in relation to where we are at. Fertiliser continues to be imported into the country and the database indicates that is sufficient fertiliser in the country at present. However, products such as urea may come into short supply. We continue to monitor the price as well. To the broader point made by Deputy Moynihan about wind generation, one would not look at that in the context of Ireland alone. We will see what is in the European Commission's proposals in the action plan on fertiliser next week when it is published by Commissioner Hansen. We will see what the medium-term elements and supports are, but it is definitely a vulnerability for Europe that we are so dependent across Europe for this key component. The Deputy made a point about RENURE. We supported the introduction of the RENURE measure, but it is not really of major benefit to us in its current form because of the lack of anaerobic digestion here. When the Deputy talks about us building our resilience, countries that have a lot of anaerobic digestion have digestate to go back out onto the land. From a water quality perspective, as well as our efforts to maintain the nitrates derogation, that would be greatly assisted if we had more anaerobic digestion in that space. That is where RENURE kicks in.
Sentiment score: 0.14