Food Industry
7. Deputy Tony McCormack asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the measures being taken to support the growth and international expansion of Irish-owned food and agrifood businesses; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [52234/26]
We all know the importance of the agri sector and in particular the agrifood sector. In the ever-changing geopolitical world we live in today, food safety is becoming even more important, while we must also focus on our economy and growing our exports. What that in mind, what measures are being taken to support the growth and international expansion of Irish-owned food and agrifood businesses?
I thank the Deputy for raising this important point. A key focus of Food Vision 2030, the shared stakeholder-led strategy for the agrifood sector, is to grow the value of Irish agrifood exports in international markets, which, as I outlined earlier, we have been very successful at in recent years. In 2025, Irish exports were recorded at €20.8 billion, with exports to over 180 countries worldwide.
Given the dependence of the sector on exports, trade and market diversification are a priority for my Department. Food Vision 2030 reflects the importance of diversifying and developing new markets and new market segments for Irish food and drink products in the UK, the EU and wider international markets. Food Vision also aims to increase the value of exports of sustainably produced and high-quality Irish food and beverages globally. Bord Bia works to promote Ireland’s outstanding food, drink and horticulture produce around the world. Its activities include participation at food exhibitions and trade shows and the running of digital campaigns, retail and restaurant promotions as well as a range of other trade promotions and events including campaigns around the St. Patrick's Day global celebrations. Bord Bia also hosts inward buyer visits on an ongoing basis as well as meetings with key international companies.
Ministerial trade missions are led by me and the Ministers of State, Deputies Dooley, Collins and Grealish, over the range of our different responsibilities. They are a key element of the strategy to deliver on the Food Vision priorities to develop and diversify markets and to increase the value of Irish agrifood exports. They also present opportunities to expand Ireland’s trade and investment profile and to promote Ireland’s strong international reputation as a producer of safe, nutritious and sustainable food and drink, for example through extensive business-to-business engagement, networking opportunities and high-level political discussions.
The destinations and markets targeted by my Department for trade missions focus on the best opportunities to develop new markets and to promote our agrifood products in collaboration with our stakeholders, which include Bord Bia, Sustainable Food Systems Ireland and Enterprise Ireland. Once market access is in place, which can be a lengthy process, Bord Bia in particular will work to promote Irish produce and assist companies in maximising those opportunities to export.
I welcome the continued success of the agrifood sector. It is one of Ireland's greatest national success stories, supporting thousands of jobs, sustaining rural communities and making an enormous contribution to our economy. We are really proud of our Offaly food companies like Glenisk, Tullamore Dew and others. Irish food has earned an outstanding reputation around the world because of its quality and the commitment of our farmers and food producers. The success of our agrifood sector should give us confidence to be even more ambitious.
We should be helping more Irish-owned food businesses to innovate, expand into new markets, create more high quality jobs and compete successfully around the world. That is how to build stronger rural economies and ensure the next generation sees real opportunities in the food industry. Will the Minister outline the long-term vision for achieving that ambition and the next steps his Department and Bord Bia will take to help Irish-owned food businesses to grow, innovate and succeed internationally?
I completely agree with the Deputy. This is a great success story. It is important and we are ambitious. The company the Deputy described from his constituency in County Offaly is a great example, as are many more in the Deputy's county, of the strength of our food companies. The strength of their products and their innovation is that they take farmers' produce to the market place and they are supported by the State through Enterprise Ireland and Bord Bia.
There are 13 or 14 agricultural attachés, off the top of my head, who are members of staff of the Department of agriculture, based in our embassies in key markets around the world. That is the level of investment by my Department in growing, emerging markets in south east Asia and beyond, where there are great opportunities. We do that in consultation with food companies because the food companies can identify market opportunities. Bord Bia can also do so. The Department works with the relevant authority to gain market access, which is a lengthy process, and when we get it, I and colleagues go on ministerial trade missions to try to open those markets, create opportunities and make connections for companies.
Ireland's reputation as one of the world's leading food producing nations has been built over generations through quality, innovation and unwavering commitment to high standards. However, it cannot be taken for granted. Around the world, our competitors are investing heavily in research, technology, productivity and new product development and the pace of change is accelerating. If Ireland is to remain a global leader in the next decade, we must continue to invest in innovation, improve productivity and support farmers and food producers to adapt to changing markets and consumer demand.
Food Vision 2030, which the Minister mentioned earlier, provides a strong roadmap but ambition must always be matched by action. Will the Minister outline what new initiatives his Department is bringing forward, working with the likes of Teagasc, Bord Bia and industry, to ensure Ireland remains among the world's most competitive, innovative and trusted food producing nations for the next generation?
A fair indication of what we will do in the future is what we have done recently. We went on trade missions such as to Seoul Food in Korea, Japan Expo, China, Germany, London and United Arab Emirates, where we went to Gulfood. Every Minister takes the opportunity of the St. Patrick's Day missions to promote the work, with Bord Bia and Enterprise Ireland, of our food and drinks companies. It can be Irish whiskey, dairy produce, beef or other things because we are exporting to more than 180 countries around the world. It is a collaboration.
Getting market access is slow. However, when companies come to us about a niche market, such as duck - they can tell us where there is a huge opportunity and they need to get market access - we reflect on it and if the economic return is there, we will put huge effort into engaging with the relevant authorities to get it. That process is slow but when we get it, we have the opportunity to build relationships, like we did when we gained access to Korea for beef.
Agriculture Schemes
8. Deputy Joe Cooney asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his plans to review the valuation ceilings applied to reactors under the bovine TB eradication scheme, to ensure farmers are compensated for the full market value for animals removed as reactors; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [52213/26]
The scheme designed to compensate farmers for animals lost to TB is simply not fit for purpose. The market value caps are totally out of step with the real world and farmers are being left thousands of euro out of profit. The Minister has publicly stated that he is monitoring and reviewing these caps. A review without an end date provides farmers with no commitment. When will the review be completed? Can we expect the caps to be increased?
I thank the Deputy for raising this important matter. We have discussed the bovine TB plan a lot in this House, this year and last year, because bovine TB is an ongoing challenge, as the Deputy is aware, for farmers in Clare and all over the country. I am acutely aware of the emotional and financial impacts bovine TB has on farmers, their families and rural Ireland. That is why I am absolutely determined to drive down the number of farm families affected by this and who have to experience the awful trauma of having a reactor and a locked up herd.
I secured an increased budget allocation of €85 million for bovine TB in budget 2026, providing a total budget of €157 million for this year. I am confident that this increased budget will allow the revamped bovine TB programme to focus on tackling disease levels through the implementation of the measures laid out in the new bovine TB action plan. It will support and enable farm families who are currently dealing with the stress of a TB outbreak to navigate a way out of a TB restriction and protect herds that are currently free from TB from the stress of a TB outbreak in the future. The objective of the new measures in the bovine TB action plan is to reduce the number of farms affected by bovine TB and decrease costs for farmers and the taxpayer.
My Department provides a range of financial supports that focus on compensating farmers for direct and indirect losses incurred as a result of a TB breakdown on the farm. The primary support scheme is the on farm market valuation scheme under which animals removed as reactors receive compensation subject to scheme ceilings equivalent to their market value in the event they had not been disclosed as TB reactors. To the end of May 2026, of the 11,476 animals valued under the on farm market valuation scheme, just over 85% of animals were valued below the scheme ceilings.
The Minister said that budget 2026 money is tied to reducing disease and I commend him on that. It is having a positive effect. Reactor numbers are down significantly year on year to June and the herd incidence rate is also down. That is welcome. However, this disease reduction policy does absolutely nothing for farmers who have animals who are reactors. The Minister can clearly accept there is a problem with the scheme. The farmers I represent are already carrying a heavy burden. Asking them to accept compensation based on valuations that are years out of date is neither fair nor sustainable. Engagement with farmers and organisations is fine but the talking must stop and a decision must be made. Farmers now need clarity and something concrete they can take to the bank, not an endless review.
In addition to the compensation package for eligible reactor animals that are removed during a TB breakdown, my Department operates three supplementary schemes that assist farmers with the indirect losses incurred as a result of a TB breakdown on their farm. They are the income supplement scheme, depopulation grant scheme and hardship grant scheme. As part of the work of the TB forum, a dedicated financial working group was established to review the financial modelling of various elements of the bovine TB eradication programme. As a result of the agreement reached in this group, over the past two years, there were rate enhancements to the income supplement scheme, the hardship grant and the depopulation grant, as well as enhanced ceilings for select animals being removed as part of the on farm market valuation scheme.
Seeing a reduction in numbers in the past year is positive. It has been directly linked to our open discussions about risk categorisation of animals and buyers being more aware of that. We know we will see an increase in bovine TB levels so we cannot be complacent. The focus at present is on reducing the levels of disease, which will reduce the very significant impact of bovine TB on Irish farm families, and also reduce the overall cost of the programme.
I compliment the Minister on the great work he is doing. With respect, farmers battling with this disease cannot live on engagement or reviews with no end date. Every month this drags on, more and more reactors are being removed at values set three years ago, while cattle prices continue to climb, which is good. The scheme also has a significant negative impact on farmers who are producing the best animals. I ask the Minister to consider a modest allocation from his existing budget now to increase the cap to demonstrate to farmers that he has been listening to them; and for a commitment that he will seek a special allocation for compensation from Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, reform in budget 2027. Farmers are entitled to that. Fairness delayed is fairness denied. I ask him to back farmers with action for these people who work hard to make a living.
I thank the Deputy for articulating the points as clearly as he did and with passion.
I understand the points the Deputy is making but as a senior Cabinet Minister, I also need to have full cognisance of the overall cost of the TB programme. Farmers may think that putting €157 million into a TB programme does not impinge on my ability to spend in other areas of the Department where the Ministers of State, Deputies Dooley, Collins and Grealish, would like to spend, but that is not borne out in reality. In 2019, just seven short years ago, the entire cost to our Department was €37.5 million. It is now €157 million because of the scale of the challenge we are focused on. I came to last year's budget negotiations with a new plan and a very bold approach that I had spent the summer negotiating. In those negotiations, a clear and explicit determination was given to me, which was that this money was to be used to drive down the incidence of the disease. I understand the points the Deputy is making. We will now be having new budget negotiations. Engagement with officials in the Department of public expenditure will involve a detailed analysis of the trajectory of the disease, where the money is going and the impact it is having. I will also be making the points the Deputy has raised regarding compensation levels.
Agriculture Supports
9. Deputy Malcolm Byrne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to provide an update on measures to support farm succession. [51677/26]
Given that one of the greatest challenges for Irish farming continues to be the ageing demographic and the low percentage of young people who are involved, will the Minister provide an update on measures to support farm succession and generational renewal?
I thank Deputy Byrne for raising this critical issue. It is one of the key issues of our time as regards our agricultural and fisheries sectors and beyond. It is not specific to Ireland or even to Europe. In Ireland, we have the extra challenge that farm families put huge store in educating their children very well, and are aided by the State in doing so, and those children then graduate into an economy at full employment with a lot of alternative options. That is all positive. It is a bit like the challenges the rising price of beef brings. These are positive challenges to have, but they are still very real challenges. We are trying to win the hearts and minds of young people who are considering a career in agriculture and farming in what is a very competitive space.
Farm succession is a key priority for the Government to ensure the long-term sustainability and competitiveness of Irish agriculture. A range of supports are in place to encourage timely succession, facilitate generational renewal and assist young farmers in establishing viable farm businesses.
Ireland's CAP strategic plan for 2023 to 2027 provides substantial resources to achieving generational renewal. Measures include: the complementary income support for young farmers; the national reserve scheme, which prioritises young farmers; and a higher grant rate of 60% for qualified young farmers under the TAMS capital investment measure. A collaborative farming grant scheme provides financial support to encourage farmers to form partnerships with young trained farmers and the succession planning advice grant provides financial support towards the costs incurred in accessing independent legal and financial advice in respect of succession planning for older farmers.
Nationally, there are very strong taxation measures to facilitate succession and assist with land mobility. For succession, agricultural relief is a key measure. Along with 100% stamp duty relief, consanguinity stamp duty relief and long-term leasing income tax relief, it supports access to land for young farmers and provides a route to retirement for older farmers. A number of taxation measures already exist. I can go into more detail in my supplementary response.
I welcome the Minister's personal commitment to succession and generational renewal. He is right to say it is not just an Irish issue. He will know about the commission on generational renewal. He has been very strong on its recommendations. Some of them apply to the next round of CAP. The Minister will have to work with his fellow Ministers and with Commissioner Hansen to achieve some of those goals. Others are domestic, however. The Minister is correct about access to land and finance. These are key measures to support succession. Commissioner Hansen has spoken about guaranteeing that all member states invest at least 6% of their agricultural spending on measures to promote generational renewal. The Commission's report talks about 8%. Will we see a significant package dedicated to succession and generational renewal developed as part of the next CAP and, most importantly, here domestically?
That is absolutely the intention. On the funding element, we obviously cannot make any commitments as to what the next CAP will look like for us here in Ireland until we know how much money we have to play with. However, the Deputy is right about Commissioner Hansen's ambitions. The EU's vision for agriculture and food identified generational renewal as a priority. This is reflected in the proposals for a post-2027 Common Agricultural Policy, as the Deputy outlined. The European Commission has also presented a strategy for generational renewal in agriculture. The increased focus on generational renewal at EU level is welcome.
The EU strategy comes to many of the same conclusions as our own commission. The commission on generational renewal estimated that the total financial support for generational renewal in Ireland was €428 million in 2024. That is really significant. A lot of that goes unseen because it is provided through tax incentives. We have seen what happened in the UK when people just assumed tax incentives for the inheritance and transfer of land would always be there. When such measures are messed with, it absolutely devastates generational renewal. It can mean the loss or sale of land that a family member had intended to pass on to another family member. I never take this for granted. I know my party and the Deputy's party would never mess with these measures but people need to be aware of this because I am not as confident about what other parties would do.
I welcome that commitment. I certainly agree with the Minister. It is interesting that the European Commission's proposal aims for 24% of farmers to be new or young farmers by 2040. That is very ambitious. With regard to the strategies, we need to ensure that agriculture is sustainable. That is the kind of goal we need. I praise the work of Macra na Feirme. The Minister will be aware of how Macra operates in his own county. From regular engagements with Macra in Wicklow and Wexford, I know it is very active in this space. We need a succession scheme that supports young farmers and older farmers as that managerial role transitions from one generation to the next. There are some measures in place to do that. We need certainty and legally binding ring-fencing of funding for young farmers under the next CAP to support generational renewal. The Minister is right that there are broader issues in respect of education and guaranteed stable incomes, which are challenges for agriculture more generally. However, to attract young people to stay in or come into the career, these measures are critical.
I agree that the goals are ambitious. They need to be because we have a very big problem here. The average age of a farmer is 57 or 58. That is far too high. It is creating a whole range of challenges from farm safety to delayed innovation and investment and beyond. These wider issues are a nut we really need to crack. I recognise the role of Macra. I guarantee the Deputy that its president, Josephine O'Neill, is very good at articulating Macra's position and desire for a succession scheme. I really want to be able to deliver such a scheme. The commission on generational renewal summed it up very well. It talked about all the barriers, including access to finance, access to land, gender balance and women in agriculture. It said that ultimately, no matter what supports were available, decisions around succession on a farm will still be made around the kitchen table when the family has that discussion. We need to aid and support all of that. I do not believe any one succession grant scheme alone will be the key determinant in that very big decision for the retiring farmer and the young farmer. A lot of things feed into it. Income is obviously a huge issue. The work I am doing on bovine TB, on securing the nitrates derogation and on supporting the tillage sector will all help with generational renewal, as will the very strong measures we are looking for in the next CAP.
Animal Breeding
10. Deputy Aisling Dempsey asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he intends to improve the inspection regime of dog breeding establishments. [52127/26]
Does the Minister intend to improve the inspection regime for dog breeding establishments in the near future?
I thank Deputy Dempsey for raising this really important issue. It is something I am passionate about. In order to bring a coherent approach to dog control, policy and legislative responsibility under both the Control of Dogs Act 1986 and the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010 transferred to my Department last year. That was part of the agreement in the programme for Government. It was a wise move. I supported it during the talks on the programme for Government. Responsibility was spread across three Departments, which was challenging. As my Department has responsibility for animal welfare, also having responsibility for the control of dogs makes a lot of sense.
As the Deputy will be aware, in both cases, local authorities retain responsibility for all operational and enforcement matters. Inspections of dog breeding establishments are carried out by my Department and by local authority dog wardens. All registered dog breeding establishments undergo an annual inspection. Additional inspections, which include unannounced inspections, are carried out according to a risk assessment.
My Department also introduced an updated dog breeding establishments inspection form to create uniformity when conducting an inspection of a dog breeding establishment. This updated form is used by both my Department and local authorities and will be kept under review in light of key developments in the areas of animal welfare and the law, having regard to the practical lessons learned from conducting inspections.
On 19 May this year, I introduced draft legislation, the dog breeding establishments Bill 2026, to Cabinet to update the existing regulatory framework for dog breeding establishments in Ireland across three key areas: welfare and breeding; sales and record-keeping; and administration and enforcement. The Bill was approved for priority drafting and will be referred to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food for pre-legislative scrutiny. For the first time, dog breeding establishments will be legally required to employ a minimum of one full-time staff member for every 20 breeding bitches on the premises, ensuring animals receive proper daily care and attention. There are other measures in the Bill I am happy to expand on in my supplementary response.
I thank the Minister. I appreciate that answer and his commitment in this area. It is obvious it is something about which he is quite passionate. It would be really beneficial if we could get some kind of timeline on that now. We met with Dog Law Ireland and other advocates. I met a lady from my own constituency that day called Alma. It is not about people like that. There are excellent dog breeders out there. There really are. Alma spoke about bottle-feeding puppies through the night and nursing the bitches back to health when there were any issues. It is not those people I am talking about here today. It is the dog breeding establishments with which we have serious issues. The updates to that legislation cannot come quick enough for those dogs' physical and mental safety. I am delighted to hear there are annual inspections. In terms of the local authorities, I know there was €2 million in funding last year and perhaps a commitment, although I will not prejudge, in the upcoming budget for more dog wardens. Those teams will never be big enough. They have so much to police and so much to inspect. I would like to ask the Minister about that.
I thank Deputy Dempsey for those points. First of all, to reassure her, the constituents she has met and the dog breeders across the country who do dog breeding well have nothing to fear from this legislation. This is to stop bad practice by any bad actors who might be in this for monetary gain, who do not care about the dogs and who are doing it to exploit any vulnerability that is in the law at the minute. Our job as legislators is to make sure we have tight and robust measures here. It was definitely an area that I felt needed tightening up. I am sure good dog breeders like Alma, who the Deputy referenced, are not doing the kinds of practices we are talking about here. There are measures we are seeking to bring in.
In answer to the Deputy's question around timelines, it will be as soon as possible. I have asked for it to be listed as priority legislation for the next term. I have engaged with our colleague, Deputy Aindrias Moynihan, Chair of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food, to deal with the pre-legislative scrutiny in tandem so that we try to get this Bill through as quickly as possible. It is really important that we do that.
As well as the point around staffing rates and beyond, the limit and the cap of one litter per year will prevent repeated breeding, which is obviously very bad practice. There will be a limit on how many Caesarean sections a breeding dog can have and a cap on the number of litters in her lifetime as well. These are all really important measures.
I thank the Minister for his commitment to getting this through as a priority. I am really delighted. I am sure many people will be delighted to hear that today. The caps he talks about are all very welcome. They are more or less in line with what people like Dog Law Ireland and advocates like my constituent Alma want. The one concern is around the number of bitches that can be in any one of these breeding establishments. We heard stories about 300 bitches being in one establishment with staff having to wear ear defenders because of the noise. The effect that has on dogs is very worrying to really trustworthy and good dog breeders. That might be considered as well.
We will get an opportunity to discuss all elements of this through the five Stages of the legislation when I introduce it to the House and get it cleared. I have not made a decision on the cap yet. I still have an open mind. I have advice from the Attorney General. There are challenges around it that we will get to discuss through the detailed phases of the legislation. Are we comparing like with like in terms of the sizes of premises, such as the difference between a garage and a warehouse? There are challenges and there could be complexities in the law in that regard. However, measures are being proposed in the heads of the Bill. We have 17 heads already, so it is quite a detailed draft Bill. We have measures in there that will naturally limit how many dogs somebody can have, as well as the capping in terms of staffing and how many litters the dog can have. These are all measures we will work through.
The Deputy mentioned funding. Obviously, I work closely with the Minister, Deputy Browne, with his responsibility over local authorities and the dog wardens. However, through my Department, I fund animal welfare charities to the tune of over €6 million, which is a huge increase on the €2.4 million that was paid out to them in 2020. We have continuously invested more in the area of animal welfare and in this area.
Agriculture Supports
11. Deputy Colm Burke asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the additional measures he is considering to support farm incomes in light of rising input costs and challenges facing the agricultural sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [52226/26]
What additional measures is the Minister considering to support farm incomes in light of rising input costs and challenges facing the agricultural sector, and will he make a statement on the matter? I know recent publications showed an increase in farm incomes but that was for the previous 12 months. The big challenge now is in relation to the cost of fertilisers, fuel and electricity. There is a really difficult challenge ahead for the farming community.
I thank Deputy Burke very much for raising what is no doubt a key point. From early 2021, the Central Statistics Office, CSO, agricultural price indices, which measure the level of input costs and output prices paid and received by farmers, saw significant growth and volatility relative to previous years. Unprecedented shocks including Brexit, the Covid-19 pandemic and Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine contributed to these trends. The conflict in the Middle East renewed pressure on global supply chains and has emphasised our vulnerability to changes in the availability and price of fuel and fertiliser both in Ireland and the EU. Input cost increases have serious implications across all sectors in our economy, including the agrifood sector, adversely affecting farmer incomes and food affordability. Furthermore, the elevated cost base of the sector is a risk to its overall competitiveness.
While 2025 was a strong year for farm incomes, with average family farm income estimated to be up by about 49% in the national farm survey, 2026 has seen higher input costs and lower output prices. The CSO reports on output prices and input costs on a monthly basis and my Department will continue to monitor their effects on farm income and viability. The Government recognises the exceptional pressures rising fuel costs place on farmers, contractors and fishermen and fisherwomen. A substantial support package has been put in place, with the full removal of all non-carbon excise on green diesel. The recent Government announcement of the further extension of the full excise rate until the end of August will provide reassurance and certainty to farm families and businesses.
In addition, I introduced the fuel income support scheme as a targeted income support to assist farmers and agricultural and forestry contractors facing unprecedented increases in fuel costs. I also put separate targeted schemes in place to support the fishery sector, which the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, has been administering, and the specialist horticultural grower sector, which the Minister of State, Deputy Collins, has been overseeing. In total, €100 million funding has been made available to support these agrifood and marine sectors and I expect payments under these schemes to commence in the coming weeks.
I thank the Minister. I fully accept that a huge amount of work has been done over the last three to four months, especially in relation to fuel costs. The issue we are now looking at over the next 12 months is the fertiliser cost increase in view of the conflict in Ukraine and also the fact that while on the one hand, we thought the conflict in the Middle East was at an end, it now appears to be resurrecting itself again and, therefore, there is concern about increased costs in relation to fuel, electricity and fertilisers. In relation to fertilisers, in particular, we have the carbon border adjustment mechanism, which applies to a carbon-related charge in imported carbon-intensive products, including fertilisers. There are going to be additional costs for the farming community over the next 12 months. The question is about how we need to plan for that. I know it changes day by day and I fully accept that. The challenges are there and, as the Minister said already, there is a substantial decrease in relation to incomes and consistency in production. That needs to be taken into account as well.
Deputy Burke's points are well made. I can assure him and the House of one thing, which is that there will be no complacency from me or my colleagues in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine in terms of the price pressures this has on all of our sectors. Our sectors are very vulnerable. As I pointed out in my earlier answer, we had a good year, by and large, in terms of commodity prices for our products last year, but it is the input costs that can really get people when something like this happens. We saw it with the illegal invasion of Ukraine by Russia back in 2022 and the knock-on impact that had on energy costs and input costs for farmers, which was significant.
Commissioner Hansen has put forward a support package on the fertiliser side. The fuel impact was real and immediate. The fertiliser impact was real too; it is just that there is a lag with that. In allowing for that impact and not knowing where we will be in the autumn as well, there will be an allocation of €15 million under the fertiliser support scheme from the Commission. I am working through the opportunities to try to add to that and how we would do that with a mechanism that would be real for farmers. I reassure the Deputy that I am in no way complacent and absolutely determined to support farmers through this very challenging time.
Another area of real concern is tillage, where there is a decrease in those involved. It is very intensive. This is again an issue with costs, especially for vegetables. For instance, about three years ago I heard of carrots being imported from Israel, yet we cannot produce them here in a cost-effective way while giving a return to the growers. One area we have let slip completely is vegetable production in this country. We are now reliant on vegetables being imported from outside of Ireland. Only a very small number of people are in it now. We need to look at how to keep them in it and increase the number of people who are producing vegetables here.
I was delighted to be able to introduce the tillage sustainability support scheme earlier this year. I have not been found wanting in standing up and supporting a tillage sector that has been under pressure in recent times. The same applies to horticulture. It is gravely concerning that the vegetable and fruit crops element has been greatly narrowed down. We have lost businesses in that sector such are the tight margins. In terms of that market here in Ireland and what Irish consumers consume, a key reason Government set up the Agri-Food Regulator, and why I gave additional funding and additional powers to that regulator last year, is to support it in ensuring equity in the relationship between the primary producer, the processor and the retailer. Any sharp practices on the retail side need to be examined and rooted out. In that sector in particular we see products being sold at very low prices, demeaning the value of Irish vegetables, which is not in any of our interests as an island nation.
Common Agricultural Policy
12. Deputy Louis O'Hara asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine for an update on the progress of CAP negotiations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [50992/26]
I ask the Minister to provide an update on the progress of CAP negotiations. The future of CAP will be critical for the farming sector and there are significant concerns about the European Commission's proposals.
I thank Deputy O'Hara for his question. Negotiations on the post-2027 Common Agricultural Policy have progressed since the European Commission published its proposals last year. As President of the Council of the European Union, Ireland is now building on the progress made under the Danish and Cypriot Presidencies. Our priority is to facilitate discussions on the remaining political and technical issues, on the CAP-specific provisions transferred into the CAP regulation from the national and regional partnership plan regulation, and on the appropriate balance that must be struck between maintaining the common nature of the Common Agricultural Policy and providing member states with sufficient flexibility to design and implement interventions that reflect their national farming systems and circumstances. That is a challenge we are going to have to try to navigate in these discussions.
It sounds nearly contradictory that on the one hand we want protect the commonality of the Common Agricultural Policy - our farmers have greatly benefited from being part of the Common Market of over 450 million people - but at the same time in designing a new scheme, if every measure is mandatory and if it is one-size-fits-all for every member state, it takes no account of the fact that we farm differently in Ireland than they do another member states, and we need that flexibility. I have been warned to be careful about how much flexibility I ask for because I might just get it and then have to own every decision. However, I would prefer that to having a system where every rule is the same for us as it is in Slovenia, France, Spain or Italy because we farm differently. We have to strike that balance.
To support this work, Ireland is engaging bilaterally with all member states to better understand their priorities, identify the issues that are of greatest concern to them and clarify areas of the legislative proposals where further work is required. We have also invited member states to submit written comments on the legislative proposals. This engagement will inform the preparation of Presidency compromise texts, with the aim of building consensus, resolving outstanding issues and advancing negotiations.
Our objective is to advance negotiations towards a partial general approach on the CAP regulation, which essentially means to agree all elements that do not have a financial or budgetary component that is still to be resolved by the negotiations on the post-2027 EU budget, which will be finalised at Head of State and Government level in the European Commission.
There are significant concerns about the reform that is being proposed to have CAP sit alongside a range of other policy areas. In particular under the Commission's proposal, CAP funding for Ireland would be cut by over 20%. This would mean our indicative CAP allocation reducing by €2.5 billion, endangering the delivery of many payment schemes which family farms depend on. Of course, this comes at a time when farmers are facing higher input costs, increased volatility, rising obligations and increased competition from low-standard imports, including from the Mercosur countries. We need the Government to be categorical in its opposition to cuts. Ireland's Presidency of the EU Council must be used as an opportunity to set the agenda that threats to CAP funding will not be accepted. Will the Minister outline what actions he will take to oppose the Commission's proposals and ensure that CAP funding is protected?
What is fairly clear from all utterances in the 17-odd months I have been in this job is my strong desire to protect the CAP budget, building alliances with member state colleagues in the AGRIFISH Council but also here in government and at Cabinet, articulating exactly why the CAP is so important to us. Ireland is a net contributor to the EU; we pay in more than we get back. That is something we should be proud of as a nation. We took the structural funds in the early years of being members of the EEC and we built an economy, a country and a society here that can be prosperous enough for us to be a net contributor. It is something we should be proud of. Those in certain other member states tell me they strive for that and look forward to the day their economies have such success that that is where they are at. We obviously want to maximise our return from being members of the European Union. There are huge benefits from being a member of that Common Market with over 450 million people.
On the financial return, 75% of our receipts come back through the CAP. This is not just a matter for us here discussing agriculture and for people in rural areas. This matters to the whole economy because if we see a reduction in CAP, it will reduce the amount of money available to come back to the economy from Europe.
Absolutely, and that is why it is critical we get a fair allocation. In particular, the future of CAP will have a significant influence on how EU member states can support young farmers. Last year, the Department of agriculture published a report from the commission on generational renewal in farming. Have any actions have taken since the publication of those recommendations? I will focus on two recommendations: the introduction of the young farmer establishment payment and a generational renewal payment of up to €25,000 for older farmers. Both those recommendations would have a significant effect in encouraging more young people to become involved in farming. They provide an incentive for families to create succession plans. I ask the Minister for an update on any actions he has taken to progress these recommendations and more generally in terms of supporting younger farmers.
It is important to point out that we are talking about the Commission's proposals. Commissioner Hansen put forward the Commission's position last year as to how he would like to see the next CAP going. He has a lot of recommendations in that. My job, as part of the Presidency, is to progress the Council's position on the AGRIFISH Council for next six months. The Council is the 27 ministers for agriculture and fisheries across the EU and we will progress what our agreed position is. Our goal is to get a partial general approach agreed - the bits that do not involve the budget. If we do not have the budget agreed globally, we cannot agree the budget elements in that. However, if we have a partial general approach, we have a fair set on what the Council of Ministers say their proposals should be.
We have had the discussion on pension proposals and generation renewal. That was looking to mandatorily take the single farm payment from farmers who receive the State pension. It is not an issue for France because France does not pay it to them already. It is a huge issue for us because we have many farmers who do not have an identified successor and we would be taking a single farm payment from them. That has been moved from being mandatory. Our position is that we are going to have that as a voluntary position to be offered but not mandatory.
Greyhound Industry
13. Deputy Shónagh Ní Raghallaigh asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will consider decoupling funding for greyhound and horseracing industries; if he will commission a report on the economic viability of the greyhound racing industry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [52289/26]
I thank Deputy Ní Raghallaigh for being in for agriculture questions today. It is great to see her here for this.
A very important pillar of Government policy is to ensure the horse and greyhound racing industries achieve their maximum potential, and in so doing, contribute to economic and social development over a wide geographic distribution. The Deputy is well aware that our own constituency of Kildare South benefits greatly from employment levels and economic activity in this regard.
Government funding, in addition to supporting these key industries, presents an excellent opportunity to yield a high return for its investment, leading to a flow of income right through the economy, thereby providing widespread benefits for our society. For the horse and greyhound fund, this is economic activity that generally tends to happen in rural areas where there are not the same other employment opportunities as there are in the larger cities and beyond. The horse and greyhound racing industries, via Horse Racing Ireland, HRI, and Rásaíocht Con Éireann, RCE, receive financial support from the State through the Horse and Greyhound Racing Fund. In budget 2026, €99.1 million was allocated to the fund, of which €79.3 million will be allocated to HRI and €19.8 million to RCE. The allocation is subject to Oireachtas approval and is split 80:20 between HRI and RCE, respectively, as set out under section 12(6) of the Horse and Greyhound Racing Act 2001. I have no plans to introduce legislation to provide a separate Exchequer funding mechanism for HRI and RCE and the industries they support.
An independent review of my Department's governance of the fund, which included consideration of the efficacy of the fund in ensuring the highest standards of greyhound and equine welfare, has now been completed and a copy of the final report has been sent to the public accounts committee. One of the report’s key recommendations is to increase over the medium term the share of the fund ringfenced for welfare purposes. My Department will work with the bodies to implement this and other recommendations contained in the report over the coming months. A copy of the report is available on my Department’s website, under review of governance of horse and greyhound racing fund Ireland.
In July 2021, Jim Power Economics produced a report on the economic and financial significance of the Irish greyhound racing industry, which was also commissioned by RCE.
Public funding should be earned through transparency, and given the evidence on welfare, declining attendance and serious questions about the industry's economic case, that transparency is clearly lacking. The figures repeatedly cited by Government that greyhound racing contributes €132 million annually are at best unclear, and at worst, misleading. The figure includes hare coursing, which Government states is now said to account for €70 million. Presenting them together creates confusion and inflates the value of the greyhound industry itself. We need clarity. What does the greyhound racing industry bring in on its own, what does it actually contribute, what does it cost the State each year and how exactly are those figures being calculated?
The lack of transparency is mirrored in welfare outcomes. Of the 12,766 greyhounds born between 2021 and 2024 that are no longer racing or trialling and remain on this island, 66% of those are dead and only 22% have been rehomed. For every dog homed, three are dead. There is also the hidden cost of the volunteers across this State that are rescuing and rehoming these dogs. How many thousands of unpaid hours is this, and where is that accounted for?
I thank the Deputy. As regards the economic and employment impact and benefit of the greyhound racing industry, this is outlined in the economic and financial significance of the Irish greyhound racing industry report.
I concur on the importance of care and welfare. A strong commitment to improve animal welfare in the greyhound racing industry is set out in the programme for Government, which requires Rásaíocht Con Éireann to continue to provide financial support for the Irish Retired Greyhound Trust, IRGT, and to contribute to rehoming greyhounds. Since 2020, my Department has ringfenced 10% of the fund allocation to RCE for welfare, including integrity. A key priority of the board of RCE is the continued expansion of the welfare and care initiatives, which include a range of measures. In its approved budget for 2026, RCE allocated €5.6 million to regulatory care and welfare expenditure. The RCE allocation to traceability, care and welfare matters for quarter 1 of 2026, was €1.1 million.
We have heard over and over about where the funding is going, the measures in place and the traceability system but I would like to focus on whether the level of public spending is justified by clear independent evidence. At present, I do not see that is, with over €20 million allocated each year on the basis of unclear figures and an economic case that does not stand up to proper scrutiny.
The Minister mentioned the Jim Power report. That report is now outdated and methodologically flawed, which only reinforces the concern. The problem is compounded by the fact greyhound racing figures are embedded within the wider horse racing structure, making genuine scrutiny difficult. At a time when the public expects strong governance and real transparency, I do not feel this is good enough. It comes down to the very straightforward point that if the funding is justified, how can we prove it? Will the Aire commit to commissioning an independent report on the true cost and value of this industry?
The Deputy answered her own question in a way at the start by saying we have heard all these things about traceability and beyond. I can outline what is there, the fact we have undertaken a review of the fund and how it is done. That report is there for all to be seen.
Rásaíocht Con Éireann operates a range of welfare initiatives to ensure the high standards of greyhound welfare are maintained within the industry. These initiatives include greyhound care centres, which provide high quality accommodation and training to help greyhounds to adapt to a range of different home environments and foster care centres, which provide care and welfare for retired greyhounds awaiting transportation to their forever homes in the United States or other locations. Foster care centres are also used where RCE forms the view that the care and welfare of greyhounds in a person's control is not of the required standard. We also have a traceability system, the RCETS, which is operational and provides traceability for all microchipped racing greyhounds from 1 January 2021, together with all active greyhounds in the racing management system. Data from the RCETS at the end of quarter 1 of 2026 indicated a total of 64,486 greyhounds were subject to traceability. This data is constantly being updated and captured.
Hospital Waiting Lists
91. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Health if children who are private patients have been prioritised over public patients for surgery in our public hospitals; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [52178/26]
The Minister has said she believes in equality for every baby born in our public maternity hospitals and I absolutely agree. However, the EY report into CHI shows that children whose parents can afford to go private are being prioritised for essential surgery in our public hospitals. Surely the same equality should apply to children as well.
I was very concerned about this and specifically about the management of waiting lists, particularly for spinal surgeries. Because of that, along with the former HSE CEO, I undertook an audit into equity of access and waiting list management in CHI. Recognising the challenges families have faced regarding paediatric services, we also undertook a separate qualitative piece of work to try to capture their experiences away from the strict terms of the counting audit and to ensure their voices inform the development of services. The audit took much longer than I wanted it to and much longer than anticipated - I was correctly questioned about that in the House - but that time was essential to ensure that the findings, conclusions and overall report were accurate and robust. The report found no clear evidence of inequity between public and private patients, but it did outline important findings in governance, including recurring delays against clinical recommended timeframes and inconsistent documentation in relation to waiting list management, neither of which is acceptable.
Importantly, the patient and family feedback revealed dissatisfaction with waiting list management with significant emotional and health impacts, although it did not need revealing to anybody here as we were already aware. These impacts was not just for the children but also for the parents. Parents and families want to be informed, involved and treated with empathy and respect. Those findings were capable of being anticipated - I would not have initiated the report had we not had shared concerns - but nevertheless they are disappointing. We need to provide a better experience for children and their families. I have met with the HSE and CHI and I am more satisfied than I would have been 12 months ago that there is a different attitude in senior management in CHI in its responsiveness and care around this. I am not saying everything situation is perfect - I certainly would not say that - but I can see a real change in the reaction and response of senior CHI management to this audit and qualitative report, which I think is important.
I thought there was some incredible spin, and some sections of the media absolutely fell for it, suggesting that this report proves there is no evidence of inequity in access. The Minister has echoed that. That is the first finding, but the full sentence states, "No evidence of inequity ... was identified; however, this conclusion is constrained by significant limitations in data availability, classification, and sample size." It is essentially exploiting perhaps deliberately poor record keeping, to claim that preferential access cannot be proved, but it does not change the fact that preferential access was found in the report. It is there in black and white on page 109 in the context of urology. Urology consultant 2 had 20 public patients with an average wait time of 12.4 months and ten private patients with an average wait time of 1.84 months. The other consultants are not as bad but there is a discrepancy between private and public. The same applies when you go into orthopaedics. Consultant 6 has 12 public patients with an average waiting time of 1.7 months and three private patients with average waiting times of zero. There are other examples.
I reject the question of trying to present this in any particular way. I commissioned the audit because of my concerns about this. There is no question but that I was uncomfortable with what was being found overall, but specifically when I drill into those a bit more there is not a systemic problem I can see. What I did see and what I was concerned about was that less complex procedures were being too easily moved to private facilities, resulting in the more complex procedures remaining. I think what the Deputy describes with those figures reflects some of that. There is a bigger complexity than what he has presented.
This is why I initiated it. This was my concern. My concern in particular was that this was more endemic than the report ultimately gives credit for. The Deputy is right that there is a limitation in data, but there is no question but that this audit was done with the best of intent and in good faith. We see more real experiences in the qualitative piece that Lily Collison did. That was an important piece of work that really speaks to the experience children had. It is improving but is not perfect.
There is often an attempt to suggest that discrimination between private and public patients does not have an impact on safety or patient care. That happened in the debate on the Rotunda. The Minister was involved and was on the correct side of that debate. I again quote the report, which states, "For Spinal patients, only 41% (9 out of 22) were treated within the Clinical Recommended Timeframes (CRTs), meaning 59% faced delays, sometimes for several months." In terms of urology, "Of the 73 patients reviewed, 30 (41%) were treated outside the Clinical Recommended Timeframes." The median delay was 152 days. There was one case where a child waited seven years for routine surgery. The report points out that "children may wait longer than clinically recommended for assessment, investigation or treatment, with potential consequences for clinical outcomes, disease progression, and quality of life." Does the Minister agree that just as private healthcare has no place in our public maternity hospitals, it similarly has no place in CHI? We should not be building private suites in the national children’s hospital. We should not be building inequality into our health system.
Yes, I am a firm supporter of the public system. There is no question about that. Some 71% of our consultants in CHI are on the public-only consultant contract. However, there is also a contractual requirement to continue to provide private space for those old, type B contract holders. It is anticipated that fewer than half of the eight planned consultancy rooms will have any private clinics. The rest of the rooms are dedicated for public clinics. More important, they will be private clinics winding down over time and that will all move to public because only be public consultants will be hired in. We are still committed to the rule of law and to upholding contracts. If I say contracts have to be upheld, I have to uphold them on the other side and we have to make that space, as the Deputy is aware. We have a very strong commitment to public service. I do not believe there is space for private work in the same way. I am in agreement with the Deputy, but there are still contract holders who have a contractual entitlement to a certain number of private rooms. I see in the new hospital that will be wound down and down, as we get from 71% to 80% and 85%. That will happen over time.
92. Deputy Paula Butterly asked the Minister for Health the number of patients awaiting elective surgery at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, broken down by specialty and waiting time bands; the measures being taken to reduce these waiting lists; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [52249/26]
At a time when many waiting lists have been impacted by the ongoing trend of higher demand and increased referrals, it is wonderful to be able to report some positive progress. In Our Lady of Lourdes, at the end of May, 939 patients were waiting for an inpatient day case procedure, which is a decrease of 17% when compared with May 2025 and a 14% decrease from the start of January.
More importantly again, 90% of those patients were waiting twelve months or less and the number waiting over 12 months has decreased by 46% since May last year. That is a sign of real activity in the hospital. I am very pleased with it and congratulate the manager, Priya, for her excellent work on that and in managing urgent and emergency care as well. Some 47% of patients in Our Lady of Lourdes are waiting within the Sláintecare target of 12 weeks. The interim target in the national service plan and waiting time action plan is 50%, so we really are getting there in Drogheda.
Significant improvements can also be seen in individual specialities. Gynaecology inpatient day cases are down 25% on May last year and 18% since January of this year. Ear, nose and throat lists have decreased by 48% since last year and 14% since January. Against a trend of rising referrals and increased demands, waiting list reductions of that kind are very significant. Overall elective surgery increased by 19% to the end of May 2026, which is positive. I have to sit that against continued good management of its emergency department and patient demand overall. You cannot bring patients into an unsafe hospitals. Drogheda is not doing that and it is still getting the lists down. With two slots per fortnight in the new surgical hub in Swords, I expect those figures to further improve in Our Lady of Lourdes and across the Dublin and north-east region as the hub gets up to speed. I intend to monitor the activity in the surgical hub and the corresponding activity in the theatres in the original hospital to make sure activity is being increased everywhere.
I thank the Minister for that information and join her in congratulating the Lourdes hospital for getting on top of the issue of waiting lists and for the good work all the staff are doing, led by the new general manager. It goes to show that when there is good management, will and the ability to reduce waiting lists, we can make progress. As the Minister pointed out, they are doing nearly 20% more elective surgeries than last year but the level of staffing is the same. While this is a great success story, I wonder if it is sustainable in the long term. It shows two things clearly. First, they are very efficient but, second, the need in the region is significantly higher than the current model accounts for. Lourdes hospital is a model 3, yet it is performing as if it were a model 4 hospital.
Yes, I know. It really is excellent. I am not saying everything and every experience are perfect but it is doing enormously well. It is not just in terms of elective surgery; it has also increased its outpatient capacity by 23% and is at 100% of its endoscopy priority 1 target. That is significant activity, good management of a hospital and an enormous progression for that hospital on 18 months ago, or maybe slightly more, when it was in a different situation.
More staff have gone into the surgical hub for the region and that benefits everybody. About half of the staff in the surgical hub will be dedicated to the hub and different hospitals will move in with their own teams. We have organised it such that, over a two-week period, access to the hub will be shared between Beaumont, the Mater, Our Lady of Lourdes, Cavan-Monaghan, Connolly - all of the hospitals in the region - to ensure equity of access for everybody there. The increase in staff for the hub is an increase in staff for everybody because it can take scheduled activity away from Drogheda.
Our Lady of Lourdes serves about 360,000 people in its catchment area at the moment and I believe that is growing rapidly. Going back to the idea that it is effectively a model 4 hospital while being classed as model 3, there is a case for looking at and expanding the services in Our Lady of Lourdes and making it a model 4 hospital. Looking at a map of where model 4 hospitals are in the country, we have them in Dublin, Cork, Galway, Limerick, Waterford, and Kilkenny for some services. There is a gap in the north east, considering the catchment of 360,000 people and growing. We are in a position to expand on those services. Staff and management are proving they are up to the task. Will the Minister consider this?
I have asked the regional executive officer, Sara Long, and the regional clinical director, Eamon Dolan, to do a piece of work that considers the whole region. The region is performing exceptionally well in the overall management of demand, although there is more in the community that needs to happen. In that region there is Beaumont, which is a neurology specialist centre; the Mater, which is a cardiac specialist centre; Connolly, which is a position for the future for elective work; the hub; and Drogheda. There is an interesting matrix of hospitals and division of work and specialities there. I have asked them to come up with what the future of the region looks like. How do we best allocate resources? How do we think about where services should be delivered and the concentration of specialist centres? It is a region that is already demonstrating that. As we move forward with the elective hospital in Connolly, we have done the preliminary work of putting in the high-dependency unit beds. It is really interesting. I have asked them to think about the region in an ambitious way and come back to me with a plan for the future. Perhaps a model 4 is possible. I do not know. Let us see what Eamon and Sara come back with.
Health Services Staff
93. Deputy David Cullinane asked the Minister for Health her plans to increase clinical training capacity across health professions in the south east; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [52161/26]
Workforce planning is an important component of planning for health services. This question is about the south east. What additional clinical training capacity is being looked at for the coming years across the south east?
I thank the Deputy. The Government is investing €28.5 million to expand healthcare education and training nationally, supporting over 1,100 additional training places by 2028. That includes 461 additional health and social care professions, HSCP, places across nine priority disciplines. Further expansion opportunities are being considered through the Higher Education Authority's expressions of interest process, informed by workforce needs, regional demand and clinical placement capacity.
Clinical placement opportunities are fundamental to development of the future workforce. We are trying very hard to ensure that happens in community settings as well as acute settings, recognising that is where we want people to be able to work. We are also targeting the recruitment of Irish-trained graduates into permanent roles but, although I raised this with the HSE in September and October, we are not in a place I am comfortable with in relation to that for this year. I expect recruitment to be faster and to be co-ordinated with the terms our HSCPs and other students have. It is very obvious they are about to graduate at this time of year. There is a better way of organising that than is currently happening.
In relation to the Deputy’s region, the HSE Dublin and South East region conducted entry-level HSCP recruitment campaigns in 2026 to support the recruitment of newly qualified graduates. In 2025, 33 HSCP graduates were recruited into the region: six occupational therapy, ten physiotherapy, five speech and language, six social work and six dietetics. Recruitment of the 2026 graduate cohort is progressing. Three occupational therapy graduates have accepted employment offers to date. This is expected to increase as graduates complete the CORU registration process which comes after their graduation. Recruitment for other disciplines is ongoing.
Recruitment is important and every additional staff member recruited in acute primary or community settings in the health service is to be welcomed. My question, though, was on increasing clinical training capacity. I know that also falls under the Minister for higher education.
I think the Minister, Deputy Carroll MacNeill, was in the Chamber this week when I raised issues in relation to South East Technological University, SETU. It has plans for a new pharmaceutical, a new veterinary and a new one health building. All of that, if funded, will be important for more graduates, research and development. I spoke to the manager of the hospital a number of times. The glassworks site in Waterford is iconic because it is the former home of Waterford Crystal in Kilbarry. Now it provides opportunities to enhance SETU. I know from talking to the local hospital manager that they see the potential for a new medical school. I think I raised this with the Minister in the Oireachtas health committee in the past. I know it straddles other Departments but there is an excitement about the site that can be realised. It could be a good opportunity to increase training capacity for doctors and other healthcare professionals if it were supported.
I thank Deputy Cullinane. That does sound like a plan of work but I am afraid it is a plan of work for my excellent colleague, the Minister, Deputy Lawless, and the Department of higher education. I do not wish to step across him but I can say in relation to clinical placements and training that I have met the HSE. The Minister, Deputy Lawless, and I have been working on this together, with some frustration that the placements have been too limited to acute settings and they need to be in community settings . We are trying to work on this, although I am still not satisfied it is happening at the scale that is necessary.
I am glad Deputy Cullinane mentioned the hospital. We had a very good week this week with the commencement of 24-7 cardiac care in Waterford and I thank Ben O'Sullivan for all of the work he has done to get ready for it. I know another two consultants are yet to come into post and everyone else did extra work to make sure we met the deadline we set of 6 July. This is very good news. Of course, we will have our surgical hub by the end of the year. As to the medical school, I do not wish to step across my colleague, Deputy Lawless, on that, if Deputy Cullinane will forgive me.
Obviously, there has to be an element of cross-departmental and cross-ministerial work on workforce planning. The health service cannot recruit quickly enough if we are not training and training capacity is very important. I imagine a lot of collaborative work is being done between the Ministers and the Departments. What I am saying is that I will raise this with the Minister for higher education-----
Yes, and I will too.
-----but I am raising it with the Minister for Health also. We could also have more training capacity in the south east and get the benefit from SETU and its plans. The hospital manager, whom the Minister has praised for other matters, sees this as an exciting opportunity.
The 24-7 cardiology care was a big day for Waterford and is a big step forward for health in the south east. I commend the Minister on the fact she ensured this happened. There was a campaign over a long number of years. I also commend people in Waterford and the south east, including in Carlow, Kilkenny, Wexford and Tipperary, who came out in big numbers on a number of occasions to demand equality of access. The fact it is now there is good news for everybody in the south east.
I thank Deputy Cullinane and I acknowledge all of the people involved. The impact of it means people can rest easier knowing they will have the care they need at any time they need it. Of course I will discuss it with the Minister, Deputy Lawless, and of course it is collaborative. The more I think about the co-location of hospitals and medical schools, what we are trying to do in medical devices and pharmaceuticals, and the opportunity for research and innovation, it is driving health not just for the benefit of patients but to make sure it is a driver for the economy as well. We have such an opportunity and we have such a talented workforce. We have such a medical clinical profession that is dedicated to research and innovation. All of these opportunities present and I am so glad Deputy Cullinane has raised SETU in this context as well.
Nursing Homes
94. Deputy Marie Sherlock asked the Minister for Health the action she is taking to address the dearth of nursing home beds and increase the number of step-down facilities in response to the crisis in delayed transfers of care in our acute hospital system; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [52270/26]
My question relates to delayed transfers of care and nursing home capacity. I understand that yesterday marked the highest number of delayed transfers of care across our acute hospitals in the year to date, with 555 patients who should have been discharged and were not. This marks 86 continuous days of over 500 delayed transfers of care in our hospitals. For the first four months of this year, almost 50% of those waiting to leave hospital were waiting for a nursing home place. What is the response to this crisis?
I thank Deputy Sherlock, who is quite right to highlight delayed transfer of care, DTOC. As she said, it has been well over 500 variously for the last period, which is essentially a hospital. This is why the use of every bed is so very important. Deputy Sherlock is correct to identify nursing home beds, community nursing units and all of the appropriate step-down facilities that are, can and should be in the system to make sure we do not have people staying in acute hospitals longer than is necessary.
In this context, the national service plan commits to the delivery of 352 community beds in residential settings for older people in this period. The community nursing unit capital programme is ongoing and will have 90 public community nursing units and community hospital beds refurbished or replaced so they meet all of the regulatory requirements. It was a big problem for us that we had beds that were closed because of HIQA standards. This is correct because we have to bring them up to standard but it is a body of work to do this. The public-private partnership project will deliver 528 residential care beds on seven sites in 2026. The programme for Government commits to building more public nursing home beds, including dementia-specific provision, which is a huge issue in the delayed transfer of care.
We are developing a new long-term residential care additional capacity plan, which will be published in the later part of this year. There is a complexity to many of the DTOCs. There is an increase in complexity, particularly on the dementia side. There are other cases where there is a clear pathway out of hospital. I have highlighted the south west a number of times because of my frustration with the use and non-use of Mallow. There are patients in hospital today who could be discharged to virtual beds that are not being used. I do not need to conflate these different issues but it speaks to efficiency and the management of every bed and seeing every bed as being so very important.
The average waiting time in DTOC is 24.8 days across all acute hospitals and in the midlands and north-east Dublin it is more than 30 days. This is a huge cause for alarm in terms of risk to the patients themselves and their prospects of recovery but also the cost to the hospital. We know that nursing home demand is the biggest driver of this, with more than 1,500 people waiting for a nursing home space, but I have to ask about the urgency with regard to the Government's response. In 2022, ESRI research identified that we would need somewhere between 54,000 and 60,000 nursing home beds. We had 33,000 beds back in 2022. We have gone backwards and in 2025 we had fewer beds at 32,408. We are not even running to stand still. I am glad to hear a capacity expansion plan will be put in place but, like the acute hospital expansion plan, it has been sitting there for a number of years and I am not hearing urgency with regard to this problem.
Going back a couple of days, on 6 July there were 526 delayed transfers of care. Of these, 68 involved legal complexity, 35 involved basic housing needs, 90 involved very complex clinical needs, 61 were about access to rehab facilities of various kinds, home support packages were involved in 42 cases, residential care in 217 cases and non-compliance in 13 cases. It is not just about nursing home support; it is also about support at home. For example, it is important to mention the expansion of the enhanced community care teams, which are the multidisciplinary teams supporting earlier discharge from hospital closer to home. There is also extended service availability in the evenings and at weekends, including discharge planning, community supports and decision makers addressing avoidable non-clinical delays to discharge where it is possible.
I have mentioned the virtual wards. I do not suggest that everybody would move onto a virtual ward but there are people for whom it is clinically appropriate to do so. Crucially, the SAFER patient flow bundle and the plan for every patient are now in place across most sites, supported by seven-day and 14-day length-of-stay reviews.
Obviously, there are a whole range of issues as to why people do not leave hospital. Almost 70% of the cases relate to a need for residential care or complex care such as dementia. The big issue is the cost. We know the HSE is running a significant deficit at the moment. It will not even make the savings it is supposed to make at the end of this year. We know the cost of an acute daybed is about €1,300, which is almost five times the cost of a community nursing unit bed. This has a very real financial implication for hospitals. The question being asked of me is about the tolerance and particularly the very long average waiting times across our acute hospitals. We need to see a much greater urgency with regard to a nursing home capacity plan, which would be a public nursing home capacity plan.
I agree with Deputy Sherlock. I recall speaking with one of the hospital managers where this is a most acute issue with regard to what is going on, what the experience is and what conversations are happening. Again, there is a question of dementia and advanced decision-making. Some of these issues are very complex and that is its own bundle. As Deputy Sherlock said, there is also the need to access nursing homes and public nursing home support. Within this, it is important to say we will not be able to facilitate every request for every patient to be in the exact location they need to be. There are some questions. I do not wish to overstate it or amplify it but I am saying we will be able to provide supports but we will not be able to provide the perfect support for every person either. A measure of flexibility will have to come into that too.
There are also cases, and again it is hospital managers describing this to me, where families do not want to have a particular outcome and the hospital needs to move the patient, who is no longer an acute model 4 hospital patient but requires a different type of care.
It is important that everybody understands that model 4 beds are for the most acutely unwell and people cannot stay.
Hospital Facilities
95. Deputy Shay Brennan asked the Minister for Health for an update on the plan to increase capacity by between 4,000 and 4,500 new and refurbished inpatient hospital beds across the country; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [48058/26]
I ask the Minister for an update on the plan to increase the capacity of inpatient beds by 4,000 or 4,500 across the country and if she will make a statement on the matter. We know we currently have 12,000 public beds and 2,500 private beds, which is about 2.9 beds per thousand of the population. We also know that the ESRI has predicted a need for a 40% increase in inpatient beds by 2040 and that the plan in 2024 was to provide 3,352 new beds.
I thank the Deputy. The programme for Government, as the Deputy said, sets out a commitment to increase bed capacity by between 4,000 and 4,500 new and refurbished inpatient hospital beds across the country. This will be achieved through a regionally balanced capacity expansion plan. The substantially enhanced national development plan, NDP, provision for the health sector of €9.25 billion will support the delivery of those beds.
To give the Deputy a much more specific update, 292 new acute inpatient beds have now opened across the country since the programme for Government was agreed, between January 2025 and June 2026, including 128 beds in University Hospital Limerick, 18 beds in Cork University Hospital, 15 beds in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda, 20 beds in Beaumont Hospital and 24 beds in Mallow General Hospital. The HSE anticipates opening 108 more new beds over the course of quarter 3 and quarter 4 of 2026 and quarter 1 of 2027.
Some 259 inpatient beds are currently under construction, including 97 beds at Wexford General Hospital, 42 beds at Sligo University Hospital and 30 beds in University Hospital Kerry. It is intended to open those beds as soon as possible once constructed. In fact, as the Deputy is aware, we are recruiting ahead of the beds being delivered to make sure the staff are there. A further 185 beds are at tender stage and another 152 beds are now at the detailed design stage. We are now seeing this bed-by-bed, significant pipeline of projects progressing through earlier stages of planning, design and approvals. Rather than giving the Deputy broad figures, I thought I would be very specific as to the progress being achieved.
I thank the Minister very much. We had the excellent Professor Rose Anne Kenny, co-ordinator of The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing, TILDA, in recently with the health committee. She pointed out the demographic challenge we are facing in health. We are going to have 1 million people over the age of 65 by 2030 and a doubling of the number of those aged over 65 by 2057, to 1.6 million people. We have already seen this trend happening from 2013, with an increase from 569,000 to 806,000.
I bring these figures up because this challenge is looming. Obviously, beds are not a silver bullet, but they are going to be part of the overall way we manage health in future. We will probably start with proper screening programmes at the age of 50, with the whole population moving into better-resourced primary care, step-down beds and rehabilitation beds. I also support Deputy Seán Kyne’s call for the Minister to press for the 300 additional beds in UHG. This is a level 4 hospital operating with level 3 capacity.
I thank the Deputy. He will not hear any complaint from me about people pressing me to deliver more health infrastructure or to spend more capital moneys. I am doing my very best to spend my entire capital allocation as quickly as possible and I run the risk of spending other people’s capital allocation, if I can be so lucky or so bold. This is because, as the Deputy said, this infrastructure investment is essential for the future.
While I do not wish to be flippant about it and, of course, we must achieve value for money and we must take the correct decisions through the right processes, we really have to aggressively spend on health infrastructure in the right way to make sure we are going to meet the very excellent challenge of having not just a growing population but an ageing population. Some of my European health colleagues do not have that same wonderful situation. Nevertheless, it creates a significant infrastructure challenge for us for the future.
I accept that answer and I thank the Minister very much for that update. It is important because people sometimes equate healthcare with hospital beds, but that is not reality. In isolation, beds cannot provide for the healthcare needs of the public. We will never develop enough capacity in beds unless we change the way we manage healthcare, both in preventative and in primary care. We really do have to step up the number of rehabilitation beds, step-down beds, home care packages, primary care therapies and nursing home beds in the community. We also need to think more strategically about how we manage the health of the population from the age of 50 onwards. Professor Rose Anne Kenny made that very point to the health committee. Deputy Sherlock already pointed out this challenge because we both listened to Professor Kenny's excellent presentation at the health committee last week.
I agree, particularly concerning rehab beds, step-down beds and neurorehab beds. I was in Blarney with Deputy Colm Burke to look at the neurorehab step-down beds in Mercy University Hospital. It was quite creatively done. It was a former hotel on a golf course that was acquired and redesigned for this purpose.
We really are trying to be imaginative and innovative about where we can acquire space to be able to provide beds of every kind. I was in Tallaght University Hospital yesterday, where existing space has been found within the hospital to be repurposed for beds. I have been in hospitals where there are plans to turn records rooms, where patient records have been stored, into beds. Hospital managers are being creative where they can be at the moment, but none of those things are going to equate to the scale of the number of beds we need. We need this significant capital programme, which I hope I have outlined. I do really recognise the challenge.
EU Directives
96. Deputy Shane Moynihan asked the Minister for Health the steps her Department is taking to address delays in processing reimbursement applications submitted under the cross-border directive; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [52045/26]
98. Deputy Shane Moynihan asked the Minister for Health whether reimbursement under the Cross-Border Directive will include interest costs incurred on bank loans or credit facilities used by patients to fund upfront medical treatment abroad, particularly in circumstances where reimbursement delays significantly exceed indicative processing timelines; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [52044/26]
These questions are to ask the Minister for Health what steps her Department is taking to address the delays in processing reimbursement applications submitted under the cross-border directive. Will reimbursement under the cross-border directive include interest costs incurred on bank loans or credit facilities used by patients to fund upfront medical treatment abroad, particularly in those circumstances where the reimbursement delays significantly exceed indicative processing timelines?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 96 and 98 together.
The cross-border directive allows public patients to access healthcare, which they would have been entitled to access in the public healthcare service in Ireland, in another EU or EEA country. As the Deputy is aware, patients pay upfront for the treatment and are reimbursed upon their return to Ireland. We want to support patients in this way and I do not want them to have additional administrative or any form of burden because of the operation of this scheme.
The HSE is responsible for the operation of the cross-border directive and has a dedicated office for that purpose. There has been continued growth in use of the scheme. The HSE tells me that this has placed additional demands on the HSE cross-border directive, CBD, office and given rise to a build-up of applications. The increased activity is evidenced by the number of treatments reimbursed increasing by approximately 75% between 2020 and 2024.
Nevertheless, it is important this service operates in a responsive way and that reimbursement applications are processed within a reasonable timeframe. The HSE advises that it usually aims to repay patients within 30 days of receipt of all completed documents. However, the HSE also advises that it is currently processing applications received in mid-January 2026. A six-month delay for reimbursement is absolutely unacceptable. It is not fair to patients to have an additional financial burden placed on them that is occasioned simply because of administrative delay, notwithstanding the increase in applications.
Accordingly, the HSE has advised my Department that additional resources are being assigned to manage this increase in demand with the aim of restoring processing times back to expected and more acceptable levels. I have, however, set the HSE a very specific target of getting back to the 30-day target by the end of 2026. It will need to sort this issue out between now and then and get back to that 30-day target. It is not reasonable to put administrative stress, financial stress or other burdens on people in addition to their healthcare issues.
As the Deputy knows, the reimbursement amount is the cost of the treatment in Ireland or the cost of it abroad, whichever is the lesser. Reimbursement is confined to the costs of the care itself and does not include any additional costs incurred by the patient. This is not the Deputy's question, however. His question is about the timeline, and I hope I have given him some confidence that this will be changed by the HSE.
I thank the Minister for that very comprehensive answer. I welcome her support and proactiveness in getting the HSE to commit to that timeline.
I have a few follow-up questions. This is around confidence-building. It is a very useful directive and gives us additional capacity in getting people the treatment they need. From my understanding of how the scheme operates, it centres on a small number of providers and hospitals because of the specific procedures that are there. As the Minister said, waiting six months for reimbursement is onerous, especially if it is an older relative or someone who has been waiting for a long time.
Could the Minister say a bit more about whether any consideration can be given to a situation where a family, not of substantial means, has had to take a loan to pay for the overall cost of the treatment and because they have not been able to repay that loan, or because the reimbursement has been delayed, this has led to interest being accrued on the credit facility they took?
Is the HSE considering providing alleviation for families who find themselves in those circumstances through, as the Minister said, no fault of their own? It is unacceptable they should have to wait that duration of time to receive the reimbursement due to them and they then have to pay an additional interest or credit charge on top of that. There is a question of fairness. I fully appreciate and am grateful to the Minister for driving the HSE to get back to a 30-day target by the end of 2026. How confident is the Minister that it will do that? Is it allocating additional staff? What exactly does additional resource look like? Will the HSE report to the Minister with an interim progress report before the end of the year to see how this is tracking? Has the HSE made any substantial progress in addressing that target in the meantime?
It is a good directive and scheme. From a political point of view, we are very supportive of this but it is also about making sure patients relying on it get the reimbursement they are due. As I am sure the Minister will agree, we do not want to cause more hardship to or place onerous pressure on people who may have been through a procedure or have had a loved one go through a procedure. Will the Minister share her thoughts on the staffing, her confidence that the HSE will reach the target and the refund of interest on credit facilities?
I cannot speak to the specific staff numbers. I generally find it is about process change as much as staff increases, so I think it is a measure of both. I will look for an interim report, probably in October, as to how the work is going. I made the point that it is possible to change processes. For example, this time last year, I gave the Medical Council a significant challenge to sort out its backlog of people applying to be doctors in this country. It was a patient safety issue not to have had them. By September, it had that done. These things can be done with a measure of focus, and I expect it to be done in this case.
In relation to the specific question about interest and bank loans, there is a difficulty with this. The reimbursement is limited to the eligible healthcare costs that would have been met by the public health service. There is no provision for the reimbursement of interest charges, borrowing costs or other consequential financial costs. Reimbursement under the cross-border directive is governed by European and national legislation. Reimbursement of additional costs is not envisaged by the directive because it was never expected people would be waiting in that period. I appreciate the unfairness point the Deputy made. That is why I am saying these delays are absolutely unacceptable and we need to get back but there is not provision in that scheme. We have no flexibility to change a European scheme of that kind in relation to additional costs beyond the healthcare costs.
I thank the Minister for her response, in particular on the process change. If possible, will the Minister tell us if there are particular processes the HSE has identified which it thinks could be changed to speed this up? I am always reluctant to say we need to throw more staff at a problem, especially when it is administrative, because, as the Minister said, more often than not a system change is needed or there are unnecessary barriers in processing which cause delays.
I fully accept the Minister's point that the directive is European legislation but the European legislation did not envisage it would take six months to reimburse an application. In that vein, is there any consideration that can be given internally for the HSE to look at what it might to do remediate and compensate the people who, through no fault of their own, are left to pay large amounts of interest they did not envisage when they took out the loans? That was not an expectation of the scheme when it was set up. It certainly was not the expectation of the patients when they applied for the scheme but, with all due respect to all involved, the HSE is the one at fault for the delay. There should be some indication or signal from it about how it might compensate or at least take account of the fact that the interest accrued or credit facilities people took have given rise to additional bank charges on the fees.
From a human point of view, families who have gone through the stress of having to travel abroad to get a procedure are expecting reimbursement. Six months down the line, they have not been reimbursed and are hit with extra interest or bank charges. This was not envisaged by the European legislation. I fully accept the point on flexibility and the parameters but given that this is a process issue related to the administering of this scheme, will the HSE look at compensating for or taking account of that in the reimbursement process?
I appreciate the point the Deputy is making but I am not going to make any commitments or policy on the floor of the House. I am also operating without information on the specific patients, the duration or the interest costs. I do not have any of that information but if the Deputy wants to speak to me about the matter privately, I will be happy to look at it. However, I will not make promises I cannot deliver as it would not be right for me to do so. I appreciate the Deputy's point and his reasoning.
Question No. 97 taken with Written Answers.
Question No. 98 taken with Question No. 96.
Healthcare Policy
99. Deputy Marie Sherlock asked the Minister for Health the reason the national lipoedema working group is proposing to exclude surgical intervention from its guidelines on the management of lipoedema; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [52269/26]
108. Deputy Maeve O'Connell asked the Minister for Health for an update regarding the work her Department has undertaken to improve access to care for people living with lipoedema. [47296/26]
My question concerns lipoedema. It is a condition experienced by an estimated 11% of women in this country. We understand a working group was set up in 2023 and was due to report in the second quarter of this year. We have not seen it yet. When will we see that report? I raise significant concern about the outcome of the report, in that the HSE has indicated it relates only to diagnosis and non-surgical management, when we understand surgery should be an important part of the care of these women.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 98 and 108 together.
I recognise that lipoedema is a chronic and often very painful condition, which can significantly affect physical health, mobility, quality of life and psychological well-being. It is frequently under-recognised or misdiagnosed. I am very aware of the distress many women experience in seeking recognition, diagnosis and appropriate support. Diagnosis remains challenging as there is no specific diagnostic test. It is based on clinical history and examination by an experienced clinician, with investigations used to exclude other conditions or contributing factors. There is currently no medication or cure as such that we are aware of. Management that appears to be the approach, requiring a holistic, multidisciplinary and person-centred approach.
In relation to surgery, the HSE's chief clinical officer has tasked the national clinical programme for plastic surgery with reviewing the evidence. I understand the clinical programme has provided its advice to the chief clinical officer for consideration. I would like to have the opportunity to discuss this with the chief clinical officer in greater detail. I have not had that opportunity in the context of the parliamentary questions and everything else going on. International research continues to evolve, including the LIPLEG trial in Germany examining whether liposuction can provide greater long-term improvements in pain and symptoms compared with complex decongestive therapy alone. That evidence will be important to inform any future updates to the guidance. A working group was established in 2023 to develop a standardised, evidence-based approach for health services but I really want to discuss the matter with the chief clinical officer, recognising the evolving evidence.
Many in the medical community with expertise in this area are of the view that specialised sparing liposuction surgery - there is big distinction from other types of cosmetic liposuction - is the only intervention that can directly address the pathological adipose tissue issues. Many women have to travel to Cyprus and other countries to access those surgical interventions. Serious consideration has to be given to that surgical intervention in Ireland. Some women who believe they have this condition are seeking liposuction in a setting not specific to lipoedema, which is very worrying. We need to make sure we can provide for these women in this country.
I take this opportunity to raise awareness about lipoedema. As Deputy Sherlock said, one in 11 women or girls has it. That is one member of your camogie or football team or two in your leaving certificate class, at least. That is how significant this is. I know the Minister is a huge advocate for women's healthcare. I joined her yesterday in Tallaght hospital for the national women's strategy. We really need to see a strategy and path forward for how we will raise awareness among the public and medical professionals, specifically for early diagnosis, which is so important for early treatment and in preventing this condition from becoming a more severe chronic disease. There are also psychological issues associated with chronic disease, in particular one like lipoedema, which is a physically debilitating and visual disease that women and young girls in particular are very sensitive to.
I thank both Deputies. It is wonderful that so many other Deputies have joined us to hear that lipoedema affects 11% of women. It is a serious chronic disease and, as with many other conditions for women, we have to think carefully about the research available. Yesterday, we launched the third iteration of the women's health action plan. In that we talk about so many conditions that present differently for women. For example, heart failure in women has different symptoms, has been under-researched and under-diagnosed and treatment outcomes have not been as good because of that.
We put €2 million in funding this year specifically into women's health research, precisely to identify areas that have been under-researched. Many colleagues here have talked about endometriosis. Lipoedema is just as important. It affects 10% or 11% of women and the impact on lymphedema - the crossover that can happen - is also a significant risk with serious health implications.
Women's health has been under-researched and under-diagnosed and there has been a bias in research against understanding women's health as something distinct, important and separate from health generally. We have seen that consistently in the research. It is important we take the opportunity to consider the most contemporary research on lipoedema and that it has the opportunity to feed in at every level. I will discuss it with the chief clinical officer to make sure we have all the best evidence about this condition.
Like the Deputies, I know women with lipoedema. There are many of them. Like the Deputies, I want to advocate loudly for women's health generally. I thank them for joining us at the women's health action plan launch yesterday. We must continue to advocate separately and differently against the bias that has existed against women's health and women's health research for so long. I thank Deputies Sherlock and O'Connell for raising the important issue of lipoedema in front of all Deputies today.
Is féidir teacht ar Cheisteanna Scríofa ar www.oireachtas.ie.
Written Answers are published on the Oireachtas website.