Mr. Paul O'Brien:

I thank the Chairman and committee members for inviting the Irish Farmers Association to address their meeting on this very important issue for farmers. I am joined by Ms Geraldine O'Sullivan, IFA senior policy executive.

The IFA welcomes the opportunity to outline its views and concerns regarding the development of greenways across rural Ireland and to highlight the serious implications these projects have for farm families, rural communities and the agricultural sector. The IFA's position is clear and constant: greenways should, wherever possible, be developed on public lands and not on privately owned farmland. This principle is aligned with the Government's Strategy for the Future Development of National and Regional Greenways of 2018, which states, "The preferred model for future Greenways is to use lands already in the undisputed ownership or control of the State, either through Government Agencies, Government Departments or Local Authorities." Unfortunately, this principle is not being upheld in practice. Many proposed greenway routes are being planned across privately owned farmland rather than public or State lands. This approach is deeply problematic and is causing significant anxiety and hardship for farm families, whose livelihoods depend on those lands. The impact of greenways cutting through a working farm can be severe, including disrupting normal operations; dividing holdings; creating safety risks; and undermining the long-term viability of farm enterprises.

The IFA is totally opposed to the use of compulsory purchase orders, CPOs, for greenway projects. Greenways are an amenity project, not essential public infrastructure, such as national roads or power lines. The code of practice for greenways agreed between the IFA and Transport Infrastructure Ireland clearly provides for voluntary land acquisition agreements as the appropriate mechanism for securing access when required. This approach ensures that projects proceed based on mutual agreement, respect for landowners and community consent, not compulsion.

Many of the proposed greenway routes, if implemented as planned, would sever and divide active farms. This is wholly unacceptable. Dividing a farm disrupts its physical layout, management and animal movement. It creates new and unnecessary biosecurity and safety challenges and may make some farms unviable. The severance of farmland cannot be justified for recreational projects and must be avoided in all cases.

It has been suggested by some local authorities that certain greenways would follow old or abandoned rail lines. However, in most cases, these lands have long since been reintegrated into active farm enterprises. In many areas, the original railway corridor has been incorporated into private holdings for decades and is now home to houses, yards and productive farmland. It is therefore misleading to suggest that these routes are available for public use or that they constitute abandoned infrastructure. In reality, they are essential to the day-to-day operation of family farms and cannot simply be reclaimed without causing major disruption and loss.

Greenways can only succeed where there is genuine community support. Farmers are key members of rural communities and have a long and positive history of co-operation, including facilitating public access on permitted walks throughout the country.

However, that goodwill must not be taken for granted. Successful greenway developments require trust, transparency and voluntary agreement. The imposition of routes across farmland without consent damages that trust and erodes community cohesion.

Across the country, IFA members have reported a lack of meaningful and practical consultation and engagement on greenway projects. In many cases, farmers have had no direct contact from project promoters until a project has gone too far and has reached the preferred emerging route corridor stage. Prior to this, farmers feel the consultation is a box-ticking exercise and a lot of work and design on the route is a desktop exercise. Most local authorities have declined to attend IFA-organised meetings with affected landowners. This approach is unacceptable.

Constructive dialogue and not confrontation should be the starting point for all greenway planning. Early, open and respectful engagement is essential if projects are to gain the confidence and co-operation of local communities. Farmers have raised a range of genuine concerns relating to greenway developments, including: loss of privacy and intrusion on family homes and farmyards; security risks and potential for antisocial behaviour; rural crime concerns, with greenways providing new access routes to private lands; animal disease risks, particularly the spread of tuberculosis through disruption of wildlife habitats; environmental disruption, especially where work impacts badger populations or established field systems; and littering and dog control issues, with implications for livestock welfare and local amenities.

These are not theoretical issues, but daily realities for rural communities and they must be taken seriously in project design and management. The IFA continues to engage constructively with local authorities across Ireland in highlighting farmers' concerns and seeking practical and fair solutions. Our approach is based on co-operation, respect for private property and the recognition that the people who live and work on the land must be partners in any development that affects them. The IFA has assisted farmers on greenways in many counties across the country, including in Kerry, Galway, Louth, Clare, Sligo, Leitrim, Cork, Donegal, Mayo, Westmeath, Dublin, Kildare, Offaly, Laois and Limerick.