Victor Boyhan (Independent)

I welcome the witnesses. I want to break this down into two segments. I want to talk to the IFFPG, but I will go first to the Department. At the outset, I apologise because I had to chair a meeting for the past hour that I could not get out of. I have just left there to be here. I hope I am not going to repeat what others have said because I was not tuned into this meeting.

I am a man who likes detail. I want to raise with the Department the fact that there was an opening statement by Ossian Smyth, the then Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications with responsibility for communications and the circular economy, on 15 May 2024. I ask the witnesses to hold the date of that statement in their minds. The Department is back before us for this meeting today, Wednesday, 12 November 2025. We have had the two statements, and we might as well have had the same thing. There are sentences and sentences in today’s statement that are an exact copy of what was said a year ago. That is an important exercise that I would like the Department to look at tomorrow. As a matter of fact, I will give the witnesses the statements on their way out of today's meeting. It does not instil confidence in me that somebody could cut and paste the essence of a statement to the Houses of the Oireachtas. This is the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food. I am disappointed about that, and I want that message to go back loud and clear to the Department and the Minister. The Department should not be represented in this way.

I thank Ms Kiely for agreeing to read the letter into the record. That allows us to make some reference to it because it is now on the public record of the Houses. Ms Kiely raised a number of issues that I thought were of concern. One of them was in relation to the concerns about the Border area. Ms Kiely and I are aware of the fluidity, the flexibility or - call it what you like - the porous nature of the Border between North and South. We would also be aware of anecdotal suggestions of inappropriate behaviour in relation to the movement of recyclable goods across the Border and how that is being policed. I want to flag that as a concern. It is an important point that I want Ms Kiely to confirm to me. I do my research before I come into these meetings. I want Ms Kiely to confirm to me what she knows of the concerns around that. It is an important point to make.

The devil is in the detail. It all hinges on the final paragraph of the statement that Ms Kiely read to the committee, which states:

The role of the Department is oversight of IFFPG’s adherence to the terms of its approval. A mid-term review of IFFPG’s current approval was concluded in 2024 and the Department requested IFFPG to undertake a series of actions relating to the board ...

I can only presume these relate to the contingency fund, the importance of corporate governance and the suggestion or possible hint that there were irregularities or concerns in relation to those matters. Again, I want Ms Kiely to share with this committee on the record of this House what those concerns were.

We need to get to the bottom of this and drill down into the coded language used. It goes on to say that, "The Department is satisfied that [the] IFFPG is engaging positively". It gives the impression that the group was not engaging positively until now. Someone chose those words. Please remember I have had sight of last year's statement that was read into the record of the House by the Department. We are now being told that, "The Department is satisfied that [the] IFFPG is engaging positively with the outcomes of the review and continues to monitor same ... ". The Department clearly had concerns here and it is monitoring them. I want to know fairly quickly what those concerns were and how the monitoring is going. If it is not possible to do it now, the Department can write to the committee with additional information. I ask this question because I think it is an important point.

In relation to the licensing or tendering, call it what you will, I was struck when I read these papers the other day that there should be a public campaign around this matter. The public needs to know about it. We live in an open economy where competitiveness is important but transparency is also important. This is especially true for areas under the corporate governance codes for the private, semi-State and State sectors. I do not know how many people are geared up with the capacity to take on this project. This is another matter Ms Kiely will be privy to and she might share something with us on this point.

I am very pleased to see some of the major stakeholders who have a huge interest in and experience of this area. I engage with stakeholders all the time. I thank them for their engagement on this and other matters. It is great to see them here. I acknowledge their presence. Ms Kiely will be aware that the Irish Rural Association raised a number of serious issues, including legacy issues and the amount of leftover waste stockpiled, etc. What is Ms Kiely's view? Have things changed in a year? Is she aware of the stockpiling of waste anywhere in Ireland that has not gone through the processes? What has the Department done about it?

It must be remembered that the key message in the statement concerned the regulatory aspect. The Department was mandated with responsibility for regulation over this area. Ms Kiely might share with us what she knows and I will share with her what I sort of think I know. This is important. People are looking in. Farmers and the media are looking in. People look at "Oireachtas Report" and take great interest in the work of this committee. I am only a conduit to ask some of the hard questions. Hopefully, Ms Kiely will be able to give us some of the answers. I am also conscious of my time. The Irish Rural Association and other organisations have raised very serious concerns. Ms Kiely will be aware of them. They were discussed at previous meetings. She might just give this area some attention.

In terms of the opening statement of the IFFPG, I am encouraged when I read words like, "The IFFPG scheme clearly demonstrates that farmers are willing and able to effectively engage with ... environmental protection [incentives]". That is encouraging and really important. We need to get the message across that the people involved are not wasters and are not dumping stuff. They want to play a meaningful role. It is the case that it must be cost-competitive and there must be incentives and the farmers want the capacity to have the waste taken from farms. There are different methods and cost and time constraints in all of this. We must, though, play our role.

I think most of what I want to hear about is from the perspective of the Department and from Ms Kiely and Ms McCormack. They are charged with the policing of this area. I would like them to quickly touch on these issues. What are their concerns about the Border? What is their knowledge? I want them to tell me their knowledge of the stockpile of waste that has not been processed. I would like to know about the cost factor and the implications of that. Are there scams? Is the Department suspicious there may be scams in this sector? I am. I want to hear from Ms Kiely about the knowledge the Department has of these matters.