Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Regional Group for bringing forward an important motion on an issue that is of real concern to farmers the length and breadth of this State. We have to start from the point that to date this has been handled very badly. We have had reports from Europe, most of which have come to farmers via the media. It is not the way to bring farmers with us and is a prime example of how not to do climate action when it comes to agriculture. Everything regarding farmers, climate action, what we are asking farmers to do and what we are rewarding farmers for doing, has to involve bringing farmers with us. That is critical if we are to meet the targets that have been set out. We also have to be mindful of the fact that farmers are up for the challenge of climate action. They want to look after and care for their land and they want to see it retained and minded for the next generation. Of that there is no doubt. The latest example of that is the huge oversubscription of farmers into the ACRES scheme. They wanted to be part of it. They did what was asked of them but they were not paid. Payments that were due last December did not come through until two months later and the balancing payment due at the end of May has now been pushed out to the end of June. That is another example of the Government showing how not to do climate action. Sometimes farmers get accused of not being up to the challenge, but when they get involved and do what is asked of them, the Government lets the side down. That is not good enough and should not happen. This Government needs to make certain that the balancing payments for ACRES participants are paid at the end of this month and not any later. This Government also needs to ensure that the new and latest ACRES participants are paid on time. That is absolutely essential because, otherwise, what is known as the flagship environmental scheme within the Department of agriculture will not work and farmers will not engage in it. Why should they, when they are not paid for what they are being asked to do? Of course, some of the compliance and measures you have to take part in under some of these schemes cost money. Farmers are down money then, at a time when costs are already through the roof and many of them are struggling as it is.

When nature restoration came before Europe there was a number of debates. The point was made that an impact assessment had not been carried out. I recall from an article on the front page of the Irish Farmers' Journal that the Minister of State at the Department of housing said that an impact assessment would be taken and would be under way. I would really like to know where that is at.

There are a number of outstanding issues relating to where we are now as we approach and look at the national plan, which will be really important. The point has been made several times in this House about voluntariness and the fact that measures in this new law have to be voluntary. That is proven in what has been said here by everyone on this side of the House, and I appreciate and accept what the Government has said with regard to measures being voluntary. That is important. Any large change to land use, such as that being proposed in nature restoration, has to be handled carefully. All of us in this House know how precious land is to farmers and what it means to them. It can an emotive issue, and we need to come at it carefully in terms of the national plan. I call again for the most widespread consultation at all levels, not just within our farming and rural communities, but that everyone is brought to the table and we find that balance. This is not the first issue where environment and farming have different ideas and views. That is why we have to find the balance and get it right. It is so important.

On funding, it has been said time and again that we need a dedicated fund separate from CAP. By the looks of the law as it has been passed to date, they are talking about looking at the next multi-annual financial framework post 2027. That lack of guarantee on funding at EU level is of concern to farmers. Again, when one looks at ACRES and how they have been treated financially in that regard, farmers will be seeking absolute guarantees on payments, and it has to be done outside of CAP. CAP was initially established to support food production and has moved an awful lot to environmental matters. We need to hold CAP for what it was brought about for and anything else needs to be additional to that.

I raised previously the issue of compensation.

We had an amendment to the initial text that was passed last July, but this was then removed. Compensation is really important. The Minister of State knows that because he was present at the meeting that I and others attended with farmers who are farming near lands that are currently being rewet by Bord na Móna. These farmers were not looking for a red cent in compensation. They were seeking a guarantee that if any damage was done, it would be rectified. That is a fair ask, and it is something we have to make sure is there to ensure farmers feel protected from any decisions made in the context of rewetting.

An issue has been raised by the Irish Natura and Hill Farmers Association, INHFA, an organisation that really needs to be discussed and brought to the table in the context of what is being requested under this new law. The idea of the priority being given to Natura 2000 sites up to 2030 is of concern to the INHFA and to many farmers. They are the farmers who are already doing the most for nature and for restoration on their lands. They are already very restricted as to the farm practices they can engage in on their lands. I ask that this widespread consultation begin as soon as possible and that the Minister of State provide an update on the impact assessment. That is really important.

See this speech in context