Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

As the Minister of State will know, across the country, the issues facing family farms are very difficult for many people involved in farming. It has been a tradition in Ireland that most people came from a family farm. The mother, the father and maybe some of the children were involved in farm activity for a major portion of their lives and perhaps all of their lives. That has always been the tradition. However, in some sectors, that has moved on. As farming has become less profitable in some ways, it has become more intensive. Farms have therefore had to become larger. This has led to the model of a corporate farm replacing that of the family farm in some cases, particularly in certain sectors. That is not good for the image Ireland wants to portray to the world. We want to show the food we produce as being of the highest quality. We want most of the dairy, beef and lamb we produce to come from free-roaming, grass-fed animals on family farms where the animals are cared for and looked after by the people who own them. We use all of that as a means of marketing our produce worldwide, which we do very well. For that reason, it is important that this is real and not just a brand.

To make it real, we have to ensure family farms are profitable enterprises for those who depend on them. Very many people who have a small family farm unfortunately need to have off-farm income. In some cases, they may need more than one off-farm income if they are to survive. That makes things very difficult. That is why we have brought forward this legislation tonight. I know the Government is opposing it. That is very disappointing. Government seems to have a blind spot as regards recognising many people's realities. We want to put together a small group through which farmers' representatives would come together with experts to work out a system by which we can make family farms viable for the long term.

We recognise agriculture is at a crucial juncture. There are issues like Mercosur, trade deals and volatility in prices, and the way the marketing of food is going is more towards looking after the corporate sector, with less emphasis and focus on the primary producer. That is what we want to see change. We want to protect the primary producer. We want to look at the opportunities. The commission could look at harnessing those opportunities and at diversification, innovation and all the things that can happen on the small family farm.

Many years ago I had mushroom tunnels. They were used around the country on small farms where it was difficult to survive. They were an additional and alternative enterprise on the farm which made it more profitable and able to survive. It is much like many things in agriculture. I had five mushroom tunnels. To survive, you had to have eight, ten or 12. Today, I think there are about half a dozen mushroom growers in the country and they have dozens of tunnels. That is the way the system had to go because of the pressure. I suppose it is about economies of scale. The concept was probably developed by Teagasc way back at that time. To make the small family farm viable, you needed additional enterprise on it. Unfortunately, it became more important to develop that enterprise into an industry than to protect the family farm.

That is why we need to look at what we can do to make farming viable for many people. The situation with bluetongue at the moment is stifling a lot of people, particularly in the Border areas, where the market depends on buyers coming across the Border from the North. This is a difficult system to understand and to work out how to resolve. A lot of farmers in my part of the world and the west of Ireland in general lamb the ewes and calve the cows, then send them off to be fattened somewhere else. The suckler farmers are an example of that. They are finding it difficult to survive because they are small by nature. Because of the type of land they have, the farm is often broken up into parts and is not all in one area. It is difficult to come up with solutions. So far all the solutions have been driven toward the more intensive sectors. I have huge respect for Teagasc, the Department and much of the work they have done but, unfortunately, it has been focused on the large intensive sector farming. On the other side, and upland farmers are an example - the hill and mountain farmers - Teagasc and other organisations have done little or no research into what improvements can be done to make their farms viable. That is one example of it.

The proposal we bring tonight is to set up a commission on the family farm. The Minister would appoint a chairperson and there would be ten members of the commission. They would include experts from across the field, including from agencies like Teagasc, from the Department and from industry. They would come together to focus on the family farm and how it can be protected and made viable in the long term and sustainably. They would come up with recommendations within a one-year period. This would be a short period in which to come up with the recommendations. The Government would then put the recommendations into action. We are talking about something to move this forward at pace. The longer we drag our heels, the more people with small portions of lands go out of farming. Forestry is taking over in my part of the world. When forestry takes over, there is nothing left because, farm by farm, it becomes trees after trees and then there is no community and they die.

The Bill will maintain the viability of the small family farm, which maintains and retains the activity of the community. When in a townland or parish there are a number of people farming on small farms, the vet is busy and the local co-op is busy selling gates, manure, fertiliser and everything to keep it going. Bit by bit, when small farmers leave the sector, all the other industries close down afterwards. To keep the rural community vibrant, we have to keep the family farm in place. To do that, there has to be an emphasis on it.

The Government's proposal is basically saying, "Look, we're already doing this. Everything is great." Everything is not great. There were almost 276,000 fewer cattle in the country in summer 2025 than in summer 2024 - over a quarter of a million fewer. There were over 70,000 fewer sheep in the country in that year. That has not changed or improved since prices started to go up in the past six to nine months.

There is a crisis and Government is refusing to recognise that. That is why we are proposing this legislation. It will put a commission in place which will work with farmers and rural communities to make those communities vibrant once more. We are disappointed Government has decided to set that to one side and continue the road it is going. The road it is going has not worked and is not working. If the Minister of State is honest, he would recognise and understand that. It is not just me saying it as an Opposition spokesperson; that is what farmers throughout the country are saying. They fear for the future. They fear their children will not want to go into farming or to maintain the lifestyle of the past. That will be detrimental to rural communities - to our footballs clubs, our schools and everything. Obviously, the Minister of State will not support this legislation, but will he do something to maintain the livelihoods and opportunity people want to have in rural communities? It can keep them alive and sustained.

I strongly emphasise the opportunities people have in rural communities to maintain the lifestyle that has held communities together down the years. The Minister of State comes from a part of the country where that can be understood. The land in Connemara is poor but the people are rich in spirit, community and resourcefulness, and they are interdependent. That comes from having to do it in the past because there was little or nothing else. When we had a recession in this country 12 years ago, everything was finished, there was nothing, building was down the Swannee and everyone was bankrupt, but farming was still there. The rural economy and rural communities survived and thrived. That is why it is important we keep the family farm as part of that and that it does not become another corporate model based on high debt. That is what they all end up being based on, and when the problems come, what happens? The whole lot is sold out and gone. The fear many people have is that the model of agriculture we have in Ireland is going down the way it has gone in other countries. We do not want to see that happen.

The amendment the Minister of State will move basically says we are doing it, everything is good and we are flying. That is not people's experience. Please come back and look at what we have here. Look at the opportunity we have for people in rural communities to be sustainable into the future. If we do not do that, we will erode the very fabric on which we are exporting and modelling the markets around the world for our food and high-quality produce.

I am disappointed the Government has come in with this amendment but I ask the Minister of State to please look at the opportunity that is in the legislation put before him.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I support the Bill. I have known the Minister of State a good while, but whoever wrote his speech has never pulled a calf or brought lambs. I will tell him one thing; you would wonder what we are listening to compared with what we are talking about. He talked about the CAP strategic plan. The fact about the new CAP and Food Vision 2030 is that at this moment, farmers around the country are facing a 24% cut to their CAP payments. How will that protect the family farm?

The Minister of State talked about well-being. The average age of farmers today is 59. Most farmers out in the rain, snow or sun are on their own. Generally, the only person they see is the postman. We talk about well-being. What have we done for them when it comes to their well-being? How do we encourage young people in when we look at what Europe is doing? Europe has decided that it will give Denmark the go-ahead, as I mentioned earlier, to get €1 billion together to get Johnny, Ludovic or whatever his name is off the farm and pay him, but he has to sign a docket that he will never farm in Europe again. He can go to Canada or Brazil, but he cannot farm in Europe. The same has happened in Holland. The nature restoration law is up in the air at the moment. We heard on day one that the State was going to be able to cover all the requirements. I have a question as to that, but I will not make a rash statement.

We talk about getting youngsters in, but if we had such good plans on the farms, and if Food Vision 2030, or 2020 or 2010, worked, would we be down 100,000 sheep? Would we be down 274,000 suckler cows in ten years? When we look at the stats, does it not tell us that the age profile is 59 and suckler cows will be down 250,000? Yet, we still go on with our heads buried in the sand believing everything is hunky-dory. The new CAP strategic plan - there will be a bit of toing and froing - will decrease by 24%. The poor old farmer in the west of Ireland is getting €4,000 or €5,000, if it is reduced. Is the next generation going to come on stream, particularly with the opportunities that are there at the moment?

Do we not look at the third leg of the stool, as I always do? If you are brought up on a small farm, in some counties at least, you might be able to build a house on the land, although some, with the way planning is going at the moment, are blocking that. You might be able to build a house. In fairness, if you have the site, you will build a house. For someone trying to buy a house in Dublin, it is €500,000 at the moment for what we call half a house compared with some of the houses we are looking at. If you get a job locally and, between the two legs of the stool, you do not need as big an income from one or the other, you will survive and make a living between the land and the job. You work hard but it is probably the greatest life you will ever have. There are times you are frustrated with it, but it is a great life to have, if you can make it work.

The knock-on effect of that, and this is where the rural economy has to be looked at, is a few people are employed in the local shop. As outlined by Deputy Kenny, there is also the local GAA club and local community centre, and there might be a local pub. If you build a rural economy, where Google, Intel and all these big guns do not exist, money circulates in that rural area and it brings prosperity, but what are we doing? The nature restoration law is about re-wetting some parts of the land. I listened to the Minister of State. He used the words "environment" and "climate" seven or eight times. This is about farmers. It is about farmers not diversifying but coming to the land, be they lady farmers or male farmers. If we look at what we have done, the stats will tell you it is backwards we have gone on age profile and in trying to get youngsters into farming. We need to encourage that or we will be in trouble.

We are looking at youngsters and talking about generational renewal. If you had 30 or 40 acres one time, you need more now. There is no doubt about it. Can you get that more, however? It is hard done when you go in as a young farmer. It is hard done when the solar company is trying to put solar panels on the fields beside you when it is for sale, or the wind turbine fella that is owned by a foreign company is trying to put wind turbines in another field, or the forestry companies - the vultures we decided we would bring in from England - come from another place and start bidding against you. It is not simple. We saw what happened in Leitrim. We see the number of trees that have been put into the likes of Leitrim. I know a certain number of trees are wanted, but where there are trees, whether we like it or not, there will not be houses, farmers, sheep, cattle, horticulture or whatever. There will be the sawmill, which gives employment, but look at the ratio of it.

If we were doing everything so right in the whole of Europe over the last 15 years, why have 5.5 million farms been shut down? That is a queer figure. It is 5.5 million probably multiplied by 2.5; when we are doing an election that is how we tally up how many are in a house. It is 12.5 million people who are now not in farming. That should ring alarm bells for us that we need a commission. We can follow the European project. They are the whiz-kids. They want us to get rid of steel and bring in most of our products. Do you know why? Climate was mentioned many times, but it is that they want us to tick this box that we are the best kids in the world.

This is so we can tell America, China and everyone else, but at the end of the day it is about pounds, shillings and pence. How do we build a rural community? Is there an agenda to drive everyone to the city? All I can see in parts of this country is a certain number of farms that are getting bigger and bigger. The average suckler herd is probably 18 or 20 cows but many farms now have 5,000 to 9,000 cows. These are not family farms and I do not care who argues otherwise. We are letting this happen and forgetting the people who lived in the rural areas. Every one of us here comes from an area of family farms, small farms. We never grew up with much but we always had enough. We built the communities in our areas. Community centres were built, as were football pitches. There was a meitheal of people.

While education is very important, I fear the consequences if we do not put a floor under family farming to make it attractive for lads and girls to go into farming, and if they keep hearing about cuts and various things blocking them from farming. If you rewet your land, you do not need to live in the area. You can live in Dublin and can get your cheque if you want. If you have forestry on your land, you can live in America if you want. This is what we must consider. Are we going to try to keep the rural areas populated? This is bigger than just farming. The rural economy, which every one of us knows, is built around it. I encourage the Government, Teagasc and all the so-called experts who believe in visions and whatever to reconsider the vision they have had since 2010. They will need to get glasses to look at it and rethink the policy.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a certain amount of sympathy for the Minister of State. Clearly, the senior Minister could not be bothered to be here to participate in this debate, despite having had three weeks' notice. Not only did he send the Minister of State in but he sent him in to deliver a speech that completely misses the point, as does the Government's amendment. The amendment states that the objectives of the Bill have been comprehensively addressed and then refers to policy frameworks, Food Vision 2030, the CAP strategic plan and ongoing work arising from the commission on generational renewal in farming. I will come to the CAP strategic plan and generational renewal in a moment.

Food Vision 2030, just like Food Wise 2025 before it, is not actually a plan for farmers; it is a plan for food production, and that is why I say that the Government continuously misses the point and why we have statistics such as those outlined by Deputy Fitzmaurice. The drive has been towards food production rather than supporting family farmers, and that is what is at the core of the Bill before us. There is a difference between the two. Food can be produced by conglomerates. It can be and is being produced by the largest corporations in the world. This is a societal choice. Do we want our food produced by conglomerates and the largest corporations in the world or by family farmers? Why would we want a future for the family farm model? When so many of our policies are being formulated at EU level, we have to recognise the implications for the family farm model. When most Irish people think about farming, they think of the family farm model. That is the model they understand because it is predominant in most of our communities. However, it is not the model that is predominant across Europe because Europe has largely moved towards a corporate form of farming and food production, just as North America did beforehand.

What is the difference between food produced by corporations and food produced by family farmers? First, the latter is of better quality and, I would argue, much more sustainable. The food densities and intensities are much more sustainable environmentally and in terms of biodiversity and every other measure. Also, food produced by family farmers has an added benefit for society and communities. When we are talking about the network of family farms in Ireland, we are talking about the nearest thing many towns, villages and entire regions have to an industry. It is the network of family farms that sustains towns, villages, GAA clubs and community life in general.

A point completely missed in both the Government amendment and the Minister of State's contribution is that the family farm is under threat. How do we know that? The numbers tell us. The number of farmers in this State has been reducing every single decade at a rate I consider alarming, as have the numbers of cows and sheep on family farms. The number of young people coming into farming on an ongoing basis is declining to such a point that I would now argue it is at crisis point.

I hear people talking about the need to encourage young people into farming. You do not need to encourage them. Everywhere I go, I meet young people who are mad about farming and want nothing more than to go into it. They love the farm, they love the land, they love the work and they love their tractors. They love everything about it but cannot see a future in it for themselves. Therein lies the problem and the need for this Bill.

The idea of the commission on the family farm came about on foot of work that a number of us in Sinn Féin had been involved in for a number of years. Included were Deputies Kenny and Kerrane, myself as an MEP at the time and others who had an interest. We were talking to farmers about what they actually needed to secure the future of family farming and how the Government could create a framework. What they said was simple but telling. They said they needed to be heard and that their voices needed to be at the centre of decisions made. As has been happening for decades, when decisions are made, farmers, who have to respond, are portrayed as backward for not accepting things foisted upon them. They end up trying to make the best of matters and to have some changes made. A Minister or backbench Government TD will say they secured the change but the manner in which decisions are made in the first place is where the problem lies.

At the heart of a commission on the family farm, family farmers' voices must be central. They have the answers. Bearing in mind all of the regressions we have seen in terms of numbers, the fact that Ireland still has a family farm network is not thanks to Government policy and certainly not thanks to the CAP. It is because of the determination of family farmers to stay on the land. They have the answers and want to be heard. The commission is about ensuring farmers are at the centre of deciding how we map out a future for Irish family farming, not just so they can survive and live on their farms but so they can thrive and afford to us all the benefits we know of in terms of delivery. Why is that important? I have often used the phrase the 3 Fs. These are what farmers need. They need fair prices on an ongoing basis. Prices are fairly decent at the minute but we know there is considerable volatility and that as soon as there is any shock to the market, it is farmers who will take the hit. The retailers will hold on to their profit margins, as will the processors and factories. Farmers will get screwed time and again because the Government has not set a framework to protect them, and the food regulator has not got the teeth even to start the work that is necessary. Farmers need a fair CAP.

Every single year, farmers are being asked to do much more. They are asked that by us as a society. European farmers, including Irish farmers, have the highest regulatory, animal welfare, environmental and biodiversity standards in the world.

That is the service they are providing to society, and we are paying them less than ever before to provide that service. The current CAP is, in real terms, a significant reduction for Irish farmers on the previous CAP, yet we have a Government that insists that black is white. It keeps telling farmers they are getting paid more now than they were in the previous CAP. Now we have an existential threat to the next CAP in terms of potentially a 25% reduction.

The premise is simple. If we and the Government want farmers to do more, we pay them more, in the same way as we would pay anybody else providing us with a service more if they are giving us more.

The final thing farmers need is fair play. They need fair play as to how the Department deals with them. Farmers should never look at the Department of agriculture as the enemy or as hostile. Certainly, the Department should never look at farmers as the enemy. All too often, however, that is the culture that prevails. If we are talking about environmental standards and Irish farmers, we cannot then nod through, which is what Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael essentially did, a Mercosur trade deal that sees the potential for hundreds of thousands of additional beef and other meat products coming into the EU at the expense of rainforests and then point the finger at Irish farmers and talk about reducing herd numbers and all the rest of it. The biggest hypocrisy of all this was the week before the vote on the Mercosur trade agreement, when I saw Eamon Ryan, someone who had spent five years in this Chamber lecturing Irish family farmers, writing an op-ed endorsing the deal. That said it all, as far as I was concerned. That type of hypocrisy needs to end because farmers need fair play.

This amendment is a joke, frankly. To suggest that the Government is doing what this says is completely disingenuous because the Government is not doing what lies at the heart of what an actual commission on family farming would do, namely, listen to farmers and find real solutions to ensure the model we should all be so proud of, the family farm model, is maintained into the future for young men and women all over this country. They want nothing more than to be able to farm their land, their father's land, their grandfather's land, or even new land that comes into the family. That is what they want, and they want a vehicle to be able to see a future in that. That is what this commission is about. The Government's amendment basically says, "This is as good as it gets". That is not acceptable, as far as I am concerned.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I was just reading through the Minister of State's list in his statement. "The work ahead is substantial", it reads. It refers to making farming "attractive to young people". The difficulty is that young people do not see a way of getting into farming because an awful lot of them cannot afford to buy the land when it comes up, if there is land beside them, or even to lease land because the bigger you are, the longer or better you survive. The very large dairy farmers are eating up any possibility for anyone else to get started. We have the same thing with tillage. The Minister of State mentioned tillage being something we needed to develop, and it is the same problem. We have one sector which is dominating. We know that the dairy industry in Ireland is extremely successful and doing extremely well but we need to be able to put some check in place to ensure that it does not smother out opportunity for everybody else. That is one of the things we need to do and one of the issues this commission would need to deal with.

The statement refers to "orderly and fair succession". Orderly and fair succession in most cases cannot happen because farmers do not see a future for the family to be able to maintain a decent income on the farm for a second generation to be able to live on it without having off-farm income, sometimes maybe several off-farm incomes, to do that.

The Minister of State mentioned "strengthening farmers" position in the value chain". The food regulator has been crying out for the past couple of years, since its establishment, for more resources and proper teeth to be able to deal with issues, and the Government has not provided them. The position of the farmer in the value chain is one of the key aspects of this.

The farmer takes all the risk. The farmer is the one who gets up at night, makes sure the cow is calving and checks the cattle. Earlier today, I was talking to people about rural crime and farmers who have their machinery stolen and all these issues. Farmers are dealing with all these things. They are the ones taking all the risk in all of this. Then, when they sell on their product, the processor takes its margin and sells it on to the retailer, and the retailer takes its margin. However, if things go wrong and get a little tight, what happens then? They will tell you about international pressures and global food chains and the way everything is connected around the world.

If there is a possibility of getting a portion of the product or an ingredient of the product somewhere cheaper, they will get it from there. Who suffers? It is the farmer, who takes all the risk, and the one without whom there would be none of it. We have the protests going down at Bord Bia at the moment. Only for the farmers there would be no Bord Bia. There would be nothing to market anywhere in the world. That seems to be lost on those who sit around boardroom tables but it is not lost on the farmer because they know that without them there would be nothing there.

It seeks to ensure that climate and environmental measures are practical and economically viable. Deputy Fitzmaurice mentioned some of these measures with regard to rewetting and climate change. There are more restrictions coming on farmers all the time to do more public good. We can debate the viability of them and all that but the ultimate viability of them is whether or not the farmer will be paid for that. The difficulty is that they do not see a future in it. They do not see themselves being paid for it, because it is all short-termism.

Forestry was also mentioned in the Minister of State's opening speech. Farmers who decide to go into forestry plant the land. They get a grant to do it. After seven or eight years they get a portion where it can be thinned and the thinnings can be sold off. At the end of it they can sell off the finished timber if they get that far and they get a decent price for it. It is tax free. That is all very good. The difficulty is that they have to replant the land again. It can never go back into farming. That is the only thing it can never be used for. It is gone forever. It is a permanent change of land use. Last year, we had a storm. Around me, hundreds of thousands of trees were knocked and are gone. Many of them had only been planted for between ten and 15 years. Going in to clear those trees out it cost more than they were worth and the farmer still has to replant the land. There is that possibility of that risk for them, and that is one of the key environmental measures the Minister of State is talking about. That risk is too high for them to look at. Some still are, but many people see a huge problem in that. The amendment put forward is looking at Food Vision 2030, CAP and all of these things as though they will be the saviour. The fact is they are not the saviour for the farmer. They are the saviour for the food processor and the retailer. That is who they are the saviour for. They are ensuring they can get a living, not the farmer. There used to be an old saying, "Wait, horse and you will get grass." That is what they used to say, and it is the same thing for this. If they wait long enough they might get a good year or two, but there are five or six bad ones. They might get another good year or two, and then they will have another row of bad ones. That is what is happening with farming. That has been the cycle up to now. We are saying there needs to be a commission that is focused on the family farm and not focused on the industry and on those who are already doing well, not comforting the comforted and the comfortable but looking after those who are taking the risk and without whom none of this would happen. Looking to that is why we feel there needs to be a focus and a listening ear to what they want, what they need, what their future communities need and what their future family needs to keep that farm sustainable and ensure that the small family farm is going to be there into the future. What will happen is what we see in some sectors. We have seen it across Europe and other parts of the world. The larger farmers and the food industry companies start taking over the farms. When they start taking over the farm, bit by bit they become the farmer. Farming becomes a corporate model. They keep buying more land and taking the opportunities and the farmer just becomes an employee of that industry. That is not a good way forward. That is not the way of the traditional agricultural sector we have in Ireland. It is going to be detrimental for the future, because when some global crisis comes that corporation is gone and all you are left with is debt. The whole lot is belly up, the same as when the building boom burst. We cannot see that happen. That is why it is so important that we get the re-emphasis back on making the family farm sustainable in the long term. That may require support from the Government, which is only for that sector, not just for the big industry.

It is more than disappointing that the Government is saying that what it is doing is working. If people open their eyes they will see it is not working. It is not working for the small family farms around the country that are practically on their knees. In my county of Leitrim there are five cattle marts, which is unusual, because with so many of the cattle the weanlings are sold. We used to say the big farmers from the midlands and the south came up and bought them and brought them off to the good land and made money on them. That was the system. Many of those marts are now under pressure. In fact, one of them in the town of Mohill is talking about closing. Why is that? If you take the town of Mohill there is practically nothing else in it. There is a modular cold store factory I know many are employed in, maybe 100 or so, or maybe less. Apart from that there is nearly no other industry around it. It is depending on the people in the rural community for the seven to ten miles around it to come in to buy their shopping, do whatever they are doing, and the mart is the central part of that. If we continue to go down this route where farmers will have to get bigger and there will be less of them, it will eventually become a corporate model, and we will end up in a situation where we see whole communities left behind. People will say no-one shouted, "Stop." That is the opportunity we are saying is here. The Government can bury its head in the sand and say it is doing great because the guys around the boardroom says it is doing well. For the ordinary people on the ground, we are not doing well. The ordinary people who want a future in small towns and villages the length and breadth of this country do not see the boom in agriculture going back to provide a future for them. The Government put forward its amendment. That is fine. That is what governments do when they are in power but they have to be responsible to the people who put them there as well. Whatever differences we have politically, the Minister of State has to understand. He also comes from a rural part of County Galway. Many people in that area and in his county want a future in agriculture. That is why this Government needs to put a focus on maintaining and sustaining the family farm model into the future, and not allow it to go down this direction, which it clearly is, where it will be about the boardroom. We need to get back to sustaining the family farm and putting measures in place. If the farmer is profitable and making money the rural economy is vibrant. The small towns are doing well. At the moment, we need to ensure that happens. The Government must use the resources, possibility and energy of government to sustain that model into the future. That is why we ask the Minister of State to look again at this proposal we put forward this evening. It is obviously not going to go anywhere tonight. The Government should look at it again and come back to it in the future. It can put its own label on it if it wants to. I do not care but it must do something for the small people who need a future in the small family farms the length and breadth of the country.

Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In accordance with Standing Order 85(2), the division is postponed until the next weekly division time.