Martin Heydon (Kildare South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank all the Members for their detailed contributions and the great debate on not just the CAP but also the importance of the agricultural sector to our country. There was commonality in some of the points raised, which does not surprise me. There was also a variance that really shows the geographical spread and nature of our different farming systems. The one thing we all have in common is that even though agricultural activity and the scale involved, no matter what part of rural Ireland you are in, can be different, the importance to the local economy, to the farm families and to the 171,000 people employed in the sector is equally important across the length and breadth of this country.

In the time I have, I will go through some of the points raised. I start with Senator Brady, who raised the point concerning ACRES. It is very commonly raised by many Members in the House, so I will come back to it here now. Regarding the ACRES challenge, when I got into this job, which was two months ago today, we had approximately 14,500 farmers who were unpaid 2023 applicants who had encountered significant difficulties with their applications. The vast majority of them had received an interim payment, which Senator Kyne spoke about. If someone was in receipt of a lower amount in respect of the interim payment - if someone got €4,000 or €5,000 - it meant that there was money due back. That hurts and it is not an ideal world. The alternative to that, however, was not making an interim payment and leaving those people without, which would have been worse. It is definitely symptomatic of something that was not right. We do not want to be in a position of paying out money, some of which must then be recouped in certain circumstances.

Turning to 2024 applicants, we were at 14,500 or thereabouts two months ago, but we are down below 10,000 now. We are making real progress. Senator Cathal Byrne raised this aspect as having a real impact on farmers in Wexford too. My Department's unit in Johnstown Castle in County Wexford is where we operate from for several of these schemes, including ACRES. I have been down and visited the officials there to see first-hand the systems and processes we have in place. I want to give one reassurance to people as we are making progress. I gave a very clear commitment in the Dáil and I give the same commitment here in the Upper House that it is my intention to have the vast majority of these cases resolved, cleared and paid by the end of May, with the most difficult and problematic ones to be cleared by the end of June. That is a commitment I am sticking to. I review those figures every week. I am keeping a very close eye on it and publishing these figures very regularly as well.

Additionally, this is about addressing the interventions we undertake in instances where we identify a problem with a particular application. Some of these problems are on the farmers' side, including issues around probate and title. I would say more than half of them are on my Department's side, where we have to make interventions. When we identify a problem, we could intervene with a pen and paper and make a manual intervention or we could design a bit of IT functionality that fixes the problem once and for all. If we go in with the pen and paper, we will be going in like that every year. I do not want that. I do not want these situations reoccurring next year. I want to ensure the fix to the problems we have encountered will be a one-off requirement. It is a very new scheme and a big change.

Touching on the points made by Senator Boyhan and, to an extent, Senator Noonan earlier, we have moved to this results-based system. Senator Higgins touched on this aspect in respect of there perhaps being an element of frustration that we have not got there quick enough. This results-based system, however, is a very different approach to what we are doing and it means the whole new system, with the score cards, was a very ambitious one that was undertaken. It has created challenges we are working towards solving, but I am determined we will find resolutions for all those farmers to get them paid as quickly as possible.

Senator Brady spoke about simplification. This is absolutely critical. It is key to everything we do in the next CAP. We have talked about simplification on several occasions but it has felt at times that the thing we have designed next has been more complex. We are constrained by the cost-incurred income foregone model. It will be very hard to see a move away from that in the next CAP. As long as that model is there, we will be very constrained. People talk to me about ACRES, GLAS or AEOS and say they have never been as good as REPS. My very first scheme on the farm at home was REPS and there has never been anything as good as it. That scheme, though, was paid on a whole-of-farm basis. We have now moved at the European level to this cost-incurred income foregone model. This means it is very difficult to design schemes that can adequately reward farmers for the work and effort they put in.That is where simplification is difficult. Ultimately, I see simplification meaning fewer schemes down the line. The key focus here, as has been touched on by a number of contributors, is that we get enough money for a well-funded CAP. That is the key effort we are making. I will be in Brussels again next Monday, making the argument again for a robust and fully funded CAP. After that, we can see what the schemes look like. Either way, we need to see it simplified.

Senators Duffy and Clifford-Lee raised the point about LEADER. LEADER has delivered significantly across communities over the years. In my constituency of Kildare South, we have three fantastic community centres in Castledermot, Suncroft and Rathangan that would not have been built without LEADER funding. That was ten years ago. LEADER will have an allocation of €180 million under Pillar 2. Having been involved in an application process long before I was a politician, I am aware of the red tape and bureaucracy that can be involved with LEADER. It is onerous. I will be looking at that, along with colleagues in government, as part of the next CAP reform.

Senator Boyhan talked about sustainability and gender equality. I am extremely committed to delivering on and am supportive of the national women in agriculture action plan. The Senator talked about my personal circumstances, having been raised by my mother on a farm in the 1980s, when it was hard for a female farmer. I absolutely see the importance of us getting that balance right. It is about sustainability in all the ways the Senator outlined. He talked about the need to be profitable. Sustainability is a three-legged stool. We cannot deliver for the environment and for society on sustainability for female farmers and others, including the next generation, if we do not have profitability in the sector. Economic sustainability is as important a leg of the stool as the other two elements. They are very much interdependent. That is key.

Senator Boyhan also referred to trade. Great Britain is our closest and nearest trading partner when it comes to agrifood. As a country that exports 90% of the food and drink we produce, it is critically important to us that we continue to maintain all of those close working relationships. I will be doing that. Since Brexit, we have been keen to open new markets. For example, we recently just got access for beef to Thailand. I will be in Korea later this year, where we have gained access for beef as well. At the end of the day, we have to reduce our dependency on the British market because, while Mercosur, which has been raised by a number of colleagues here, including Senator Collins, is a concern for people, the impact of that on our industry is one thing, but if Britain, where 52% of our beef goes, does a Mercosur deal, one would see an even greater impact on the price here. We have to be aware of those risks. Obviously Britain is our closest trading partner and pays well. Our product is trusted by British consumers, so we will continue to engage there, but backup options are needed so we are not dependent on any one market.

Senator O'Loughlin raised the issues of trade and tariffs in the USA. I will be leading a trade mission to the US on 6 April, during which I will visit Washington and, I hope, Chicago, along with a number of businesses in different areas. They are key businesses where we are looking to engage and put our best foot forward regarding the importance of our trade. We are working closely with the Tánaiste and his trade forum, which I will attend tomorrow. I will be raising these points in Brussels next Monday too. I spoke about this in Cabinet yesterday. Ultimately, the impact on Irish agrifood produce is potentially significant. We have many people in the whiskey sector, dairy sector and beyond who are concerned. We are engaged with Commissioner Šefovi on any countermeasures the EU might bring in. An important point to remember here, which maybe gets lost in some of the recent media coverage, is that the EU does not want to propose any lists for tariffs. We want as close a working and trading relationship with the United States as possible. We particularly want that in Ireland. Europe wants that too. These countermeasures are a result of decisions being made by the United States. It is not a position Europe wants to be in. We will work closely with our European colleagues to put our best foot forward, with the best interests of our industries here and how they may be impacted at heart.

Senator O'Loughlin the issue of raised solar farms. We included the introduction of planning guidelines for solar farms in the programme for Government, which is important. It struck me, when Senator Noonan talked about all the good work that has been done and how we build on it for biodiversity and habitats, as well as producing our top-quality food, that farmers are doing an amazing job. We are heading for three years in a row of reducing our emissions by continuing to produce that top-quality food that is so important to our economy and trade. The story we have to tell about the improving impact on our biodiversity and on our water quality, as we saw from the EPA yesterday, is really important from a trade perspective. We are not just doing this because it is the right thing for the environment. It is actually the smart business play for Irish farmers to do that. What is clear from Senators O'Loughlin's and Noonan's points is that we have pressure on our land. We have many different demands on our land. We have to manage those well.

Senators Collins and Tully raised the issue of our forgotten farmers. There is a commitment about them in the programme for Government. I am looking at my options for a scheme. There was an allocation of €5 million in the budget. It would be hard to see how that could do what needs to be done. I will try to work with that as far as I can. The Senators raised the point about full convergence. I have an open mind on convergence. There are different perspectives there and I will engage with farm organisations about that closer to the time.

The Senators raised the issue of Mercosur. As Minister for agriculture and as a Fine Gael representative, it does not come easily to me to oppose a trade deal. Trade deals are good for Ireland and good for our farmers. Irish farmers have benefited hugely from international trade deals the EU has struck. There are specific concerns regarding Mercosur. Whatever about the financial impact on our sector, which would be wanting, asking farmers to deliver greater environmental efficiency while seeing product come in at a lower footprint is where we could lose the room with farmers. That is the point I will make in Brussels and beyond and why I oppose Mercosur in its current form. In general, trade is good for our country and good for our farmers, beyond that specific deal.

Senator Noonan talked about the climate and nature fund. There is a great opportunity for us in that. I will not be found wanting in trying to chase bits of money, wherever I can get them, for all the different elements to support farmers in the important work they are doing. The multi-annual financial framework is a key part of being able to adequately fund a CAP.

I referred to some of the points that Senator Higgins raised. She talked about the EU Court of Auditors and painted a picture of our farming system that was quite negative. If she was here now, I would challenge her on throwing out that statistic about 80% of payments going to 20% of farmers. That is across Europe. It is very different in Ireland. We have a much more balanced system here. Our average farm holding here is 32 ha. The payment on that is 66% and, with the complementary redistributive income support for sustainability, CRISS, and eco-schemes, we have a much more balanced system here. It is not the case that the most money goes to a small number of big farmers. It is much more redistributed here. That is why I say I have an open mind on any next steps towards convergence.

I agree with proportionate rural development. A point was made on forestry and it was said it is a business as usual approach. Our latest forestry scheme is very generous, with €1.3 billion. It is different from what was there in the past. There was a throwaway comment about Storm Éowyn and that we have not learned. Huge damage was done to our national forestry plantation across the country by Storm Éowyn. The trees that were knocked down were trees that were planted under previous regimes where we did not do things the way we do them now, where there were monocultures. It is important we are fact-based when talking about the impact these things have on us. The programmes we have now have learned from mistakes in the past of the impact of where we plant forestry and what type of mix of forestry we have. There is an economic point. We need to have an economic return for the landowner from this. It is privately owned land. The Constitution rightly enshrines property owners' rights. The only way to get farmers to engage in this activity is if they are financially incentivised to do so. I made a point about peatlands and Senator Higgins made points on it. The measures that will be introduced will be voluntary. The only reason the farmers will do this is if it makes financial sense for them to do so and they wish to do so. We will then support them to do that in a voluntary capacity. That is really important.

I take on board the points about the native honeybee, which I know has been raised by Senator P. J. Murphy, and about apiculture. I take the Senator's point about the amount of money allocated and the number of beekeepers we have. We know the intrinsically important role the bee plays in pollination and overall. I will look at it.

I know the stone walls in south Galway were badly damaged by Storm Éowyn. I am worried that they may not be reinstated. That is why the measure in ACRES to retain those features is important. There might not be too many people who will rebuild them otherwise, and if we lose them, they will be lost for all time.On the points made about straw incorporation, I can tell Senators that, as a guy in Kildare, no one ploughed good barley straw into the ground over the past couple of years when the price of straw was where it was. I know the sense is that when straw is expensive farmers, in the west in particular, might think "Oh, that is because of straw incorporation". The type of straw that goes into the ground generally tends to be poor quality straw that would not be used for bales. It is a good system of support for tillage farmers and has proven benefits in terms of its organic nature. For farmers in the west, having a healthy, thriving tillage sector is really important as it means they can have that supply of straw and beyond.

The supports we have in place for the tillage sector are important to keep viability. I regularly say that farming is like a gearbox because if any one of the gears breaks then the wheel does not turn. We are all interdependent on one another. That is why it is in the interest of the small livestock farmer in the west that there is a healthy tillage sector. It is an ecosystem whereby we all gain from having one another and that we, as an island nation, do not depend solely on the imports of certain categories. We have seen what that was like. I live 20 minutes from Carlow town and I do not want to see another sector experience the devastation that occurred in my area in 2006 when we lost the sugar beet industry. The tillage sector is really good for our economy and also for the environment in the context of the measures it makes, as a bread crop and beyond. The tillage sector is not in that space but we do need to protect and mind it, given its benefit to us all.

Senator P. J. Murphy and a number of other Senators made a point about succession. We have the Commission on Generational Renewal in Farming, which is due to report to me in the second quarter of this year, at the end of June. I will very much keep those proposals in mind as we look to the next CAP. We absolutely want to do this. I thank Senator Kyne for his very insightful experience of the time he spent filling out those forms. I do think that people are romanticising when they look back and say, "Oh, the old retirement scheme was great." It had huge flaws. The biggest flaw was that key wording of the scheme basically said that the farmer was banished from the land and was not to be there. We knew farmers who were afraid to get caught walking across their yard carrying a bucket in case somebody reported them as being actively farming in spite of being banished from the land. There was a fear they would lose all their payments and would have to repay it all for years. It was an awful way for people to live and it is a complete anathema to what we should have. Succession should recognise the vital role and corporate knowledge of the retiring farmer or the farmer who has taken a step back. Let us be honest, farmers do not ever really retire, but we do want the option to step back and encourage the next generation to come on while leaning on and having the support of that farmer who has so much knowledge from before. I am very determined that any new scheme will strike the right balance.

Senator Sarah O'Reilly raised the point about fairness and the balanced regional element to that. I reiterate the points I made in response to Senator Higgins. On comparison with Dublin, one could be talking about the horticulture farmers in north County Dublin, who are very important, or the few on the fringes. I understand the point made by Senator O'Reilly and that sentiment that will be there from others. There are big farmers in the west and there are small farmers in the east. Sometimes comparisons are overly simplified but there is really significant balance in how we distribute payments around Ireland compared with other European countries. I will continue to make sure that there is absolute fairness in this regard in any reformed CAP. The Senator's point about simplification is at the heart of this. Farmers regularly tell me that just getting little bits of money here, there and everywhere makes it hard to see what it is all for when one puts it all together. Simplification would mean we can get the money directly to farmers using the least amount of bureaucracy. It has been a challenge to get there in the past but I am determined to have that as part of the next CAP. As for the point relating to ACRES, I have already touched on the issue.

I thank Senator Scahill for his comments. Sustainability is as important to farmers in County Roscommon as it is to farmers everywhere else. His points on that were very well made and I look forward to working with him on the challenges facing us.

Senators Cathal Byrne, Noel O'Donovan and others raised the nitrates derogation. Nitrates are hugely important for many farmers, particularly those in the south east and in Cork South-West, as I know from having been in Timoleague and other areas. There are farmers doing huge work in these areas and they should take great heart from the EPA's figures that were released yesterday. We cannot hang our hat on that alone but we know the measures are there. The Government is supporting farmers with the nitrates measures by having the €60 million Farming for Water EIP, which is a really important way of supporting farmers to take those individual measures. In addition, I brought a memo to Cabinet in recent weeks and important meetings will take place across Europe in the coming months. We are putting our best foot forward on that. The Cabinet subcommittee, which is part of the programme for Government, is coming forward now and its first meeting will take place at the end of this month. That initiative is a really important way of bringing in the local authorities. As Senator O'Donovan pointed out, the local authorities must be part of this conversation. It is not just about what farmers are doing; it is what the EPA, Uisce Éireann, local authorities and beyond are doing.

I take on board the points made about the importance of the protein aid scheme.

Senator Kyne made points about succession and GAEC 2. I will finish by discussing GAEC 2. This morning, I had another meeting with representatives of the INHFA. I tried to assuage their concerns about GAEC 2. I understand that there are concerns about this area.

On the point made about the land parcel, we must have a controllable area in order that when we are audited we can stand over and look at it. If we were to incorporate every piece of peat soil in this country, the area would amount to 750,000 ha but it would bring in 880,000 ha of mineral soils, which would be excessive. That is why we have gone with the proposal for a land parcel comprising only lands with over 50% peat in the soil. That brings in 100,000 ha of mineral soil. One can incorporate it in with that but one cannot have a smaller area. If you do anything other than that, you will bring in more mineral soils.

I want to take a step back. I can understand people's concern about this matter. This is a baseline entry requirement to qualify for the BISS scheme. This is not a designation and it is not something that will be in place forever. Plenty of the conditionality for single farm payments in the past has changed, such as the tagging and registering of cattle. That conditionality is no longer in place. This measure is conditionality for the remainder of this CAP. We cannot be sure it will exist beyond that. If it does, it may be in the form of an eco-scheme. I want to reassure people that the fears in this regard are not justified. It is a baseline entry requirement and at its heart is that farmers can continue to actively farm, plough, sow, maintain existing drains and have new drains, in line with existing national legislation. Farmers' concerns are not borne out by the facts that will be there. I continue to deal with the Commission and the farm organisations on it. I really am confident that farmers' concerns about this will not be realised and I hope to be able to provide clarity to them in a letter in the near future. Farmers can already look up the online system on agfood.agriculture.gov.ieto look at their own land parcels and put the Hammond map in over their own farm holding to see what that map looks like. Most of them will already have a very good idea of those that are in there but this is about a minimum baseline requirement that will not impact their day-to-day farming activity.

I look forward to working with colleagues in this House in my term ahead. Having been a Minister of State for four and a half years, served on Front Bench duty and regularly been in here answering questions on behalf of other Ministers, I strongly believe that this House deserves respect to be shown by ensuring that when a question on agriculture is asked, we will endeavour to ensure that a Minister or Minister of State from my Department will answer it. We will be here and answerable to the Members of this House. That is the least this House and its Members deserve. As far as is possible we will try to stick to that. It is really important.