Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for taking this Commencement matter this week as it is a matter of urgency. As the Minister knows, farmers are required to sign and submit their basic income support scheme forms by tomorrow, Thursday, 15 May, to be entitled to receive their annual payments from the Department of agriculture. Part of this submission is a declaration that the farmer is compliant with GAEC practices on the farm. Just over a week ago, I met with representatives from the IFA in Sligo, Leitrim and Roscommon.These farmers, all thinkers who take their environmental and legal responsibilities seriously, wanted to draw my attention to the BISS submission date in a last-ditch hope that the Minister might listen to my plea on their behalf.

Most Senators from rural constituencies such as Sligo-Leitrim, which includes parts of south Donegal, will know at this stage that GAEC stands for good agricultural and environmental conditions. GAEC regulations set out minimum environmental standards which must be adhered to. There are nine GAEC standards in total. GAEC 2 is the last to be imposed and relates to the protection of peatlands and wetlands. As only approximately 20% of our landmass is thought to be carbon-rich or mineral soil, GAEC 2 will not affect large swathes of the country, such as eastern counties, where the land is rich and well drained. There is a fear, though, that it will have a disproportionately significant impact on my part of the country. A lot of the things that farmers are being asked to do are things they are totally comfortable with - no problem at all. For instance, ploughing of grasslands to a depth greater than 30 cm is prohibited, but I am told there is no problem with that. Grasslands can be reseeded only once every four years. Again, I understand that is considered standard practice. GAEC 2 allows for the maintenance of existing drains but tightens up on the prohibition of digging new drains without planning permission on peat-rich soil. That is all very well as well, but the farmers I spoke to from the IFA are struggling with two basic issues.

The first of these issues is the definition of what constitutes peaty, carbon-rich and organic soils. This is what I would like the Minister to provide if he can: clarification in plain English as to what constitutes peaty soil. Are we able to agree on a single terminology for these soils? Are they peaty, are they carbon-rich or are they organic? I have heard all three of those terms used interchangeably and, as we all know, the use of multiple phraseologies often leads to confusion and misunderstanding. The current definition on the Department's website is:

A peat soil is defined as organic soil materials which have sedentarily accumulated and have at least 30% ... organic matter over a depth of ... 45 cm on undrained land and 30 cm deep on drained land.

The Minister knows all this; there is no need for me to go into it. However, a couple of questions occur to me. "Dry mass" is the mass of a biological sample once the water has been removed. An ordinary farmer is surely unable to ascertain this himself or herself, and this must be a job for a laboratory that can test a soil sample. Assuming this is correct, have soil samples on all land parcels throughout the State been taken?

The second issue that farmers are concerned about is what portions of a farmer's land are classed as being peaty or carbon-rich. As of 6.15 p.m. yesterday, the Department website advises, "The Department is in the process of writing to farmers subject to the standard." In the process? The deadline for submission of BISS forms is tomorrow. When will the Department complete its process of writing to farmers? If farmers find themselves in the process of deciding whether GAEC 2 applies to their land when the deadline expires, and when they decide it does not, will they get paid?

This leads me on to portions of land. If a farmer believes or learns subsequently that a proportion of their land is mineral or non-peaty soil, can they split their land into portions? This is a bone of contention that has come up a lot. The Department's website indicates that this will be possible "in certain circumstances", but what are those circumstances? Should a farmer disagree with a decision that all or part of their land is classed as peaty, what will the process be for lodging an appeal? They must have clarity. These farmers I have spoken to are not trying to upset the apple cart. They just want clarity. There is nothing more certain to undermine a relationship than uncertainty. Will the Minister grant our farmers the respect they deserve and pause the implementation and enforcement of GAEC 2 for one more year?

Martin Heydon (Kildare South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Senator Cosgrove for raising a really important issue and giving me the opportunity to put on the record of the House a reassurance to farmers in her area and all over the country who are concerned about GAEC 2. The Senator has outlined those concerns, and I know from my colleagues here in Donegal and Kerry as well that those concerns are shared by farmers. Much of this is down to the fact that there has been stuff talked about that has nothing to do with GAEC 2, which is a baseline conditionality for this. One's base is what was known as the single farm payment. This is only linked to that. It is a baseline requirement for that. This is something we as a country signed up to in 2023. We got a derogation in 2023 and 2024. We sought a derogation for this year. It is not in my gift to give an extra year; this is a decision of Europe. We asked for it and we were told "No". We are dead in breach. If we do not implement a measurement, we will be in breach and will be subject to fines that would definitely be in the region of €100 million-plus and would come out of my budget to support farmers.I cannot let that happen. We engaged with the Commission and looked to have a set of standards that, because it is baseline, should not impact hugely on farmers' day-to-day activities. That is what we worked towards and what we got agreed. The reason the letters are going out at such short notice is that when I came into this job on 23 January, this was not signed. We had not made a submission. It was the first thing I was asked to do. I engaged with farm organisations and had a lot of consultation rather than just signing it, because I wanted to get my head around the issue and understand the extent of it. I reassure the House that there was really detailed engagement to make sure there was no alternative, and to reassure myself that the measures that are in the proposal will not change farmers' day-to-day activity and that there is a minimal entry element. At that point, I sent a submission to the Commission to say this is what we wanted to put in place. We had been having detailed engagement with key stakeholders like the farming organisations over the course of the past couple of years, during that time. The Commission only approved our proposal on 30 April. I could not write to farmers before then. There is enough confusion. There would be more if I went writing to farmers saying they might be in GAEC or they might not be. We know where the area is. I will talk about the map and the point the Senator raised in a minute. Ultimately, when we got approval and the Commission said it accepted our proposal, that triggered our letters to go out.

How do we come up with the areas? There are a number of existing peat maps that have mapped the whole country. Teagasc has the Hammond map from 2009, which is the one we have used. It is the best one to use in this space. We had to have a controllable area so we can prove to the Commission that we have an area that we can control and examine to make sure the conditionality is met. That conditionality does not change a farmer's day-to-day activity. He can continue to plough, reseed and maintain existing drains and even lay new drainage in a GAEC 2 parcel, subject to existing planning legislation. While it has been in place for 20 years, is that planning legislation in effect? Have people applied for planning previously when they were doing this drainage work? Possibly not, and that is where some of the concern is. I have received loads of queries from farmers wondering if this will stop them from getting planning permission for a house or a shed or something. It is completely separate. It only relates to applying for the single farm payment. The local planning authority does not know what parcel is GAEC 2 and what is not. It is only between the farmer and the Department. We have sent out the maps now. Anyone who is a GAEC 2 farmer has received a map indicating what land parcel on their holding comes in under that. To come up with a control area, we proposed and the Commission accepted that it would be any land parcel with 50% or more peat - it does bring in some mineral soils. We could not have less than 50% peat in the land parcel. If we went for every land parcel that had any peat in it, that would have brought in another 800,000 ha of mineral soils. We think we have got the sweet spot here where we have the right balance between doing what we need to do to meet the baseline conditionality and allowing farmers to continue to have day-to-day activities pretty much unhindered and making sure there will not be a load of farmers fined at the end of this process, which I am very confident there will not be.

Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome our visitors in the Gallery. I hope they enjoy their visit to the Dáil and Seanad today.

Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for his reply. I knew there was a lot of progress on it since 30 April. I am delighted. However, there is still uncertainty among the farmers I represent. If the deadline for submissions is tomorrow, can something be addressed tonight? I know the Minister has only recently taken over his brief. Is there some way there will be a guarantee so people do not feel they are going into something and they cannot reverse? The concern was about the appeals process. There is no guarantee or clarity around that, if people want to make an appeal. Could there be more clarity?

Martin Heydon (Kildare South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Apologies. I did not answer two of the Senator's earlier questions. One was on appeals and the other was on splitting the parcel. Farmers can split the parcel if there is a natural boundary like a wall or hedge in an existing land parcel. They can just do that on the application. There will be an appeals mechanism. Most farmers will not need to appeal this. It will not change their day-to-day activity. I can understand why there is confusion. I can understand how scarred and concerned people are around nature restoration and land designation. This is not that.GAEC 2 is not that. It is a baseline conditionality of just the single farm payment when you apply. My Department consulted the relevant stakeholders and NGOs on the proposed standards. Once approval of the standard was received from the Commission, we wrote to farmers straight away. My Department provided direct information to the farm advisory services. Most farmers are putting in this application in consultation with their advisers. The advisers have been briefed. We had meetings with public and private advisory services to ensure requirements are fully understood. My officials attended a number of public meetings where concerns were raised. My Department officials continue to attend local meetings and we will continue to answer farmers' questions.

As I outlined, the standard will have minimal impact on day-to-day operations of farms beyond what is already legally required anyway. There is no opportunity to further delay the introduction of GAEC 2. To do so would put us in breach with no defensible case to the Commission and would leave us open to significant fines which would come out of the pot of money I have to support farmers. I cannot let that happen because I would then have less money to support our farmers day to day. I reassure farmers about GAEC 2. Farmers down the line will not face loads of fines because day-to day activity will not change.