The Minister, Deputy Heydon, is very welcome here today.

I am delighted to have the opportunity to join Senators today for what is a really important and timely discussion. The Government recognises the exceptional pressure that rising fuel costs is placing and has placed on our farmers, contractors and fishers in particular. I have heard it from friends, neighbours and in my ongoing engagements with all of our agrifood representative bodies in recent weeks, including the main farmer and farm contracting organisations with whom I engage regularly. Green diesel has almost doubled in price, from less than €1 per litre in a matter of weeks, right at the time when farmers and contractors are in the middle of a very busy spring season and facing into a very busy silage season too. The same is true on the fisheries side. This is why the Government approved a substantial package of supports, including the full removal of all non-carbon excise on green diesel to the tune of 7.4 cent per litre and a further payment that will provide support equivalent to 20 cent per litre through a €100 million fuel support scheme. These supports when taken together total 27.4 cent per litre and exceed by nearly 6 cent per litre the entirety of excise, both carbon and non-carbon, charged on green diesel prior to the conflict in the Middle East, which then stood at 21.95 cent per litre. It will benefit farmers and contractors, recognising their central role in sustaining essential food production.

This is about much more than just one sector, though. It is about support for every citizen in the State because when input costs rise, it puts pressure on the price and availability of food for all consumers. Energy shocks without support will lead to significant inflation, particularly in respect of food, on which we all depend. Unchecked, it would have a direct impact on the cost of living for all. By supporting the agrifood sector, our hauliers and all of those reliant on fuel who play a role in getting food from farm to fork, we support everyone. Approximately 120,000 farmers and 1,500 full time agricultural contractors will be eligible to apply for support. There is also provision within this funding to support fishers. I understand that my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, will address the House on the specifics of the fisheries support shortly but I am happy to answer any questions Senators may have on that today. A fund of €5 million per month will be provided in a targeted way to support our fishers and specific specialist horticulture and forestry workers.

For farmers, agriculture and forestry contractors, this targeted and practical support package, based on actual fuel usage last year, ensures that those who are most exposed to these increases will receive meaningful assistance at a critical time of the year on farms. This approach is in line with discussions I have had with key stakeholders, farm organisations, representative bodies and contractor representatives and ensures that funding is directed where it is needed most, that is, helping to sustain essential food production and rural economic activity. It will also, for the first time, provide a direct support to farm contractors, recognising the vital work they do in our farming and forestry systems. This coincides with the first meeting of the farm contracting working group facilitated in line with the programme for Government commitment. Payments will be made through a single application process, with funding allocated based on historic fuel usage in 2025. The need for the scheme to be targeted was strongly emphasised in ongoing engagements with the farmer representative bodies and the farm contractor groups and organisations. My Department has undertaken intensive preparations since last week's Cabinet meeting to approve the €100 million fund to implement the fuel support scheme as quickly as possible.

Yesterday my Department met farm organisations and contracting bodies to discuss in detail the planned implementation of the scheme and I will shortly update my colleagues in Cabinet on same. Timelines will be carefully managed to co-ordinate with the existing payments schedule and ensure delivery of these supports as soon as possible. Liquidity and cash flow may arise as issues for some farmers and contractors in the coming months. Conscious of this, I have written to the main banking institutions asking them to show forbearance with the agrifood and fisheries sector where cash flow issues are emerging and to continue to support these sectors during periods of financial pressure with access to the appropriate levels of short-term finance. I will be meeting the main banks in the coming days and will emphasise these points to them also.

I will speak briefly on the wider package of supports that have been announced. On 24 March the Government introduced €250 million worth of targeted measures to provide temporary reductions in the rates of mineral oil tax applicable to petrol, auto diesel and marked gas oil or green diesel, as we know it. The Government also reduced the NORA levy from 2 cent per litre to a nominal amount for a period of two months. We were clear when we announced our initial package of measures last month that we would keep everything under review, conscious of the ongoing global instability. I made it very clear at the time that our first intervention would not be our last. It was very clear at that time, when the move was on the non-carbon excise element of the diesel price, that there was very little of that on green diesel due to the ongoing support the Government provides to our agriculture sector. The fact was that there was very little non-carbon excise on green diesel in the first place. Similarly, it is not on the fuel that fishers use for very good reasons, namely, that this is about food production and beyond. It meant that in the first intervention farmers felt that it had very little benefit for them compared with the broader package but I was, at that time, working on the broader package. I was working with the contractors' association and beyond. It was very important that we continued to develop a new scheme so that, for the first time ever, we would have a dedicated, targeted scheme for contractors as well as farmers.

Following that initial package I continued to engage with agricultural stakeholders. In early April the Tánaiste and I met farm and farm contractor representatives. I held a further meeting with a wide range of agrifood stakeholders on 10 April, followed by a series of bilateral meetings on 11 April. On 12 April the Government announced a new package of measures on fuel costs to support the transport, farming and fisheries sectors, reducing excise on a VAT inclusive basis as follows: diesel by a further 10 cent, bringing the total reduction on auto diesel to 31 cent per litre; petrol by a further 10 cent per litre, bringing the total reduction to 27 cent per litre; and marked gas oil or green diesel by a further 2.4 cent, bringing the total reduction to 7.4 cent per litre. These overall reductions include the NORA levy reduction. Green diesel or marked gas oil, while appearing to be a relatively smaller decrease, is subject to a reduced rate of excise duty compared to petrol and auto diesel. The combined reductions mean that non-carbon excise duty on green diesel is now zero. The Government is also deferring the planned increase in carbon tax scheduled for 1 May until the budget. This will impact green diesel and non-propellant fuels such as kerosene, heating oil, natural gas and solid fuels. The reductions in excise on fuel for consumers take effect from 14 April and run until 31 July. The NORA levy reduction will also run until 31 July.

I thank colleagues in the House for their ongoing engagement through what has been a very difficult period for the country and for everybody who serves in public office. As we strive to help those most affected by these challenges, we have to manage and navigate a number of hurdles that present themselves. The transposition of the energy directive into Irish law is important and from a European perspective, our engagement with Europe is also really important. State aid rules and the implications of any work we do are also a consideration. These are issues the Government has to work on that the public do not see at face value. I understand that the very viability of some businesses is potentially challenged and people are seeing the very real risks in trying to make the numbers stack up. Contractors faced increases in their diesel bills, at the busiest time of the year, of potentially €70,000 or €80,000. They had real concerns about not being able to access the credit that they would normally access. I know from my own farm at home that generally the system works on the basis of the contractor carrying out the work at the busiest time of the year and the farmer paying later in the year when the cattle are sold or the grain cheque comes in. That business model was going to be greatly challenged in this space so it was right, for the reasons I outlined in terms of the impact on inflation and the cost of living for every citizen in the State, to support our farmers, fishers and hauliers. As an exporting nation and an island, we are so dependent on hauliers for moving products around. If we had allowed costs to run to such a level that they challenged the business model to such an extent, then we would risk increasing the costs of the products that hauliers deliver. Supporting them supports every citizen in the State. There is a very strong financial case for supporting our farmers during this period and for directing support to contractors. My engagement with the farm contractors of Ireland and beyond has been about meeting the programme for Government commitment, established last year, to establish a working group within my Department. That working group has now been established and I am very proud to say has already met. The contractors now have a dedicated resource within my Department to work through a number of issues that have been a concern for a long time. I am really proud that my legacy in the Department will be one of increased support and a better standing for contractors than they had heretofore. This is also the first ever time that we will have a scheme that is dedicated to contractors as well as farmers while differentiating between the two. That brings its own challenges. It means that we have to clearly agree a definition of a farmer and we have to agree thresholds and the normal parameters that there would be in any scheme to be able to reassure people that it will provide value for money for the taxpayer.

I thank people for their support and recognise that this is a significant intervention by the Government to support our farmers, fishers and farm contractors.

I welcome the Minister back to the House. When we mention agriculture, this year so far we have seen so many pitfalls, such as the TB programme, fuel protests, Mercosur challenges, CAP coming in and on top of all that we have the bluetongue vaccine to roll out throughout the whole country, which I hope we do not lose sight of. The backbone of this country is farming and we cannot forget that when we see the amount of money that is made from our exports on an annual basis. These are the people who get up early in the morning and go to work. As one of our colleagues in the Lower House said, they are the people with the black hands. I might not have black hands but they are torn because I was fencing this morning trying to keep in sheep from the neighbour. That is one thing we do not really expect but it has to be done.

We have seen the protests on the streets last week and the anger and frustration of hauliers, farmers and contractors. We have listened to them and I welcome the support scheme that the Minister and his colleagues implemented. We need clarification on a few parts of the scheme going forward. A question that is frequently asked is, will an agricontractor that carries out land reclamation, for example hedge cutting, drainage or roads through farm lands, be entitled to the rebate scheme?

If a farmer purchased gas-marked oil in February 2025 for this season, will this amount to be taken into account for the rebate scheme for the year going forward? If a farmer or contractor has a tax clearance certificate and can prove that he bought a certain amount of gas-marked oil in 2025, will he be able to get a full rebate on the amount he bought in 2025 or will there be a cap on the amount of rebate that he will receive? There are huge contractors and then there are smaller contractors. Will there be a cap on the fuel that was bought? Simplification is a word we use around this House when it comes to farming and farmers. I hope this scheme will be simplified so that there will be no pitfalls in it for the farmers. If a person has receipts for diesel, has a tax clearance certificate from the Revenue Commissioners and can prove that a certain amount of diesel was bought, then that person should be entitled to claim back that same amount of diesel for 2026. That is where the scheme should start and finish.

Why can the Government not cap fuel prices? That question has been thrown at us all over . Why do we not cap it? Has this Government profited from the hike in fuel prices? Some people out there, and some in the Opposition, claim that we have made multi-millions out of the price and profits. I would like to have that rectified in this House here today.

We all know this is not only Ireland's challenge but a global challenge. Challenges, when put to farmers, always come out the other side. The war in Ukraine and the war in Iran certainly impacted on Ireland as a whole this year. Maybe it is time to think outside the box in regard to farming. Maybe it is time to look at generating our own energy supplies. Farmers can put more solar panels on all the sheds in the country to feed into the national grid and receive some money back from ESB Networks for supplying the energy. That is something we need to look at.

I welcome all the moneys on offer to our farmers. As the Minister said, the VAT on petrol and white diesel was 23% but the VAT on green diesel up until now was 13.5%. Farmers are working at this time. The general consensus is that this will work and will ease the burden for the farming communities and contractors. Some clarity is needed around what defines a contractor.

It is up to each farmer to fill in the paperwork and submit it. I hope the Department is ready to issue the money to the farmers and contractors. It is badly needed. We have seen the price of diesel at the moment. The weather is getting good. It is a late spring and the crops are being sown now, fertiliser is being spread. Everybody knows the cost of fertiliser is high at the moment. That is another issue. I hope the money will roll. That is important. The money needs to roll to the people who need it most. They are the people who get up in the morning. Some 99% of the people who were on the streets of Dublin, Galway, Cork and Limerick were hurting. I am glad to see that they are back to work. I hope this money is rolled out to them sooner rather than later and that the scheme will be simplified.

I welcome the Minister. I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach and the Seanad Leader's Office for facilitating this additional hour of debate. It was expected to wrap up last week but a number of people did not get to speak. Thank you for facilitating that.

We are talking about the response to the Government's statement in terms of the fuel and the challenges around that. At the very outset, agriculture, horticulture, forestry, fisheries and indeed the equestrian sector - we must not forget that, particularly in the heartland of the Minister's constituency he knows the significance of the equestrian sector - are under enormous pressures from fuel costs. Increases have indeed fuelled anger and frustration. In the Minister's opening lines he confirmed to us that green diesel has nearly doubled in price. That is the reality of it. Of course, the cost impacts on farmers, sustainable agriculture, food produce, which is a really important line the Minister mentioned also in his statement. It fuelled anger and frustration and we must learn from that, not demonise anybody over it. I am not suggesting anyone is doing that here. There is a learning there. There was anger and a breaking point. We have to reflect on that, learn from it and move on.

I will reference the IFA's response to the Government package. I will quote the IFA's press statement of 13 April 2026. Indeed, I want to reference the Government's announcement for the new package of fuel supports published on 12 April 2026, because they are two important documents.

In the IFA's response to the Government package, its president, Francie Gorman, acknowledged the package of measures announced by the Government and said they were "significant" on 13 April. It was important that the IFA made that statement. It has been vocal on many fronts during this campaign, so it was interesting to read and a very powerful line within the IFA's own message. It went on to state "there will need to be regular engagement to keep the situation under constant review to ensure the agri-sector is protected in these highly volatile times" and that the Government must focus on practical supports.

The Minister and I know that the pressures on farmers, hauliers, transport operators and those with private and commercial vehicles are enormous. They are under immense pressure. We also know the importance of keeping supply chains flowing so that we do not encounter a rocket and feathers effect. That is an important point to make. The IFA is also seeking a fodder scheme and additional supports for the tillage sector, which it mentioned in its press statement. Will the Minister give some feedback on this matter, albeit maybe not today? Will he send us a memo or note on that matter? I know it is at an early stage but that is an ask. The Minister undoubtedly has to take into consideration many demands on his Department in terms of resources, but it is important to put on the record that the IFA is seeking additional support for the tillage sector and mentioned this in its press release.

On 12 April, the Government announced a package of measures, which I referenced in relation to the Government Information Service's press release, as published on its website. The Government announced the "package of measures on fuel costs and to support the transport, farming and fisheries sectors." Its release also said that these measures were an important intervention and "in addition to the previously allocated ... targeted supports to assist those experiencing real and immediate financial pressure."

It is important now to set out a pathway for implementation, and I say that in simple terms. We need simplification and absolute clarity, but we also need to manage people's legitimate expectation around these funds and supports. It is a moving thing. Every day we wake up there are international pressures. We have to plan for that. It is important that we have communication and realistically manage people's expectations of these supports. While I welcome them, that is an important point to make.

I know that the Minister's Department has commenced intensive preparations to implement a suite of measures. The Minister has outlined some of them. Given the scale and complexity, timelines and expectations must be carefully managed to ensure efficient delivery of Government supports. Stakeholders need to be kept informed at the various stages of the schemes. In the past, schemes have not delivered what they promised. I will not repeat all of that. The Minister, many other Members here and I know that there have been difficulties in some schemes about honouring them and making full payments in a timely manner, but I hope we have learned from that. I hope we have the IT skills to administer these schemes and payments under them. That is something that the Minister will clearly be keeping under review. It is important that these various schemes are finalised as quickly as possible, rolled out and clearly communicated to the potential applicants. Communication is key here.

I want to acknowledge the contribution of the Irish Rural Association, Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association, ICMSA, and the Irish Cattle and Sheep Farmers Association, ICSA, who all flagged fuel hardship well in advance of the protests and called for Government supports and interventions. That is an important point. Many of those organisations tell me that they did not feel they were being listened to. They did not feel that their messages were being driven forcefully through. That is their view. Also, there are many individual farmers who are represented by no farm organisation and no representative organisation, and they, too, have valid concerns. It is critical that the Government respond now and works together.

I will leave the Minister with this message. Let us have absolute clarity where we can on the supports and measures. Let us keep simplification to the fore in how we communicate these measures and how we deliver on the payment, or phased payment, of them. At the end of the day, at the very heart of all of this are sustainable and viable rural communities and, for that matter, urban communities. It is important that we recognise the importance of the private vehicle and the commercial vehicle in the greater debate. This is not rural versus urban and it should never be that, but we do know that the rural communities provide our food. They are important in the food chain, both in the internal market in Ireland, but also across the island, in Great Britain and across greater areas.

The measures are welcome. They are a beginning. There has to be flexibility here because we simply do not know what is coming over the horizon. It is also important that we have a sense of caution and realism, and we must manage the expectations of those who are seeking support.

I thank the Minister for his presence here today.

I welcome the Minister and the opportunity to have this debate on fuel supports, specifically for the agricultural sector and based on recent events. The deal has been thrashed out. The previous speaker mentioned a number of the stakeholders who were in the room. I think every sector was well represented. That deal is done. It was not an easy deal to do, but I welcome it and I compliment everybody who was involved in what were very fractious and trying times on coming out with a deal that was acceptable to the vast majority.

I will not take all of my speaking time because we will not rehash all of that. The deal is done. We know why it needed to be done. Depending on who you are talking to but also, as Senator Boyhan mentioned, on fluctuations in the oil market, it may not be enough. Every morning on "Morning Ireland" when it goes to the business news, we hear about the price of a barrel of oil fluctuating at an enormous rate, depending on what utterance has come out of the White House the night before. We are a long way from being out of the woods, to coin a phrase.

While I know the Minister is working on a scheme and I will talk about that in a second, the first package was always to be reviewed. That message go lost along the way somewhere. A lot of people took the package as being a final package, but it was never going to be. The Minister was quite clear on that, as was anyone who was asked about it. It was a first offering and the situation was to be monitored, and if needs be, which was the case, the second package would come. We do not know if there will be a third package, but what contingencies are being put in place and what analysis is being done as to the need for further interventions?

Regarding the current scheme, the Minister says he is working diligently and his officials are working to get it out. The money needs to be paid. The money need to get to the contractors and farmers' pockets ASAP. The cuckoo has arrived and that is when it kicks off on the farm. Now is the time of greatest expenditure. It is now that farmers need the money. I would be a little bit taken aback if, as the Minister referenced, we were still at a phase of deciding the definition of a contractor. I would not be enthused about how soon we will see the terms and conditions of the scheme, how soon people will be applying for the financial aid or how soon people can have that money in their pockets. I hope the Minister can reassure me on that in his final response. It is certainly not reassuring, from where I am standing, and I need the Minister to provide clarification.

There was also a mention of EU state aid cover being necessary. Where are we on that? Has that been achieved yet? To broaden the debate somewhat, the Common Agricultural Policy was set up in 1962. Basically, it was a policy that delivered money to the agricultural sector. It was a social contract between the agricultural sector and society for the provision of traceable, safe and cheap food. With every CAP that has been negotiated since the original one, there has been money peeled away in the multi-annual financial framework. It is ongoing at the minute; there is a proposal for it to be reduced by 20%. We have gone further away from food production and security in CAP. If never before, this should be the wake-up call that we need to revisit food security and the production of good-quality, cheap food for our citizens. We have the mechanism to do it in the CAP.

We cannot be running every time there is a scare. During the past four years, we have had Ukraine and now we have the situation in the Middle East. Fertiliser and fuel are probably the two ingredients that will affect the overall price of food on the table at the end of the day and it seems over and again that these crises and wars are affecting that.

Why can we not build a strategy into CAP to get the money that should be ring-fenced for food production? Money has been leaked from CAP to migration, climate and defence. The biggest issue we have as a society and a generation of people is food security and it is way beyond time to commence the debate. Lack of food security is a bigger issue than any other security we have. That has been highlighted in recent weeks by how a war and the closure of one narrow strait of water can threaten the production and security of the food we need to live and eat. We have always been proud of having plenty of reserves to fall back on. That is not the situation any more and this has highlighted that. They are in negotiations at the moment. We need to stress that when negotiating the CAP budget in the multi-annual financial framework. There need to be insurance budgets - for want of a better phrase - built into the CAP for situations like this so that every time food production is affected, we do not have to run and protest; have meetings, marches and discussions; gather up a load of stakeholders into a room; thrash out a deal; watch what is going on in the rest of the world in the current geopolitical situation; see what is going to happen; and see whether we will have to do the same thing again in two weeks' time. We have the mechanism there; it is called CAP. We need to revert to what it was set up for, that is, securing food. That will include having insurance money in situ in every CAP to ensure we can support our contractors, farmers and hauliers. While this is just agriculture and it is the farmers who produce the food, it would not be on the shelves if it were not for the hauliers. Food production and the cost of food is being affected at every juncture by what has happened recently, and possibly will be again going forward.

I plead that we use this is as a wake-up call to build insurances into the coming CAP and all future CAPs for situations like this. Money can be make available for climate actions, floodings, etc., but fuel crises, the lack of availability of fuel and fluctuating fuel costs need to be built in there also.

I warmly welcome the scheme the Minister mentioned but I would like to see how soon the money can get to the fishers. I welcome that the fishers are included. Often, and I am as guilty of this as anyone else, we talk of agriculture and food and do not go as far as the marine. Especially by those who come from two midland counties as the Minister and I do, the fishers can often be forgotten. When we talk about our tractors and how much diesel they burn, we can only imagine what a trawler is burning and the extra expense on them.

The Minister said he would talk to the banks about being lenient. I ask him to also talk to the fuel distributors and suppliers, who are in many cases now demanding payment on delivery. I know there is extra money involved and the 1,000 litres cost twice what they did. They will probably have to carry more credit but if the farmers do not have it, they do not have it. Some suppliers are saying they will not come out to fill a tank unless the money is there. The Minister needs to talk to them and maybe tell the banks to talk to them. If the banks supported them, they might be able to give the fuel to the farmers without demanding payment upfront.

A Sheanadóir Collins, an bhfuil tú ag roinnt do chuid ama leis an Seanadóir McCormack? Tá. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Go raibh maith agat. I have spoken to many farmers and contractors in recent weeks. When speaking about supports, they said their main objective was to see supports at the pumps, not a rebate scheme. I will not turn my nose up at €100,000 and I am sure nobody will, but they wanted it at the pumps as an instant relief on the cost they faced. I hope there will be enough staff put in to resource this. We have gone through ACRES a lot in committee and the Minister has assured us ACRES is up and running fine and the late payments are either up to date or are scheduled. I hope this does not go down the same path and that farmers and contractors do not have to wait until next year to see their payment come through. They cannot afford to do that.

On fertiliser, urea was €520 per tonne earlier in the spring and has gone up to €800 per tonne. I know of one farmer in Mayo who is milking 400-plus cows. He gets five loads of urea every year at the start. He is paying an extra €30,000 or €35,000 this year. That is a huge amount to have sitting in a bank amount on the contingency you may have to pay it. I do not know how he will pass that cost on. I do not think there is a way to pass it on. Something will fall behind on his farm or in his life.

We need to look at a full package; it cannot stop at fuel. We definitely need to look at fertiliser. Considering we had such a wet start to the year, it has only been going out for the last couple of weeks. Everything is late this year. Growth will be late and cutting will be late. Last year was slightly better but this year will be tough.

To anybody who asks where the Government will get the extra funds, I would respond it is a full package of €750,000 between farmers, contractors and hauliers. Think of the couple of steps that were built for €700,000. Maybe we could stop building steps and security huts and start thinking about where it needs to go. I know the Minister knows because he comes from a farm and knows what it costs and the stress that goes with it every day. They need our support and we need to stand up here and fight for that support.

We are talking about the Minister liaising with all the different agencies but the people out on the ground were not all part of these agencies. A lot of them were part of none of these agencies. It is wrong that some say in these Houses we will not engage with people who are not in these agencies. There was every kind of contractor and haulier. Just because they are not in the IFA or the Irish Road Haulage Association does not mean they should have any less of a voice. I met them when they were on their protest and I listened to them. I felt some people from the Minister's Department should have been there as well. When there was an IFA meeting in Newbridge in the Minister's constituency, I was there. They were looking to talk to the Minister. The whole Larry Murrin thing was going on. Now that can has been kicked down the road. They are looking to be listened to and keep saying they are not being heard.

We hear of this €100 million package. When will it begin? There were road hauliers who were out there and I spoke to them only last night. They told me they are getting 12.8 cent off green diesel but that is if they can get a rebate. If a haulier is delivering livestock, he gets nothing. Why should he be treated differently from another haulier on the road? Everything just got so confusing and there was liaising with so many different Departments. You are giving sweets to one and you are giving a bowl of coal to the other but then you are forgetting that the one thing they were asking for and that could keep their businesses on the road was for the price at the pumps to be reduced. These rebates might come in four times a year but these people have a serious cash flow issue at the moment. The cost of living and of everything cannot be put onto their consumers. What are they supposed to do right now? We are all faced with these questions every day and that is why we are coming in here looking for answers. If there is this €100 million package, when will they start to see the results? They need to know where they will get this money from and when they will see the results. Will the Minister look at real supports right now, rather than quarterly rebates to those who qualify?

We saw the CSO figures out last week. As the Government will have €3.5 million of a budget surplus, I do not want to hear the money is not there. I can talk about the public waste of money - I stand up and talk about it in this Chamber every week - but these are people who keep our country going. They are struggling, their mental health is struggling and their businesses are struggling. I know a haulier who transports pigs and does not know if he can keep his trucks on the go.

There are little bits of support that might be there for April or might be there for May. He does not know after that. They need clarity now. They do not want to know about all of these big millions of figures that are coming. They want to know what is going to affect them now, how they can keep their businesses going and how they can keep their trucks on the road. It will not really give them any type of stability to know that there may be €100 million but we might not see anything until July. We are in April so I would love the Minister to stand up and give us some clarity for those who are watching in at home now who do not know how they are going to keep their businesses on the road. Green diesel is not a luxury. They wanted to see the price properly reduced at the pump and not in a rebate that they have to pay out first. They do not have the money. It is time now to talk directly to the people. Had they been liaised with properly in the beginning we would not have had the situation where they felt they had no choice but to get out and protest. Nobody blames them for doing it because all they were doing and all they were asking was for the Government to listen. We forget in these Houses who elects us. It is those very people who elect us. It is not anything we need to take for granted.

Senators Nessa Cosgrove and Malcolm Noonan intend to share time. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. We all know in here that the production of meat and dairy for global markets is a key sector of our economy and provides about 7% of the total gross value added of our annual wealth, which is €16 billion annually coming in to our country through agricultural exports. Up to now, this existing free market economic model in the export of high value dairy and meat made sense but this model of working is over. The era of free market global trade is over. I do not want to be the prophet of doom but it is like Senator Paul Daly said, the move towards tariffs, protectionism and trade wars was evident even in the first Trump Presidency. We failed to take that warning and we failed to act when the second Trump regime started weaponising tariffs to ensure their policy objectives.

The growing, packing and movement of cheap food is dependent upon the availability of cheap oil but the era of cheap oil is over. We have seen the cost of green diesel, which farmers depend on, almost double in two months from around 97 cent to €1.80 a litre. It does not take an economist understand that the operation of a farm in Sligo or Leitrim making an average annual income of just €25,000 rapidly becomes unsustainable in these circumstances. Nearly all the fertiliser that beef farmers use is imported and produced in the Middle East, China and Russia, regions that are either currently unstable or at high risk of instability due to possible future conflicts. Two thirds of the grain we use to feed our cattle or to produce our bread is imported. Food is packaged in disposable plastic trays and bags made from fossil fuels and shipped or flown around the world. Beef and dairy is going out while vegetables and grain are coming in. We have failed to prepare for the end of the two eras of globalisation and cheap fossil fuels, leaving us completely vulnerable to global food insecurity.

In the over-specialisation of the production of beef and dairy for export, we have also failed to protect our growers. We should have seen the dangers and we should have acted sooner. We need to move beyond supports only for dairy and beef. Of course support dairy and beef farmers but we must also provide more support for our growers. A total of 83% of our fresh fruit and vegetables are imported. This is not just the exotics that we cannot grow here but it is also the crops we could easily grow in Ireland. Apples, carrots, broccoli, onions, garlic and potatoes are imported from across the globe at an enormous financial and environmental cost. There has been a collapse in the number of commercial growers operating within the State from around 600 in the 1990s - where I grew up there were growers all around me - to just 74 today. Recently, a grower in Kilkenny responsible for 12% of our national carrot crop went into liquidation.

Making the changes that would support our growers would be a relatively simple process. This is why I appreciate this debate with the Minister. Below-cost selling and the undercutting of Irish products by supermarkets needs to be stopped. We should be subsidising Irish produce at the point of sale so that choosing the Irish option will always be cheaper for the consumer and it should never cost the producer. Farming is an indigenous enterprise that could produce enough vegetables, grain, poultry, meat, eggs and dairy to meet our needs. We have amazing assets. We have the skills of farmers, the innovation of the agrifood sector and the support of CAP. We also have an abundance of natural resources. As well as bringing real money into our economy from outside the country, farmers generate employment and wealth throughout our rural communities. We all know that farmers support local economies. They buy local and the money stays in the local economy.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. I just want to add to the points made by my colleague. The shock that has been reverberating around the world has to be the wake-up call for our agricultural system. It gives us the opportunity to look at changes in models of agriculture in Ireland and in particular to look at regenerative agriculture such as using less chemical fertiliser inputs. Among the farms down in my part of the country is the Daniels' farm that uses a lot less nitrogen-based fertilisers and that is a profitable dairy enterprise.

Agroforestry and working farming with nature has to be a central tenet of the next cycle of what we do with CAP. The CAP budget will be reduced and there are huge demands on it. It is clear that the Commission is trying to move away from those direct subsidies. We will see the LIFE projects being eliminated in the next cycle as well. This is at a time when we have a nature restoration plan and an opportunity for farmers to participate in long-term schemes where they could be getting additional income for restoring nature on their lands.

Will the Minister say how many local abattoirs are left in this country? We should be butchering meat and selling it locally in our local butcher shops. My colleague made the point in relation to the groceries order and the below-cost selling of vegetables in our supermarkets. That issue has to be tackled. The horticulture sector is really in a terrible state and it needs similar supports, if not greater supports, than dairy and beef are getting. If we are looking at future-proofing our agricultural sector away from the shocks that we are experiencing at the moment it has to be towards regenerative farming. There are lots of very small producers out there producing for local markets. Developing that sector and developing local markets for produce, with direct selling to customers, has to be the way. It must be at least part of the way forward, if not the entire way forward. I ask the Minister to give consideration to that.

While I have the floor, I mentioned in the Order of Business the traditional farm buildings grant. In 2025 that grant scheme was €1.5 million but this year it has been cut in half to €750,000. If the Minister can find any money in the coffers in the Department of agriculture I ask that he give it to the Heritage Council. It is a hugely popular scheme for farmers and farm organisations. If that funding could be reinstated for our traditional farm buildings, I would certainly welcome that.

The Minister is welcome to the Chamber. We are living in unprecedented times. I think that is not a cliché that can be overused enough at the moment. I respect that the Minister is living through a crisis that is directly affecting his Department and I want to compliment him on how he is handling the crisis, for the Minister's engagement with us as Oireachtas Members, and with the organisations that are deeply affected by the crisis we are living in.

We had quite an honest debate here last Tuesday in the Chamber when we spoke about the fuel crisis and the protests. Many of us across the room spoke quite honestly and said that we needed to speak out as parliamentarians and that the Government needed to take lessons, learn lessons and act better. That is the debate we have inside in this Chamber. It is based on fact, based on emotions and based on reality. It is also important to put on record the level of support that has been provided in the recent package by the Government of €750 million. Some will say it is the biggest package in Europe, while some will say it is the second biggest. I think Malta is a little bit ahead of us. This is €137.87 to every citizen within this country that the Government has provided. That is welcome and badly needed because people are under pressure. As parliamentarians we know that people are under pressure. We feel their pressure and we do our very best to explain and communicate that pressure to the Government or from opposition. That is our role. I genuinely want to put on the record the Minister's work and the Government's work in putting that package in place. We continue to manage this crisis while we need to see potentially if we need to do more.

Senator Daly raised a very important question. What I am hearing on the ground is that simplification is needed in agriculture for the various schemes that are currently in operation, not the support scheme that is currently put in place for this. Simplification is needed. Outside of the work for this support package, will the Minister consider carrying out a review within the Department of the various schemes and simplifying if at all possible? In recent times the Minister has asked the EU to simplify habitats and nature restoration law to make it more simplified for farmers and to communicate it better. That is a really welcome call and we need to do that within our own Departments as well. I recently brought a number of stakeholders together in west Cork including the Department's forestry section, the National Parks and Wildlife Service, NPWS, Cork County Council and various organisations, to communicate with the farmers on a specific issue.

To say there was divergence at the meeting would be an understatement. There was even divergence within the NPWS on how it should communicate with farmers. We need to do better.

I have a couple of specific questions, one of which is on the carbon tax. I am strongly of the view that we should remove carbon tax on green diesel and agriculture because we do not have alternatives in that space. I welcome carbon tax in terms of its support for retrofitting and the fuel allowance but I believe we should remove it. I am asked by many of the farmers that I represent why there is no carbon tax paid on aviation fuel. I am not sure if the Minister has the answer. Maybe that is a question for the Minister for Transport, Deputy Darragh O'Brien. Why is there no carbon tax paid on aviation fuel? I would like an answer to that question.

I also want to acknowledge the support scheme that was put in place for fishers. We are all aware in this House of the lack of support for the fishing community in recent years, if not decades. This time it is a credit to the Government that a scheme is going to be put in place to support fishermen with their increased fuel costs. That is welcome and I thank the Minister specifically for his engagement on that. Senator Manus Boyle asked me to raise the specific point that it is for the whole sector, both inshore and offshore. Inshore fishers are being protected here as well. As many of the inshore boats are small with petrol engines and do not qualify for the current supports, it is important they are included in the new scheme.

There is important work ahead in agriculture. The CAP does not get mentioned in agriculture debates as much as I would like. It is going to be really important in the months ahead to ensure that we have a sustainable CAP, a CAP that actually works for the farmers of today. I thank the Minister for his work. It is clear that this funding must be released as soon as possible and that the process involved must be as simple as possible.

I begin by welcoming the Minister. It is the first time that I have met him face to face and I am delighted to be here to make my views known. As someone who was elected on the Cultural and Educational Panel, I found the debate today very educational. I have learned a lot from listening to colleagues. I know for a fact that the assistance package, for want of a better term, that was delivered last week by the Minister, Deputy Heydon, and his Government, in the panoply of aid packages across Europe, is one of the most generous. Senator O'Donovan attested to that earlier.

I was impressed by the generosity and the ability to react to an ever evolving situation that looked, to my layman's eyes, to be getting nastier and more fractious by the day. I really worried about it. Senator Boyhan who has departed our company in the last few minutes, mentioned that it is important to manage expectations and the Government needs to be conscious of that. I would hate to see a situation arise where every pressure group could take to the streets, cause mayhem and get a dole-out within a few days. As the Government said, speaking within the recognised procedures to the recognised representative groups gives a robustness to the whole democratic process. I heard somebody suggest that the people out there were not engaged with but I do not accept that for a moment. Everybody was potentially engaged with. We do that every five years in a thing called a general election. I do not accept that it is necessary to cause mayhem on the streets. I missed a funeral in Dublin last Tuesday. One cannot go back and visit a funeral again when one is stopped from attending it because of a blockade on the road. I was not the only one. There were thousands of people who missed appointments and this, that and the other. I am getting slightly off topic but these are important points to make. We must manage expectations and not show a tendency to throw in the towel whenever a pressure group comes our way. The Government did well. It was a very generous package and as someone who is not involved in the agriculture sector, I want to thank the Minister for that.

I want to raise another issue now. I want to advert not just to the implications for farmers and haulage contractors but also for shipping agents and shipping companies. In that realm, I draw Members' attention to the second paragraph of a letter sent by the Minister, Deputy Heydon, to Waterford City and County Council. It reads as follows: "The Department strongly condemns the mistreatment of any animal and takes the matter of animal welfare most seriously. Neglect of, or causing unnecessary suffering to, animals is not acceptable in our society". In the context of haulage and export and bearing that in mind, despite the ongoing conflict in the region large volumes of Irish cattle are still being exported to Israel, both directly from Ireland and from other EU member states. Since October 2023, for example, 9,000 young cattle have been shipped directly to Haifa from Greenore alone. Irish cattle can easily be identified by their tags. Not only do these animals have to contend with a long sea journey, which is costly for exporters, where they suffer from respiratory illness, ringworm, corneal ulcers, leg injuries, diarrhoea and varying degrees of heat stress among other things, they are arriving in to the middle of a so-called war hot zone. Sources at Haifa port have informed us that every day during hostilities barrages of rockets fall on to the port and surrounding areas where the quarantine centres and fattening farms are centred. It is beyond my understanding that any competent authority is still authorising shipments of this nature in the knowledge that animals are being put into great peril of life and limb and possibly the ultimate cruelty. Furthermore, the workers at the port operate there in fear of their lives and want to complete the unloading with unprecedented rapidity. It is observed that this haste involves the widespread use of electric prodding to get the cattle off the vessels as quickly as possible. It is clear that sending animals to Israel at this moment is sending them into extreme danger. Nowhere is safe. Much the same is happening in Lebanon with the current campaign. I am making these observations not with any animus towards legitimate trade but from what I hope is a moral perspective. We are all humans in this Chamber and we should show cause with all sentient creatures. It might be worthwhile for the Minister to address that in his reply.

I thank the Minister for coming to the House today. I am deeply invested in this issue. I agree with the Sinn Féin Senators who said that what agricultural contractors want to see are reductions at the pump. I understand it when the Minister says that cannot happen but that is how they see it working properly. I know a number of lads, agricultural contractors, who have gone out of business in the last year. At the recent protests there were echoes of 2008 when many agricultural contractors went to the wall. There was huge fear among those contractors who lived through that period. They definitely do not want to go through a similar situation again. As we all know, the margins for these contractors are small. Their outgoings are huge and the leasing of machinery is huge. They might pay €400,000 for a harvester that might only do two or three months' work in the year. Often agricultural contractors are the very last to get paid. The fellow who sells the fertiliser gets paid first. He gets paid before the contractor.

There is an obligation on the Minister to protect food production from global shocks and to enhance food security. Why was the price of agri-diesel not meaningfully reduced in the first funding tranche? That points to the fact that the Government's eye was off the ball and that agri-diesel was an afterthought. Why was that the case? Why was it left until after the Easter break when men were really fighting for their livelihoods and those of their families? There are also questions about how this rebate scheme is going to work.

Has the Minister a definition of what a contractor is? A lot of contractors and fishermen I am hearing from are concerned that they will be outside the remit of this rebate scheme. That is a huge concern for them. What will that scheme look like? When will the agri-sector benefit from that scheme? Has the Minister any idea how he will roll it out? I know there is an idea of how it will be rolled out for farmers. Has he considered the carbon tax element? As Senator O'Donovan has said, there are no alternatives for these guys. They have no alternative. Farmers know the difficulty with Government schemes through TAMS and ACRES, which are overly bureaucratic with the Department nearly wanting to know the colour of your underwear. Is the new scheme going to be based on last year's diesel receipts? There can be a difference in diesel spend in the past year, particularly with so many contractors going out of business. Some of them will have to take on more work and more machines, and I know one contractor who says he has 1,000 acres extra silage to cut.

During the bank bailout the farmers were asked to increase food productivity to try to bring us out of that recession. Farmers bought more land and invested heavily in their businesses. They are now in my view being penalised by the same Government for that.

Does the Minister agree with Leo Varadkar's comments at the weekend that it is the people in urban areas who are paying all the bills while farmers are the ones receiving a lot of subsidies? Does he think farmers are a burden on the State? I want to pick up on Senator O'Donovan's point. He spoke about the €750 million package being brilliant. I say that RTÉ got €750 million over a few years. I know people like Senator Joe Conway were stopped from going to funerals and that, and some people were badly inconvenienced. I know these men who were protesting, and they were protesting to save their businesses and to be heard.

I find it hard to believe that four weeks on from the initial measures people are still wondering why such a small amount was taken off the green diesel. Some 15 cent was taken off petrol and 20 cent was taken off diesel, but it was from the excise duty and there is only 11 cent of excise duty on green diesel. That is the reason why there was such a small amount. However, that has been addressed, and we always knew it was going to be addressed and monitored as the situation developed. I also refer to Senator Noonan, who spoke about protecting our butchers and abattoirs. I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment. In some situations, I believe we are regulating these abattoirs out of existence, and it is something we should be wholeheartedly embracing and trying to retain.

As my colleague has already pointed out, €750 million was either the largest or second largest measure enacted across Europe. We have to be appreciative of that. On the farm subsidy support scheme, I welcome the measure. It was a measure that was further down the page when it was announced, and a lot of people did not see it initially as up to 20 cent off green diesel for those providers. However, I met some constituents at the weekend. I met a young fellow who is a new agricultural contractor. He worked for the past couple of years with other providers. He set up his own business last September and between September and December he does not have enough receipts to justify himself going into this new agricultural season where he expects to be quite busy. He hopes there can be some exceptions for individuals like that because they are still experiencing the same high costs and are still extensively leveraged for the machinery they have bought. Hopefully something can be done about that. As well as that, Senator Duffy and I have been contacted by the Irish Co-operative Organisation Society, ICOS, which has engaged with the Minister and was involved in the negotiations. The schemes that have been introduced are based on extensive engagement he has had with all of these organisations. ICOS represents a range of rural co-operative businesses involved in milk processing, feed milling, livestock markets and agri-trading. These are businesses like Aurivo in Ballaghaderreen, County Roscommon, which is an extensive employer in my area. These collective businesses make a substantial contribution to the rural and national economy and to exports. Their members operate significant road transport fleets involved in milk collection and animal feed deliveries. While they welcome the package of supports in response to the escalating energy costs, they reiterate the need to see strong supports for farmers and the businesses they rely on such as co-ops. ICOS members are carrying dramatically increased energy costs at the moment. Their concern with the road transport support scheme is that it will cause inequality in the haulage of agri-goods and produce because the eligibility requires them to be a licensed haulier rather than their own transport. Hopefully, something like that can be looked at because they do not operate private milk collection or food transport schemes themselves.

As well as that my colleague has mentioned carbon tax, which is a tax I agree with in principle. It is bringing €1 billion into the Irish economy at the moment. That money is ringfenced for our SEAI grants. Even the ACRES scheme is supported by it I believe. However, the tax was introduced with a clear purpose, which was to discourage the use of fossil fuels and drive a transition towards cleaner and more sustainable energy sources. In principle, I am sure that is a goal we all support in this Chamber. Reducing emissions and protecting our environment is essential for future generations, but the policy must reflect the practical realities. Farmers and agricultural contractors do not currently have viable alternatives to fossil fuels when it comes to powering machinery. Tractors, harvesters and other essential equipment depend on green diesel. There is no widely available affordable alternative to meet their demands. I welcome the postponement of the increase, but I would like to see a discussion had about postponing that further until there is a viable and suitable alternative to green diesel.

My apologies, I did not realise that Senator Brady had not spoken.

I want to just set the record straight here.

Has the Senator spoken on this already?

I have spoken but I just want to set-----

I am afraid we have called on the last speaker.

-----the record straight on Senator Joe Conway's remarks about our live exports. It is important we set the record straight before we go any further. Our live exports are a very important part of our-----

We really have to call on the Minister to talk.

-----agri-sector. They contribute so much to the sector, and I would not like to see any of our people who are exporting cattle labelled in such a fashion. I hope Senator Conway will withdraw some of those remarks about our live exports.

We take note of the Senator's comments.

There are strict and stringent rules from the Department, and I hope they will be taken off the record.

I call on the Minister to respond.

I thank all of the Members who contributed to today's debate and put forward thought-provoking points and clearly articulated the experiences they have had in recent weeks. I have highlighted a number of questions they want answered, which I will go through. I reflect on some of the comments made about how Government engaged with the public and beyond that. The point about democracy was referenced in simple terms. I am a democrat, and I am proud of our democracy. I will fight to the death for people's right to have a different view to mine and to be clearly able to articulate that in a constructive way.

Any power I have in my role as Minister for agriculture and as a TD is derived from the people through the democratic process. We have elections. Those processes come and go. People in this House were elected through a democratic process as well. That process gives us the power that is derived from the people. When future elections come, those who are not Members of this House or the Lower House but who wish to be will have the ability to put their names forward. Until then, we have been charged by the people democratically to make decisions to protect these sectors as much as we can. We do that to the best of our ability.

Senator Brady talked about simplification, which he made very clear in his point. He asked about 2026 and 2025. This is based on usage in 2025. It will be self-declaration. When talking about simplification, it does not get any easier than self-declaration but there will be a robust audit process because this is taxpayers' money. We will always protect taxpayers' money. Some of the contributions make it sound like there is a bottomless pit or it is our or someone else's money, but it is the people's money. We are charged through the democratic process with minding it and using it to the best of our ability to support the public. That is what we are doing in supporting our farmers, fishers, farm contractors, hauliers and more.

Farmers and farm contractors will have to prove their usage in 2025. There is a very good reason for that. If they were proving their usage in 2026, we would not be able to pay them until after the end of the process. We want to pay them before this process ends. This covers until the end of July. It is my clear intention that people will be paid in advance of that because they need the money quickly. As to how soon this can be done, as soon as possible. As to how soon it will be open for applications, as soon as possible. We have made good progress since I got approval last Sunday week. I anticipate I will be able to bring this to Cabinet very soon to be able to open for applications. We are making progress. I ask people to bear that in mind.

On who will be covered, the scheme is focused from a farmer's perspective on the undertaking that it is active primary production of agricultural products on farms. There is a clear definition from the Commission as to what that is. Farmers and contractors are both covered.

Senator Brady asked about state aid requirements. Discussions are ongoing around a state aid temporary framework to cater for the consequences of the crisis in the Middle East. It is expected that this will come into effect in the coming weeks across the EU, which is an important point to reflect on as well.

The Senator also asked about price caps. There is a good reason we have not introduced price caps - they do not work. International evidence from Hungary, France and Slovenia shows they can lead to shortages, queues and rationing. It does not remove the costs, but transfers them from the individual to the taxpayer, which is still everybody's money. It costs billions of euro in the short term and would significantly undermine economic stability, leaving consumers much worse off. It is not in people's best interests to have price caps. I am happy to be able to clarify that.

Senator Brady also asked if the Government was profiteering from this. When the price of fuel went up, Exchequer funds were increased by about €4 million a week as a result. When we introduced the first package of €250 million, that was an Exchequer intervention to support the public across a range of areas to the tune of €4 million a day. We have as a Government used taxpayers' money by taking away and covering the NORA levy as well. We are subsidising fuel now by around 32 cent a litre, so it is far from profiteering, which was the message that deliberately misled the people through social media in very simple terms. It takes a few minutes for me to explain that back. This is the challenge the Government will always have - "When you are explaining, you are losing". It is hard to win over hearts and minds when you have to explain these intricacies but the Government will continue to do that. On that basis, the Government was far from profiteering. This is all taxpayers' money. We were using it in a very targeted way, as we clearly did again subsequently.

Senator Boyhan spoke about simplification, clarity and the need to manage expectations. He made a point around fodder schemes and tillage supports. I have an ongoing budgetary process. I always have to agree a clear set of priorities for the year in terms of next year's budget and beyond. I will continue to do that. Work in my Department never stops. Previous schemes and communication are important.

A number of Senators referenced ACRES. I think Senator Collins referenced it in particular. I am very proud this week that we have expended €37 million of taxpayers' money on 47,000 farmers in balancing payments under ACRES. It is a properly functioning scheme. It had challenges at the start. I was not happy with it when I came in. I worked closely with my officials and we have it going very well. Those farmers were very appreciative of receiving that payment. They are the farmers who put their hand up for a higher environmental ambition in their work, taking on that extra measure, and they are being supported in doing that. On the points around carbon tax throughout this debate, in excess of €1.5 billion is the cost of ACRES because we took in additional people who applied in the second round. Some €170 million of carbon tax this year goes to fund that element of ACRES. Farmers are direct recipients and beneficiaries of that. I take on board the genuine points expressed about that and the lack of an alternative source. A private individual has the option to purchase an electric car and put solar panels on their house but a farmer who has a tractor does not have the alternative of an electric tractor. This has to be reflected upon. It is a challenge for us.

Senator Boyhan referenced farm bodies and representative groups of farm contractors, as did Senator Paul Daly, and asked that I engage with them. They have a mandate from their members but we listen to everybody. We engage with the people. We are messengers of the people as TDs and Members of the Upper House. Similarly, Members' engagement as elected representatives of the Oireachtas is also important in terms of their input in our policy-making. I respect the mandate of everybody here. That is why when they ring and they reach out, I am happy to refer back.

Senator Daly asked if it would be enough. A few other contributors asked what the future held. We do not know for sure. We do not control the cause of the energy shock. We did not create the war between Iran, the US and Israel and we cannot be sure when it will end. We all hope and pray it will end as soon as possible, primarily for the people directly affected, but also to be able to get back to a more normal way of operating. I am acutely aware of the impact energy shocks have on everyone's lives. That is why the Government cannot spend every euro available to it now. To those who ask us to do so, it would not be a responsible thing for the Government to do. We have to manage and have a robustness in the Exchequer funds that allows us to get through what could be a very tough winter and to have that set of interventions. I am not in a position to give any commitments beyond the €100 million and where we are at. I do not know what the future holds or if interventions will be needed.

In making the case I did to my Cabinet colleagues when seeking €100 million to support farmers, fishers and farm contractors, I reflected that we were in the busiest time of the year for the use of green diesel in agricultural activity and producing our food. Whether you are a dairy, tillage or other kind of farmer, we are heading into a very busy silage season and into July we will be into the cereal season. This intervention is a direct support at the time it is needed the most.

On the points articulated across the House about the cash flow challenges posed for contractors, in all of my engagements with farm organisations, I put two options to them. There was the option of direct intervention in a flat rate per hectare payment, which would be quicker but would not be targeted on usage. The clear majority view was it was better to design a new scheme, which takes time because you are not working off the blueprint of a previous scheme. We never had a scheme for contractors before. We are making great progress in having that open for applications very soon. There will be no delay but it takes a little more time do something new. It was the majority view across the representative bodies to have something targeted based on usage. Contractors by their nature use a lot more, so they will get more of the subsidy than individual farmers, but that benefits every contractor's customer because they will see a lower contractor bill than they would have if this intervention had not been made. Every farmer who uses a contractor will benefit from that, just as they will benefit from the subsidy themselves.

Senator Daly's point on food security is relevant. The scheme details will be available as soon as possible. We are working night and day on that. We have made great progress in a little over a week on in.

The Senator's point around fuel distributors is also valid. I will be meeting with representatives from a number of the banks tomorrow. In engaging with them, I will make the point about ensuring that latitude is given and that there will be forbearance. A key point, which was highlighted by Senators Collins, McCormack and O'Reilly, is that contractors just want the reduction at the pumps. Senator O'Reilly said that this is the only way contractors can see it happen. That is because they never had a scheme previously. I will be the first Minister for agriculture ever to have a directly targeted scheme based on usage to which contractors will be able to apply. Of course, they cannot see that because they have not experienced it before. However, the best way to do it is on the basis of their usage, etc. We will do that in a targeted way.

Senator Collins mixed up her thousands with her millions when she referred to a figure of €750,000. It is €750 million of an intervention.

In fairness, Senator McCormack corrected herself.

Did she? Okay. To be clear, €750 million is also another way of saying three quarters of a billion euro. For anybody to try to minimise that intervention and say that it is not enough, we would be getting into magic money tree territory if we were to say that we just need more and more. We have to manage that. I was just double-checking that was not a deliberate attempt to minimise what is on offer.

Definitely not.

That is fair enough. I accept that. It is important to make that point.

The clarity Senator McCormack referenced will be coming soon, but we have made huge progress in regard to the mechanics of how this operates.

Senator Cosgrove painted a bleak picture of the challenges and the concerns that exist. In the context of the points she made - I do not have time to dwell on this but I would love to get into a longer debate on it - I bring to her attention the fact that we have interventions that support our more marginal sectors, such as the vegetable sector, that are struggling. The introduction of the agrifood regulator, which I have granted additional powers, is a direct support to equalise the balance between the primary producer, the processor and the retailer and, in that space, the vulnerability that the primary producer has had in the past. A ban on below-cost selling will only drive more money into the supermarkets' pockets. You cannot guarantee that money gets back to the primary producer. We have to protect the primary producer - I absolutely see that - and we have to protect our system. To challenge the overall point the Senator made to the effect that exporting food is bad and that importing food is bad, there is an inference there that we should just get back to sustainability. There was a great deal of subsistence farming in the 1950s, and we were a very poor country.

The direct answer to Senator O'Reilly's question is that I completely disagree with Leo Varadkar's comments. The reason I believe he is wrong is because activity in rural Ireland drives our rural economy. Our urban dwellers love to go on holidays down the country over the summer. It is not only the tourism industry that has our vibrant rural communities. It is our fishers and our farmers and the work they do all year round that drives those communities on and that ensures that our countryside is well kept and that Ireland is a beautiful place to visit. This is as a result of our rural towns and villages being driven on because of the multiplier effect created by our farmers spending money locally and by their making money from producing beef and dairy products and exporting them. Food security is about the integrated nature of global food supply chains. It is not about producing everything here ourselves. However, that is a matter for a wider debate.

In response to Senator Noonan's points on regenerative agriculture, there is a lot happening in that space. Getting back to the point, let us not distil it down into too much simplification from a food security perspective.

Senator O'Donovan spoke about simplification and asked whether I would consider a review of all schemes. We have that coming up in the form of the reform of the CAP. We will hold the Presidency of the EU Council in the second half of this year. I am not being glib in saying that. I am actually saying that the Senator is dead right, but this is the huge opportunity. When I have the Presidency of the AGRIFISH Council, in designing the new CAP, I am determined that we deliver simplification. I am on the record previously as saying that means fewer schemes. It means less paperwork to get whatever money we have - we will fight for more money because we do not have enough in it - delivered as easily as possible.

It is absolutely our intention to support fishers. Senators Kyne and Boyle were in contact with me in respect of inshore fisheries as well and the €5 million monthly. We are at an advanced stage on designing a new scheme there as well.

Senator Conway spoke of managing expectations. I am. My expectation is that I will have a scheme open for farmers and contractors very soon and that I will be able to pay them soon after. In terms of the importance of live exports, Ireland has a very high standard of animal welfare. This is something that I have responsibility for and that I take very seriously.

Senator Scahill referred to new entrants. We provide for new entrants in other schemes. My clear commitment to Macra, which raised this with me directly, is that there would be provision for somebody who is a first-time farmer this year and who did not farm last year. We have to design that. It is my hope and intention to be able to devise a way to do that for new contractors as well, but, obviously, we also have to protect taxpayers' money in that regard.

Senator O'Reilly missed my earlier contribution. In it, I touched on a lot of the points the Senator raised.

Those are most of the points I want to make. I thank Senators for this debate. I understand how important it is that we deliver a scheme that supports our farmers, farm contractors, fishers and forestry contractors through this most difficult of times. Recognising that challenge, there is a good rationale for the entire State and every citizen in it to support them. I thank the Senators for their support and look forward to being back before them in the near future.