Conor D McGuinness: 900% Rent Hike Threatens Waterford Farmers

Minister, 16 hill farmers on the Knockmill Downs in West Waterford are facing rent increases of 900% by a British absentee landlord and this increase will put them off the land. These are generational farmers, families who have farmed that mountain for generations, for centuries and I've met them several times and only last week David Cullinan and I were up on the mountain with them and what's happening here is a stark injustice and it has echoes, Minister of Darker Times, when absentee landlords, British aristocrats pushed Irish farmers off the land and that is a comparison that should concern all of us and it certainly should concern government. It's 2026 Minister, not 1846, yet farmers in Waterford are being forced off land that their families have farmed for generations and government is making it worse. At the very moment that these farmers are under the most pressure in this land dispute, their farm payments are being withheld. The Irish government is holding them over a barrel and it's strengthening the landlord's hand. So the government is taking a side, the Department of Agriculture is taking a side in this and it's pushing these farmers towards the edge and I've raised this issue previously with your colleague, with Minister Hayden. There have been protests, there's been strong public support, this has been raised by congressmen and MPs in the United States and in Britain and but yet there's been no action from government. It's not acceptable, can't continue. These farmers are doing everything they can to remain on the land. So I'm asking you directly, will you ensure that the payments are released to these farmers? Will you meet the farmers to hear their concerns, to hear their stories and will you clearly support their right to remain farming on this land and make a statement here in the Dáil supporting them, supporting hill farmers and sheep farmers in maintaining their way of life and their agricultural activity. I just thank the deputies, Deputy McGuinness and Deputy Cullnane, who's and I sort of acknowledge that you have raised this issue. I understand that the farmers have been farming on that area as you've identified in question for generations. Indeed that some farmers have had hundreds of years of continuous farming in the same area. However, I'm informed by the department that the land in question is owned by a third party and you have identified that regardless of how that came about or the historical dimension of it, there is a third party which owns the land and the third party has now requested a substantially increased rent for use of the land and I think therein lies the problem for everyone. Our department has no role unfortunately in how farmers and landholders agree a rental price and this is clearly something that must be arranged between the landowner and the farmer renting the land. I don't see that situation changing in the future either. It's a private commercial transaction between two parties. Our department routinely corresponds with farmers to establish that they have the land at their disposal and that they are actively farming the land declared on their applications. Now I understand that the farmers involved here are also concerned about payments that our department administers which are dependent on the right to farm this rented land and I recall that Deputy McGuinness that you raised this issue during oral PQs recently, I think about a few weeks ago and I think at the time you were requesting that the department would waive the requirement for to have this land at their disposal. It is a core principle of the Common Agricultural Policy Funding that farmers have the right to farm the land that they are declaring. So in other words that the land is at their disposal and unfortunately it is the case, in this case, it is clear that these farmers do not have this land at their disposal unfortunately for all the issues that you have raised as long as this disagreement over the rental price continues. So the department is constrained by the terms and conditions of the Common Agricultural Policy, so it's not within the gift of the department to make payments to farmers who are not able to assert a legal right to be on land. Now I fully get the situation here but unfortunately it's no different to if you were renting land for me or I was renting land for you. The historical context to this of course makes it challenging and emotive for all of us and I'm aware from other experience I suppose that other parts of the country this has happened as well. I know there's an infamous case that goes back I think to the Shirley estate in places like Carrickmacross and you know there were protracted battles in the courts and through your colleague Deputy Matt Carty you may be able to ascertain some information as to how those challenging issues were addressed and I see this as somewhat similar just from my own observation rather than from a departmental perspective. So it is challenging, it's challenging for all of us to grapple with it but I accept and recognise that it's most challenging for the 16 farmers whose lives and livelihoods depends on this. I think you and this government need to make a clear intervention here and I'm more than happy to say that what is happening here is wrong. That the demand of 900% of a rent increase by a British absentee aristocratic landlord on Irish farmers is wrong. Full stop and I would urge you to make that statement and for your colleague Minister Hayden to make a similar statement and I think that would carry an awful lot of weight. But to return to the farm payments issue I think it is really important to put on the record here again that all farm payments are being withheld from farmers that are unable to produce this commonage letter from the aristocratic absentee landlord. So effectively the proof that government requires to show that these farmers are actively farming on these lands in dispute and all other lands that they are farming is a commonage letter from the landlord in which they are in dispute and that is an unfair burden. It is an unfair intervention into this dispute and it is not necessary. There are creative means that you can establish that these farmers are actively farming land and ensure that they have some kind of income rather than holding them over a barrel while this dispute continues. This issue obviously and but I'm also conscious of the constitutional rights of property owners and you do say that there's often a grey area and this is black and white. Emotionally it's black and white and it says for any of us for any member of society the picture that you paint is black and white in terms of what should transpire. But from a departmental perspective and from a government perspective we have to be conscious of the constitution and the laws and be seen to uphold those and also uphold the terms and conditions of the common agricultural policy. So that puts very significant constraints on what I can do or what Minister Hayden can do but for sure I'm more than happy to meet with the 16 Hill farmers as soon as possible and I'll go through with them and if you or others can come up with a greyness or find a route through it or a solution well then you know happy to look at that. So as I said more than happy to meet with the 16 Hill farmers.