2026-02-19

Tá an Phríomh-Oifig Staidrimh anois ag rá go bhfuil an gnáthphraghas tithíochta i mBaile Átha Cliath tar éis dul chomh hard le €500,000. Tá an Rialtas i gcónaí ag rá linn go bhfuil praghsanna tithe ró-ard, ach tá siad ag ardú bliain i ndiaidh bliana faoin Rialtas seo. Ní fadhb í seo do Bhaile Átha Cliath amháin. Tá praghsanna tithe ag ardú níos gasta taobh amuigh de Bhaile Átha Cliath ná mar atá siad taobh istigh de Bhaile Átha Cliath. Tá praghsanna imithe suas €32,000 le bliain anuas ar fud an Stáit, agus níos mó ná 14% i gcontaetha ar nós Contae Laoise, Contae an Longfoirt, Contae Uíbh Fhailí agus Contae na hIarmhí. Ar fud an Stáit le díreach ceithre bliana anuas, tá praghsanna tar éis léimt breis is €100,000. Cén dóigh inar féidir leis an Rialtas seasamh leis sin? Cén dóigh inar féidir leis seasamh leis go bhfuil tithe ag dul in airde le €100,000 taobh istigh de cheithre bliana? The Central Statistics Office now tells us the typical price of a home in Dublin has reached €500,000. The Tánaiste repeatedly tells us that prices are too high, yet they are rising higher and higher year after year under his Government. In just four years alone, prices have jumped by €100,000 across the State. How can you stand over this? To buy a typical home in Dublin now requires an income of over €100,000. People in the Tánaiste's own area where he comes from in County Wicklow need an income of €130,000. There are parts of this city where people need an income above €150,000 to purchase a typical home. The vast majority of workers are nowhere near that level. That is the reality. Even two solid, decent incomes are no longer enough. How is anyone going to live in Dublin? How is a nurse, a garda or a young teacher to build a life here? How is a couple who are working hard, paying their taxes and doing everything asked of them supposed to compete in a market that has spiralled completely beyond their reach? The crisis is deeply personal now. When young people who are trying to buy their first home look at their parents' generation, they see that people of that generation were able to marry, buy a home and raise children in their 20s or early 30s. Now, those young people see a future taken from them. They are ten years behind that timeline. It is a lost decade for this generation. They cannot start a family, put down roots or plan their lives. They watch their 30s slip away while prices surge further out of reach. They feel locked out not because they have failed but because the system has failed them. This is a social emergency now. Just last night, the Government voted to allow vulture funds to bid against ordinary families who are trying to buy houses, further exacerbating the problem. Every single CSO release confirms the brutal reality out there. People are being priced out of their communities, the places where they work and their country. I am sure the Tánaiste will say again that supply is the answer. If the typical home costs €500,000, ordinary people will still be locked out. This is not just a housing challenge; it is an affordability catastrophe. I ask the Tánaiste directly a very simple question that so many young people are asking me and I am sure have asked him: how high do house prices have to rise before the Government realises that its policies are simply not working? Is it €600,000 or €700,000? Make no mistake - that is the direction of travel the Government is taking this country in. How is anybody supposed to live in Dublin given these prices? How high do prices have to go before the penny drops with the Tánaiste?

We all know that house prices are too high for too many but it is also important that we do not misunderstand what a median price is. A median price does not refer to every house or indeed a typical house, as the Deputy said, in Dublin. Anyone who searches online will see many homes available in Dublin for below €500,000. That is not to take away from the challenge in relation to affordability but it is an important point of clarification. The Deputy also chose not to reference a number of other statistics published in that same report by the CSO yesterday which speak to the very people the Deputy wished me to speak to. They speak to young people wanting to buy their first home. The figures yesterday also showed that 50,583 homes were purchased last year and that almost 40% of them were purchased by the very first-time buyers the Deputy referenced. The number of homes purchased last year was up from 48,775 in the previous year. It almost doubled the number of transactions in 2013. It is important when we pick reports that we look at all of the figures in that report. The report yesterday also showed that there were more first-time buyers in 2025 than in 2024 and more homes and transactions around homes in 2025 than in 2024. I was pleased to see in the figures that the proportion of first-time buyers was also up, to almost 40%, with 19,680 of that total being first-time buyers. I want to put those facts out there to have a rounded conversation on where we are at regarding housing, housing supply and first-time buyers. Yes, I will say that supply is the key to all of this because it is. We have got to continue every single day to see what more we can do to increase the number of homes. There are some positive signs which are not often acknowledged. We are now seeing 600 first-time buyers every week drawing down their mortgages. That used to be 500. It is now 600. These are real people every single week. We are seeing more than 60,000 applicants having availed from the help-to-buy scheme. Over 9,000 home buyers have been approved to use the first home scheme. I reference that because, of course, that reduces the headline prices.

No, it does not.

It ensures that people can actually benefit from cash through the help-to-buy scheme and from an equity share in relation to their first home. We are also conscious when we look at how we are doing compared with other European countries that we now live in a country that has one of the strongest rates of home completion in the entire European Union. For every 1,000 people in Ireland, we are seeing 5.9 homes being completed. In the EU, that averages at 3.3. Home completions were up last year, at 36,280. That is up 20% on the previous year, and indeed represents the highest number of homes completed since 2011. We saw very positive housing commencement figures in December, with 3,065 homes commenced, which was more than the previous month. We will continue to see positive commencement figures. When look at planning permission, we see that momentum has picked up as well. I tell the very young people that the Deputy referenced that we are seeing more homes being built, we are seeing more homes being commenced, we are seeing more homes being completed and we are seeing more people every week being able to buy their first home. In the CSO figures yesterday, we are seeing more housing transactions last year than the year before and first-time buyers making up a greater proportion of that. I agree with the Deputy that this is a continuing housing emergency. That is why we are reforming the planning laws and why we are increasing zoned land. We really need all our councils to get on board here right across the country and zone more land. I appeal to all political parties to assist in that. It is why we are rolling out unprecedented levels of funding for infrastructure, such as water and energy. It is why we are strengthening the Land Development Agency's powers. It is why we have brought in some of the strongest tenancy protections in Europe. It is why we are cutting the VAT rate to activate apartment building, and we are seeing some positive signs in relation to that. We have a hell of a lot more to do. Objectively, the figures that we see show progress in relation to housing supply. We have got to drive that on throughout 2026.

With respect, the Tánaiste just dodged the complete question. The question I asked him was about affordability. He talked about the first home scheme, for example. He knows that if the typical home in Dublin is €500,000, the first home scheme does not even apply any more. You cannot get it for €500,000 or more. You cannot get it in Greystones or Bray for the median home because the prices are €575,000 and €550,000. Let us get back to the crux of the issue. The point I have made to the Tánaiste - the CSO has said this very clearly, and I am sure the Tánaiste does not dispute it - is that house prices have gone up €100,000 in four years alone. In the past year, they have gone up €32,000. Is the Government listening to young people? Is it listening to young people who are telling me or my colleagues that their lives are being put on hold and that they have lost a decade as a result of Government policies on housing? The social fabric is breaking down. Some people see no future here because of affordability issues. I am asking the Tánaiste what the Government is going to do about it. Where the Government is taking this situation is that house prices are rising, rising and rising. The policies of the Government, such as the policy it voted for last night - it had promised it would not do so - to allow vulture funds to bid against these same people who want to purchase their homes, are doing one thing only, and that is pushing up house prices. Answer me this: how can the Tánaiste stand over Government policies that have seen house prices increase by €100,000? Does he recognise the impact this is having on young people across this State?

Hear, hear.

Of course I recognise that house prices are still far too high for far too many, but I also recognise that the figures - the very same set of figures the Deputy has quoted - show more home transactions last year than the year before, and more first-time buyers last year than the year before. They are real people too. They exist in the Deputy's community and mine. Six hundred people every single week are getting their keys for the first time to a first home. That is progress. We used to talk about that figure as 500 people a week. Yes, there is more to do in relation to that, but we cannot selectively quote the figures. The median is not the same as every and the Deputy accepts that too. The help-to-buy scheme has significantly helped people. It has helped more than 60,000 people. Sinn Féin has a policy to cut it by nearly two thirds. The first home scheme has helped 9,000 people. Sinn Féin wants to abolish that scheme as well. As recently as yesterday, 24 hours ago, the leader of Sinn Féin lodged her objection to 249 student beds in her constituency. When Sinn Féin comes in here, it is a housing emergency in the Dáil and it is a housing objection in the constituency.

Absolutely.

Is the Tánaiste still not going to answer about the €100,000? Is he just going to ignore that?

I call Deputy Eoghan Kenny.

Object, object, object. Object all the time.

Order, please. I call Deputy Eoghan Kenny.

Fine Gael objected on Cork City Council. I refer to a former Lord Mayor, Des Cahill. Go away and check it out. Deputies are coming in here making statements around councillors, but its Lord Mayor did the same in Cork.

The Deputy does not like the truth.

People in glass houses.

On behalf of my colleague, Deputy Robert O'Donoghue, I welcome the Tidy Towns group from Rush. Over the last number of days, there has been an absolute outcry of support for special needs assistants, SNAs, school communities, children with special educational needs and SNA provision for the coming academic year. This outcry and this stress have been caused by the Government and policy decisions that the Government has made. These actions and communications have been cruel; there is no other word for it. Is it any wonder that there has been such an outcry when the Department of education has made a decision to abruptly take SNAs out of mainstream environments? A person does not have to be an expert to know that taking SNAs out of mainstream environments genuinely affects children, and this is affecting the most vulnerable children in our society. Last year, I stood on the streets of Cork city and outside Dáil Éireann protesting with parents who could not get access to special classes. At that time, I welcomed the fact that there was an allocation of special classes. While they may not have been fully appropriate, I welcomed the development. At budget time, I welcomed that there was a new allocation for SNA provision. I welcome improvements to our education system. What I do not welcome, and something I will never accept, is that provision of services would be taken from a child. I know from working within school environments that there are children who rely solely on the support of a special needs assistant. We are now, as a State, going to take those supports away from particular children because they do not fit into the rigid criteria that have been created by the National Council for Special Education, NCSE, and the Department of education. It is unacceptable to imagine or think that we would have children in this country who currently rely on a SNA not getting that support in the next academic year because of decision making by Departments and politicians. As a society, we must accept that the level of resources has not kept up with the level of need. The Taoiseach and the Minister can come in here all they want and say that we have increased the number of SNAs, but if we abruptly pull SNAs from mainstream classrooms, it destabilises them immediately. If we must take these decisions, we must see genuine increases where all children are able to avail of the necessary supports if they need them. There should not be a sudden announcement of "You have it this year, but not next year." Will the Tánaiste confirm what this pause means? When will the pause be lifted? Will schools lose SNAs for the next academic year? Will he confirm for schools that have been told by the NCSE that they have an increase in allocation for next year that this will stay the same?

Hear, hear.

I join the Deputy in welcoming Rush Tidy Towns to Leinster House. It has been an extraordinarily upsetting and difficult week for parents of children with additional needs, for SNAs, for the children themselves, for teachers and for school communities. That is why it was really important to pause and get this right. The first thing I want to say is that we will see more SNAs in our schools next September than this September. The second thing I want to say is that no SNA should lose their job or will lose their job. In fact, we need more people to be willing to put their hand up to become a SNA. We need to provide them with the job security that is required for that to happen. Any approach to any review has to be child centred. There was significant feedback around the country that this was not the experience of schools on the ground. I say this to be constructive. Like the Deputy in his constituency, I am aware of schools that sought reviews because they know they need more SNAs. This review cannot be some sort of one-way street. It has to be about identifying the care needs of the children in the school and matching the resource to the care needs. Also, and this should have happened quite frankly in advance of the review, it has to be done in conjunction with a redeployment plan for SNAs. This is something that I believe is almost there. I hope that is a fair characterisation. It is very nearly there. We need that redeployment scheme in place. It will be the first time that we have ever had one. It will put our SNAs quite rightly on a par with teachers, for example. Again, for the first time ever, there will be a proper special education workforce plan. They are two key components that have to be put in place to get any form of child-centred review right as well. I fully recognise the vital role our SNAs play in supporting children with special educational needs. I fully recognise that there are children who would not have been in a position to complete their education successfully, whether in a mainstream school or a special school, were it not for the SNAs. I fully recognise the very valuable work they do. We are increasing the number of SNAs. We are going to see nearly 25,000 in our schools from September. We are also increasing the budget. However, I take the Deputy's point that this is at a macro level and that we have to see how it applies individually, school by school and child by child. The Minister, Deputy Naughton, and the Minister of State, Deputy Moynihan, listened this week. They listened to the upset, anxiety, concern and anger and they rightly took the action to pause. We are going to get this right over the next number of weeks in that the approach to the review will be child-centred, there will be an SNA redeployment scheme and we will finally have a proper workforce plan for special education. We will intensively engage with stakeholders in the weeks ahead to get this right.

With all due respect, while I agree with the stuff the Tánaiste has said, he has not answered any of my questions. He raised the issue of care needs. Does he accept that the care needs system has become too rigid? I am putting on the record of the Dáil that those who are on the autism spectrum and those who have inclusion needs, social anxiety or academic needs, such as dyslexia, dyscalculia or dyspraxia, do not fit into the criteria you need to meet to get the support of a SNA. They will not have that support. That is the fundamental issue. I need an answer to the first question I asked the Tánaiste because I am meeting SNAs, teachers, principals, students and parents tonight. When will this pause be lifted? That is the fundamental question. The Minister, Deputy Naughton's office sent an email back to a school in Dublin 15 this morning saying that this issue was the responsibility of the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Moynihan. Is this his issue or is it the Minister's?

It is an issue for the whole of Government to get right. We are absolutely determined to get it right. The Minister, Deputy Naughton, and the Minister of State, Deputy Moynihan, are working hand in glove, along with all colleagues in government, to get this right. There should be no change in the application of the care needs criteria. The Deputy asked me what my view is regarding what must come from this pause. That is my view. That is what needs to happen. We also need to get the redeployment piece right. The Deputy very fairly asked me how long the pause will last for. I will give him an honest answer, which is that it will take a number of weeks to get this right. There is a short window. We need to provide clarity and certainty to schools so it cannot go on for longer than a few weeks. However, at the same time, it is about getting it right rather than doing it quickly. Some of what we have all heard about happening on the ground in individual school communities was not right. Let us make sure some good comes from what has been a very upsetting week for parents, children, SNAs and teachers. We are all fully committed to putting this pause to good use and to getting things over the line that have been an issue for too long, including that redeployment plan. We are happy to keep the Oireachtas updated.

Does the Tánaiste agree that there is a time to take a stand on sport and that the Ireland versus Israel soccer fixture is exactly that time? We should have a boycott supported by the State and the entire population. We should not be complicit in normalising a team that is integrally connected to a genocide, racism against Palestinians and the oppression of the Palestinian people. Ireland has been in this situation before, going back to the 1980s, apartheid and the IRFU. At that time, Charlie Haughey called in the IRFU and told it that it would be incompatible with the State's interest to participate. I never thought I would be holding Charlie Haughey up as an example. John Robbie, a former rugby player has said: I used to think: did I actually know how bad apartheid was? Of course, I did. I should never have toured. ... I consider it a stain that will never leave me. This will be a stain on Irish soccer and on the young players whom the Taoiseach and, it seems, the Tánaiste are encouraging to participate in this. Does the Tánaiste think the Israeli soccer team is a normal team? Some 1,007 athletes have been killed since the genocide began. Of the 421 footballers who have been killed, nearly half have been children. A total of 288 soccer facilities have been destroyed. In December, just a month or so ago, a football pitch at the Aida refugee camp in the West Bank was ordered to be demolished by the IDF. Six Israeli teams currently play in occupied Palestinian territory in direct contravention of UEFA and FIFA's own rules, although UEFA and FIFA do nothing about it, and three of the biggest teams in Israeli football, Beitar Jerusalem, Maccabi Tel Aviv and Hapoel, have horrendous histories of racism towards Arabs and Palestinians. A lot of the players who play on the Israeli team are involved in these clubs. A popular chant from Maccabi supporters goes "Let the IDF win and F-U-C-K the Arabs". "Why is school out in Gaza? There are no children left there." is a chant from one of the soccer teams. Those chants ended in riots when Maccabi travelled to Amsterdam. In its 100-year history, Beitar, the team supported by Netanyahu, has never allowed an Arab to play. Racism is very normalised. I will also mention the Israeli women's football team, which made a disgusting propaganda video in 2024 in which players swapped their Israeli jerseys for IDF uniforms. Shon Weissman, who has played for the team, has said that Gaza should be wiped off the map. Manor Solomon has defended the genocide. The children's teams are separated by apartheid by the Israeli football league. Does the Tánaiste think any of that is normal? Does he think that our players should be forced into a situation where they must be play against a team that is integrally involved with oppressing Palestinians?

I do not agree with the Deputy's view in relation to the football game. Our position in relation to Gaza, the genocidal activity there and the horrors the people of Palestine have experienced is very clear, as are the views of the Irish Government and the people of Ireland in relation to the horrific terrorist organisation that is Hamas and the terrorist attack it carried out. We continue to take active steps almost every day to try to assist in practical ways. My colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Defence, was at the Rafah crossing in recent weeks, where she announced on our behalf a significant increase in funding. That is an example of a direct action we can take. We have recognised the State of Palestine, stood by UNRWA and increased our support for it. We hosted a conference on the two-state solution in Dublin Castle only last month. We continue to work for a two-state solution. We continue to recognise the Palestinian State and support the Palestinian people in their legitimate aspiration to have their own state. However, when it comes to sport, we also have to think this through logically. The FAI, the governing body of Irish soccer, took a view as to what should happen in relation to Israel's participation. It canvassed and conveyed that view, as is its right. I do not run sporting organisations. UEFA decided not to take that view on board. The tournament is going ahead. If Ireland pulls out, what does that achieve other than to damage Irish soccer and participation in sport? While I am not suggesting the Deputy has done this, I do not like what I am seeing happening now, which is that pressure is being applied to individual players. They are being asked whether they are going to play and told they should not. We should be supporting the men who are putting on the green jersey and who represent our country with distinction. They have a couple of crucial games coming up in relation to the World Cup. We have to go back to our childhood, or I certainly do, to remember when we were last this close to having that opportunity. Sport is sport. I never expected Deputy Coppinger to reference Charles Haughey in an admirable light but she has. However, I believe this is a separate and distinct issue. I really do know that this is a challenging issue for many people. I know the depth of feeling in this country. I share that depth of feeling but this is about the Irish soccer team. I want the boys in green to put on the jersey and win. I want them to win the game. I want to support the soccer team. I do not want to apply pressure to the team or to individual players. I reckon there are many people, including people in grassroots community organisations such as soccer academies in the Deputy's own community, who also want to see the team play. If we pull out, we will feel better for five minutes but who actually suffers? It is not the Israeli football team. It is Irish soccer. It is not a wise thing to do.

If we boycott this game, it could lead to a domino effect where other teams would also boycott.

It will not.

It is not just about being a sacrificial lamb. Russia was not kicked out of FIFA because FIFA had a moral backbone; it was because a number of teams refused to play. We could be giving a lead. By the way, this is not the World Cup, as the Tánaiste well knows. It is an inconsequential tournament.

That is your view.

It is not the World Cup play-offs or anything like that. I want to send solidarity to Joanna Byrne, the first woman chairperson of the League of Ireland. She has been asked to resign because Drogheda United, which happens to be owned by a US multinational, does not agree with her stance that this match should not go ahead. Last year at an AGM, 93% of FAI elected representatives took a decision about Israel and that they should be pulled out. The Tánaiste seems to think it is okay to state something but not to back it up with any action. Of course, the natural thing to do after such a vote is to follow it up with your principles that you will not play against Israel and then to put pressure on UEFA and FIFA, rather than putting pressure on individual players. By the Taoiseach's statement during the week, he put the pressure on the players to go ahead, and so, I feel, is the Tánaiste.

No. We are supporting the decision taken by the FAI to participate in the competition. We have enough to be doing running the country without running sports organisations as well. I do not run the FAI. I think it is a bit sneery of the Deputy to call it an inconsequential tournament. It might be inconsequential to her, but I do not think we should suggest to the soccer players that it is inconsequential. It is not for the Deputy to attach that value to this.

Compared with a genocide, it is.

The Deputy would not like people suggesting her participation here is inconsequential. Soccer players and young boys and girls across the country who play sport want to see our soccer team do well. They want to see our soccer team participate. I think we can and should differentiate in relation to this. I do not think we should apply this pressure to individual soccer players or our national soccer team in relation to a decision they should take. I gave up soccer when I was about nine years of age because I was appalling at it. I took up politics and I intend to stick to politics and allow the soccer players to stick to soccer.

During Covid, the buzzword everywhere in every country was about food security and making sure that where shortages were showing up in places, we would learn from those mistakes. Ironically enough - in my opinion, it is because of Commission pressure - over the last couple of years it is worrying to see in Holland that regarding 10% of the land where farmers were farming, they had to sign a docket. They were basically turfed out and told they cannot farm in Europe again. They had to sign that docket. It is the same this week. The European Commission is after giving Denmark the go-ahead for a €1 billion fund which will take out 9% to 10% of its lands. In every country throughout Europe, we see the pressures on land in the line of forestry, solar and wind. Also, we see new EU regulations. We have done it in this country, where farmers have set aside 10% for nature. They did not say anything about it, may I add, and they were prepared to do it. The nature restoration law is coming in and the interpretation of it will be known in the next few months. I will not make a hasty statement one way or the other in the line of that. Stats tell us that throughout Europe in the last 15 years we have lost 5.5 million farms. That is 5.5 million families. That is a colossal amount. There is something wrong. It is not that we are against trade deals, but there seems at the same time to be a massive push - be it New Zealand, Australia, Mercosur or CETA - to make sure we hammer these deals fairly quickly. There seems to be an agenda driven by the Commission and Ursula von der Leyen. Steel and other heavy industries have been driven out of Europe. On the figures relating to what we have to achieve in climate, it appears farmers are the next casualties, when you look at the reasons both Denmark and Holland have decided to do what they are doing. We seem to be now more content to bring cooked, vacuum-packed chicken in from China and feed people in Europe with it than to farm the chickens in Europe. We seem to be more content to bring in beef or other products because of the methane out of cattle. I am asking the Tánaiste - and I am also asking the Taoiseach - whether, when European leaders meet, this madness that is going on can be halted. We are taking prime land out of production in Europe and we still think of Covid and self-sufficiency. At the same time, we are going to fly it or boat it. I thought we all lived in the same world, where the cow puts up the same methane and farts the same in some other part of the world as in Europe. Why are we doing this to the farmers of Europe?

I have always admired the Deputy's bluntness. I will make a couple of points. I say this respectfully. We have to be considered in our comments around trade. The Deputy knows this and I do not need to be telling him or his constituents this but we are exporting about 90% of the agrifood we are producing in this country. We need to understand that. Again, I am not suggesting the Deputy does not, but we need to bring it into the public debate. Do we want a trade situation where we can sell our product anywhere but no one else can sell theirs here? That is not what the Deputy said but it is a natural outworking. If we want to continue to sell Irish produce across the world, as we proudly do, we need to understand that trade is two-way and that will mean continuing to engage in trade agreements. We have to start having earlier and honest conversations with farmers It always seems the conversation with the farmer comes at the end of the trade deal and that is mistaken. I have said that to the trade Commissioner. We should be engaging much earlier with the farming community to understand and address those issues earlier. We also have to be honest. The figures have been or are about to be published. I think we made about €21 billion in agrifood exports in the last year. That is based on selling our stuff to other places. The natural outworking of that is that we need to allow people sell their stuff into the European Union. It is a two-way relationship. This country is a small, open economy that is extraordinarily reliant on trade. I still think we can do better in engaging with and addressing the views of farmers and agrifood producers earlier. The second point I will make is on land in general. I agree with the Deputy that we cannot have a situation where the farmer is held up as the bogey-man for the climate emergency. It is not fair and it is not true. We see really good progress being made in agriculture. Instead of lecturing farmers, we have to work with them and incentivise them. We have to make sure they can continue to make a living and that we can continue to support the family farm. That brings me to things like the nature restoration law. Anything to do with that will be voluntary, voluntary, voluntary. It cannot use CAP funding, but it is up to farmers to choose whether they want to pursue it or not. We need to support our farmers. We have come through a difficult flooding situation. The Deputy is very knowledgeable on this. Things like adaptation and using State lands, in the first instance, to provide better resilience will be important to rural, and indeed urban, communities. We have to support our farmers financially in making the transitions that need to be made; support them in participating, whether in ACRES or the areas of natural constraint scheme; support them in nature, biodiversity and environment; support the forestry sector, with funding of €93 million allocated this year - an increase on last year; and work with them in partnership and recognise farming is not some sort of discretionary extra or hobby. It is the crucial backbone of the Irish indigenous economy. I do passionately believe that. We will have the Presidency in the second half of this year and we need to make sure that is reflected in the priorities of the European budget.

I never said I was totally opposed to trade deals. We have to bring in bananas and other things from some other countries. There is no one saying otherwise. The question I am asking is whether it does not sound an alarm to all European leaders. By the way, if you look at the stats for Irish exports, most of them go to Europe and the UK, especially in the line of beef. Think about if policy was right in industry and agriculture. Figures have gone up in industry and people working. We have lost 5.5 million farms in Europe. I will give the Tánaiste an example. I spoke to a farmer from Denmark yesterday. He is an organic farmer. He is a big organic farmer in my book because he had something like over 300 cows. He is doing organic. That is the best type of farming if you want to be the perfect student in the class. However, he is being taken out. We are probably going to replace him with someone who can shove a bit of a hormone or medicine into an animal that is banned in Europe. Does that make sense? This is what I am saying. Where is the focus? Can leaders reset the agenda? Countries are under pressure because they have to hit this target. Once we hit the target, we are the best kids in the class. That is what seems to be the thing. Whatever sacrifice we have to make, if we have to be the salesperson for it, it is sound, provided we do not produce it. That is the worry I have throughout Europe.

I have enough challenges answering for the actions of the Irish Government without answering for the actions of the Danish Government. What I assure Irish farmers is that the policies being pursued by different European governments will not be reflected in the policies being pursued by the Irish Government. Anything we do in this space in relation to nature restoration will be done in partnership, in collaboration and on a voluntary basis. I want to be really clear on that. I want to reassure farmers in Ireland that it is voluntary. I also want to say to farmers as we approach the next CAP, the CAP money cannot be used for that. I think this is a European-wide issue. The loss of 5.5 million farms is a serious economic issue of concern for Europe; I agree with the Deputy. This is our indigenous industry that we should be protecting. We have to make sure that we reduce the bureaucracy around these schemes. As I talk to farmers in Ireland, and as I hear from colleagues across the European Union, one of the reasons people opt out of schemes is they feel it is not worth their while. There is too much bureaucracy, too many checks and too much red tape. Along with making sure we get a decent sized budget the next time in terms of CAP and other supports for farmers, we also have to make sure that simplification is not just something reserved for foreign and indigenous companies but also is something that Europe applies to its farmers, including Irish farmers.