The Young Fine Gael Agricultural and Rural Affairs Committee is calling on Minister for Agriculture, Food
and the Marine, Martin Heydon, to urgently address major flaws in the rollout of the Agri-Climate Rural
Environment Scheme (ACRES), which has left many farmers unpaid and others unfairly disadvantaged
due to structural failings within the scheme’s design.
The current tranche inequality has created a two-tier system that is undermining trust. While farmers in
Tranche 1 received payments on schedule, those in Tranche 2 — despite fully complying with scheme
requirements — have been left in limbo. This is unacceptable, particularly for young farmers who rely on
timely payments to manage cashflow and plan investments in sustainable practices.
The committee also questions the decision to open Tranche 2 of ACRES while many Tranche 1 participants
had yet to receive any payment or meaningful communication regarding their entitlements. Worse still, the
Department accepted far more applicants into Tranche 2 than the administrative system could realistically
support. This over-subscription has deepened the payment backlog and left compliant farmers waiting
months without income or clarity. The responsible approach would have been to limit the number of
Tranche 2 contracts to what could be processed and paid in a timely manner — with additional applicants
held over for a properly prepared Tranche 3. Instead, the scheme was allowed to expand beyond its
capacity, putting delivery at risk and undermining the credibility of Ireland’s agri-environmental
commitments.
The committee is also highlighting the damage done to former locally-led, results-based agri-
environmental projects, such as the Burren Programme, Hen Harrier Project, and Pearl Mussel Project.
These initiatives, once praised across Europe for their farmer-led approach and measurable outcomes, were
subsumed into ACRES under the promise of scale and improved delivery. Instead, many of their
participants have seen a loss of income and a dilution of the results-based ethos that made those schemes
successful.
There should now be serious consideration given to back payments or compensatory support for those
farmers who have lost funding and flexibility as a result of being moved under the ACRES umbrella. In
addition, there must be a commitment to restoring the levels of funding previously available under these
original results-based programmes — to ensure that high-performing environmental delivery is not
financially penalised under the new system.
The committee is deeply concerned that the poor delivery of ACRES is now damaging the reputation of
results-based agri-environmental schemes as a whole — despite the fact that these were some of the most
successful and respected rural initiatives ever implemented in Ireland. Results-based schemes are unique
because they make sense for the farmer’s heart, head, and pocket. They reward care for the land and
biodiversity (the heart), they are logical and locally tailored (the head), and they provide fair financial
return based on real outcomes (the pocket). That balance is essential for genuine long-term engagement.
By contrast, earlier action-based schemes like REPS (Rural Environment Protection Scheme) often fell short
— asking farmers to tick boxes and implement generic measures without regard for local conditions or
tangible environmental results. In many cases, these actions delivered little for the environment and even
less satisfaction for the farmer. ACRES was meant to be a progression — combining scale with the best of
the results-based approach. But instead, it has adopted the rigidity and inefficiency of old models while
abandoning the trust and partnership that made results-based projects successful.
The committee is calling on Minister Heydon to furnish a detailed report into the shortcomings of ACRES
to date. This should include an explanation of the tranche payment discrepancies, the impact of absorbing
successful results-based programmes into a centralised scheme, and a plan to ensure equal treatment and
timely payments across all participants going forward.
The Department of Agriculture should also look to best-in-class examples from Europe. In Austria’s ÖPUL
(Österreichisches Programm für umweltgerechte Landwirtschaft), farmers receive predictable, outcome-
linked payments with consistent advisor support and regional flexibility. France’s MAEC (Mesures Agro-
Environnementales et Climatiques) is built around decentralised delivery through local agencies, ensuring
timely payments and measures that reflect local environmental realities. The Netherlands’ ANLb
(Agrarisch Natuur- en Landschapsbeheer) model supports farmers via collective groups and landscape-
scale planning, improving both coordination and trust.
A core weakness in the rollout of ACRES to date has also been the lack of a robust, farmer-facing advisory
system. In contrast, European models such as Austria’s ÖPUL and the Netherlands’ ANLb place well-
resourced advisory support at the heart of scheme delivery — ensuring that farmers are not left to navigate
complex requirements alone. If Ireland is serious about delivering environmental results at scale, then
properly funded, independent advisory services must be embedded into the design and operation of
ACRES.
To address this, the committee is calling for the establishment of a structured and fully resourced advisory
model within ACRES. This must include ring-fenced public advisory capacity through Teagasc, financial
support for private planners, and the reintroduction of local facilitator roles to provide on-the-ground
support for farmers. Clear and timely communication protocols must also be put in place so that farmers
are not left in the dark about payment timelines, plan reviews, or scheme requirements. Without these
supports, the potential of ACRES — and farmer participation in any future environmental schemes — will
continue to be undermined.
Director of Agriculture & rural affairs Dean Kenny said “While we recognise there has been a marked
improvement in the area of farming payments delays since Minister Heydon has been appointed, there are
still many unanswered questions. These delays have affected the agriculture sector in many different ways,
and young farmers in particular, who rely on payments such as Acres to cover the ongoing costs of running
their farms and businesses, we believe have been disproportionately impacted by these failings. We do
believe that these can be rectified somewhat, but only with clear messaging and commitment from the
Government. If this is not done there will be many more young farmers that will consider alternative career
opportunities”
The committee believes that ACRES still has the potential to deliver real environmental and economic value
for rural Ireland — but only if its design and delivery are reformed to put fairness, flexibility, and farmer
trust at the centre. We are calling on the Minister to act swiftly to restore confidence in the scheme, support
those who have lost out, and ensure that future agri-environmental policy reflects the standards already
being delivered elsewhere in Europe. Farmers are ready to lead — but they need a system that
leads with them.
ENDS