Michael Lowry (Tipperary, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The forestry and timber business is of huge economic importance to those involved in the sector across County Tipperary. It is a national business and industry that has never achieved its full potential. There are many unhappy people in the forestry sector. These same people are very disgruntled with the administration of the Department. Services, practices, procedures and various schemes and programmes are in a chaotic state. We have raised this matter on numerous occasions. We have seen a little progress but it is not sufficient. As a result, many people in the sector are demoralised, there is huge uncertainty and a lack of clear direction. The industry, in general, lacks a clear path for the future. The result is apathy and a lack of confidence in the future.

The timber sector is worth €75 million to the immediate local economy and supports a further 350 jobs through contractors in haulage, forestry, harvesting and planting. Everyone accepts that there has been significant underperformance by the sector. The Minister of State inherited this and is doing her best to regenerate the industry but, unfortunately, there is no confidence there.

At the beginning of this Dáil term, licence applications for afforestation, felling and road access were extended beyond two years. That is as a result of all Deputies raising issues we had in our constituencies with the Minister of State. This is having a significant effect on the ability of those who depend on the sector for employment and a livelihood.

For private growers and farmers, the benefits of participation in the forestry sector were becoming a negative given the delay that existed in accessing felling licences, in particular, due to the significant number of nuisance objections and complex environmental requirements that were delaying afforestation and felling. These regulatory and environmental obstacles remain. In addition, the lack of clear sight within Government to a viable, sustainable and profitable forestry programme has also negatively impacted private investment in the sector. The new forestry programme that was recently announced appears to offer better incentives for landowners and is a welcome improvement on previous offerings. However, the grant that companies can claim for establishing forestry and development sites is not sufficient and does not keep pace with what is happening or match the increases in the price of materials and labour supply costs.

Forestry companies that develop and establish these sites are simply not able to do it; it is not viable for them with the scheme that is being proposed. This begs the question as to who will be able to deliver the new programme the Minister of State has proposed. Many of these forestry companies are in a bad financial position as a result of their trading levels in recent years and all the sectoral difficulties that are impacting their businesses. This has damaged their revenue, bottom line and profit margins with the result that they have very little funding on hand to spend as investment.

Many people have told me over the years that they find it very difficult to develop relationships with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine that would allow them to trade profitably, particularly in the last five years. As I said, many of them are in heavy debt. How does the Department believe these companies can afford to take on new afforestation projects when this programme does not offer them a clear margin or profit?

We have all encountered the problem of ash dieback. Deputies have raised the issue in the House on numerous occasions.

It is a problem for us in Tipperary particularly, as a county that relies on ash for our sporting activities, hurling and Gaelic games. Every hurley maker in the county and country is telling me now that it is a very serious issue and that they have run out of raw material. This ash dieback is having a significant impact on the overall forestry sector. The ash tree has been a feature of the Irish landscape for centuries. It is also part of the Ireland's social, economic and sporting life. But now, serious concern is being expressed about the survival of the species because of the devastating impact of ash dieback.

This invasive fungus was first detected here in October 2012 on plants imported from continental Europe. The disease is now prevalent countrywide and is likely to cause the death of most ash trees over the next two decades. There are inadequacies with the existing reconstitution and underplanting scheme for ash dieback. There are several practical issues relating to this underplanting option. There is need for adequate financial support for forest owners impacted by this fatal disease.

Teagasc is currently carrying out research to establish a gene bank composed of genotypes of ash tolerant to the disease, aimed at producing planting stock for forests and hedgerows.

Forest owners are very dissatisfied with the current ash dieback reconstitution and underplanting scheme and it needs to be reviewed. It has been confirmed by the Department itself in a Dáil question that so far, it received 410 applications for 1,608 ha and has decided on 128 of those for 434 ha. Of the outstanding applications, while all have not yet been assessed, some 100 are currently delayed because of the requirement for planning permission for the replacement of broadleaf high forest, in this case ash and conifer species. This is adding insult to injury for affected forest owners and must be changed and we must certainly look at that. This poses difficulties for landowners wishing to replace their diseased ash plantation and it is very important to review it at this stage and to engage with all stakeholders as a matter of urgency.

There is talk of a possible joint venture with Coillte, our state-supported company, which has been largely excluded from participating in afforestation since an EU ruling in 2003 which prevented it from claiming grant premiums as a State-owned company. This proposed joint venture with a UK institutional investor may change this status and mean that this new venture will be able to claim grant premium. If so, we must ask what impact will this have on the already struggling private sector operators who will have difficulty competing for land prices versus a highly geared institutional investor.

To conclude, there are barriers to entry which need to be addressed. There needs to be a review of the current afforestation business model to improve scale economies and deliver wider scale. We need to develop a national land use strategy to provide a formal framework to make use of planning applications and decisions.

My final point is that there needs to be greater communication with all stakeholders involved in the industry to bring it forward.

See this speech in context