Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the delegation which has made a powerful presentation. The unusual feature of the proposal to sell Coillte's harvesting rights is that I have not heard anyone, other than members of the Government, speak in favour of it. I hope the indications given this week that the Government is rethinking its proposal are correct. The Irish Timber Council has outlined succinctly, from the perspective of the sawmills, the reason this proposal is wrong. It would be useful for the joint committee if our guests were to outline how the industry managed to overcome the downturn without any significant loss of jobs in the sawmill sector. I understand that at one stage 70% of the output of the major mills went into the domestic market and that this figures has now reversed and with 70% of output being exported. This means the sector has shifted from a position in which a small proportion of finished saw logs were being exported to one in which the vast majority of output is being exported. Will the delegation briefly outline how the industry managed to achieve this turnaround during a rapid collapse in the housing market? This development illustrates the resilience of the industry in Ireland and its capacity to survive an utter disaster, particularly as the downturn was so connected to construction.

I ask the delegation to elaborate on the effect of the proposal on employment. Where is employment in the sector located? One of the major challenges we face is to protect rural jobs. Different figures were provided on direct employees and ancillary employment for harvesters and so forth. How many of those employed in the sector live in rural areas or within 20 or 30 miles of the forests they harvest or the mills that employ them?

We are very fortunate that ECC Teo is based in Corr na Móna, just two miles from my home. The company employs more than 100 people directly, and is responsible for the employment of 200 to 300 people both directly and indirectly. Thanks be to God, the roads leading to its premises are chock-a-block with trucks every day. Those in other areas might complain about the number of vehicles involved but we smile when we see them. Most people are stunned to think that what has become an international industry is based in a place as remote as Corr na Móna. ECC's facility is probably the most remote in geographic terms but it is fair to state that the majority of the companies represented here are based in quite rural areas or adjacent to small towns which are experiencing huge problems.

In the context of downstream industries, will our guests indicate the number of people who are employed in board mills and bark processing plants? Will they also indicate whether it will be possible for those facilities to obtain alternative supplies if existing supplies dry up? One of the slides in our guests' presentation says it all, namely, "The Irish sawmilling sector is totally opposed to the potential sale of Coillte harvesting rights". Our guests could remove the term "Irish sawmilling sector" and substitute the words "Fianna Fáil" because I and my party are completely opposed to this sale. We would literally get peanuts from such a sale. The amount involved would be minuscule and the uncertainty created in the sector would be overwhelming.

I wish to refer to one further matter. One of the things which Coillte and I achieved during the past ten years relates to the multi-use of our forests. The forestry-felling, harvesting and sawmilling industries have been exemplary in their operations in this regard. In addition, Coillte has pursued a very progressive policy in the context of managing forests in order that they might be available for rural recreation. As one of our guests indicated, the number of recreational visits to our forests exceeds 18 million. I am aware of the massive investment on the part of Coillte in respect of this matter. The sawmilling and harvesting industries and Coillte always work in a way which ensures that harvesting operations do not unnecessarily discommode recreational use of our forestry. There has been fantastic co-operation among those involved. The stakeholders all recognise the contributions they each make to the national economy.

I wish to state, on a practical and philosophical level, that when one owns something, one has certain duties. If a pension company owns something, for example, its duty is to maximise its take at all costs. It does not matter who gets in the way. The bottom line is that regardless of who gets in the way, the company's fiduciary duty to its investors is to maximise profits. Nothing else can be taken into account, except at the margins. In my experience, Coillte sees itself - quite rightly - as a State body with a national duty. As well as trying to maximise profits, it must also consider the long-term interests of the industry. If Coillte's partnership with the industry no longer existed, the national good would not be served. Even if the company could export all the logs that are produced to China and obtain a greater price for them in the short term, this would be very disruptive for the economy. As a State-owned company, Coillte always takes the greater national good into account. I found the latter to be the case when it invested significantly in rural recreation and other amenities in our forests. As a State company, the duties of Coillte go way beyond the simply obtaining the maximum price for the product in the short term and not thinking about the long-term national interest. That is the fundamental flaw in the fact that we are even contemplating selling this resource.