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

On rural recreation and the financial performance of Coillte, as a citizen of this nation, taking the wider interest into account, where a State body invests in public good as an alternative to giving money directly to the Exchequer and then asks that the Exchequer return the money back to it in order for it to do the public good job, that is a dividend. It is fair to say that Coillte has consistently invested in a manner in which a private company would not in public good in terms of rural recreation. I believe 3,000 additional jobs could be created through rural recreation in this country.

However, we must never forget that 45% of the waymarked ways in the country are through Coillte lands and that in many cases, to get to uplands, access is through Coillte forests. Not only is Coillte land significant for rural recreation; it is also, in many cases, the key to getting to the uplands. There was a Mr. McSharry who, as some of the members might remember, did not want to allow access to his land in Sligo and we resolved that issue by reaching agreement. He had no difficulty with the public walking the mountain; he just did not want them going up past his house. With Coillte's co-operation, we managed to get access through the forest up to the mountain and everybody was happy. We must look at this in the round and say there is considerable public good involved here.

Of course there are faults with Coillte. It would be strange if there were not, because I have never heard of any operation, State or private, that does not have its faults. The fundamental difference is that if we retain the ownership of Coillte we can deal with the faults and try to improve matters but if one gives it away, the owner of the crop has only one focus, namely profit. They will give the Minister all sorts of commitments at the beginning but, as we saw in other sales, such as that of the sugar company, after a time they come back stating they cannot survive.

We must be fair here too when we look at Coillte's financial performance. There seems to be criticism today that there have not been significant dividends paid to the State in direct cash and that there are deficits in the pension fund. We should remember that Coillte's borrowings are commercial and they are on the company's rather than the Government's balance sheet. We should remember that every year, in forestry premium, etc., the private sector gets a great deal of taxpayers' money for forestry. It is paid directly to farmers in premiums and so on. It is not paid to Coillte. Therefore, when one wants to measure the performance of the private sector in growing trees and of Coillte in pure financial terms, one must compare the input of taxpayers' money to one sector with that to the other. Coillte is doing this without racking up significant losses against a private sector that receives forestry premiums of over €100 million a year.