Michelle Mulherin (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The witnesses talked about farmers having concerns because their lands are locked in and they went through the various issues there. It would appear, at least in certain communities, that it can be perceived as a negative thing at times that the land is planted because there is not much else going on. There is not much other employment, activity or so on and I know the witnesses have given figures on people employed. We need to see value added to forestry. I am from Mayo and my understanding is that most of the wood that Coillte fells goes on a train from Ballina to Waterford. Does Coillte have any plans to add value in the western region? I am not just talking about Mayo but the west. One would hear this comment about forestry. I recognise the many positive aspects to Coillte's work and endeavours, including carbon sequestration, tourism, and recreation. Coillte has partnered more with communities which have an interest in promoting these things but it is stark that the wood is leaving and no value is being added. These are the types of jobs which we want to see created in rural Ireland where value is being added to products and material coming from the earth.

I will address wind farms. I understand Coillte has developed its business in the area of renewables. Communication is important and I do not know if Coillte has the best track record with it. I refer in particular to the application made at Cluddaun in Moygownagh in County Mayo. It was refused because it was deemed to be over-industrialised by An Bord Pleanálá. One of the hallmarks of people's complaints related to communication. People have to be engaged with much more, whether about planting or wind farms. I will contrast it with some private wind developers which seem to handle communities much better than Coillte. I do not want to name other State bodies but the witnesses know which are involved in building wind farms and other renewable projects. I do not know why but people seem to get rubbed up the wrong way. It is important to have community acceptance and it has to be understood where people are coming from with regard to massive infrastructure. There is a conversation to be had. It is not just a case of stating what is available and that a person is to take or leave it, or what a community's contribution is, or that a community will get a walk or a forest trail. People deserve more than that. In areas where people are doing energy projects, that will help us to achieve our renewable energy targets but people are not asked to do that in a city. They are asked to do it in rural, often very scenic areas. There has to be a balance.

I understand that even where land is forested, there can be a wind corridor and turbines can still be put up. How much more land has Coillte identified where that can be done? That would seem to get over the visual impact concern that many people have about wind farms. How much more land is it possible for Coillte to develop in that way, bearing in mind issues such as connection to the grid? I understand that it has to be possible to connect to the grid. There is no point in having power generated in a forest where it cannot be connected to the grid.

I join with my colleagues who have raised concerns about the operation of partnerships with Coillte and private land owners. Since concerns have been raised, perhaps the witnesses could outline in general what the pro formacontract is? They have mentioned that there are a couple of types of contracts. Who bears the cost of insurance? What sort of consultation goes on? Who bears the cost of felling the trees and the transportation of trees to market? Who decides on the timing of it?

Is it really a partnership? How is the payment divided? Is it 60:40? Generally, are there certain types of contract? What are the bones of this for the private landowner's bottom line? Sufficient concerns have been aired with the witnesses today. We could do with getting light on how these contracts are operating. The witnesses themselves acknowledged that some of the contracts were drawn up 15 or 20 years ago. Will they tell us how those contracts operate with regard to the specific questions raised by members as well as my own?