Mr. Mark Carlin:

I might start on the questions about ash and will take them in the round. A question was asked about the scientific appraisal and I will provide some background information on what we are trying to do to restore ash. We have identified two hundred clones from around Europe and three of those provenances are from Ireland. They have been planted out in Castlemorris, County Kilkenny. In total, there are 600 clones planted there now. They were planted in April this year. We chose that site because it is a hotspot, unfortunately, for ash dieback so it is a very good testing ground for these provenances. Early indications are very positive. It still early but ash dieback usually has an impact on juvenile trees so thus far, the situation is very positive. We will continue to increase this clonal bank with a view to planting many more of those clones. We will then try to develop seed orchards from this and get back into planting ash broadly in our forests again. The news is positive. Ash is an extremely important species not only for Coillte but for society, particularly from a hurley ash point of view. It is extremely important from a biodiversity and social point of view that we get back to planting ash again and that is what we are striving towards.

The scheme itself is not relevant to Coillte but I am aware of it. It is more relevant to our farm partners than it is to our own estate. In terms of our estate, approximately 60% of our ash is impacted. We have cleared out the worst impacted sites and we are carrying out heavy thinning on the less impacted sites. Ash responds well to heavy thinning and it seems to slow down the rate of spread of the disease. My understanding of the scheme is that it is better than the one that preceded it. It looks at the extent of damage and tries to apply the right mitigation, depending on the level of damage. That is the right approach to take, rather than just clearing everything out. It is more nuanced now and I hope the scheme will be more relevant to what we need to try to do.

There were a number of questions about our farm partners, one of which was about seeking resolution and the other was about arbitration. On the issue of resolution, we have tried very hard to resolve disputes before they get into arbitration. While I cannot speak about specific legal cases, it is worth bearing in mind, from the point of view of numbers, that nine partners have sought arbitration. Two cases are advanced and seven less so and we are doing everything we can to get them resolved as quickly as possible. I am sure members will understand that they are in a legal process over which we do not have control. We are meeting all of the deadlines that we have to meet and providing all of the information required. We want to get this straightened out as much as our partners do. Clearly, we would rather not be in this position with these nine partners and we are working with all of our partners to try to improve on issues that were identified a couple of years ago, mainly around communications and commercial statements. We have tried very hard recently to improve our communications with all of our partners in an effort to avoid unnecessary arbitration in which neither party wants to get involved.

There was one other question on felling licences and Natura impact statements, NIS, from Deputy Fitzmaurice. All of our applications for felling and road permits and for afforestation are screened for appropriate assessment.

For those that have been screened, we are preparing a detailed ecology report and an NIS to support each of those applications. They are being submitted to the Department along with the application. We hope this will help to speed up the process. I think I have answered all of the outstanding questions.