Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank our guests from Coillte for being here. I have a number of questions and I will try to be as brief as possible. As the Chairman mentioned, Ms Hurley mentioned the licensing backlogs and in speaking about the solutions, seemed to have a heavy focus on resources within the Department and the forestry appeals committee. Are resources the only deficiency or is there a need for further legislation?

Ms Hurley spoke about the Brexit challenge and issued a stark warning, particularly in the event of a no-deal Brexit. She did not list any specific proposals or propositions to try to mitigate the challenges of Brexit so does she have any proposals in that regard?

I welcome her commentary on the protection of the ash species and the measures put in place. If possible, could she indicate if there has been any scientific appraisal of whether those measures are working, the effect they are having and the long-term implications of those measures? At a previous meeting when we discussed ash dieback specifically, reference was made to the elm species and the fact that it was almost wiped out. Will Ms Hurley indicate if Coillte has been involved with any preservation measures for the species?

Today I read lengthy debate that occurred before the Covid-19 pandemic, when lengthy debates were possible, on the farm forestry partnership scheme. The witness is aware there is quite an amount of concern that the arbitration process has not been resolved. From reading the transcript, the inference of the committee was that the matters raised could be resolved. I received a response from Coillte further to a parliamentary question I had submitted that essentially indicates the matter has entered the legal realm and, therefore, no information would be provided to elected representatives. This is extremely worrying. Does the witness accept, in the first instance, that the very fact that this is caught in legal wrangling represents a failure but also that it represents a great threat to encouraging farmers to engage with Coillte and other statutory bodies on forestry matters?

It would be remiss of us not to mention a question that has arisen in recent days. I have been engaging with local communities on wind farms and the important role they can play in creating energy. In many areas, however, prior to a wind farm being developed, communities would often cite concerns, and this is particularly the case with Coillte-owned sites. I understand Coillte is the owner of the location of the Meenbog wind farm and it was involved in that project. Could we get clarification on Coillte's initial role?

The images certainly stopped me in my tracks when Mr. Mark Rooney posted a video on Twitter and other social media showing peat slippage and trees moving through the area adjacent to the Meenbog wind farm. Does Coillte accept the concerns raised by residents in advance of the development of that wind farm were legitimate? Does it accept that this incident raises serious concerns about future developments? Concerns are often dismissed out of hand and ridiculed in some instances but they were clearly legitimate in this case.

I have a copy of a letter from the energy company involved and it speaks of a lack of understanding or appreciation of the feelings of people involved. The letter is dated 12 November and somebody received it today from the energy company. It enclosed a leaflet and some general information on wind energy, while also outlining the proposed additional development at Meenbog. Does the witness accept that this is completely inappropriate and that her organisation has a role to play in this regard?