Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I strongly the urge that we consider a ban; not stopping the timber coming in – just taking the back off it. We have such a valuable crop here so we should not let it in. We will not even be able to replant if that beetle comes in. It stays. You cannot just clear-fell and start again. If the beetle is there, the land is useless for the production of timber going forward.

I have spoken on ash dieback on numerous occasions and I had a Topical Issue matter taken on it last Thursday evening in the Dáil. The response I received was that we cannot compensate for the loss. In my fairly long experience representing farmers – people with ash dieback are farmers – it is the first time I have ever seen a disease outside of their control that could not be compensated for, as TB, brucellosis and foot-and-mouth disease were. The list is long and endless. We are not going to get into where ash dieback came from and who is at fault for it. Farmers expected this to be a retirement pot but now unfortunately all they have is a heap of rubble. I made this suggestion the other night and I have made it on numerous occasions. If these farmers had access to premiums going forward, while they would not be jumping up and down with joy, the vast majority of that 16,000 ha would be replanted. As it stands at the moment, they are standing back and waiting for a signal as to what will happen as regards compensation or some kind of retribution. If we do not want to call it compensation, we could give it some other title. They are waiting to make the decisions on that land. To get 16,000 ha back into the afforestation system would be a huge boost for confidence in the industry. It would do an awful lot of good for confidence in the forestry sector. It would bring fair play to these farmers who have suffered huge losses.

The next point I wish to make relates to something said to me at the start about the level of premium farmers and private investors are getting. My understanding from stakeholders is that they lobbied strongly for farmers to get a higher premium. Private investors will compete now for land for afforestation. While I accept farmers are getting the premium over a longer period, which was always the case in the past when private investors could access premium as well, in the past, farmers got a significantly higher level of premium than private investors. I do not see how individual farmers will be able to compete with the likes of Gresham House and so on in purchasing land. We have seen the price of afforestation land rising. I do not see how they will be able to compete. The vast majority of the suitable new land that will go into afforestation and come onto the open market and be sold will go into the hands of investors with the forestry strategy we have now. In my vision for the forestry sector in Ireland, I would rather see it in the hands of local farmers and locals. One of the big problems we have had with the Save Leitrim group is they resent that much of the land in Leitrim is going outside of local residents. I know the strategy has been devised, but it is most definitely an issue with the competition that will be there for land. The bias will be too much in favour of private investors.

Contractors have been mentioned. Manpower for the industry going forward will be a significant issue. We have had a number of years where there have been serious problems with licences and so on. We will not go back over that. The Minister and Minister of State have given figures the increase in licensing output and that is most welcome. One thing that has happened in the recent past was the start date someone could work on designated land has been brought forward from 31 March to the end of February. That is shortening the season for these contractors even more. I wish that to be looked at and the date of 1 April that was in place up to the past 12 months. If contractors were allowed work, it would at least extend the season further. If we give contractors too short of a season for working, they will take other options and move away from the industry. It is a very specialised industry. The operators of that machinery are very specialised. There are many different tricks to the trade that people will not just pick up at random, such as stopping watercourses as well as understanding the distance to be back from them, stopping pollution coming out during clear-felling and so on. The contractors have a lot of experience. The issue of the shortening of the period of work by a month on hen harrier land or designated land that has been raised with me is making it much more difficult. In addition, the weather conditions in the depths of winter can make it very hard to work at that kind of land. Normally, March would be a more suitable month for working. I would like the Minister of State to consider that again to see if we can go back to the previous date of 31 March.

We talked about the licensing issue and the reissuing of licences. The applications that have gone in were talked about. Is it possible to try to reboost the confidence of people applying? We could have a charter in place as a timeframe so people know when they apply that they will get an answer in a specified period - whatever the period is, whether it is four or six months, etc. I saw a charter working superbly with farmer payments. When the charter came in place, farmers knew exactly the date they were going to get it. In fairness to the Department, in 98% of cases, they would hit the charter and the date of issue of the licenses. If we could put a charter like that in place, it would be block in building confidence for new applicants into the industry.

I am sorry for the long-winded speech at this hour of night.