Mr. Donal Whelan:

The Bill proposes that the Department be able to charge fees in respect of applications made under the legislation, including felling licences. Under the current arrangement, as provided for in the Forestry Act 1946, fees are not imposed on applications for felling licences. As well as my role as technical director of the Irish Timber Growers Association, I am also a working forester and manage a number of plantations for farmers and forest owners. One of the big issues facing them is the time it takes to obtain a felling licence through the system. The Bill proposes that greater detail will be required in respect of management plans and potential inventory information to receive one's felling licence through the system. In addition, it proposes that a felling licence will only last for five years, notwithstanding that it is standard management procedure to thin conifer plantations every five years. The forest service and the Department have limited resources, as do all Departments. We are concerned that the Bill will impose so many requirements on the sector to obtain a standard felling licence - this is in addition to the other points we have made - that it will cause a logjam in the system. This is already happening.

The National Council for Forest Research and Development has produced forecasts for the private sector and found that timber output from the sector will increase tenfold in the next 14 years. The current system is not fit for purpose. The Bill proposes a much more detailed application process. There are approximately 19,000 forest owners in the private sector, all of whom will require a felling licence. There is no way the system will be able to cope with this level of applications. This is the issue we have. It is not the case that we are being negative about the Department. The critical issue is that, based on our experience, the proposals are not workable.

Mr. Lacey responded to the point made by Deputy Martin Ferris on compensation. One of the major issues giving rise to the loss of confidence in the forestry sector is that it takes between 40 and 50 years before a woodland owner obtains a return, although it is an important one. In the past three or four years forestry has come within the tax net, having previously been tax exempt. The reason it was tax exempt was that it was such a long-term investment. Revenue from forestry is not taxable as income tax but comes within the ambit of the high earners' income restrictions. The issue with this is that it takes 40 or 50 years to obtain the main return from a crop, yet it is effectively taxed as one year's income. If one wants the private sector to thrive, such barriers must be removed or ameliorated in some way.

It is a critical issue for us. On the last occasion we appeared before the committee there was a great deal of commentary about Coillte. In the context of the private sector, planting figures have fallen and we are going to have the same problem getting the timber to market. As stated by stated by Senator Comiskey, the sawmill industry is doing really well. It is importing raw material which is very bulky and costly, sawing it here and exporting it. Those involved are making a living out of doing that. That is a difficult thing to do, the reason being we are not producing enough timber in our own country.