Mr. James Geoghegan:

There are alternatives. For years, farmers were using stakes, but now these are only lasting three to five years. One of the questions was on to the labour costs relating to fencing. To pay a contractor to do fencing now, the labour costs more than the stakes, at roughly €8 to €10 per stake erected. If it is necessary to do this every five years, there will be a huge cost. In addition, if a stake that is going to last for 40 years is put down, then this means only one tree being cut out of the forest. If, on the other hand, it is necessary to replace the stake every five years, then eight stakes will be needed over the same period. Each stake costs €5 or €6. There is also the cost of labour, at €64, and the wire is a cost as well. There will be a major cost to farmers if we cannot continue with the 40-year product we have on the market.

The reason the ban is coming in across Europe is because creosote is carcinogenic, which we do not disagree with, and the pollution going into the ground is an issue. When there was first talk about banning creosote, however, 15 or 20 years ago, the treatments then were totally different than they are now in the creosote business. As Mr. McConn said about the vacuum drying of timber, I store timber in my yard on a gravel surface. I have stored creosote continuously there for six years and there is not one drop of it on the ground because the timber is completely dry of creosote. We also always use gloves handling it. Regarding working the machines and driving them, there was a problem years ago when the creosote was hitting the stakes. There would be a splash and it would be getting on your skin, which is not good for people. The new creosote treatments need to be looked at differently than the old-style ones. The ban is based on those old-style treatments, which is the problem.

The European creosote companies did a lot of work to reduce the amount of creosote left in timber. They are saying that they put in the creosote, it seals all the molecules of timber and makes them waterproof and then they take the creosote back out. I know for a fact that there is no run-off from the stakes anymore, as Mr. McConn was saying. The ban is based on timber with wet creosote, with the creosote running off it, splashing onto people's skin and causing contamination.

The whole ban is based on obsolete information. That is a major issue. Earlier, I was driving creosote stakes into the ground until 3 p.m. I have no issue doing that. I am a fencing contractor. We were fencing a dairy farm today until that time and the lads worked on until it got dark. I came up here obviously. We are not afraid to use creosote timber, that is the current creosote timber. I would not be too fond, however, of using the 20- or 30-year-old system of creosote timber. Regarding saying it is carcinogenic, in respect of the current system of treatment, the creosote does not get on anybody's skin and there is no contamination to humans. It is out in the field and not doing any harm to anybody, while it is saving farmers a great deal of money. The ban, therefore, is based on false information. All the countries that voted for it are European countries that do not use creosote anyway because they have a dry climate. We are in a different situation here and we need to be treated differently than the rest of Europe due to our climate.