Mr. Fintan Kelly:

I would just respond to Mr. Roddy's point where he quoted the nature restoration law. There is also a section in the preamble which states: "Member States can choose from a wide range of restoration measures for drained peatlands in agricultural use spanning from converting cropland to permanent grassland and extensification measures accompanied by reduced drainage, to full rewetting." In an Irish context, there are an awful lot of farmers who are farming on permanent grassland which is managed extensively. In the context of the nature restoration law there is a lot of farming ongoing that would meet the requirements of rewetting. It is not necessarily full rewetting that is being applied.

On Deputy Smith's point about Gresham House, I am representing the Environmental Pillar here today, which is an umbrella organisation of 32 of Ireland's leading environmental NGOs. We do not actually have a position on many aspects of the Gresham House deal. My personal view would be that a lot of the public sentiment around it relates to the private nature of the investor. That falls outside the scope of our environmental remit. However, we would have some concerns. We are supportive of Coillte lands being retained in public ownership.

We are supportive of Coillte lands maintaining public access and of Coillte leading the transition to a more sustainable forestry model. Essentially, that is a movement away from monocultures of Sitka spruce that are clear-felled. What we are observing of the Gresham House deal is that Coillte is effectively the manager for Gresham House and the latter is getting the same deal an Irish citizen would get in terms of environmental requirements. Gresham House is funding more unsustainable forestry in Ireland. That is not in line with what we would expect of Coillte and the State and we would not support more of that model of forestry.

As Dr. McGoff said, we wrote to relevant Ministers stating that we wanted the legal mandate of Coillte to be reviewed, along with Bord na Móna. We referenced the Gresham House deal because that deal exposes the lack of control the Government and the relevant Minister, Deputy McConalogue, have over Coillte’s decision-making. The Minister stated in the Oireachtas that the model Coillte had adopted was not the model the Government would have chosen. If that is not an alarming indication of the lack of control the State has over public bodies, I do not know what is.