Mr. Simon White:

If the Cathaoirleach will forgive me, there is a point one can make on that. There are terms and conditions with all the new schemes. When we all signed up to forestry, we did not sign a contract. We signed a document agreeing to abide by the terms of the day. That is an open-ended document. From our experience to date, I would not do it again because it means that the terms and conditions can change. In 2022, the Department allowed the EU to bring in a whole new concept of forestry. It is no longer considered a crop. That is gone. Therefore, you could be compensated for plants and animals up to then. As trees are not considered a crop, something else has happened. The Department has not designated what it is but it is not compensable. That is the sort of ridiculous thing that is going on. We know the Department changed all the terms and conditions. If we do something wrong, we get penalised straight away for not abiding by the conditions but the Department can change the conditions the whole time and then we get affected again. If you had a contract and knew the terms and conditions, then if these are changed later and we suffer because of it, we have to be compensated. I refer to the terms and conditions in the new forestry schemes. People do not understand now that the responsibility for disease is on the landowner. Before it was always the responsibility of the Department for forestry to protect our estate in trees. It failed to do that but now it has switched the responsibility and people do not understand. If you plant your 1 ha and it seems fine, if it gets a disease and in five years' time, you cannot deal with the disease, the Department can claw back all the premiums and grants that you got. People do not understand that because they do not see the terms and conditions. You have to look up the forestry Act and all the statutory instruments. If you ask a lawyer what your position is, they will not know. It is not clear. People are not being told the full truth and they are being sold a pup. All we can say to people is that they should open their eyes, look at what they are signing up to, and really believe that if they plant, they plant forever. They are doing it for their children and their children's children. It might look fine for them for five years but they have basically sold their land to the Department and to the State because they will have no control over it again after the five or ten years for which they get premiums, if they do that.

What are they going to do with that? I am asking people to be aware. They can do this and do it right. If they want to plant, they should not plant for a grant but plant to have a habitat, a forest or income to do something for the future and for the next generations. They should not plant for a grant.