Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Tá sé oiriúnach agus tábhachtach go bhfuil an t-ábhar seo á phlé againn anocht agus amárach. Ba mhaith liom aitheantas a thabhairt don Teachta Boyd Barrett ar son na hoibre a rinne sé agus a rinne an United Left Alliance chun an díospóireacht seo a chur ar bun. All of this stems from the EU-IMF memorandum of understanding which states Ireland has to generate €3 billion from the sale of State-owned assets and companies. I understand some significant reports on this matter have yet to be published and it would be wise to examine them when they are available. Perhaps the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine should have a role in inviting all relevant parties to an open and frank discussion at that forum. It is good that we are starting that process by airing the views of Deputies.

The first question we must ask is whether the sale of the harvesting rights would make sense economically or financially, or from the perspective of our heritage and culture. We need to highlight the need to stress-test the implications of the full or partial sale of harvesting rights for the future commercial viability of the sector, including the sawmill sector. Like other Deputies, I have read Dr. Peter Bacon's report assessing the consequences of the proposed sale. I went to the Oireachtas audio-visual room today to hear some of the comments he had to make. His report makes some very logical arguments against the sell-off of harvesting rights, purely for economic reasons. He suggests this measure would cost the State money, rather than generating income for it. He provides some interesting statistics in support of his position: the loss of funds from Coillte's profit flow would cost the State €565 million; in addition, the company's deficit funding requirement is €313 million, its debt liability is €172 million, while its pension liability is €130 million. The economic cost of the job losses or the loss of the amenity value must also be considered.

We know that Coillte is a significant employer in rural areas. Rural Ireland has been subjected to many other losses without the potential for increased unemployment as a consequence of the threatened loss of jobs. We also know about the economic risk to the timber processing sector. At today's briefing I listened to representatives of the Irish sawmill sector talking about the job losses it could face. The provision of logs for Irish sawmills by Coillte will be interrupted, at the very least, if the privatisation goes ahead. These well established sawmills have long-standing relationships with their customers. There have been far too many examples in this country of white collar crime, unregulated industries and cartels. There is a real concern that more small businesses will be overpowered if these rights are sold. We know that job losses lead to further costs for the State.

Can we trust a private profit-driven company to maintain the country's "open forest" access policy? If that policy is not continued, it will affect culture and heritage tourism from foreign and domestic sources. We know the extent of visitor numbers. There are real concerns that public access could be severely restricted. There are international examples of where this has happened and where privatisation was reversed to encourage greater community participation. I have listened to organisations such as the Woodland League and Mountaineering Ireland that have serious concerns about public access when these decisions are commercially driven. I doubt that recreation is high on the agenda of a profit-driven company. At a time of recession, austerity and budget cuts, we should not discourage a free activity that is good for our physical, emotional and mental health.

Coillte has not covered itself in glory. It has serious questions to answer about the extent of the grants it received from the European Union and the manner in which it was established in 1989. What was the exact size of the land bank gifted to it? What other assets came with it? Do we know what is beneath the trees? Has this been studied? Do we know what mineral rights we are giving away also? Why is Coillte excluded from the scope of the freedom of information regime? In what capacity did it sell land in County Mayo to Shell? It has also sold land to the National Roads Authority. This has had a serious impact on part of our cultural and historic heritage.

The loans to Coillte approved by the Dáil bear no relation to the single contribution the company has made to the Exchequer. As Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett has pointed out, serious issues arise with regard to Coillte's relationship with the former Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern. As has been mentioned, the country's level of forestation is way below the European average, which means the country has massive potential in this respect. If these rights are sold, our natural environment will be undermined in a serious way. Our efforts to meet the current and future Kyoto Protocol targets for carbon emission reductions will also be hindered.

Article 45.5 of the Constitution provides that "the operation of free competition shall not be allowed to develop as to result in the concentration of the ownership or control of essential commodities in a few individuals to the common detriment". I see forestry as an essential commodity that should be protected for the common good. Our forests were established using public money for social and economic purposes. An interesting Bill proposed in 1975 by the former Minister, Mr. Justin Keating, would have ensured a corporate tax rate of 50% would have applied in cases of this nature. However, it did not get anywhere. I hope we do not make the same mistakes we made with gas and oil resources in the case of our forests.

See this speech in context