Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh an Aire Stáit. Is é seo an chéad Bille atá tugtha faoi bhráid na Dála aige, go bhfios dom, ina ról mar Aire Stáit a a bhfuil freagracht ar leith aige i leith foraoiseacht. Os rud é go dtagann sé as Contae Thiobraid Árann, ní fhéadfainn gan a rá leis:

Cad a dhéanfaimid feasta gan adhmad?

Tá deireadh na gcoillte ar lár.

Caithfidh mé cuairt a thabhairt ar Chill Chais am éigin.

I welcome this opportunity to discuss the forestry industry. It is often treated as Cinderella when it comes to land use in Ireland but, as other speakers have noted, afforestation offers many benefits. However, we should remember it is one of several competing uses for land. Contrary what many people think, the better the land, the better the forestry. It is not as simple as forestry being confined to marginal land while the good land is used solely for agriculture.

I ask the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Hayes, to follow the example of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine in dealing with this Bill. The Minister, Deputy Coveney, took on board a significant number of amendments to the Animal Health and Welfare Bill 2012 and he took all of our proposals seriously. On Report Stage he either accepted our amendments or came back with his own alternatives. The IFA has raised issues with the Forestry Bill. The best way of dealing with the issues raised by the IFA or anybody else - the IFA does not have a monopoly on raising issues - is to tease them out on Committee and Report Stages to decide whether their concerns are valid and how we might work collectively to improve the legislation.

If the debate on the Seanad and Dáil reform are to have any relevance, we must improve the way in which we scrutinise legislation. Unfortunately, the media often describe the business of this House in terms of votes and confrontations. They seem to think that Ministers never listen to rational or reasonable arguments put forward by Opposition Members. If an amendment stands up to scrutiny as part of the tedious work done on Committee Stage, it is incumbent on the Minister concerned to take it on board irrespective of who proposes it. However, if an amendment is shown to be superfluous or without foundation, the Minister is perfectly right to reject it. When we do this type of work we must forget about party divisions and recognise that all of us can play a role. The role of Opposition is to voice the concerns that are raised with us and to decide whether the counter-arguments hold water. If we take this approach to legislating we will be able to deal with serious issues.

I have great sympathy for those who see more bureaucracy in many of the provisions we make in this House. I do not know how many times over the years, whether in government or opposition, I have been assured that the process to be followed will be so simple that it will not require delays or paperwork. Inevitably, the process in question did not work out that way. We should be careful to ensure there is a purpose to every regulation and that the information sought will be used. We must not ask anybody to do anything that is not strictly to the benefit of society.

Many ordinary people, particularly those in small operations, find that the amount of paperwork involved in the simplest processes is horrendous.

We keep discussing necessary reforms of the Houses. I bet Members that, if we held a referendum on changing how the Oireachtas operates and another on getting answers to letters and decisions on applications from the State in good time, it would be 10:1 in favour of the latter. I must wait more than a year for a decision from the Ombudsman. The State has become bogged down in process and untimely decision making.

As the Minister of State knows, I raised a question a number of weeks ago about delays in the issuing of planting licences. I understand that there is some toing and froing between his Department and the National Parks and Wildlife Service, NPWS. It is not right that people must wait while two Government bodies pass the parcel on decisions. We must introduce legislation on time limits on decision making. A planning application takes eight weeks and one must jump when asked for further information before a decision is given. It should be the case that, unless there is a valid response to a licence application within a fixed time, that licence should be automatically granted. Bureaucratic delays are costing money.

I have had a long association with forestry. I started work in Corr na Mona on 2 January 1974. In 1978, I was involved in the setting up of a fencing stake mill. I knew nothing about forestry, but I learned fast and furious. The successor company on the same site, ECC Teoranta, is probably known to the Minister of State as one of the largest timber mills in the country. In fairness to Connacht Gold and P. J. Fahy, they have made a success of that mill. It started as a lamb fattening station, but fattening mountain lambs in a shed proved not to be the most economic prospect after the oil crisis.

Since then, I have witnessed significant change in the timber and forestry industries. When I was involved, there was no Coillte Teoranta. Everything belonged to the Department. It is fair to say that those forests were well managed. The situation changed and Coillte Teoranta was established. I do not agree with the popular belief that Coillte Teoranta does not have a central role in afforestation. As a State company, it should be encouraged to afforest more land and to have a planting policy. It should not merely become the manager of an existing State forest. Given its know-how and skill, it should be part of the national drive to plant. Any private planting is actually funded by the taxpayer. It would be cheaper to have Coillte plant more forest, as the taxpayer would not need to provide direct funding. I foresee a considerable role for Coillte.

I welcome the decision not to proceed with a foolish policy. Everyone in the industry from workers and timber millers to recreational users welcomed how the Government drew back from selling the forest crop. I do not doubt that the Minister of State was very relieved when the Cabinet decided not to sell Coillte. However, we should not assume that the issue has now been addressed. Coillte has more potential and should not be left as is. We should view it as a leading edge development company with a large land resource.

I do not believe in merging Bord na Móna and Coillte. Their raisons d'êtreare fundamentally different. However, there is no reason for a lack of total co-operation in those parts of their businesses that overlap.

I will address this issue in two segments, the first of which is the development of the timber industry. The construction industry used to use very little Irish timber in construction. We were told that it was too damp and not up to standard. The change in the past 15 to 20 years has been extraordinary - kiln drying, stress testing, other technical innovations and better management of quality control in timber mills. Not only is Irish timber acceptable on the Irish market, but it has 5% of the British market.

We often discuss the large down sides of the past five years, the terrible fallout for construction, etc. The construction industry has seen significant unemployment. What is often overlooked is the fact that, in 2008, between 70% and 80% of major timber mills' sales were to the domestic construction market. They have managed to change this situation with no loss of employment and just a few weeks of short-term working. Now, 70% to 80% of their timber is being exported to Britain. We should salute those in the industry, including Coillte Teoranta, which worked with the mills through a difficult period. Had Coillte been sold off, it would not have been able to save our timber industry. We should also salute the processors, who adopted an extraordinary get-up-and-go attitude instead of crying about a major problem. They got out on the road and decided that, with their home market gone, they needed to get into export markets. They did so successfully. In the past five years, they have invested in further technological developments so as to produce better product and compete in export markets. It is important to note that the industry's exports are worth €303 million to this economy.

This example shows the major advantage of resource-based industries. If they move upmarket, pursue technological improvements and develop their products, they will hang in during the bad times when overseas industries might decide to move elsewhere. I always place a large premium on indigenous industry. My argument for investment in and State support for indigenous industry is that, if supported, it is less likely to leave during a downturn. Basically, it has nowhere to go. The people involved are from this island and their operations are based here. Obviously, multinationals consider the world stage. I am not saying that we should not have multinationals, but we should encourage our resource-based industry. We must also continue pursuing technological innovation.

Our large timber mills are producing high volumes of high-quality standard products. When I was involved in exporting timber to Germany, I was always fascinated by its large number of micro-timber industries. They produced everything from garden paving to products that tended to be done in concrete in Ireland. At the time, arguments were put forward to the effect that our timber was not as suitable.

Many of those technical issues can be resolved if we develop the right technology. It is important to invest in technological development such as the Marine Institute does for the maritime sector and Teagasc does for agriculture. We should examine the forestry industry to discover if there are other uses for our timber.

There are major possibilities for indigenous timber in the energy sector and the Western Development Commission has done a lot of work in that regard. There are also challenges because burning wet timber does not provide much heat. There are ways to overcome that problem, but a concerted programme is required. Nonetheless, every forest product is important.

In addition, afforestation is important for nature reserves, including as a habitat for the red squirrel which has been under threat in the east. West of the Shannon, however, it seems to have withstood the ravages of the grey squirrel. Many other wildlife species inhabit our forests also. The State must look beyond the purely commercial value of public goods, as well as recognising the contribution of State and private owners to wider environmental issues. Carbon sequestration is another major benefit.

Having been in the timber industry, I was in the unusual position of winding up as Minister with responsibility for rural recreation. Some 45% of the country's waymarked ways are over Coillte lands. If Coillte was not in the equation, we effectively would not have such waymarked ways. I pay tribute to Coillte for its early recognition of the part it could play in rural recreation and the company's willingness to invest in it.

When the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform works out the dividend for Coillte, he should give a rebate from that dividend for the public goods element of its work, particularly if the company can prove it is investing in such matters as rural recreation which is so important for tourism.

It is important not to have over regulation in forestry. There is a balance to be struck in laying down broad powers for the Minister who may say that he or she would not use them unreasonably, and on the other hand not having a workable system. We should take our time with this Bill and ensure that in every stage of the afforestation process - including planting, growing, felling and replanting - the requirements are balanced. There should not be a surfeit of regulations for small amounts of work.

We cannot seem to get into our heads, either here or in the EU, the idea of de minimus. The process for felling a few hectares of forest should be a lot different to what is involved in felling an entire forest. We must ensure that in areas of ecological sensitivity we will preserve the ecology, while on the other hand being able to operate a commercial business.

I wish the Minister of State well in his new appointment. While his portfolio may not have the biggest profile, he can make a major contribution to progress in the areas under his Department's aegis. We are all agreed that forestry is good and by working together we can try to make sure that we will have a vibrant forestry industry that complements the country's superb agricultural industry.

See this speech in context