Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 15:

In page 8, after line 35, to insert the following:"(2) The Minister has a duty to provide information to ensure the public and other authorities are regularly informed on the role and condition of forests as well as on all forestry activities.".

This amendment relates to the entitlement of stakeholders, communities, environmental NGOs and so on to information on the development, planning and management of forests. It is important that this imperative be provided for in the legislation. This is important for many reasons, one of which follows on from comments made by the Minister of State. In terms of the need to develop forestry and win people over on the huge potential it presents, we should start the process by involving those who are most enthusiastic about forestry. I get the sense from people who spend all of their time worrying about these issues that there is deep alienation from the powers that be, including the Government and Coillte which owns half of the forests in the country, in the planning, management, development and protection of forests. We need to address this issue. We need to unite all of those with an interest in developing forestry. From the involvement of all stakeholders will come better ideas.

People will learn from one another. They may also learn to overcome certain suspicions they have about one another. I still believe - it is not the Minister of State's fault - that environmentalists and farmers are still suspicious of one another and that these suspicions need to be broken down. The involvement of all stakeholders, including NGOs and those with environmental concerns, would help to overcome suspicions to the benefit of forestry as a whole. People could learn from one another.

A farmer must make living and an investor in forestry does not want to be burdened with unnecessary regulations that might hamper his ability to make a living. Sometimes, perhaps, environmentalists need to understand that. Perhaps they do not fully appreciate it all the time. Equally, farmers sometimes do not fully understand the knowledge and value environmentalists could bring to developing forestry to the benefit of everybody.

Over the past year or two I have been forced to learn a little about forests, given the campaign we are involved in. I learned about agro-forestry and how planting native species on the boundaries of land used for growing crops or grazing cattle enriches the fertility of the soil on that land, thus benefiting the produce. Therefore, there is a double benefit. One is not only developing forestry, because there are also spin-off benefits at all sorts of levels, including for the farmer and environment. The land being used for a more conventional agricultural purpose benefits. Perhaps this is not always fully appreciated.

These are examples of where more buy-in and participation from NGOs, concerned community groups and other stakeholders could actually result in the development of forestry to the benefit of everybody.

With regard to information, let me return to the subject of Gougane Barra. There is suspicion about this matter. I do not know whether it is justified, but there seems to be a lack of information on the basis for the decision that was made. I submitted a series of questions, prompted by people concerned about the matter, and slowly information began to trickle out. Should a decision as big as this not have been subject to the making available of much more information? Should there not have been much more pre-consultation such that everybody would understand that action would have to be taken if there were a very big threat? On the basis of evidence to prove certain action is necessary, everybody could be satisfied. That has not happened in this regard and, therefore, there is suspicion and a bit of a cloud. I do not know the truth of the matter but I contend that there is concern and some suspicion.

If this Bill is to help develop forestry, it must recognise these problems and set out to achieve an improvement by having a more robust regime for giving information to the public on what is happening with forestry. The public should be involved in decisions on the planning, management and development of forestry.

See this speech in context