Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I bring apologies from Deputy Carthy, who is unable to attend. I commend the Minister and Minister of State. This is the first time that I have spoken in their presence and I congratulate them on their appointments.

Sinn Féin recognises the importance of this legislation and welcomes that the Government is seeking to address the existential crisis facing the forestry industry. The challenge the sector is facing is one that can now be measured in weeks. We in Sinn Féin have played our part in helping to bring this legislation to the floor in a timely manner.

The Government must recognise and accept how this crisis came to be. Last December, the then Minister, former Deputy Creed, spoke of being involved in a "major triage operation" regarding the building backlog in the forestry sector. He spoke of recruiting additional staff and external environmental consultants, all of which we now know amounted to nothing. By May, the then Minister was describing the backlog as temporary and unavoidable. The reason for the crisis in our forestry industry is not one of too much democratic political participation, but of a lack of political will and interest in dealing with the issue. Interest in rural Ireland is something that this Government has shown little of. We have now reached this crisis point.

That the Bill allows the forestry appeals committee to meet in divisions is to be welcomed and is the primary mechanism through which the backlog can be addressed. Upon the passing of the Bill, the Government will be promptly tested. It is incumbent upon the Government to ensure that the additional staff and resources that the forestry appeals committee needs are put in place urgently. We can discuss the amount of appeals coming in and the reasons for same, but the real test will be the Government clearing the backlog, getting the timber industry, including sawmills, back to work as quickly as possible and ensuring that jobs are not lost.

We in Sinn Féin have several concerns regarding the Bill. It places too much discretion in the hands of the Minister and may limit ordinary citizens' access to the appeals process. We have engaged constructively with the legislation and are seeking to address these concerns, which are shared by many, through the amendments that we have tabled. This is not our preferred manner to legislate, however. In particular, that amendments were required to be submitted for consideration today prior to the Seanad voting is a procedure that the Government must not believe will be welcomed as common practice.

Our amendments will not seek to impinge upon any aspect of the legislation that seeks to address the existing backlog or even the way that appeals will be handled. We seek only to add safeguards to ensure that any citizen may engage in the process freely, as is citizens' right. We would extend the period wherein an appeal could be lodged to a reasonable six weeks. We wish for the time a person has to appeal to be counted from when public notice of a licence is granted rather than when the decision is made. We want to ensure that people appointed to the forestry appeals committee are suitably qualified. We seek to ensure that ordinary people can engage in the appeals process without prejudice. These amendments are reasonably worded and we appeal to the Government to recognise not only the rights of citizens to engage in the process, but also its own obligation to safeguard and ensure those rights.

While the Minister and Minister of State may correctly point out the potential benefits of the new online portal that the Government is bound to make available, they will be aware of significant concerns that the portal will not be available for some time. If use of this portal can deliver documents and materials critical to appeals in a timely manner, it would play an important role in making the appeals process more efficient. What is not tenable is limiting people's ability to appeal today on the promise that a separate future appeal might be more streamlined. I expect that the Minister and Ministers of State will give some undertaking that this portal will be available before any constraint is placed on appellants.

Much of the discretion provided to the Minister within the Bill is unnecessary and a cause of concern. I call on the Government to accept our amendments to rectify this. The Minister is empowered to reduce the period wherein an appeal may be lodged but is prohibited from extending it. To us, this is bizarre. In addition, the discussion around fees in the Bill has often missed the point. The Bill repeals the Minister's existing ability to introduce fees and then reintroduces it in a separate section, but with one key difference; the Minister will no longer have to justify these fees to the Dáil. I urge the Government to accept our modest amendments to place a cap on fees and mandate the Minister to provide a refund in cases where an appeal is upheld.

The Bill is imperfect, but by engaging with the Opposition constructively we can pass legislation that will allow for the existing backlog to be cleared in a timely manner without impinging on the rights of citizens.

With the new forestry programme due in 2021, the Government will have an opportunity to shape Irish forestry policy for several years. A proper forestry policy should deliver for everyone. It should be of benefit to the community, the local economy and the environment. A forest should be an amenity, somewhere people want to live near. This means greater diversity requirements in afforestation, more native species and less Sitka spruce. While the conifer may be the most commercially viable in the short term, the resulting monoculture provides none of the ancillary benefits while damaging soil in the long run.

It is known that much of the cause of the backlog is opposition to forestry policy in general rather than individual operations. Upon the passing of the Bill, while the Government's first duty is to clear the existing backlog promptly, its second duty and opportunity are to develop a new forestry policy that provides broader benefits not only for today, but tomorrow. The Government should bring a new forestry programme to both Houses of the Oireachtas in a prompt manner, accompanied by further legislation to address the outstanding concerns and do so as a matter of priority.

We will be supporting the substantive motion before the House in order to save rural jobs and ensure that the forestry industry can continue to operate, but the Government must live up to its part and ensure that rural Ireland can be made vibrant once again.

As the Minister and Minister of State will be aware, I represent County Leitrim, where up to 50% of the land available for forestry is under Sitka spruce primarily. This frustrates and annoys the communities living in the areas in question. Many years ago, I spoke to a man in Ballinamore.

It was the evening and the lights were coming on as darkness fell. He pointed to the mountain behind the town and said he remembered when there were hundreds of lights on the mountain and that the only thing there now was trees. That is what is happening, not just in mountainous and hilly areas but in every part of County Leitrim. It is really frustrating for farmers who want to buy a piece of land beside their farm but cannot do so because they are outbid by big corporations which purchase it for investment purposes and then plant it. It is an issue that is extremely sore and annoying for people living in rural areas.

My own parish has seen huge amounts of forestry development. The local school has had its number of teachers reduced from three to two this year because there are so few families living there. When I look at the horizon beyond my house, more than three quarters of it is made up of conifers. Where the land is planted, there is no longer any need for the farmer. There are no cattle on the land and no need for the vet to come out. There is no tractor to be fixed and no roof to be put on a shed because there is no need for a shed. There is no need for anything really. As far as the community is concerned, that piece of land has become sterile. There will be a lot of activity on it for three weeks every ten or 12 years when the trees are cut and drawn away but then there is nothing again for years.

There is a really deep problem which the Government must address. If we are going to have parts of the country under large amounts of afforestation, something must be done to replace the communities that are being displaced by that afforestation. We see in those same parts of the country that people cannot get planning permission to build a house. When that point is raised, the answer is often given that they should go and live in a town. My parish does not have a town, nor do the parishes that surround it. We live in a rural area with dispersed communities and there is no town. Those communities have survived for centuries and can survive again if the Government would take the interest to ensure they are provided with the resources to be able to continue.

Afforestation is a huge problem for many parts of rural Ireland but it should be a huge opportunity. The difference is in whether the Government puts the right policies in place. The policies in place at the moment are only about big corporate interests and being able to produce the maximum amount of timber off the worst kind of land as fast as possible to make the maximum amount of profit. Everyone else can just stand by and watch as their community dwindles in front of them. That is what I have seen happen and we must do something about it. We will support this legislation to ensure the blockade is stopped and people who have forests grown can cut the timber. The timber has to be got out and those jobs must be sustainable. We recognise that and it is fine. However, the other side of the issue is not being addressed with any urgency at all. On my first day in the House I pointed out that we have a huge problem in that we are not delivering for rural Ireland. That is not happening at all.

If we are going to move forward on these issues, to look at all the factors in the round and ensure we deliver for people in rural areas, we have to recognise the problems that exist. We must recognise, first of all, that the level of grant aid that has been given for afforestation to people who are not farmers must be different from the level of grant aid given to people who are farmers. It was the case in the past that farmers got a higher level of grant aid. If they had a small piece of land of poor quality which they wanted to plant, there was an opportunity to do so. Now the same level of grant aid is offered to the investor who comes from wherever. That has created a completely unfair scenario. These people come with very deep pockets and can offer bids for land that put it out of the reach of any local person. That is a huge problem. At the same time, there are many wealthy Irish people who come together and invest in these companies to provide a pension fund. They buy farms and land in places like Leitrim and plant them. They do not know, understand or care what that does to the local community. That is fine and understandable. The Government should know, understand and care about the impact on communities, but that does not seem to be the case. The Minister and Minister of State have an opportunity to do something about that responsibility.

Another problem that has been arising for years in many parts of rural Ireland, particularly in counties like Leitrim where there is poor infrastructure, is that roads are being decimated by forest operations. Part of the problem is that forestry is treated as an agricultural crop. Every other agricultural crop grows in a year or two years, but this particular crop takes 40 years to grow and is harvested in a couple of weeks. During those couple of weeks, thousands of tonnes of materials are coming out across small county roads which simply cannot sustain the load and are being crushed beneath it. Local authorities are putting weight restrictions on those loads and trying every way they can to put pressure on the forestry companies to come up with answers to the problem. What is really needed is for the Government put a fund in place to enable local authorities to replace the roads. A simple solution that has been proposed is that a small portion of the grant aid to afforestation should be set aside for such a fund. The hauliers will undoubtedly argue that they pay road tax and they have a point in that regard. They are entitled to have good roads in place. At the end of the day, the problem we have is that the weight of the forestry loads simply cannot be sustained by the roads on which they are being transported.

Another huge problem is one that has been raised with me by people in the tourism industry. In different parts of the country, formerly magnificent scenic views have been totally blocked out by a wall of dark green forest. A tree is small when it is planted but it is 12 ft or 14 ft within a couple of years and 40 ft by the time it is ready to be cut. It is like building a wall around a whole community and sometimes the trees are very close to people's houses. My view is that anybody proposing an afforestation project of more than 5 ha should have to apply to the local authority for planning permission. Any such project involves a permanent change of land use and a permanent change to the landscape. I introduced legislation in the previous Dáil to give effect to that provision and I intend to put it forward again in this Dáil. I hope the Government will co-operate with me and look seriously at the proposal.

On Leitrim County Council, all political parties, including Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, Independent representatives and the CEO agree that we need to have a planning permission requirement for forestry. There is also concern among local authority members about the amount of run-off coming from forestry. An acidic sap that comes out of the trees in October and November is getting into the water and causing a lot of pollution. In fact, the council tells me that apart from farmyard pollution, forestry is the next highest contributor to pollution in County Leitrim. It will be the same in many other counties if the intention is to expand the amount of land planted. There are consequences to that expansion and those consequences need to be examined and preparations made to mitigate them. We must work with people to ensure the Dáil is not still debating these issues in 20 years' time because some other problem has been created by poor foresight at this time.

The answers to all of these problems are most likely to be found among the people who live in these areas and are dealing with the problems. I appeal to the Minister of State, Senator Hackett, in particular to talk to people. The Green Party and many other environmental interests in County Leitrim are absolutely in tune with everything I am saying in this regard. They understand the problems and they see the way that conifer planting has destroyed communities. There is little use in somebody who lives far away telling us that trees are lovely and we should plant loads of them. Unfortunately, it is not as simple as that and we must work through the problems that are created by these issues.

One of the biggest problems is the change of land ownership. In places like County Leitrim, land is moving out of the hands of the community and into the hands of corporate interests. If it does not happen at the beginning, it happens towards the end. Farmers decide to plant their land and for 15 years they will get a premium on it. By that stage, they are getting a little older, they might need a hip replacement or whatever else, and they need to get a few bob together. They get the thinnings out of it but there is no more premium coming and it will be another 20 years before they see another bob. It is at this point that the company which brought away the thinnings may offer to buy the whole lot, and that is when the land transfers from local to corporate ownership. The same thing is happening all over the place. In some instances, the land is bought by corporate interests in the beginning and ends up under forestry.

These issues must be dealt with and I hope that happens in the next forestry programme. There are also issues around agroforestry and how it is operating. There is talk of only having six years of payment for agroforestry, which is nothing near what is needed. The issues around forestry are not just to do with how big companies are being allowed to go in, cut fast, get the product out and then replant. The issues are also around communities of people and rural neglect, and those are the issues that need to be dealt with first. When that is done and people have confidence, they will embrace forestry. Their problem is not with forestry itself but with the consequences of it. In my community, as in many communities throughout the country, people have a very negative experience of those consequences.

I understand the motivation behind this legislation. We know why these changes have to happen, but we also know that a lot more needs to be done in dealing with this sector. We will support the Bill. I hope the amendments we have put forward will be accepted by the Government and will help to bring a new day for the industry.

See this speech in context