Martin Browne (Tipperary, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

We have had meetings and meetings about this. There was just nothing at the committee meeting regarding the amendments. No matter what the Opposition put through that evening it was not going to be accepted. I ask the Minister to listen to Deputies Sherlock and Cairns. They are telling the Minister, as are the foresters, that this kind of amendment will only improve the system we are all saying has failed at this stage.

Since becoming a member of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine, I have had ongoing discussions with forestry workers about their individual situations. It has become clear to me, and to everybody else, that they have specific issues with the Government's policy, the impact it has having on them and the level of communication that filters down to them from the Department and the forestry service. Some of them will tell you that what is coming down is nil. The inclusion of forestry-related aspects in this Bill is a case in point. It took them and all of us by surprise, given that the original purpose of the Bill was to determine the manner in which fur farming was to be phased out. A surprise of this nature demonstrates the perpetual level of dissatisfaction of the sector with the Department and, indeed, some of the distrust that is there. That there is distrust between the Department and foresters has come up at every agricultural meeting at which we discuss forestry. That is the sad situation we are in.

Sinn Féin has included this amendment for the purposes of giving clarity to local foresters on how they are faring in terms of the national plan. It will make it plain whether the target set for afforestation is realistic for them, given the dysfunctionality of the forestry services and the licensing system. We met the Minister earlier. I will take him at his word when he said it is improving, but to try to convince those that have planted trees that this system is working is next to impossible. That is coming across on a daily basis. This amendment would also result in what we hope would be an increased level of Government accountability to local foresters who have felt their concerns have been overlooked in the quest to reach 8,000 ha per year. I must note that target will be missed again this year. I do not care what is said because going by the figures for the month of January, what we have seen all along will be repeated.

We are aiming for more discussion and debate in the House regarding the supports that are available to foresters, whether those supports are actually serving the purpose the Government maintains they are there for and whether the foresters feel the same. For too long, there has been a lack of oversight of the issues that affect the forestry sector and the supports that are made available to it. The ash dieback, or reconstitution and underplanting scheme, is a case in point. It was widely panned by foresters as not being fit for purpose. The Minister and all of us in the Chamber who are involved in this have gone to see some of these plantations. A key purpose of this House is to have oversight of matters of importance to all sectors of society and in business life in this country. We are seeking to ensure this happens effectively.

See this speech in context