Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I want to talk about the restoration land policy that is now being formulated by the Commission and the very significant impact it will have on this country. At the outset, there needs to be much more discussion on this restoration policy. It has to be modified greatly. This country will suffer very severe consequences if it goes through as outlined in the proposals that we are seeing coming out of the Commission at the moment. France and Germany seem to be pushing this policy. As there are little or no peatlands in those two countries, it will have very little impact on them. Sweden is fundamentally opposed to it, as is Finland. We need to take a similar stance.

This morning in the audiovisual room, we had a presentation on the economics of afforestation, on what it can do in respect of meeting our challenges on climate change and on the economic benefits it can bring to rural Ireland. I met the chief executive of Coillte last week. If the policy being proposed by the Commission comes forward in its present format, Coillte will be able to replant just 35% to 40% of its forestry land. That land would have to be let grow wild, which would have an economic impact. Consideration must also be given to the lack of calculation of the carbon sink of grown forestry. The reality is that some of our peatland that trees are on at the moment is not suitable for forestry. However, the majority of our peatland can grow Sitka spruce three times faster than other lands across continental Europe. At the moment, Europe is only 80% self-sufficient in timber. If we have learned anything from Ukraine, the energy crisis and the threat to food and energy security, surely it is that Europe has to concentrate and make sure it has security on all fronts as much as is practical.

A representative from COPA-COGECA attended a meeting of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine two weeks ago. The obligation that is being put on member states at the moment is that a minimum of 30% of land and sea, including all remaining primary and old-growth forests, has to come under this restoration law. The devastation that this would have on rural Ireland would be immense.

The last time we had a significant designation of land in my part of Tipperary was for the hen harrier. At the time, there was a promise that a good scheme, with adequate compensation, would be brought in. The scheme lasted for two years. The scheme which is there now is a pale imitation of the scheme that was there at the time when that this designation was introduced. The designation on hen harrier land has managed to reduce the capital value of the land by 80% to 85%. If the land was eligible for forestry, at the moment it would probably make €6,000 or €7,000 an acre as the price for forestry land is escalating rapidly. However, if it was put on the open market with the designation, all it would make is €1,200 to €1,300 an acre. This designation has had a huge economic impact on those landowners.

That aside, they are saying that some of the arable land that has been drained over the years will have to be rewetted. The Commission can hear this loud and clear. There is no farmer in this country that will allow land that was painstakingly drained and put into arable production to be rewetted. That is not a runner and it cannot be allowed to happen.

This proposal on restoration is coming from Brussels. Unless it is modified to properly suit this country, our forestry industry will be decimated. We had representatives from the forestry sector there this morning. They have huge challenges at the moment. There is huge competition to get available land. We had all the hassle with licences in the past. They are waiting for a new forestry strategy that hopefully will mend some of their problems. However, the restoration that is being proposed in Brussels at the moment has to be opposed by this country in the same way that Sweden and Finland are doing it, and it has to be modified.

See this speech in context