Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent) | Oireachtas source

On the announcement of the €1.5 billion, it is a lot of money. Many people were interested to see how it would be divvied out. There are improvements in the planting grant for some and on the yearly subsidy the farmers get. It is worrying that, of the €1.5 billion, there does not seem to be a red cent for ash dieback. That is unusual because we have a problem that needs to be rectified. We talk about growing more broadleaf trees and we need to get farmers on board.

The worry I have is the Minister of State is trying to promote forestry while the EU is involved in the biggest land grab of all, namely, trying to get 30% of the land in the country rewetted. That is its agenda. Adding the 18% forestry to that 30% and throwing in the odd lake or river, that is probably 50% of the country gone. Where does food production come in? We need to think about people making a living.

Much of what the Minister of State said was sound, but I do not agree with the Deputy who spoke about how we will be carbon farming. You can forget about a community if you are carbon farming for the simple reason that it is abandonment. It is not going out driving in a sheep, a cow or a bullock. You do not have to be there because it is basically rewilding. You do not have to get up at night and go out with a flashlight looking for a calf in a ditch or whatever.

When the Minister of State spoke about planting, she mentioned the south and east but did not mention the west. Is the west being earmarked for rewetting? No one will force us in the west, whether EU or anybody else, on this rewetting thing. They need to cop on to it. For years our livelihood has been made out of shoring some of the land. We above all people have contributed on rewetting. Along with the Minister and the national parks, we have done 6,000 ha working together on certain bogs. When they come into the field, it will be a different story.

The pressure that is on should be recognised. I am not saying it is the Minister of State's fault. She has increased the rates and that has to be acknowledged. No one is saying that has not happened, but consider the rates for the bit of land the dairy man has. I was in Limerick this morning. I spoke to a person whose farm is in Tipperary and who told me that it costs €450 to rent an acre of land in Tipperary. That is about €1,200 per hectare, and your land is not tied up. You can decide after four or five years what you will do. I am not saying it is the Minister of State's fault, but that pressure exists in different parts of the country in respect of land. It is problematic.

There is one part causing problems and the Department needs to nip it in the bud. There is much speculation about Coillte going with an investment company. Why does it not go to the European Investment Bank for funding if it is buying land? It is going with an investment company in England. We hear - and let them contradict it if we are wrong - that a special purpose vehicle will be introduced and that company will draw the premiums, which Coillte never did before, and then go in ploughing out bits of lands. Small farms where a farmer might be trying to be viable and buy 5 or 10 acres will be made unworkable. If that starts, an awful battle will happen in rural Ireland. The Department can nip that in the bud.

In fairness to the Minister of State, over the past two years, forestry licences, where Coillte had an advantage, have improved well. However, the Minister of State mentioned 8,000 ha and said we are flying now. The facts are we have about 4,500 ha - or let us say 5,000 ha - of planting licences granted this year. Let us multiply that by 2.5 because to plant 8,000 ha, approximately 12,000 ha must be given out in licences as a result of the fact that one third will never go back into it. That is the reality. If the Minister of State is at her damnedest at the moment getting out 5,000 ha, how will we magically get to 12,000 ha to make sure we will be able to plant 8,000 ha with the fall-off of what has happened? There is a reason behind some of it. They went to GLAS or the agri-climate rural environment scheme, ACRES, because they had been waiting two or three years. That is the reason. It is because there is a bad taste in farmers' mouths. I know there are new grants there and appreciate that part of it.

There are solutions but we could be picky about it. It is a solution many farmers will buy into. There will be a scheme for sewing broadleaf trees over 1 ha. Even if every farmer was encouraged to sew 1 acre, however, 130,000 acres would be sewn in one go. It would be about seven or eight years of what the Minister of State's target is. It will tick a box but it will not solve the problem of planting. We still need planting for the timber industry because we cannot just run away from it.

Figures were provided with regard to what trees and bogs or peat will absorb and put out, and what land will and will not do. Everybody needs to know we are on default figures because in fairness to Teagasc, that agency has started doing the research and the initial results look positive. Compared with what the default position was in relation to emissions, it is a good bit less. Even a cow, which everyone was kicking around the place not too long ago, looks like the emissions could be 20% less. That will change a lot of the ball game. There is an awful fight for different sectors and that is where the pressure will come on.

See this speech in context