Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute on this subject again. I also spoke during Sinn Féin's Private Members' motion, which made three concrete proposals. Deputy Carthy has touched on a number of them, those being, licensing and how the State can get itself off the hook in the Coillte deal. In my comments, I will focus on the forestry strategy.

Sinn Féin's Private Members' business called for the publication of a forestry strategy as a matter of urgency and for it to prioritise afforestation undertaken by local communities, farmers, landowners and public bodies over investment management ventures, which is the model of delivery that should be at the strategy's heart. In his concluding remarks, the Minister referred to the Government's approach and said:

The second part is that we publish our new forest strategy as soon as possible, and an ambitious one. This is what we will be doing. We are working on finalising that at the moment and it will be a really good forestry strategy to go with the unprecedented high premium rate that we already announced just before Christmas.

There was no mention of the delivery mechanism or the prioritisation of local communities, farmers, landowners and public bodies over investment management ventures. That should come as no surprise.

There is agreement that we need an ambitious plan for forestry, but the Government seems to be ignoring it, which is the disappointing element. There is an agreed vision of what the future of forestry should look like. Indeed, the Department conducted an extensive public consultation using surveys, various deliberative models and stakeholder engagement, and prepared a summary report of the result. What does the citizenry say when we speak to it about the future of forestry? There is a wisdom in crowds, as there always is. Regarding Ireland's ambition for forest creation, and according to the report, citizens recognise:

1. The current level of forest cover in Ireland is too low and there is an urgent need for a greater level of ambition.

2. Ireland needs a major expansion of new forests, to where there is a greater balance with traditional agriculture in the landscape.

3. Land availability is a critical element to any future increase in forest cover.

4. A significant shift in land use change is needed and will require much better integration of trees and forests with traditional farming and agricultural practices.

5. There needs to be a regulatory system in place that can deal efficiently and effectively with the requirements of forest establishment and management.

The right reasons - Forests for Climate

1. Climate change is a key driver for increasing forest cover.

2. Combating climate change should be a priority objective when planning new and managing existing forests.

3. Forest carbon accounting will be a key tool to understanding the climate change impact of the forest sector and to informing decisions on future land use planning,

4. Increasing the use of wood and wood products, both as a long-term store of carbon and as a substitute to using more carbon intensive products are key ways that forests can contribute to meeting our climate targets.

5. There is a preference [among the citizenry] for managing forests in a way that addresses climate change.

People want forests in urban and rural areas. According to the report:

1. There is generally a very positive attitude toward forests in Ireland and they are an important natural resource for urban and rural communities, using them regularly for recreation and health and wellbeing [sic].

2. Continued access to public forests is vital to maintain the benefits of forests to people. There is a general divergence in preference for access to publicly or privately owned forests ...

5. Continued and improved engagement and communication with forest owners and farmers is essential to maintaining good working relationships and building confidence and trust.

I have more to go through, but it already seems that if the Department, Minister and Minister of State actually listened to the public consultation that they conducted, they would not have landed themselves where they are.

The consultation continues:

The right reasons - Forests for Wood...

2. There is a preference to see more wood products used in the construction of Irish houses an in energy generation ...

5. There is a need for wider education and awareness raising on the benefits of wood and timber products.

Using forests for nature shows a major gap in the Government's approach. The consultation reads:

1. Supporting and protecting nature and biodiversity are key drivers for increasing forest cover and planning and managing existing forests.

2. There is a preference for expanding, enhancing and restoring native woodland habitats.

3. Establishing non-native conifer forests on sensitive peatland habitats is a key concern. The existing biodiversity and climate mitigation value of candidate afforestation sites should be an important consideration in this regard.

4. A diversity of approaches to forest establishment and management should be used in support of nature ...

The right trees

1. There is a preference among the public for more diverse mixed forests and native forests.

2. The urgent need to create more forests should not be used as a reason to continue planting less diverse forests ...

The right places

1. People would like to see more forests established on a mix of private and public lands and in urban and near-urban areas ...

The right management ...

2. There is an interest at community level to facilitate greater community involvement in forest establishment and management ...

4. Using a suite of options in encouraging more farmers to plant trees will be important.

Nowhere in the above did the citizenry say that we should develop a complex market mechanism and use investment funds to buy up tranches of private land to deliver corporate profit. Rather, the people have said that they want a model of forestry that delivers for local communities, the environment, farmers and the economy. Indeed, this is the same sentiment that came from the Citizens' Assembly on Biodiversity Loss last week. The Government has landed somewhere entirely different, though.

There has been extensive discussion of the Coillte deal, which is a bad deal for Ireland. Today in the Irish Examiner, Mr. Paul Hosford reported the deep concerns of the European Commission, specifically its Directorate General, regarding the elements of the Government's plan relating to biodiversity and nature, for example, planting on peatlands and the impact on birds. The Irish Examinerreads:

[The commission] has previously drawn attention to risks of inappropriate afforestation of sensitive habitats such as peatlands and negative effects on areas of high ecological value ...

I will draw a connection. When the Government consulted the people of Ireland, they said exactly the same thing as the European Commission did.

The Irish Examineralso reads:

The [strategic environmental assessment] report also does not ... adequately address concerns about the piecemeal encroachment of forestry plantations and roads into open landscapes under high natural value farming and relied upon by open habitat birds, notably the hen harrier and the breeding curlew. Breeding curlew numbers have collapsed from an estimated 3,300-5,500 pairs in the late 1980s to no more than 150 pairs at present.

There is an agreed vision - my party certainly reflects it - in the report of the public consultation with a wide range of stakeholders. The Government is failing miserably to deliver on it.

See this speech in context