Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

There has been much discussion of this issue. I assume the Minister, the Ministers of State and everyone else across the House has received a large amount of correspondence from people who have been put out by what they have seen. We can probably all make easy politics of a situation where natural resources are being sold to a British investment fund. That sells well. The problem is that it is partly true. How did we end up in this particular set of circumstances? I am not entirely sure how the conversation went or how Coillte suddenly decided this was a good idea. I accept the difficulties that exist in respect of state aid rules but I do not understand why there was no conversation at Government level. I do not understand how the Minister, Deputy McConalogue, can say he did not know about this deal until it was done in December.

I am not sure whether the Minister of State, Senator Hackett, knew about it before that point. What I do not understand is how there was not a conversation to state that this is not what we seek to do. We can get into arguments in regard to 12,000 ha and 1% and all the rest of it but really this comes down to what the Minister already said is not his preference. Therefore, it is an acceptance that this is a bad deal. This is a bad deal in regard to afforestation and the Irish people. Therefore why are we doing it? On some level this has happened. The second question is, what are we doing to extricate ourselves from what is a really bad situation? What legal advice has been sought in regard to how we backtrack from this? It is all well and good saying deals were done and mistakes were made and we move on. The fact is this is a major disaster. In fairness, we have to congratulate all those people who have become worked up in regard to this. While we might be talking about 1% and 12,000 ha, most of it land that was already forest, the fact is that we could have been talking about a huge number of the future plans in regard to afforestation. The only reason this happened is obviously that due diligence was not done in regard to the European Commission from a point of view of providing another modality or means for Coillte to do this. Clearly a huge amount of work needs to be done to buy back trust with farmers. We can talk about ash dieback or the issue with licensing and backlogs and so on but the fact is what we are all hearing is that the Government lacks credibility because it is dealing with farmers and others who have been burnt too many times before. We need to be able to engage them and bring them back into play. We certainly do not need this deal that nobody seems to think is a good idea. The Minister of State does not seem to think it is a good idea. The Minister, Deputy McConalogue, does not think it is a good idea. We have heard multiple Government Deputies also saying that. The Tánaiste said this needed to be reviewed. Has anything been done in regard to reviewing this? We absolutely need to backtrack out of this deal and introduce a real means of doing business. What conversations have taken place with the European Commission and who has had them from a point of view of getting around state aid rules?

We know state aid rules have changed. We know that when the Germans and the French talk to the European Commission in regard to the need for them to deal with variances, anomalies and stuff they determine is absolutely required by France or Germany, they are able to deliver changes in regard to state aid rules. I believe therefore that there is a fair argument here in regard to this. I also accept that on the particular issue I had with the European Union and the European Commission was their at times absolute opposition to public and state services. Now I think the European Union and the European Commission have learned a lesson through Covid-19 when they saw the absolute necessity that sometimes the State has to step up to the mark. Therefore you have to facilitate the State and semi-State bodies such as Coillte. We cannot have a case where the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, ISIF, is going to put in €25 million and Coillte is going to put in €10 million. Let us be clear. Gresham House is only here to do business for Gresham House. What would the point of it be if for any other reason? It is hardly going to be altruistic. We have all accepted it is a bad deal so the deal needs to be stopped. We need a move back from it but I want to know what conversations have been had from a legal point of view. We need to find a means to do this properly and do the business that needs to be done from a climate change point of view. I hope the Minister of State will have answers to all those questions.

See this speech in context