Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

49. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he intends to extend current supports to address ash dieback; if he will outline additional measures his Department is taking to support forestry landowners in removing affected trees; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25111/23]

Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Minister of State intend to extend what was announced for the interim scheme for farmers and other landowners whose trees have been affected by ash dieback? The clear response from the likes of the Society of Irish Foresters, SIF, and the Irish Farmers Association, IFA, is that what was announced for the interim scheme, including the enhanced features, does not go far enough. Does the Minister of State intend to go further, given their remarks?

Pippa Hackett (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputies across the House may be aware that the first confirmed finding of ash dieback disease in Ireland was made on 12 October 2012 at a forestry plantation site that had been planted in 2009 with trees imported from continental Europe. In March 2013, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine introduced a reconstitution scheme to restore forests planted under the afforestation scheme that had suffered from, or were associated with, plants affected by the disease.

Following a review of the national response to ash dieback disease, arising from scientific advice and evidence that eradication of ash dieback disease is no longer feasible, the reconstitution and underplanting scheme, RUS, was launched in June 2020. The purpose of the RUS was to clear all ash trees and replant with other species. Grants for site clearance and replanting to cover the costs associated with these operations were provided, and premiums continued to be paid where the contracts were still in premium. A total of €9.2 million has been expended to date on both schemes.

In March, I introduced an interim reconstitution scheme for ash dieback via general de minimisprovisions. It doubles site clearance rates, increases grant rates and has an improved premium regime. The interim scheme includes the following enhanced features: a 100% increase in the site clearance grant rate from €1,000 to €2,000; enhanced grant rates as per the draft forestry programme for the period 2023 to 2027; those applicants whose sites are still in premium will continue to receive the premiums due for the remaining years; and for those in receipt of the farmer rate of premium, a top-up premium equal to the difference between the equivalent forestry type and the existing premium will be paid. This will be calculated for the remaining years left in premium and paid in a single sum. A similar scheme for the reconstitution of ash dieback will be launched as part of the new forestry programme.

Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for her response. Even with the enhanced features of the interim scheme, several issues have been flagged. The likes of SIF and the IFA have said the scheme, even with the enhanced features, does not go far enough. The Minister of State has said it includes grants to cover the cost of site clearance. Does she know what those costs are? Again, the organisations are telling us that what the Government has announced does not cover all costs associated with removing affected ash dieback trees. We know that because this issue has been allowed to go on for this long, the situation is now worse. The decay in the trees is worse, and that will make it more expensive to remove them safely. The costs announced as part of the scheme do not cover this.

I also wish to raise the issue of the compensation package for the loss of income suffered. Affected farmers and landowners should be allowed to access the same premium grants as new entrants under the scheme. This is just as much about confidence in the sector as it is about dealing with the issue of ash dieback.

Pippa Hackett (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I fully accept that the ash dieback issue has damaged confidence in the sector. I also accept that there are concerns about the RUS. That said, there are satisfied farmers who have availed of the scheme and who are pleased to have done so. I accept that there is another cohort that is not as pleased and who keep the pressure on, but a total of 974 applications under the scheme have been approved since 2020. Farmers are engaging with the scheme as it stands. However, it is a challenging time for farmers. I accept that the issue damages confidence. I did and will commit to reviewing the current scheme, even with the increased rates for this year. That is on my agenda to do.

Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That will be important. It is not just a matter of dealing with the issue, which is important; it is also a significant issue of health and safety. We have to remember that. It is about confidence in the sector. A farmer or landowner thinking about how those affected by ash dieback have been treated would not be very confident or seek to engage or enter forestry. Therefore, it is important that the Minister of State consider allowing those affected to access the same grants and premiums as new entrants. If we want to build confidence in the sector, we need to get the supports for those affected right. That is very important.

There is also an issue with roadside ash dieback. Landowners are being told they are responsible for dealing with it. I am aware that the Department has issued guidance on this but the farmers will need more than guidance; they will need financial support. It is a serious health and safety issue and it needs to be investigated. I ask the Minister of State to consider not requiring felling licences and allowing permissions to be granted automatically to get this issue dealt with once and for all. She should get rid of the red tape, deal with the issue by granting permission for all the affected trees to be removed, and consider again the financial package to support farmers and other landowners in meeting the cost of site clearance, which is not currently being met although it should be.

Pippa Hackett (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for that. We examined quite thoroughly the idea of not requiring farmers to apply for felling licences. As part of Project Woodland, we examined the regulatory processes involved very extensively. We simply cannot allow farmers to fell trees without getting a licence. Felling entails a significant project that has an impact on the wider environment, so we do need to have a process in place. That process protects the environment as much as it can.

The previous costings for the site clearance grant was €1,000 per hectare. It is unfair to say that a doubling of that does not meet the costs. We would have examined the cost of clearance when we came up with the original figure and it was generous of the Department to double that figure since this year. As I said, I will keep the process and the ash dieback scheme under review. Between hedges and trees, about a quarter of all the trees in Ireland are ash trees so there is another discussion to be had about that.