Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)

I thank the Acting Chairman, Senator Bradford, and other Senators for their positive contributions and for the many and wide-ranging ideas which have emanated from all sides on the future role of Coillte and the value of forestry. It is encouraging to hear such positive views.

Senator Bradford referred to the 8% reduction in premia which was necessary in the April budget. This measure arose due to the economic circumstances. There was genuine concern, which I shared, that the impact of the reduction could be negative. As it transpired, however, the level of planting this year will be higher than last year and the indications are that it will also increase next year. Obviously, this increase cannot be attributed to the 8% decrease in the value of premia. A number of other considerations such as land use options came into play.

I separated this provision on the funding limits for Coillte from a much larger Bill which is under preparation in the Department and will probably run to 40 sections. Approximately half of the sections have been cleared by the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. I will explain the reason for the urgency with the Bill later. Ideally, I would like to return to the House early in the new year with the main Bill which deals with many areas which were mentioned by various Senators.

Senator Bradford asked whether borrowing heretofore has complied with rules and guidelines. Having checked this matter carefully in preparing the legislation, I am satisfied that all the borrowing which has taken place complies with legislation.

I was pleased to hear Senator Bradford and other speakers take a positive view of the involvement of Coillte in wind farms. This is being done in a number of ways. The company is co-operating in a joint venture with the ESB in Garvagh Glebe in County Leitrim. Coillte may also be in a position to act alone in some instances. In specific circumstances it may be advantageous for it to arrange permissions and so forth before selling the site and investing the proceeds in an alternative forestry enterprise. I would like such flexibility to be in place and I am pleased Senators welcomed this idea.

Senator O'Brien also spoke in positive mode and cited a number of positive and exciting statistics related to forestry. Despite the visibility of trees, we tend to overlook forestry's value in terms of employment, recreation and other areas.

Senator Coffey is clearly familiar with the two panel board product facilities located close to his home in County Waterford. One of the plants is just inside the border of County Kilkenny at the Port of Waterford, while the other is in Clonmel. These companies provide employment opportunities. Substantial investment has been made in Medite in recent times and similar investment is required in SmartPly to facilitate exports and ensure standardised quality, speed and other factors which are important considerations when one is exporting 80% of one's product. I visited both plants recently and what I saw was positive. Senator Coffey also referred to opportunities in carbon sequestration, to which I will refer.

Given that the original borrowing limit was set at €101 million or thereabouts and has increased, through inflation, to approximately €188 million, people are entitled to ask the reason it is being increased to €400 million. It is being increased in the context of a draft strategy from Coillte for the period until 2012. This appears a short timeframe in some respects. The strategy envisages the company developing in non-traditional areas to ensure it is able to fulfil its commercial remit in the first instance and plays a much more positive role in afforestation, recreation and many other areas. This is a welcome development.

Initially Coillte indicated that its plans could involve borrowings of up to €700 million. Having consulted the company and examined its proposals and potential developments in the short to medium term, we decided that €400 million is more than sufficient to enable the company to do what is necessary for a considerable period.

Senator Coffey referred to an incident in Waterford involving a 150 year lease and so forth. While I was familiar with the case six months ago, I have forgotten the details. I will, however, obtain an update for the Senator because this is an important point. Part of the job the Houses are charged with is to ask hard questions about how public money or money in public companies is spent. The places in which to answer the question are these Houses and I will be more than happy to revert to the Senator with the details, as I do not have a sufficiently clear recollection to respond now.