Paul Daly (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I also welcome the recent announcement by the Minister of State, the Minister and the Taoiseach of the €1.318 billion investment in the forestry programme and many of the concepts therein. I am a member of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine, which has deliberated on the forestry sector too many times to mention. I know our focus was mainly on the backlog in licensing. I welcome the numbers given by the Minister of State and the fact that there has been some alleviation of the problem but we are still not out of the woods, if she will pardon the pun.

The forestry sector has an enormous role to play in our environmental, climate and biodiversity challenges. We have not come anywhere close to harnessing the potential therein because of the aforementioned issues and problems. Hopefully, this new forestry programme will go a long way towards getting things back on track albeit that the programme is still out for public consultation and by virtue of the fact the moneys mentioned are from the Exchequer, we must still get approval from the Commission under state aid rules.

Hopefully, when all those bridges have been crossed, we will then be up and running in what will hopefully turn the entire sector around. I also welcome the initiative announced by the Minister of State for agri-forestry where a farmer can sow up to 1 ha without having to apply for a licence.

I still have some queries about the entire licensing system and process. I do not want to be negative because I welcome the proposal and I know it is a move in the right direction, particularly the increase in premium by anything from 46% to 66% and the extension of premium payment from 15 to 20 years.All of this is to be welcomed. If people buy into the programme, as we want them to, then the first problem we must address, and this was mentioned by the Minister of State herself, is regaining confidence in the sector. I refer specifically to the farming community. The debacle of the last several years has meant that people who have had issues with licences being caught up in the system have moved on and done something else. From observing their problems, other people have now decided it is not worth the hassle, that they will not go near forestry and that it is impossible to do so. These are facts and I am not fabricating them. They are facts we must address and turn around.

How we do this is going to be a major issue. The question is how this sector can be resold in its new clothes to people who may and, hopefully, will invest in it. This is going to be a major issue for the Minister of State's Department, all the associated bodies and people with vested interests. The current lack of confidence in the sector will need to be reversed. We must work on this aspect from the word "Go". As the Minister of State is aware, the joint committee published a report in which we addressed many of the issues regarding licensing problems and made several recommendations. I still advocate for these suggestions. Specifically, we recommended an initial application for an afforestation licence would also include single consent for future road building, thinning and felling. What is really adding to the backlog in processing licence applications is the need to apply for three separate licences at each juncture in the progression of a forest: to develop a road; to thin the trees; and then to fell them. I still advocate the adoption of this recommendation from our report.

Based on the dashboard information, as received today, I have some questions for the Minister of State. As she rightly stated, the numbers have improved and the backlog of applications has decreased. If we look, however, at the number of afforestation licences issued in the year to date, these amount to 621. In the same time, 2,894 felling licences were issued. Four times more licences have been issued for felling than for afforestation. I do not need to explain the consequences of this. If we are cutting down more trees than we are planting, then we are facing a problem. We are a long way short of meeting our 8,000 ha target. Given the average afforestation licence is for 7 ha, how many afforestation licences does the Minister of State envisage we would need to approve annually to meet this 8,000 ha target?

Equally, what communication has there been with the nursery sector? This is an area that again, because of what happened in the past, has not been able to predict what availability of saplings will be needed and, therefore, what number of seedlings it will need to sow every year. These nurseries have no idea what number of licences are going to be granted, so it has been nigh on impossible for them to predict what volume of saplings they will need to supply the forestry industry. Hopefully, and we all do hope this, applications for afforestation licences will take off again based on the new announcement. Are the nurseries ready and prepared to meet demand when it increases?

Based on other conversations we had in the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine today, I request that the Minister of State and her Department keep a close eye on, and thoroughly monitor, the proposed new EU nature restoration law. If we are to believe what we have been told, there is potential in this regard for a requirement that up to 70% of our blackbog-type, previously drained soil be restored to its original standard of 70 years ago. We are led to believe that this includes such land that is planted. If it was not planted 70 years ago, this would have an enormous effect on our overall acres of forestry. It is, therefore, extremely important that the Minister of State's Department monitor this aspect. I wish to hear her comments at the end regarding this proposal and what effect it would have on our overall forestry figures if it were to come to fruition.

I would also like the Minister of State to give some more detail on the newly-proposed road grants in the programme, if she has any more information on this aspect. As I said, I am aware the Minister of State's plan is still at the stage of public consultation. The t's are not crossed nor the i's dotted and I accept this.

Turning to a few other queries, the forestry type, FT, 11 and 12 grant rates are probably not going to be accurate in future now, based on the change to the species requirement, with the requirement for a plantation to have 20% broadleaf trees. This will mean that people involved in forestry will incur additional costs. There is no allowance for an increase in these grants contained in the programme, as far as I am aware.

While I welcome everything in this plan and it is all well intentioned, will large-scale institutional bodies be able to avail of the same grants? If so, it is vitally important that we monitor the progress of this programme to ensure that, albeit unintentionally, it does not enhance large-scale institutional developments further. As the Minister of State said in her statement, this plan is intended to bring more farmers into this scheme and this is what we all want.