Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 4 Mar 1942

Vol. 85 No. 15

Committee on Finance. - Vote 53—Forestry.

Tairgim:—

Go ndeontar suim breise ná raghaidh thar £21,750 chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1942, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisí i dtaobh Foraoiseachta (9 agus 10 Geo. 5, c. 58, agus Uimh. 34 de 1928), maraon le Deontas-i-gCabhair chun Talamh do Thógaint.

That a supplementary sum, not exceeding £21,750, be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1942, for Salaries and Expenses in connection with Forestry (9 & 10 Geo. 5, c. 58, and No. 34 of 1928), including a Grant-in-Aid for Acquisition of Land.

Baineann an Vóta Breise atá beartuithe le suimeanna breise alos talamh do thógaint le haghaidh foraoiseachta le habhair fálachta do cheannach agus le costaisí agus fáltaisí maidir le mórriar adhmaid teine do sholáthar chun an easnaimh do shlánú atá ann de dheascaibh ganntanas guail.

Tá suim bhreise de £15,000 ag teastáil chun talamh do thógaint fé Mhírcheann C (1). I dtosach na bliana airgeadais atá ar rith anois isé an fuighleach do bhí sa Chiste um Thalamh do Thógaint (Deontas-i-gCabhair) ná £6,036. Chuir seo, maraon le suim de £25,000 do vótáladh i gcóir na bliana, suim iomlán de £31,036 ar fáil chun talamh do cheannach i rith na bliana. Isé an caiteachas glan as an gCiste seo go dtí an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1942, ná £29,281, ar a n-áirmhítear suim de £25,240 in aghaidh tailte do cheannach, agus isé an t-achar iomlán do bhí sna tailte sin ná 7,934¼ acra. Do bhí fuighleach de £1,755 ar fáil chun íoc as caiteachas i rith an chuid eile den bhliain. Isé méid an airgid cheannaigh atá dlite d'aisíoc as 1,025¼ acra ná £4,796. Tagann fiacha eile, fé n-a ndeachaidh an Roinn Foraoiseachta chun 9,357¾ acra do cheannach, £19,795. As an tsuim seo meastar go gcaithfear £10,000 ar a laighead roimh an 31adh lá de Mhárta seo chugainn.

Beidh suim de £1,500 iníoctha freisin in aghaidh cíosanna agus blianachtaí thiocfaidh chun a bheith dlite i rith a bhfuil gan caitheamh den bhliain airgeadais. Tá gá le deontas breise de £15,000 dá réir sin.

Fé Fho-Mhír C (2) tá suim bhreise de £34,000 dá cur ar fáil chun abhair do cheannach. O thosnuigh an phráinn tá ganntanas sreang fálachta ag cur becainn ar an Roinn Foraoiseachta i gcúrsaí plandála. Tá iarrachtaí á ndéanamh chun caindíocht mhór de líonra sreinge d'fháil o Ameirice, ach is deacair a rá conus eireoidh leis na hiarrachtaí sin. Go dtí seo táthar tar éis 6,000 rolla de líonra agus 50 tonna de shreang dheilgnigh do chur chun bealaigh as na monarchana in Ameirice. Go dtí seo níor tháinig ach cuid den tsreang seo go dtí an tír seo, ach fé théarmaí an chonnartha dlightear íocaiocht do dhéanamh nuair a cuirtear na hearraí amach as an monarachain. Tá 9,000 rolla eile de líonra sreinge nár cuireadh chun bealaigh go fóill. Isé is foras leis an tsuim bhreise de £34,000 atá á cur ar fáil fén rannán "Abhair" ná an tuigsint go geaithfidh íocaíocht a bheith déanta roimh an 31adh lá de Mhárta seo chugainn as an gcaindíocht iomlán de shreing do hordúiodh.

Is soláthar nua an soláthar atá á dhéanamh fén rannán "Soláthar Tein-abhair le haghaidh Práinne" sa mhírcheann chéanna. Ar iarratas ón Roinn Soláthairtí rinne an Roinn Foraoiseachta scéim do thionnscnamh i mí na Bealtaine, 1941, chun adhmad teine do chur ar fáil chun freastal do phráinn na huaire. Do thóg an Roinn ortha féin fén scéim 100,000 tonna d'adhmad teine ina bhforaoiseacha féin do leagadh agus é do sheachadadh do stáisiúin iompair. Do bhí an t-adhmad le hiompar chun carnáin chaothúla chun bluic do dhéanamh de ag Fuel Importers, Ltd.—cólucht do bunuíodh go speisialta chun margaíocht tein-abhair do stiúradh d'fhonn freastal do phráinn na huaire. Thóg Fuel Importers, Ltd. ortha féin na costais iomlána fé n-a raghfaí fén scéim d'aisíoc leis an Roinn. Tá beartuithe anois an chaindíocht de thein-abhar do bhí le cur ar fáil fén scéim seo do laigheadú go dtí 88,000 tonna. Suas go dtí an 31adh lá d'Eanar dob é an costas díreach a bhain leis an adhmad san do ghearradh agus d'iompar chun na stáisiún ná £72,076. Meastar gurb é an caiteachas iomlán suas go dtí deireadh na bliana airgeadais ná £75,000. Is muirear iomchuibhe ar Fho-Mhír C (2) den Vóta Foraoiseachta an caiteachas so, mar an t-adhmad atá i gceist is cineál é a glanfaí amach ar aon chuma an túisce bheadh sé ionmhargaidh, chun áit d'ullmhú i gcóir plandála. I ngeall ar leitheadúlacht na scéime, is inmhianuithe, ámh, an soláthar is gá do dhéanamh fé rannán ar leithligh sa Mhírcheann.

Tá soláthar cúiteamhach in aghaidh fáltais o Fuel Importers Ltd. fán rannán "Adhmad do Dhíol fén Scéim Soláthair Tein-Abhair le haghaidh Práinne" i mírcheann H—Leithreasaí-i-gCabhair.

Tá fo-scéim fé n-a bhfuil an Roinn ag cur 12,000 tonna bloc adhmaid teine ar fáil chun a ndíolta le bárdas Bhaile Atha Cliath, a ghníomhóidh mar ghníomhacht iomdhála, á muirearú ar Fho-Mhír C 2 (4)—Oibreacháin Chultúrdha (Saothar) agus ar Fho-Mhír C 3 —Muilte Sáibhéarachta ion-iompair (Saothar). Ní gá aon tsoláthar breise fé fho-mhír C 2, ach beidh suim bhreise de £750 ag teastaáil fé Fho-Mhír C 3. Bhéarfar na fáltais fén scéim seo chun creidiúna fé Fho-Mhír H (1)—Leithreasaí-i-gCabhair (Muilte Sáibhéarachta), agus tá liúntas déanta i gcóir suime breise de £2,000 fén rannán san. Ní déanfar furmhór an chaiteachais fén scéim d'aisíoc leis an Roinn go dtí tar éis deireadh na bliana airgeadais.

I ngeall ar ghanntanas abhar fálachta agus ar an laigheadú thiocfaidh dá dheascaibh ar obair phlandála, meastar go ndéanfar sábháil de £26,000 ar Fho-Mhír C (2). Isí an tsuim bhreise ghlan atá ag teastáil dá réir sin ná £21,750.

One is glad to see that, in this Supplementary Estimate, the Department of Forestry is looking for an additional £15,000 for the acquisition of land, and one can only hope that, at long last, there is to be some little advance in this matter. There is hardly a Deputy in this House who does not know that land is being offered—almost pitched at the heads of the Forestry Department— over a number of years, extensive areas of land, eminently suitable for planting and for nothing else; and, for some extraordinary reason, the Forestry Department has refused to accept that land, even when it is given with the fullest goodwill of all parties concerned or having any claim to the land, and given, if not for nothing, for practically nothing. Therefore, I hope that this request for an additional sum denotes a departure from the old happy-go-lucky system of acquiring a piece now and again.

The main matter to which I wish to draw attention in this Supplementary Estimate is that of the wire fencing or wire netting. We are told that the operations of this Department have been hampered very greatly through the fact that they had not sufficient supplies of wire netting. We are told further that, up to the present, 6,000 rolls of netting and 50,000 tons of barbed wire have been ordered from factories in the United States. Only a portion—we are not told how much —has so far reached this country but, under the contract terms, payment is due on the dispatch of the goods from the factory. One can understand and appreciate certain Departments of State—particularly the Department of Supplies—being, so to speak, "caught out" by this war. Those Departments are responsible for the importation of a great variety of articles but, so far as I know, the only article in connection with their operations which this Department has to import is wire. Certainly, it is one of the principal articles, and I cannot understand why a little foresight could not have been exercised and a greater supply—even if not sufficient—obtained in advance.

I think I referred briefly to this matter last year—either on the main Estimate or on some Supplementary Estimate—and I queried the Minister about it. My recollection is that he told me that it was ordered some time last year. Apparently, the Minister did not waken up to the fact that he was short of wire, an essential commodity in the activities of the Forestry Department, until the war had been going on for at least a year and a half.

The position the Department then found themselves in compelled them to place contracts in America, under the terms of which payment was due on the dispatch of the goods from the factory.

There are many other matters in connection with this forestry work to which I would like to refer, but this is the main matter and one regarding which I want to get an answer now, so I propose not to say anything about the other matters until the main Estimate comes before the House. I think the House is entitled to a very full explanation as to the position the Department found themselves in regarding wire netting and barbed wire.

There is one item which requires a little explanation, that is, the scheme by which the Department produced 100,000 tons of firewood which would go to Fuel Importers, Limited. The Minister's statement says that that amount is now reduced to 88,000 tons and that the cost of felling this timber and transporting it to the station was a total of £72,000. That is almost 19/- a ton, which would be a very high price if that timber is transported to the station in the ordinary way that timber is sent in bulk. The Department's job is only to fell the timber, strip it and cut it into four-foot or six-foot lengths for transport. If that is all the Department does, that cost of almost £1 per ton is entirely excessive.

I am perfectly aware that people handling timber in the country districts, with sawmills of their own, are able to cut it into nine-inch blocks and sell it at a price not very much more than that. I would like to know if the Department's timber is cut into four-foot or six-foot lengths, as if it is in those big lengths, the cost is entirely too high.

Does this Supplementary Estimate cover the question of cutting timber for the purpose of fuel?

Because I want to put this point to the Minister: There is at the present time a very acute shortage of fuel in a wide variety of districts in the country and a number of charitable people are anxious to facilitate those who are short of fuel in cutting trees for conversion into timber for burning, much on the same lines as the Department themselves are trying to do in collaboration with Fuel Importers, but what happens is that where persons are anxious to give the necessary permission to their neighbours to come and cut trees which, in their judgement, may properly be removed from the woods on their premises, they are informed that they must apply to the Department of Lands for permission to do that. That is reasonable enough; I do not complain of that; but when they apply they get a form that has to be filled up asking them by what title they hold the land, on what estate the land is situate; whether annuities are being paid upon it, and what proposals they have for planting to replace the trees removed; with the result that many well intentioned persons, contemplating the prospect of a protracted correspondence with the Department and generally getting entangled with the Department, simply say: "We had better drop the whole business; I do not want to be saddled with an interminable correspondence which may end up God knows where. The simple way is to let nobody cut a tree." I suggest that, in the exceptional emergency in which we find ourselves, where a person writes to the Department for permission to cut trees for the convenience of his neighbours, an inspector, or Gárda sergeant should go to the premises and, if the proposal is a modest one for the cutting down of a dozen or two dozen trees, the trees should be marked and the land owner told: "If you do not go beyond that, there is no necessity to go through the customary formalities involved in getting permission to cut trees."

I do not think the administrative difficulties would be insuperable, but if the Minister feels it is absolutely necessary for an inspector of his own Department to attend in such cases, I would put it to him that all the usual, normal questionnaires should be suspended and that nothing more should be done than that an inspector would go to the premises and say: "How many trees do you want marked for cutting down and conversion into firing?", and if he is satisfied that the trees which it is proposed to cut down—and they are very commonly ash trees—are not going to make any material difference to the afforestation of this country, I suggest that a simplified procedure should be adopted—the trees marked by the inspector and the proprietor of the premises told to go and cut away.

We are now at the end of this winter, but Departments move slowly and I am thinking of next winter when our problems will be as big, if not greater than they are now. I suggest that between now and next autumn the Minister should work out the simplified procedure which I suggest and, in answer to any further application, propose to the applicant that this simplified procedure should be followed and warn him that while this simplified procedure is made available in this time of crisis, it must not be regarded as a precedent to be followed when the present emergency is passed.

The Minister has estimated the amount of the emergency fuel, that is timber cut for fuel purposes, at £75,000 up to the end of the financial year. Could the Minister tell us what is the estimated amount of sales up to the end of the year or what is the amount up to the present time of standing timber? Will the Minister tell us what is his procedure with regard to standing timber at the present time? Has the fixing of prices in respect of fuel and timber introduced a fixed price which the Department charges to persons who buy standing timber? Could the Minister say how that price is arrived at, what it is and whether the standing timber is now offered for competitive tenders? If there is a fixed price, how does he manage to allot standing timber to various applicants for different supplies of standing timber?

Has the Minister given further consideration to the question of transplants that was raised recently by way of Parliamentary Question? The Minister will remember that he was asked whether there was a surplus of transplants this year and, if so, whether it was proposed to destroy them in the way in which they were destroyed last year. In reaction to his answer at that time, the Minister ascertained from various sides of the House that it was regarded as a shocking thing that these young trees would be destroyed, apparently at the suggestion of a section of the nurserymen. Again I would ask the Minister if he has reconsidered the matter, whether he will say that this destruction will not take place; whether they are available to those nurserymen who want them, or available, as Deputy Allen and others suggested, to the county councils for their planting schemes?

Could the Minister give us any information as to the price at which Fuel Importers, Ltd., sell the timber when it is for sale? I take it that the Minister supplies Fuel Importers, Ltd., with cut timber at the cost only of the cutting.

And transport. I regret I am not in a position to say at what price Fuel Importers sell timber but I can find out.

Do they make a profit on it?

I could not say that either. My only concern in the matter is to see that, as far as possible, in the interests of my own Department, the costs are recouped. It is really only an accountancy matter. Some officers of my Department might feel that our Department should show a profit on the matter, but at any rate we have reached the point that we have got an understanding to get a balance in the form of appropriations for whatever our outgoings may be in providing timber. We have not yet finally agreed what the charges are to be but it is estimated that the Department's outlay on the scheme will be covered by a rate of £1 per ton, and that is the rate proposed.

Does that include transport to a place like Dublin?

Transport to the station.

Is that the railway station?

The railway station.

It does not include transport to its ultimate destination?

It does not include transport to the city. I think that is reasonable. It may be that in individual cases, as Deputy Linehan says, isolated merchants or even merchants in a big way of business, may be able to do better. We are not trying to make any profit on this, and I am sure the officials of the Forestry Branch are anxious to get the best return possible. Having regard to the fact that the timber has to be felled, cut into logs and taken to the railway station, I think it is reasonable enough. We have not received any complaint, I think, from Fuel Importers Limited that the price is unreasonable. It seems to me that if they consider that in the final price to the consumers, the cost of felling and preparation for the market is unreasonable, it would be for them to raise the question.

We have arranged to circularise the nursery trade with regard to these transplants in which Deputy Mulcahy is interested, and if I am satisfied that transplants cannot be obtained otherwise or that plants which other firms in the trade require cannot be obtained, I intend to make them available. I think the Deputy will realise that we must have some regard to the claims of those in the wholesale trade who say that they have stocks of certain species available. At the same time, I do not want to have destruction of those plants, and I will go as far as possible to avoid having them destroyed. I explained, on the last occa sion when this matter was mentioned, that county committees of agriculture and others will have to get their plants from the members of the wholesale trade. All we can do is to facilitate the wholesale trade, as far as we can, under the circumstances. We cannot, obviously, deal with individuals.

As regards Deputy Dillon's point, we have only a limited staff of inspectors. I am told we have 16 in the country, and a very severe burden is being placed on those 16 inspectors in carrying out inspection and recommending the amount of replanting necessary, if replanting conditions are put in the felling permit, because those inspectors, like the Forestry Branch generally, are expected to carry out the normal work of afforestation in the country. The House and the Government expect me to see that a very substantial acreage is planted. There is all the more interest in that matter in view of the great amount of felling that is going on at the moment. This whole question of felling and the setting up of a timber control has thrown a very severe burden on our inspectors, and I expect that the burden will become more acute in the future, because travelling is becoming very difficult, and more and more felling is likely to go on. I must point out to the House again, and I hope to have their co-operation on this matter, that it is the law that felling permits must be obtained, and it is not too much to ask anybody to wait for a reasonable period if the Forestry Branch are not able to give a permit to fell right away, which they do in the vast majority of cases where there are only a few trees involved. A farmer has a few trees near his house, or perhaps a few trees somewhere else, which he thinks, from more than one point of view, it would be an advantage to take down. As a general rule the Forestry Branch tries to convenience such people, but then there are others who want to cut large numbers of trees, and in those cases there is no way out except to have inspection. If, as frequently happens, the owners choose to fell before they get a permit to do so, and before the inspector has reported on the matter, we have to prosecute them. As in other matters in which the Government is interested, I hope that severe fines will be placed upon people who cut down trees without getting a permit. If they find that the filling of forms is too arduous for them to undertake, they can easily get some assistance. All they need do in the first instance is to go to the Civic Guard station and inform them of their intentions.

After two and a half years, it seems to me that the amount of illegal felling during this war is increasing rather than otherwise, and I must ask the House to give all the co-operation possible to see that the law is carried out. Otherwise, it will be quite impossible to maintain any proper form of timber control, and it will be equally impossible to enforce a proper replanting programme on those at present felling trees. I should like to be able to meet Deputy Dillon in the matter, but I do not see how it is feasible. A forestry inspector is not like Sir Boyle Roche's bird; he cannot be in several places at one time; he has to get about like any other Government officer. I think the Forestry Branch has done very well up to the present in maintaining a very large annual acreage of new plantation, and, at the same time, looking after this additional work which has been thrown upon them.

Deputy Morrissey complained about the delay with regard to wire fencing and meeting. Of course, unhappily, military people are very keen on barbed wire and wire netting generally, and I am afraid that when it became evident that war was imminent the supplies were seized at once in the countries in which they are produced. The Forestry Branch were trying to get those supplies from Great Britain since October, 1939. For many months, when supplies were not nearly as stringent as they are now, it seemed that we might get some from Great Britain. After several months' endeavour, we had to transfer our attentions to the United States, and it has taken from May or June, 1940, up to the present to get even a very limited supply of wire fencing and netting from the United States. I do not know what areas Deputy Morrissey refers to as being pitched at the Forestry Department. Areas that seem to be very suitable might not be so very suitable, but, even if we are all agreed that they are suitable, there is still a certain procedure that has to be followed. The title of the lands has to be looked into. Investigations have to be carried out, and the price has to be fixed, and investigations often take a considerable time, particularly when the property is a large one. The owners may not even be in the country at the present time. If the Deputy— or any other Deputy—will communicate with me about any areas in which he is interested, and in which he knows that offers have been made to the Forestry Branch, I shall do anything I can to have the matter expedited.

Before the Minister concludes, I should like to ask him a question. The Minister, perhaps, misunderstood me. All I am asking is that there should be some simplification of the procedure, and I suggested certain lines that occured to me. Would the Minister, for the period of the crisis, exempt certain classes of trees? For instance, would he permit larch to be cut for this period without the customary licence, or, if that is not possible, would he simply say that the usual forms need not be filled but that the inspector will attend and mark specific trees which may be cut forthwith? All I am asking for is simplification of the procedure in order to make it less likely that there will be illegal cutting in future.

In view of the fact that fish merchants in Cahirciveen find great difficulty in providing timber for fish boxes, would the Minister's Department facilitate those people in future by making it possible for the Department of Supplies to grant those licences to the fish merchants concerned within a specified period? Last year there was considerable delay in procuring those licences, and the people concerned were held up for weeks before this timber was made available.

I cannot undertake, even in cases where timber suppliers have entered into definite contracts, that, merely by reason of the fact that they have entered into those contracts or want to get on with their business, they are entitled to priority of treatment over others. I cannot agree with that. Naturally, the Forestry Branch and, I hope, the Department of Supplies will try to facilitate such people, but we do not want to be in the position of being blackmailed into giving felling licences. A certain number of contractors in this country seem to think that by entering into very speedy arrangements to purchase large quantities of timber, they can then come along to us and, on the threat that a certain amount of employment depends on their getting this timber, compel us to give them a felling licence.

We are not going to be browbeaten in that way. We will try to meet those who approach us in a reasonable frame of mind in a proper way, but I do not think advantage should be taken of the present position to force our hands. We will do our best to meet people, but we dislike those people who try to browbeat us into doing something we would not normally do. All those people, both timber suppliers and private owners, should know by this time that there is a Forestry Act which has been in operation since 1928 and they should know that they are not entitled to cut timber without licence. If they do so, we will prosecute those who purchase the timber and those who fell it.

I have not much sympathy, therefore, with those people to whom Deputy Dillon refers, people who will not go to the trouble of carrying out the normal procedure. We know that the regulations in many respects are irksome to people, but they have to fill up these forms. Records have to be kept. If any Minister is challenged here, that Minister must be in a position to state what actually happened and it must be realised that even though the filling of forms is rather tedious and troublesome, there is a definite reason for filling them. The Department likes to have records of what has been permitted in certain cases. I do not see how we can get out of the difficulty. Those who want to facilitate the public by providing timber are surely sufficiently intelligent to be able to follow the normal procedure.

Then the Minister cannot consider simplifying the procedure at all?

I do not think so.

Vote put and agreed to.
Vote reported and agreed to.
Top
Share