Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 28 Apr 1949

Vol. 115 No. 2

Committee on Finance. - Vote 53—Forestry (Resumed).

In the House last night I was speaking on the question of the acquisition of land for forestry being the greatest difficulty. I am aware of the difficulty in the fulfilment of the programme, of which the House and the country are already aware, of planting 25,000 acres at least. Many Deputies seem to fear the provision of the 1946 Act, which allows the Department of Forestry to use compulsory powers for the acquisition of land. They pressed on me the need that I should step carefully and warily in acquisition. They were really pushing an open door, because I consider that in most cases the finding of suitable land for forestry acquisition will be dependent on the small farmer rather than the big farmer.

When I say small farmers, I mean farmers with a low valuation who have land in mountainous areas. While their acreage might be fairly large, and in some cases extremely large, the quality of the land is poor and the poor law valuation, as I am sure most Deputies familiar with these districts know, is small. For that reason I do not propose to use compulsion except in extreme cases or in cases, for instance, where a number of tenants—eight, ten or 15 tenants—have a right of commonage and where the vast majority of them are anxious to sell their interests in that commonage. If I find in a case like that that one or two are objecting, just through peevishness or for some other cause, we would have to consider using compulsion on the one or two objectors. Even in such cases as that, there is provision for striping the commonage, so to speak, leaving the one or two objectors their share of the commonage.

What happens in a great many cases is that one or two landowners living near the commonage enjoy the full benefit of it to the exclusion of their neighbours living further away who have equal rights to that commonage. At least, that occurs in many cases in the West. To meet such a situation where you might have 12 to 15 small farmers having a right of commonage and where, say, 14 of them were willing to sell while one of them is objecting to sell, it might be necessary to use compulsory methods, but even in that case I would be very slow to use compulsion. It may be necessary to cut off one-fifteenth part of the commonage and leave it in enjoyment of the person who does not wish to sell, and take over the remainder of the commonage. Taking it by and large, I am opposed to compulsion although some Deputies seem to think that compulsion should be used for the purpose of getting our programme fulfilled. I think that would be very dangerous because we have a peculiar system of land tenure in this country. To establish that system much blood was spilt. The fight for the establishment of that system brought to the forefront men such as Davitt, Dillon and Parnell, who devoted their whole lives to the struggle to secure peasant proprietorship. I do not think any Irish Government would seek to undo or to endanger that right which the tenants now have.

I do not want Deputies, however, to get it into their heads that we are going to stand back in any way in our efforts to get suitable land for forestry. We are going to offer every inducement to people who have suitable forestry land, particularly in mountainous areas, to sell us that land. I have no doubt that the people living in those areas will be prepared to make us offers of suitable land even though agricultural prices are higher than they were ever offered before. For that reason it is hard to expect people to part with their land easily. Nevertheless, I want to say that there is a keen desire amongst people in all parts of the country to make such land available for forestry purposes. As a matter of fact, offers are starting to come in from many parts of the country. Since I announced the 25,000-acre programme some months ago, offers are pouring in, so much so that at the moment we find that our inspectorial staff is insufficient to deal with all these offers. Some Deputies mentioned that we were taking offers rather carelessly and that we were not sending out inspectors to investigate them. The real truth of the matter is that we have not a sufficient staff to deal with the number of offers coming in at the moment.

I might point out at this stage that up to the time of the change of Government there was a great deal of talk about forestry and about the area available for forestry. Some mentioned 1,000,000 acres, others said there were 3,000,000, while more said there were 7,000,000, and men who had given a good deal of thought to the problem and who had read a lot about it could only make just a vague guess. Just shortly after I came into office I asked the Forestry Department to set about making a survey of land suitable and available for forestry all over the country. When I say "suitable" land I want Deputies to realise that all suitable land may not come into our hands or may not be offered to us. There are many landowners who may not be willing to sell suitable land, but the survey is fairly well advanced and I hope to have it completed by September or October. While it may not be extremely accurate, nevertheless it will be able to give us once and for all an idea of how much land is suitable for forestry. After that, when we see what offers are made, we can approach the owners and ask them to sell the land to us.

Could the Minister have the map which I suggested prepared?

I intend to have a map prepared. It will be on view in the offices of the Forestry Department or else I might make it available here in the House, in the Library or elsewhere, for Deputies together with such detailed information as Deputies who are keenly interested in forestry may wish to have. When that survey is completed it will give us a fairly good idea of the acreage we have. I should like to say, even though Deputy Allen and Deputy Kennedy propose that even arable land should be put under forestry, that I hold that food production should take first place.

Does the Minister realise that afforestation is necessary in certain areas to maintain the fertility of the soil and that his experts are of opinion that afforestation is necessary to prevent deterioration of the soil?

By all means. As a matter of fact, I am looking forward to, though I may not see the day, when the State will have a pretty large area of forests situated in the right places so as to give employment and so as to provide, if possible, the full needs of the home market with home-grown timber, properly seasoned, cut and prepared by experts. Forests so situated are of material assistance to arterial drainage. These mountain sides and mountain slopes are at present nothing but receptacles for heavy rainfall, causing flooding and damage in the lowlands. The areas which have been denuded of forests in the past have left us with a problem of drainage which is costing many thousands of pounds to solve at the moment. I take pride in the fact that I am as bad a fanatic for forestry as anyone in this House, if not the worst fanatic. I am anxious to see the full programme of 25,000 acres per year completed. At the same time, we must bear in mind that most of the landowners who have suitable forest land own it as of right and while I should like to see afforestation going ahead and intend to use every means to further it, I should not like to see the desire to acquire land for forestry being used as the thin end of the wedge to interfere with the good solid title and tenure of the tenant farmers.

I want to make this clear. If the Forestry Department once gives an inkling to the people, or if the people who own forest land once get it into their heads that the Minister is going to deprive them of that land whether they like it or not, it may have the effect of stiffening their resistance to such a point that it would kill the work of reafforestation on any large scale. In other words, this problem has to be handled very carefully. Several Deputies mentioned that a better price should be paid for the land. I have made it known that I intend to pay a better price as an inducement to get land. I hope, and I have not any doubt, that we shall be able to get sufficient land to enable us to carry out the 25,000-acre programme although it is a pretty stiff one. In order to plant 25,000 acres per year, about 30,000 acres or 33,000 acres will have to be purchased, because all land that is purchased is not plantable. Take a mountain-top with a certain contour. Just to give the House an idea of the total acreage which must be purchased, I might point out that up to the present 150,000 acres have been purchased for the purpose of forestry. One hundred and twenty thousand acres have been planted and slightly more than 30,000 acres are unplanted or, at least, have been deemed unplantable up to now. With our increasing knowledge of forestry, we might be able to steal 2,000 or 10,000 acres out of that block of 30,000 unplantable acres, according as experience shows that certain species will develop on land which was hitherto reckoned as a dead loss.

Deputy Cowan seemed to be in doubt last night as to the future programme. I may not have been sufficiently clear in my opening statement last night. We have the land to plant 25,000 acres next year, if we had the plants. Even if we had the plants, it would not be desirable to plant all the land. In the last three or four months, since the Government definitely decided on a 25,000-acre programme, an all-out drive has been carried on to get in land. It is always wise to have at least double the amount of land in hand, so as to provide for the amount to be selected. The land has to be spied out and it takes a good deal of time and experience to determine the best type of timber to grow on it. One has to be very careful in these matters, so that the failures may form only a very small percentage. The officials deserve a good deal of credit up to this, as the percentage failure has been very small. It shows they gave great attention to the selection of the trees for each particular kind of land and that, in spending the taxpayers' money in the creation of forest they were not prodigal or spending money heedlessly. The programme next year will be for about 10,000 acres.

In this present year?

What I describe as the 1949-50 season. Planting for some species may begin in October and we can plant other species up to the last day of May. Severe frost—such as we had two years ago and which occurs practically every winter—destroys many of the young transplants. We may start at the nurseries in October with sufficient for 10,000 acres and may find a terrific frost kills many of less vigorous plants, just as if stock broke in and destroyed them.

The obtaining of land is a slow process and has to be dealt with carefully. Those with legal knowledge realise that the getting of good sound title is not as easy or as quick as we would like it to be. On many occasions, we may be very keen on a particular 500 acres or a larger area and when we go to take it over we find there are impediments and burdens, old wills and titles never properly cleared up. We must do that or insist on the owner doing it. Sometimes the owner puts his foot down and tells us to take the land as it is or do without it. We are not like private individuals who might burn their fingers if they wish, as they are spending their own money; we are using the taxpayers' money and must be sure of a sound title.

I can suggest a way to short-circuit it.

There are methods of short-circuiting, but I do not know if they are desirable. This holds up the Land Commission to a great extent and the Forestry Department as well. The Land Commission have to be still more careful; the Forestry Department takes land and holds it for the State, but the Land Commission must hand it over with a completely free and clean title to the purchaser.

This year some 4,000 lbs. of seeds were put down. The seeds do not always come up to the germination tests or produce the number of plants anticipated. In some areas only half the seeds may produce transplants, while in other areas there may be only one out of ten. The conifer variety produces 190,000 seeds to the lb., but the number that can be produced from that may be only 10,000 or 12,000. Some years you get good returns and other years you do not. It is in a very fluid state and you cannot be sure of it. We find there are frost, bad germination, delay in land acquisition and weather conditions to contend with. When I set a target of 25,000 acres I am not setting that goal for the purpose of falling short of it: I have every hope that it will be reached and some anticipation that it may be passed in some years. However, I hope it will be maintained steadily. If we do that for 12 years it will make a terrific change in the country and all its benefits, including employment, will be seen.

Deputy Allen and Deputy Kennedy surprised me last night. Since they, went to the other side of the House I have not known more liberal-handed men than they. They want to pour out money and spend at a terrific rate. There is no need to impress on this Government the need to pour money out in the proper directions. As a matter of fact, it was not through pressure from the other side of the House that the forestry programme was started. Deputy Allen is particularly keen on growing hardwoods and he says there is a scarcity of them. The truth is that 90 to 95 per cent. of the timber demands of this country is for softwood. That disposes of the idea that there is not sufficient hardwood. The Forestry Department do not say: "We will sow in this year 2,000 acres of hardwood and so many acres of softwood". Whatever land is available is used according to their skill and judgment for the species of timber that will grow best on it. If they do not get land suitable for hardwood, they do not plant hardwood, and it would be wrong for them to do so. Nevertheless, there is a good percentage of hardwood up and down the country. I have not the exact figures, but I believe there is no danger of a shortage of hardwood. A good deal was cut down for firewood during the emergency, but not in sufficient quantity to endanger the supply of hardwood for ordinary usage at present. I hear no complaints about that point.

A good deal of confusion seems to have arisen about the supposed clash between the interests of forestry and the new land reclamation scheme outlined by the Minister for Agriculture. In case I did not explain it last night, may I say now that there is no need for a clash there? The policy of the present Government is that land reclamation uses up arable and semi-arable land up to a certain point and from that point the forestry scheme comes in. There is no need for me to encroach on the work of the Minister for Agriculture, or for him to encroach on mine. It would scarcely be profitable, in my opinion, to use public money in trying to reclaim a particular type of land which will grow excellent timber forest. Nature dominates most areas and shows her hand plainly in most areas. While it can be said that land could be reclaimed at very high or prohibitive cost, it would not be profitable while we could grow a good crop of timber on the same land with little or no trouble. If there is a fight or a battle with Mother Nature in one area, let us use one of Mother Nature's forces, timber, to reclaim that land and make a profit out of it. That is a fairly sound national policy with which no Deputy will find fault.

Some Deputies spoke about the advertising of forestry. I think that since 1943 and again, some two years ago, when Clann na Poblachta first appeared on the scene, forestry has got plenty of advertising. The people are very forest conscious. We have put it before them in a way in which it was never put before them, and the people have risen to the occasion very well and, for the first time, I believe, have now begun to realise that forestry is something which the country ought to have, something which ought to be provided in order to give the young people employment and something which future generations will have as a very valuable asset. It is an asset the full benefits of which I would not attempt to calculate.

There has been a certain amount of talk by some unthinking Deputies with regard to soft woods and they have suggested that there is too much softwood in the country. Perhaps there is a good acreage of pinus contortus, that is, softwood, which may not be a first-class commercial timber, but I have another thing altogether in my mind. One way of disposing of timber is to dispose of it in the form of planks for ordinary carpentry or joinery purposes and I should be very glad to see the home needs satisfied from our own timber, but I have something else in mind. In the past 15 or 20 years, huge advances have been made in other uses of timber and I hope to see the day when we will have forests large enough and developed enough to enable big pulp mills to be established for turning out the hundred-and-one valuable by-products of forests which we use to-day.

In England, they have a mill in a certain area using something like 300 tons of stuff as thin as a man's finger for pulp purposes, turning it into paper and wallboard and so on. It is a very valuable industry giving good employment to young men, and I want to throw out this hint that if I am Minister in charge of the Forestry Department for the next two, three or four years, we might perhaps, if we can possibly manage it and if transport costs are not prohibitive, be establishing a pulp mill, the first of its kind in the country in the Wicklow area or perhaps the Tipperary area, where the forests are big, to utilise the thinnings which at present are being sold for one purpose or another but which could be turned to much better use in a pulp mill. These are things I envisage.

I think it was Deputy Commons who suggested the great help which forestry would be to the Land Commission in relieving the poverty and uneconomic and unhealthy conditions in many of the congested areas. I am afraid he must have been standing by when I was talking in my sleep, because I had the very same idea. Forestry brought into these congested areas will give employment. At present, many farmers I know have vast stretches of mountain land which is absolutely useless. They were described by Deputy Kennedy as snipe walks, but in the cases I have in mind no decent, self-respecting snipe would be seen in them. If these people will sell us this land—and I intend to offer every inducement to them—we can bring employment into these areas and it is from these areas that emigration is worst, due to the fact that the young men have no future. There is no local work and although the Office of Public Works may make available a few grants for roads in the winter, that is not employment. It is merely stopgap work. We intend to put an end to it, if we can, and give them something decent, something in the nature of whole-time employment of a nice nature, and for that reason I should like to bring forestry into these areas so as to give the young men a chance and hold them at home in the decent employment to which they are entitled. Apart from that, it will have the effect of beautifying the countryside and bringing wealth into what are now known as the backward parts in a way which has to be seen to be believed.

There was a good deal of talk about the fact that I did not make provision in the Estimate for the full programme this year. It is never done, and Deputy Little was a Minister for long enough to know exactly what Cabinet procedure and finance procedure is— I do not blame other Deputies on this side or the other who may not be aware of it—and if he were Minister for Finance I will guarantee he would be the last Minister to allow another Minister to estimate for something which was purely nebulous, something which could not be exactly calculated. Is that not the very purpose for which Supplementary Estimates are allowable and are allowed?

I intend to purchase, if I can, 30,000 acres of land this year; that is, from 1st April to 31st March, 1950. I do not know what the price of that land will be, but I think it should be quite sufficient for the House to know that any time I want a Supplementary Estimate I can come to the House for it. I was gratified to learn that I would have the support of all sides of the House in so doing, but I do not intend to play fast and loose and pile up moneys in the Estimate when I know that the House is available to give me at short notice whatever I have to ask for. The same point arose in connection with another Estimate on which I spoke, the Gaeltacht Services Estimate. Certain Deputies said that we were in a great hurry to pass the Gaeltacht Housing Bill without providing any money for it, but it would be putting the cart before the horse if we were to provide moneys in respect of a Bill which the House had not passed, and would be assuming that the House would have to pass it, whether it liked it or not. The cash side of the matter is not going to hinder the programme in any way.

I am afraid the Department of Finance has the Minister well in hand.

That is cheap talk. Some Deputy asked what acreage of nurseries we have at present. We have about 320 acres of nurseries and by the time the full programme is in operation we will need approximately 740 acres of fairly first-class land for nurseries. I might say in relation to this matter that I should like to see the nurseries, because of their high labour content, established in areas in which there is congestion or a big number of unemployed without any hope of getting useful or gainful employment in the area. We will establish them, if at all possible, and provided (1) we get the land suitable for them, and (2) the labour and so on will be available and the costs of transport from the nursery to the nearest forest area are not so high as to be prohibitive. I should like to establish 20, 30 and 40-acre nurseries in areas where they would be a help. They may not soak up all the unemployment in a particular area, but they will help in the way of giving relief to a number of families.

Are there not private nurseries? Do they come into the picture?

I will deal with those when I come on to refer to the £10 grant payable to private producers. The private nurserymen and the £10 grant are fairly closely linked. Some Deputy spoke of an experimental plantation in a high, exposed place. In actual fact, the foresters and forest foremen do make little experiments on their own. In the case, say, mountainside where the nature of the land changes from the bottom up to the top edge of the planting line, they put little squares of different species down and watch for the results. In that way, a vast amount of useful information is gathered about soil, exposure and so on. Exposure is one of our biggest troubles. Some Deputy spoke about the magnificent work done in a big sand-dune area in France, off the Bay of Biscay, 100 years ago by Napoleon. Planting near the sea has to be done very carefully and the greatest caution has to be exercised. There is a type of maritime pine that will flourish there and give good results, but most trees get withered up if salt spray is blown in and descends on the foliage. It burns it up. Every Deputy has witnessed the effect of spraying a patch of grass with salt and water. Salt spray has the very same effect on forest trees. There is only one variety, that which I have mentioned, that we can be sure will stand up to salt water spray. For that reason, we cannot go too near the sea with ordinary varieties until we learn a little more. It should be borne in mind that forestry is in its infancy in this country as yet, and while our experts and foremen have gained a tremendous amount of knowledge about soils, trees and all the rest of it, I feel certain that there is a good deal yet to be learned on the subject.

Some Deputies pressed the desirability of private individuals planting trees. I would like to see everybody who has a patch of waste land planting it. I do not know that there is one holding out of the 300,000 holdings in the Twenty-Six Counties that has not such a patch of waste land that could be planted. I regret to say that Mayo is particularly barren of trees as far as private planting is concerned. The grant of £10 an acre has outlived its usefulness and is no longer sufficient inducement to the private individual to plant, but I cannot increase it this year or next year for the reason that the difficulty affecting the Forestry Department also hits the private nurseryman, namely, the shortage of seeds. We must remember that England has launched a tremendous forestry policy. France is aiming at 10,000,000 acres within a period of 20 to 25 years. Poland proposes to plant 2,500,000 acres. The United States and Canada, two vast territories that had always plenty of timber, are for the first time paying attention to their timber resources.

The fact remains, from a survey of the timber resources of the world, that if another world war breaks loose every country will feel the shortage of timber. In other words, we have been cutting down woods much faster than we have been replanting, and at a greater rate than was wise. There is a serious shortage of mature timber here, and I know of no country that at the present time has a sufficient quantity of mature timber to feel easy about the future. The result is that every country is planting, planting, planting. When we tried to buy seeds this year and last year we found that we were very lucky in getting half of what we needed. I mentioned the fact that the Minister for External Affairs succeeded in getting a God-send of extra seed. How he did that I do not know. He succeeded in getting between 1,200 and 1,600 lbs. of extra seed, for which I was very thankful and which will help us to complete our first 25,000-acre programme when they come to the transplant stage in three years' time. That difficulty has also affected the private nurserymen.

It has been suggested, of course, that we should collect our own seeds. Every effort is being made to do so but it is only from the seed of trees nearing maturity or that have attained very full size that the best results are obtained. Sometimes trees bear seed at a very young age. This seed does not produce good transplants or healthy trees. We have too few mature trees to give us the type of seed we would like. The gathering of seed is a very peculiar business. Trees 60, 70 and 80 feet high bear seed at the top and the seed is so formed as to be easily taken away by the wind. If the seeds are gathered before they are ripe many of them will not germinate.

I want to say a word of thanks to certain people who have private woods or forests of their own and who have allowed foresters to collect all the seed possible. We are collecting all we can. We have a kiln in Avondale for opening the cones of the conifer trees in much the same way as nature would by sunlight and heat. We are collecting a fair amount of seeds and the home collected seeds have been giving excellent results in the nurseries for the last few years. I hope to see the day when we will be collecting all our own seeds and will not have to seek any abroad.

If we increase the grant of £10 an acre now, we will be deluged with applications by people who, when they receive sanction, will find that they cannot get plants from the nurseries. We cannot sell them the plants as we have little enough for our own needs and, in any case, we would not dream of going into competition with private nurserymen. It would be scarcely fair. It would not be playing the game. The nurserymen have told me that they would not have sufficient plants. I gave them an idea of the number of trees we expect to be planted by those who got felling licences in the past and who are still waiting to fulfil the replanting condition. The private nurserymen cannot supply all of them and will not be able to do so for three years. I regret to say that there is no use in increasing the grant for two or three years until private nurserymen are in a position to meet the increased demands. The war is responsible for that position. It is no use blaming the last Government or this Government It is something beyond our control. The shortage of seeds and the felling of forests all over the world has produced the situation and we simply have to take our time, whether we like it or not. We cannot plant unless we have transplants and we cannot have transplants unless we have seeds. When the Private Nurserymen's Association inform me that they are in a position to meet the demand, I intend to ask every farmer in the country to plant a small plantation of his own of one acre per year. There are 383,000 homesteads and if each planted an acre or, if one out of three planted an acre, they would put the Forestry Department, with all its machinery, to shame. One-third of the farmers, planting one acre per year, would plant well over 100,000 acres in a year while we would be struggling and straining with 25,000. I do not think there is much else to deal with.

Would the Minister deal with the question of the condition of the workers and foresters? He was appealed to from all sides of the House to improve their conditions.

To establish them.

I had no intention to by-pass that matter or to overlook it. Six Deputies in particular, Deputies Commons, O'Leary, Dunne, Byrne (Senior), Byrne (Junior), and Little, pressed the problem of insufficient wages, protective clothing, protection in the form of huts, or something like that, in the plantations, Church holydays and bank holidays.

What about insurance, putting them on the same footing as the road workers?

Why did not the Deputy do that for them?

Since I took over last year, forest labourers have got two increases in their wages and, while they are getting a middling wage at present, I admit that it is a wage with which I am not satisfied. There has been a good deal of talk about tying them with agricultural labourers. Some Deputies took the note that forest workers were superior to agricultural labourers. Others took the note that agricultural labourers were superior to forest workers. The truth is that each of them has to be expert in his own particular kind of work. By and large, a-farm labourer's work and a forestry labourer's work are pretty nearly the same thing. Perhaps the forest labourer has not to be familiar with such a diversity of jobs as the farm labourer, but each has to be skilled and expert in his own work. It is not every labourer who can be entrusted with actual planting of the young transplants. I am anxious to see something done, but, at the same time, as the ex-Ministers will realise, we must be careful that in being kind to them we are not eventually cruel to them. We must take into account that an increase in wages is always very welcome, but if that entails further increase in the cost of living not alone for those who receive the increased wages but for the people generally, it would be a good day's work for a short time and a very bad day's work in the long run.

We are trying to balance things and make conditions as easy as possible for all concerned. I want to say here and now that I would like to see forestry labourers and other foresters getting better wages than they are getting, but I can assure you that the Minister for Finance has his hands pretty well filled in trying to balance things. There is no use in bringing about a steep increase in the cost of living or feeding a dog on his own tail by giving an increase in wages to-day, bringing an increase in the cost of living to-morrow, with a demand for a still greater increase in wages, with a still greater increase in the cost of living. The Government is engaged at the present time in trying to bring about a system whereby wages will purchase all the necessities of life for the workers who receive them.

A good deal has been said about Church holydays. Deputy Little and some other Deputies raised the question. What happens regarding the time spent in going to Mass on the seven Church holyday mornings? Different things happen in different areas and they are confined to three things. In some cases the forestry labourers go to Mass and come to work and get paid a full day's wages, or so I understand; in some cases they do not go to work at all—which I would like to see; in other cases they go to Mass and the time is taken off their pay sheet. Forestry is not like a furnace that cannot be let out night or day; it is not like the case of the sugar beet workers where the machinery cannot be allowed to stop night or day, and in this country, particularly in rural areas, I would like to see forest workers not going to work at all on Church holydays. The question of whether they would be paid or whether they would not be paid would not cause any terrible friction either between them and myself or between me and the Minister for Finance. There are only seven Church holydays and they would work on bank holidays. I have always worked on bank holidays and so does everybody else in the country. It is just a custom in the country and there is no more to be said about it than that. I would not, however, like to lay down a hard and fast rule that foresters shall not work on Church holydays, but I would not like to see them working. I would like to see them giving notice to the-foreman that they are not coming to work to-morrow because it is a Church holyday and that is all. In regard to the question of whether they should be paid or not, they would not find a very stern antagonist in me when the question would arise.

Reference has been made to the question of protective clothing and shelter out in the grounds where they work. Personally, I would not like to see workers working out in protective clothing. I had to do it myself and I know it is cold comfort, as they say in the country, to have to work in protective clothing or covered up with waterproofs because you cannot work and you cannot even walk. We do provide them with wellingtons, but I would like to see work stopping as it would definitely entail a hardship if they had to work. I would not like to think that any workman under my control, either in the Department of Lands or the Department of Forestry, would have to-injure his health or lay the foundations of tuberculosis by working out in the open in cold places. That question is being examined at the present time and my sympathy goes to the workers. Furthermore, I know myself from experience and practice exactly what they have to put up with. I have experienced the same conditions and I know what I would like myself.

If these workers came under the Unemployment Insurance Act they would benefit if they became unemployed, but at present they are getting no benefit.

A new scheme is being brought in by the Minister for Social Welfare and I think that all forest workers will be covered in the way the Deputy has in mind. I would ask him to have a little patience until that scheme comes in and if forestry workers are not included I am sure that it will be possible to take the question up with the Minister for Social Welfare. Those workers will get every concession we can give them. I think that that covers all the ground.

I should like to ask the Minister what hope he can hold out to the 161 foresters in this country of becoming established civil servants? That is their main grievance.

I am fighting on their behalf at the present time and for some months past. I received a deputation of these men themselves and I was very impressed by the case they put up. They put up their case in a very decent, gentlemanly way and showed a wide knowledge of financial conditions and of all the implications of their establishment if it took place. They compelled me to be on their side. I have nothing to say on the subject at the moment because nothing has transpired so far. I am fully on their side and I fully realise the difficult nature of their work. Many of them have to handle; not hundreds, but thousands of pounds of State money each year and I want to pay them this compliment whether they are established or not and whether they get their demands from the Minister for Finance or not. Many of them are married and I am sure some have not a whole lot to spare, but a mistake of 1d. has never been found. They discharge their duty and love the work they do. One man said to me that if he was kicked out he would work for nothing if money were scarce. "I love the forest," he said. This shows the interest they take in their work, more than any other officials in the State. I admit that forestry lends itself to that; you get to love your work, to love the improvements you have brought about in the countryside although it is a question of State money. These men care for the young trees as though they were human beings. Their outlook impressed me very much and I want to pay them a high compliment. Many of them cycle six or seven miles to pay their gangs of workers on a Saturday night and they are scrupulously exact. Many have to work to keep their accounts in their own houses after hours and burn their own oil but they do not get any overtime. I appreciate every single thing they do and I hope that it will be in my power very soon to show some little appreciation of their work.

Would the Minister consider putting pulp mills somewhere between Tipperary and Waterford?

I have been examining that.

There is a certain amount of scrub timber in Waterford.

But not all that timber is suitable for pulp mills. The kind that is utilised is thinnings which would go to waste otherwise or be sold for a trifle as firewood without being appreciated by those who buy it. The big difficulty about pulp mills is that you have to place them in a situation where the cost of transporting the raw material into the mills would not kill them.

In Tipperary and Waterford there are quite a number of forests.

I would consider that. I know the place the Deputy has in mind and I imagine that either there or Wicklow would be the situation of the first pulp mill. In a year or perhaps two years when things get going with a swing, I will definitely consider it.

Motion to refer back, by leave, withdrawn.
Vote put and agreed to.
Notice taken that 20 Deputies were not present. House counted and 20 Deputies being present,
Top
Share