The Minister's Department has certainly made considerable progress in forestry in recent years, and the trend seems likely to continue. Forestry does not readily pay for itself and for that reason many people are slow to embark on private plantations. May I place on record, before I go any further, that the forests we see around the country now reflect great credit on the technical staff of the Forestry Division? Nothing adds more to the attractiveness of the countryside than beautiful woods. Our forests are well cared for by the Forestry Division. There are some magnificent forests in Wicklow. There are some beautiful forests in Offaly on the slopes of the Slieve Bloom mountains. They are well worth a visit. The progress made in the areas around Bawnree, Kinnitty, Clonaslee and Mountrath reflects great credit on those responsible for the plantations.
I have often wondered if the Minister and his Department have ever given any thought to schemes for the encouragement of private planting. Has he ever sought the support of the county committees of agriculture and organisations like the N.F.A. and Macra na Feirme? Has the Minister ever considered giving special tax relief to landowners who embark on large-scale private planting? In France, as the Minister must be aware, new plantations are exempt from local rates for a period of 30 years. We have a good deal of land which can be described as woodland. The owners of this land pay the same rates as if it were arable land. There seems to be something radically wrong with that system.
A farmer may have land which is unsuitable for either grazing or tillage but which would be ideal for planting. The Government and the Minister would be very wise to consider the suggestion I make with regard to exemption from rates for a period of 30 years, as in France; trees take 25 to 30 years to mature and therefore a period of 25 to 30 years must elapse before the owner can reap any financial benefit. So far as I know, there is a similar scheme in Denmark. In British Columbia, one can obtain what is known as a tree farm classification. This classification exempts the owner from rates. In addition, he gets substantial relief in income tax. The Government would be well advised to embark on some scheme of rate exemption or tax relief to encourage private planting.
With regard to the numbers employed, there is scope for much greater employment than at present. This time twelve months I suggested more co-operation between the Forestry Division and Bord na Móna in the reclamation of cutaway bogland. We know that not every type of plant is suitable for cutaway bog but experiments could be carried out to find out the most suitable type. Such planting would beautify the present eyesores. There is nothing so bleak as cutaway bog.
The Forestry Division are often subjected to very serious criticism. It is an easy matter to accuse the Forestry Division of not going ahead quickly enough with afforestation. It is very easy to grow trees on paper. Those who criticise should appreciate that it takes a long, long time for a tree to reach maturity. Whilst other State Departments may be able to give quick results, the Forestry Division cannot do so. The land has to be prepared. It has to be drained. It has to have a suitable moisture content. Plants suitable to the soil must be set.
We have also the various schemes of thinnings and in addition to them we have the various stages of pruning and so on. It all takes a considerable time, and when we now see that most building contractors throughout the country are using our own native timber that reflects great credit on the Forestry Section. We have reached the stage when in the estimation of building contractors Irish timber compares as equal to imported timber. That is a cause for rejoicing and for appreciation of the hard work involved in bringing about that state of affairs. I am sure the Minister for Lands will agree that it is a very pleasant state of affairs, and we who differ politically from him are pleased with it. It is something which any Irish Government might well be proud to see— that our commercial timber ranks amongst the best compared with timber imported for any building and constructional purposes, and I hope that trend will continue. The Minister, I am sure, will also agree that that state of affairs would not have materialised were it not for the foresight of those who were responsible for planting trees 25 and 30 years ago.
Forestry is a national asset, it gives employment, it beautifies the countryside, and it pays big dividends when timber has matured and is ready for cutting. That is why I say that any money this House invests in forestry is money well spent and any money we spend on training our foresters, and on sending them to Denmark and other places in order that they may keep themselves up to date with modern methods, is well spent. As far as this House is concerned, I am sure that any money which the Minister asks for in that respect it will not be denied to him.
Coming back to the question of employment, I feel that the Minister ought to call his forestry advisers together and make arrangements to try and provide a substantial increase in the moneys sought for forestry in next year's Estimate. We do know that in recent years the law has been simplified in regard to the taking over of land for forestry purposes. In practically every county in Ireland there are some lands suitable for planting and I think the Minister's Department, now that a certain measure of progress has been achieved, ought to formulate a new scheme for a survey to be carried out in every county in Ireland, first seeking those who may be prepared to give their lands voluntarily for forestry purposes. In that regard the advice of county committees of agriculture should be obtained, and the assistance of the N.F.A. and other kindred organisations. A scheme should then be formulated and sponsored, either by the Forestry Branch or by groups of private individuals with the assistance of the Forestry Branch, to ensure that more activity will be engaged in and that a greater number of men will be employed in forestry.
There is a time of the year when Bord na Móna has to lay off workers and I have often wondered if it would be possible to have some kind of scheme by which we could dovetail the ending of these men's employment with the starting of work connected with forestry. When the time comes for Bord na Móna to lay these men off the Forestry Section should be prepared to take them over immediately and put them to work preparing lands for afforestation or send them to local forests where they may be employed on road making.
A great deal of good work has been done in regard to road making in forests. The Minister said some time ago that forest roads should be narrow so that as little land as possible would be taken up by them, but I have always thought the very opposite. At least I feel that roads through forests ought to be sufficiently wide enough in parts to carry traffic. One does not expect that roads through forests should be tarred and steam-rolled like main roads but they should be reasonably good. If groups of interested people come to this country to inspect our forests it should be possible for the heads of the Forestry Section to conduct them on tours through our forests and for that alone I think it would be wise to have good roads through forests. I agree it will cost money but again I feel it would be money well spent. Such roads in time will be required for the removal of the trees and that should be remembered.
Convenient to forests in many parts of the country there is often to be found land which we might term as too good for forestry but not good enough for tillage purposes. In the constituency which I represent there is an area convenient to the Mountrath Forest known as Cartown Lawns and I have often wondered why the Forestry Branch does not propose to plant that area, or why it has not been possible for them to consult with the Land Commission and ask the Land Commission to take over those lands and divide them out amongst local people who have to pay very substantial sums both for the grazing of livestock and for the taking of conacre. The Forestry Section should take greater care that no land is planted that could be suitably grazed for livestock, on the one hand, or that could be converted into tillage land through the Land Rehabilitation Scheme, the Fertiliser Scheme and other schemes that could add to the quality of the soil.
I know the Forestry Branch has taken this matter rather seriously but the evidence shows that in many areas lands have been taken over that in the opinion of local people are considered of too good a quality for forestry purposes while in the vicinity people were obliged to pay up to £20 and £25 per year per acre for land under the conacre system. I would ask the Minister to consider this matter seriously because I feel that in my constituency, at any rate, there are a number of problems of that kind which are presenting difficulties. While the difficulties are not of a very major character there is certain hardship when decisions are not arrived at within a reasonable time. There are a number of matters which have been left lying in the Forestry Branch for a considerable time, like Mahomet's coffin, without definite decisions taken on them, and I would ask the Minister to ask the Director of Forestry, or whoever is responsible for coming to decisions, to make the decisions necessary. I say that in relation to the question of the exchange of holdings in which the Forestry Division are in touch with the Land Commission and one is waiting for the other to make a move. We have a number of such cases in Laois, particularly in the Killenure district, and I would be glad not to have these matters dragging on for years.
Another matter to which I wish to direct the Minister's attention is the question of providing a pension scheme for forestry workers. Now that local authority employees can avail of a contributory pension scheme, I feel the time has come to have such a pension scheme for forestry workers. I believe that if the Minister introduced a proposal for such a scheme it would meet with a measure of support in the House. In view of the fact that industrial workers and others have the benefit of contributory pension schemes and seeing that forestry has become a major part of our economy and employs so many people, the time has come when we should consider increasing our staff and providing properly for them. I am sure that this matter will have the sympathetic consideration of the Minister. A contented staff with security and pension rights will feel they have a stake in their work and will take great pride in it.
I have often wondered whether we could not have for forestry workers, as is available for post office workers not qualified for pension, a fund known as the Minister's special fund. Under this scheme a gratuity could be paid on retirement to a forestry worker who had given good and faithful service or when he is told by the forester: "You are no longer of any use to us; we shall have to get a younger man who will be more lively." It is regrettable that such men have to go because they love their work and take a keen interest in it. Most foresters listen attentively to the instructions of the forester and look upon themselves as skilled in their own particular sphere. In my own area—I do not know if there are any great forests in the Minister's constituency—the forestry workers can be heard discussing technical points of forestry among themselves. This shows they are learning from the forester and, when we have an interested staff such as that, I think they deserve some pension scheme or gratuity on their retirement.
This side of the House has no criticism to offer of the work of the Forestry Division. We feel, however, that there is room for expansion in forestry, that more money should be spend on it, more men employed and more lands acquired for forestry purposes. Of course, we realise that it is difficult to acquire certain lands because of title difficulties and so on. Nevertheless, I should like to hear from the Minister what amount of land is voluntarily offered to his Department for forestry purposes. I know the Minister is anxious in cases where land is offered voluntarily to fit it in with the existing forestry scheme. Land may be offered in isolated areas where it would not be economically possible for the Department to open up a small unit unless they could be sure of acquiring land in the adjacent districts. While that may be wise from the financial point of view, I feel that from the economic point of view, and particularly from the point of view of utilising waste land, the services of a forester should be available, not permanently but for one or two days a week, in such areas and a number of men should be employed so that these small areas could, in time, be developed. I would ask the Minister to look into the question of land offered in the Ballinahemmy district of Clonaslee because there is room for a very great expansion of forestry in that area.
It has been my experience that the Forestry Division has been reasonable in the matter of the price offered for land. I do not know of any instance in my constituency where the forestry section could be accused of being unreasonable in the price paid for land offered voluntarily. Naturally the owner of the land will try to get as much as he possibly can and those furthering his interests will endeavour to make the land as rich as possible for that purpose. But I have found in my constituency that a satisfactory solution could always be found, and a little bit of common sense on both sides was able to solve many difficulties. Rather than asking land owners to enter into correspondence, it would be far better if the officials could call personally to try to make some arrangement on the spot. That has been done with most satisfactory results in Laois and it is easier and simpler for everybody.
In representations to the Department I have caused as much difficulty as any Deputy but I have always been met with great courtesy and satisfaction so far as the officers were concerned. Forestry has made great headway in this country, and the evidence is there in the opinions of our builders of our timber. Let us hope that that progress will continue in the years ahead. I know it is difficult for any Minister for Lands to get his colleagues in the Government to give him everything he wants for forestry, but I feel Governments ought to be more liberal with the amount they spend on forestry. If we are anxious to extend the employment forestry can give and double the work, I feel the amount of money expended on forestry should be increased. This side of the House wish the Minister for Lands and the forestry section every success and good luck in the undertakings they have on hands. I can give them an assurance of the co-operation of this side of the House so that they can carry on the good work which is proceeding with such a measure of success.
I do not want to finish by taking the good out of what I have said but when complaints are made to the Department I am not happy about the manner of the investigations that take place. I do not know what the machinery is but I do know that an unpleasant and unsatisfactory thing happened in the Geashill State forest. It does not reflect credit on the Minister or on the officers of his Department. It may take five years, or it may take 10 years but the wrongs that were done there will eventually be righted.
I am sorry that the Minister is not as familiar with what took place as I am and I am sorry that an impartial inquiry was not conducted into the whole affair. Naturally the Minister will take the word of the officers of his Department but I have every confidence and belief in the word of the ordinary labouring man and what convinces me that the inquiry was a sham was that the man who was honest enough to put the matter in writing to the police and to his local representatives was dismissed from his employment. He was victimised and would not be taken back and he was told, when he applied to be re-engaged, that he would not be re-employed because he was a mischief-maker.
Everybody in the area knows the respectability of the man. They know his honour and his honesty. Everybody knows that everything was not honest and above board so far as those in authority were concerned. It may take a considerable time before justice can be done but I want to tell the Minister that if ever there is a change of Government one of the wrongs done in Tullamore State forest will be put right and that without any great delay.
I was rather surprised that the Minister himself did not take a more impartial view of the situation. He was far more inclined to view the matter as being not of a very serious nature. If the Minister were in serious contact with the Gardaí, with the authorities and with the respectable people in the district he would know from first hand information that this unfortunate man was victimised, for what reason is best left to the consciences and minds of those in the Forestry Division who are responsible for the state of affairs there to-day.
I had no intention of concluding on such a note but I feel that the Minister cannot say but that my speech has been reasonable. I should like to see every person concerned with the forestry effort treated reasonably. No man wants a concession more than another but the least one expects to see is fair play and justice. I am making this speech only in the interests of honour and justice and in the interest of a good old forestry worker whose politics are not mine. I honestly feel that there has been a case of injustice and that the people who came out best came out best on their own reports.
Naturally enough it is the duty of every Minister to defend his own officers but I do not think it is the duty of a Minister to defend his officers if they are wrong. When reports come before a Minister they are usually reports well spliced and with plenty of sauce so that they will go down well. I am satisfied that this was an instance in which the Forestry Division could have been more reasonable and more generous. The position in State forests has not been improved because of what we believe to be a cloaking up of the whole situation by an officer or officers of the Department. I should be long sorry to make allegations on this Vote and I do not propose to do so for certain good reasons but I ask the Minister to discuss the matter further with the head of the section who will be impartial and who, I am sure, will be anxious to see that justice is done. I still think that this man should be re-employed even though he will not get a good recommendation from those in charge of the forests.
He did what his conscience told him to do and the least the Minister can do is to have sufficient confidence in the good old forestry worker who carried out his work conscientiously and well, who found that wrongs were being done and who was prepared to place his information in the hands of the police. A man should not be deprived of work because he felt that the ratepayers' money was not being wisely spent.
When a man comes along to a forestry worker and says: "Here is 10/- I should have given you in your wages the other night," anyone would know that there was something fishy about it. As far as the measurments of the men's work were concerned there is no doubt that the proper returns were not going into the Department. The returns were investigated in the office in the absence of the foreman in charge. The correct returns were not being sent to the Department. One of the men concerned is probably a greater expert in the taking of measurements than the man actually making the returns.
I hope that is the only State forest in the country where there has been such an unpleasant experience. It could not happen in the Emo State forest because the supervision there is second to none. The supervision in every forest in my constituency, with this exception, is carried out in a thoroughly efficient manner, and I cannot see why, when there was uneasiness and when there was information placed before the Minister, he should use it in the way he did. I cannot understand why something was not done to relieve the position and the necessary steps taken to see there was no recurrence, and further, no individual should have been victimised because he was man enough to make his complaints honourably. That is why I think the Minister should look into this matter again and see if there is anything that can possibly be done.
I wish the Minister every success and good luck in the Forestry Division and I hope that next year we shall have more money provided because, of all Departments that ask this House for money, none should get it as readily as the Forestry Division from the point of view of the employment they provide as well as the great work of afforestation itself.
