Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 10 Dec 1964

Vol. 213 No. 6

Committee on Finance. - Vote 37—Forestry.

Minister for Lands (Mr. Moran):

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £469,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st day of March, 1965, for Salaries and Expenses in connection with Forestry (No. 13 of 1946 and No. 6 of 1956), including a Grant-in-Aid for Acquisition of Land.

When introducing the Forestry Estimate for the current year, I told the House that the Estimate as then submitted did not include provision in respect of the ninth round increase in basic pay nor did it allow for the effect on operational costs of a pending reduction of the working hours of Forestry labourers to 45 hours all the year round.

The head under which this extra provision is mainly required is subhead C.2, which relates to Forest Development and Management. Over three-quarters of the expenditure on this subhead is in respect of direct labour and the 9th round wage increase of 12 per cent with a minimum increase of £1 per week coupled with a reduction from the beginning of July, 1964 of the summer working week for forest workers from 48 hours to 45 hours per week will necessitate an additional provision of £252,500 for wage payments to forest workers. The general pattern of rising wage rates has also contributed to increased costs in respect of services and materials amounting to £69,500. The main non-labour elements showing higher costs are cartage, maintenance and repair of machinery and hire of mechanical equipment. The total additional requirement for subhead C.2 is, therefore, £322,000 spread over the various operational sub-divisions of the subhead. An additional provision of £65,000, arising from adjustment of salaries of foresters and certain other grades, is required under subhead A.

Increased allowance rates for travelling coupled with an increase in travel requirements have necessitated an increase of the travelling and Incidental Expenses provision of subhead B.1 by £12,500 while increased Post Office charges have necessitated an increase of £6,000 in the provision for post office services in subhead B.2. There is also a small additional sum for subhead C. 3—Sawmilling—due to wage increases.

In subhead H—Appropriations-in-Aid—allowance has been made for a shortfall of £75,000 in receipts from timber sales, which it is expected will be partly offset by an increase of £10,000 in miscellaneous receipts resulting in a net shortfall of £65,000. The inflow of money against current timber sales was exceptionally heavy in the closing months of 1963/64 resulting in a revenue level for that year appreciably above expectations but with a resultant shortfall in income in the current year. Some difficulties may be experienced in achieving even the somewhat reduced allowance now proposed.

The gross additional amount required on subheads A, B1, B2, C2, and C3 is estimated at £406,500, which with the expected shortfall in Appropriations-in-Aid brings the gross requirement to £471,500. Savings on other subheads of £2,500 are, however, expected, so that the net Supplementary Estimate is for £469,000.

Sir Anthony Esmonde:

Speaking on behalf of Fine Gael, we are not going to oppose this Supplementary Estimate but I might add that it seems to me that in all sections of the administration of this Government, we are going to have Supplementary Estimates due to the rising costs of production, rising wages and so forth. This is not the Estimate on which to comment on that trend and simply en passant I wish to refer to the fact that it does exist. We are fully in favour of as great an increase in forestry production as possible. This Supplementary Estimate covers the wide range of activities of the Forestry Division and I propose to make a few general comments and perhaps the Minister, if he is in a position to do so, would reply and give us an indication whether he is working on these lines of policy or not.

It is an undoubted fact that there is a growing shortage of timber and in fact the supply does not meet the demand in Europe today. That trend has been very evident over the past three or four years and I wonder if the Minister feels that the policy he and his Department are adumbrating is sufficient to meet requirements, because it is quite obvious to anybody who knows anything about timber and is responsible either for buying or selling it that the demand has increased out of all proportion in the past 12 or 15 months. Projections such as I have before me and which I got from attending a conference of the Food and Agriculture Organisation which discussed the matter recently, go to show that the urge and the drive in European forestry policy is to make production as rapid and as expansive as possible in the immediate future. For that purpose I want to make one or two suggestions to the Minister.

In Europe at the moment they have two million hectares, or approximately five million acres, available for actual afforestation and on top of that, they are making a drive to secure another one million hectares of marginal land. Marginal land as far as I understand it to be—perhaps the Minister's advisers may differ—is land on the verge of good agricultural land and it is afforested along the edge so as not to interfere in any way with agricultural production. The Minister's advisers know my view on the planting of arable land but marginal land is a different thing. The planting of such land creates shelter belts and also acts as a water barrier. The projections in European policy are to get another one million hectares of marginal land or approximately 2½ million acres. They are endeavouring by doing that to meet the requirements of the market.

I want to direct the Minister's attention to the fact that the world population is increasing at a tremendous rate. The estimated projection for population is 65 million a year. There is, of course, as a result of that increase an increased demand for timber for constructional and building purposes. I should like the Minister to indicate to the House what plans he has, or if he has any plans, for marginal development. If he has no plans, would he consider encouraging private enterprise to produce that marginal development? It is only out of private enterprise you can get it.

At present we have a cut and dried system, admirable on paper, where, if a person plants an acre of land, he can get subventional help from the State for that purpose. But it is very hard to get an acre of marginal land on a small farm. Would the Minister consider in the administration of his Department making it possible for people to plant marginal land and get some benefit to encourage them to do so in regard to the cost of timber, fencing and so on? As I have emphasised so often, it is only by getting private enterprise, in conjuction with State afforestation itself, we can hope to get the production.

I think I am right in saying we are practically the only country in western Europe that is not increasing its private planting. Our planting is practically entirely in the hands of the State. While I realise that State afforestation, in the cost of production and the difficulties we face nowadays, is an essential, alongside that there should be encouragement of a healthy private enterprise. I have the feeling—maybe I am wrong; maybe I have a suspicious mind—that the Forestry Division feel they are the be-all and end-all of forestry production. As such, they have failed to produce our own requirements. We are not producing our full requirements. There is always the urge to buy outside timber, because there has been the trouble of timber being used here before it is mature. No one can blame the Forestry Division for that. Our overall requirements are not met here and are not likely to be.

We are voting a sizeable sum here. Could the Minister tell us in a few brief words when we are going to be solvent? We have invested a considerable sum in forestry over the years. Could he indicate when we can say: "Here is a mass industry carried out by the State. It is solvent and paying a dividend"? Obviously, it is not doing that at the moment because we are voting this £500,000 as a Supplementary Estimate to meet particular requirements.

One other thing was stressed in Europe. The problem does not apply to us at the moment, but we will face it shortly, the same as everybody else. In their drive for production and the tremendous demand for timber, the heavy imports they are making, their efforts to get up to the fullest production, the people in Europe find themselves confronted with the difficulty of ageing manpower. This brings us back to rural life in Ireland again. It is a tremendous difficulty that the Forestry Division may have to face in regard to ageing manpower. Although we have some measure of unemployment here, it may be possible that in the not-too-distant future we may find ourselves short of manpower. Therefore, the Minister should give us some indication of what he believes are the trends in that direction, whether we will face that situation. If we do face it we will have to keep production up. The Minister should tell us what plans he has for greater efficiency within his Department to meet that production.

There is another matter. Although it is a matter personal to my own constituency, I think it is a matter of national importance. In my constituency the Forestry Division have recently taken over an estate, the Doyle estate, with a house on it known as Ballysop House. The Minister outlined the plans for us. The Forestry Division are to set up an arboretum or a forestry college there. This is a memorial to one of the world's greatest statesmen, affectionately remembered by us all, John Fitzgerald Kennedy. It is only right that this memorial should be in Wexford.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I do not wish to stop the Deputy, but is there any money in this Estimate for this?

Sir Anthony Esmonde:

There is, administration. If you will allow me develop my point. They have taken over Ballysop estate. I am informed that the original house—Ballysop House, built about 120 years ago— is to be demolished and in its place a modern structure is to be erected. I have made representations to the Minister's Department on this subject, but somebody—some architect, some planner or somebody within the Civil Service itself acting on the direction of the Minister—has decided this building must go.

There is very strong feeling in Wexford on this subject. I am voicing the opinion of my constituents that this house should be allowed to stand. The Forestry Division say: "We must demolish this house if we are to build a suitable college or whatever will be there." Further representation has been made to me that as this memorial is associated with the Kennedy family, who are very interested in the problem of retarded children, the house should be left where it is and used for the care of such children. There are plenty of rooms in it and it is on a beautiful site overlooking the mountains. The reason I am making this plea to the Minister is that the Kennedy family are perhaps the greatest supporters and helpers of organisations for retarded children. It would be a fitting memorial if this house were left for that purpose. It is a fine house and it would cost thousands to build its like today.

I know that what is known as a policy decision has been taken by the Department that this house must be swept away. I am trying to urge on behalf of my constituents, on behalf of public opinion in Wexford for which I am qualified to speak, that the Minister should seriously take another look at this. I only hope the bulldozers have not already been sent down to perpetrate what I consider would be an outrage on this fine old Wexford residence.

Mr. Tully:

On behalf of the Labour Party, I wish to say we also support this Vote. While we agree the Department have come into line in regard to the ninth round wage increase and have introduced a 45-hour week and a five-day week for the summer period, we regret they have not decided to apply the five-day week all round. Perhaps it is a technical matter but we would urge the Department to introduce the five-day week all the year round, and particularly because of the fact that, as the officials and the Minister must be aware, the employees of the Forestry Division who work in country districts have not had the benefit of any short day or leisure time down through the years. A person who has to travel a distance across a mountain or across fields to work in a forest finds that by the time he gets home after stopping work at one o'clock, his half-day on Saturday is gone and, for all practical purposes, he has only Sunday to do anything about his own place. Leisure time does not enter into it.

It is true that in country districts the five-day week has been a blessing because many people, including many forestry workers, who have small portions of land have been able to work them and in that way to supplement their income. While I do not want to criticise too severely the present situation as far as income is concerned, in the forests, I would point out that one of the great snags there is that although the income has been increased because of the introduction of the bonus system, nevertheless, forestry workers are by no means very well paid and do need something to supplement their income. The fact that they are able to do some work on their own land or on their own property, if they have a small portion of land, on the day on which they have not to work has helped considerably.

I would, therefore, urge the Minister to consider this question for the winter period as well as the summer period. One can envisage a person working until one o'clock on Saturday during winter periods and having to go one and a half miles from the mountain to a road and then a distance of four or five miles to his home. It is dark by the time he gets home. The amount of work such a person can do about his own place or the amount of leisure he can have is negligible. I would urge that something be done about it because, unlike most other workers at the present time, forestry workers have not got either a pension scheme or a sick pay scheme.

I was very interested in Deputy Sir Anthony Esmonde's suggestion about the possible shortage of manpower or, as he put it, ageing manpower. I do not think we will run into that as a very serious problem in the near future but if outside employment continues to offer better wages, sick pay schemes and retirement pensions, naturally the attraction will be from employment such as the Forestry Division provide. That is one factor which will result in a reduction of the number of persons anxious to work for the Forestry Division.

I would just make one further comment as far as the ninth round increase of wages and salaries is concerned. Nobody will attempt to deny that the ninth round was a shot in the arm of the economy of this country. I was one of the persons responsible for the negotiation of that increase with the Federated Union of Employers. Even there it was admitted that almost 80 per cent of the money which would be paid by industry would find its way back into industry almost immediately because workers, particularly low-paid workers, do not save money. They spend it as fast as they get it. Therefore, a wage increase is in very many cases something which does good to everybody.

I am interested in the extra money for sawmills because I have been trying to get extra money for some of my people in the sawmills for some time and I hope this means that the rates will be brought up to the rates being paid in local sawmills.

On the question of the shortage of land available for the extension of forestry, I would suggest that there is one obvious solution which the Department have not yet adopted. It has been made here again and again. I remember that about thirteen years ago the suggestion was made from the Labour benches and other benches including those occupied by the present Government. I should like to know from the Minister if anything definite is being done about the cutaway bogs. There should be an effort made to develop cut-away bogs on a much larger scale for the purpose of tree planting. I know that it is being done to a certain extent but not to the extent that it should be done.

There is another obvious remedy. There are people in my constituency living in what has been described as marginal land, land on which it is extremely difficult for a small farmer to make any kind of decent living. Such persons should be offered farms of good land, of which the Land Commission have a considerable amount in their possession in Meath, on condition that the land which they at present occupy be made available for forestry.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I do not want to interrupt the Deputy but I do not think there is any money for the acquisition of land in this Estimate.

Mr. Tully:

The whole question of administration is covered in the Estimate.

An Ceann Comhairle:

That is administration of existing land.

Mr. Tully:

The question of employment is mentioned in it and the money being made available for employment. Employment cannot be continued unless land is available. The Minister yesterday, I think, said there was a shortage of land for development.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I was merely pointing out that there is no money in the Estimate for acquisition of land. If there is, all right; if there is not——

Mr. Moran:

There is not.

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Minister says there is not.

Mr. Tully:

I would rather take the Ceann Comhairle's ruling than the Minister's, thanks very much all the same. If you say I cannot expand on that, very well. In any case, I was almost finishned.

There is another matter which, since the ninth round of wage and salary increases has been brought considerably more to the fore, that is, the question of forestry workers' pay and deductions made from the wages of forestry workers. Over the past few years the PAYE system was introduced but Government Departments do not operate it in the same way as other employers do. They have a special section dealing with it. For some extraordinary reason it has become a habit that persons, particularly persons who were not liable for income tax until the particular year, have heard nothing at all about it until a couple of weeks before Christmas and then they got the bad news that they owed £15 to £20 income tax and that it was proposed to deduct at the rate of £2 per week from that date until 31st March.

Last year I had to make representations and I want to say that the officials, who have always been most courteous, did agree that it was extreme hardship that in Christmas week a person should have £5 deducted from his pay of £9 because of the fact that somebody had forgotten to collect income tax from him. Is there any reason in the world why forestry workers as well as other employees of Government Departments should not have such deductions made weekly? Why have PAYE for those outside and adopt a different system in respect of forestry workers? Why cannot PAYE be applied to everybody? This is one of the things which is causing a certain amount of unrest.

The whole question of forestry work and the items covered in this Estimate are matters with which we on these benches must agree. We do agree that the salaries and wages needed to be adjusted and we agree also that the travelling and incidental expenses needed to be adjusted. Those things must take place.

There is one thing which I cannot understand and which perhaps the Minister might be able to explain. The Minister said:

In Subhead H (Appropriations-in-Aid) allowance has been made for a shortfall of £75,000 in Receipts from Timber Sales, which it is expected will be partly offset by an increase of £10,000 in Miscellaneous Receipts resulting in a net shortfall of £65,000. The inflow of money against current timber sales was exceptionally heavy in the closing months of 1963/64 resulting in a revenue level for that year appreciably above expectations but with a resultant shortfall in income in the current year.

Surely, with the increase in wages, the increase in costs of every kind, there must also be an increase in the value of timber being sold? That being so, how does it come that there is such a big deficit here or is that being taken into account? If it is, does it mean that the position would have been very much worse but for the increase in timber values?

On top of that, could the Minister say how this situation arose? Was it because certain forests became mature, that the timber was ready for sale at a particular time? It seems rather extraordinary to me. I was under the impression that as years went by more and more timber would be available for sale and that because of the increase in its value, the money expended on that timber would be recovered faster and faster. Perhaps the Minister, if he has the necessary information, would make a comment on that.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

After the tourist industry, the agricultural industry and the fishing industry, there is no reason why forestry could not rank next. The real position in that regard is, perhaps, that since native Government was established, we have been only tinkering with the development of forestry. The Supplementary Estimate moved now by the Minister, asking this House to give him some additional moneys which are required in connection with wages and salaries, is necessary and perhaps no time should be lost in providing the Minister with the Estimate in order that the essential services of this branch of the Department may be continued.

It is notable again, however, as has already been pointed out, that nearly every State Department this year has seen fit to come to the House with a supplementary estimate. We have now reached the stage when our State Departments present their Estimates, this House is presented with a Budget and then we have a rehash of the whole demand from the taxpayers in which the various Departments seek additional moneys. I hope this practice of supplementary estimates will be discontinued and that an effort will be made by Government Departments, including the Forestry Division, to present to this House their annual Estimate to cover the amount of expenditure which will be incurred for the financial year. In principle, it is wrong that demands should be made on this House so frequently and I hope that after this year a better system of estimation of expenditure will be evolved. We are now asked to provide for the Forestry Division £65,000 for wages and salaries, £12,500 for travelling and incidental expenses, £322,000 for forestry development and management, and £1,000 in connection with saw milling.

I put it to the House, and particularly to the Minister for Lands, that the Government have not shown any real earnestness to make forestry what we all desire it to be. It is all very fine for the Minister to stand up here and paint a picture of an increased acreage being acquired for forestry, of an increased number of persons being employed in forestry or of improved conditions of employment for forestry workers, but forestry deserves to be brought up to date and modernised.

In the Government's Second Programme for Economic Expansion, there is a target set for forestry which I cannot describe as very ambitious. I cannot say that the Minister charged with the responsibility for forestry has shown the earnestness expected of such a Minister, more particularly when we realise that at one time, in the early ages, our country was one of the best wooded countries of Europe and that it was only as years passed we were completely stripped of our woods and forests.

An effort has been made to expand forestry activities and it is admitted that there has been a certain amount of improvement in that regard. In parts of this country, in Cork, Kerry, Wicklow, Laois and Offaly, there are some of the finest and most attractive plantations in the world. There are in charge of these forests some of the ablest foresters that can be got, foresters who are equal to the best in any of the great forest countries of France, Denmark, British Columbia or Norway. I venture to say our State foresters can equal the standard of efficiency and skill of the foresters of Sweden, Norway, Denmark and France who are looked upon as the world's greatest authorities on forestry. However, our men are not treated in the same manner as the forestry supervisors of these other countries are treated by their Governments. The Governments of these other countries realise the great importance of forestry, whereas here forestry seems to be taking one of the last places.

I can never understand why our forestry industry cannot expand at a far greater rate than it has in recent years. In our annual estimates, a niggardly sum is provided, and the Government were never bold enough to set a courageous target for forestry. Today we are asked to provide modest sums for the purpose of bridging the gap from now until 31st March. It is high time this House asked for a more courageous deal for forestry. Our rate of planting and the annual target for planting should be vastly increased.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:

This is a Supplementary Estimate and the debate is confined to the various subheads. No money is being provided for the acquisition of land.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

I have not mentioned the acquisition of land.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:

No, but the Deputy is arguing that the acreage should be increased and I take it land would have to be provided

Mr. Moran:

It is no trouble to Deputy Flanagan to produce trees without land.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:

Subhead C.2 relates to existing forestry development but not to any increased development.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

I realise that in order to expand forestry, one must have land and also that on subhead C.2, in which we deal with forestry development and management, I put it to the House that while we have the best possible forestry supervisors, we do not seem to appreciate their skill and efficiency. Will the Minister be prepared in the course of his reply to deal very fully with certain questions?

He seeks here, for salaries, wages and allowances, £65,000. Perhaps he would let us have some information as to what portion of the money will be provided for foresters. Forestry workers are a select and skilled type of worker. They have got a 45-hour week and it is hoped that all forestry workers will be on a five-day week the whole year round. I join in the plea made by other Deputies in regard to that and, in addition, I ask that a pension scheme and sick pay scheme be introduced with the minimum of delay. Unless work in our forests is made more attractive, we may face the position in which skilled workers will be obliged to seek employment elsewhere. In areas convenient to large State forests, we may face a labour shortage, not due to lack of workers but due to the fact that they are seeking employment with suitable pension and sick pay schemes.

Such schemes are long overdue and the Minister should take steps to improve conditions in State forest employment by taking action now and not leaving it to the incoming Government to bring about this improvement. If he does not do it, I venture to say it will be done very shortly. It is high time public recognition was given to the men responsible for the work of our State forests. We have been trying to improve their conditions for many years and it is only Deputies in whose constituencies there are extensive State forests who realise the development and the amount of hard work and the specialisation it entails for those on forestry staff. If we want efficient forest workers, we must have attractive conditions of employment.

Conditions have been improved but they are still lagging behind without justification. If the Minister is so eager to see an expansion in forestry and development maintained, he must have a contented staff devoted to their work. In my constituency, there is a forestry training college at Kinnitty which is perhaps the best such establishment in the world. There is nothing like it outside the country. It was set up and designed to provide this country with the best type of specialised men to manage and take charge of our State forests. Some years ago a plea was made to parents with sons willing to embark on a good profession with a future, to send their sons, if they had a liking for forestry, to the forestry training college. The response was reasonably good and that college has produced some of our best foresters.

Mr. Moran:

There is nothing in this Estimate about forestry education.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

I am coming to the payment of foresters. We have had excellent results from the Kinnitty college but recently there is a decline in the number of people following the profession and there have been vacancies in the college. Why must we face a shortage of foresters? It is because the foresters have not been properly paid and their conditions of employment not made attractive. I know that if the Minister can prevent foresters from ventilating their grievances, he will do so, but I am entitled to ask what part of the £65,000 will be provided for the foresters. Unless we have foresters with proper conditions of employment in charge of our forests we cannot have proper forestry management and development because it is those men who will be responsible for it. I want to inquire from the Minister, since there is difficulty in recruiting students to the forestry school at Kinnitty——

Mr. Moran:

There is no such difficulty. This is another invention of the Deputy's.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

——whether that is not due to the failure of the Department of Lands to pay the foresters. Because the foresters are, therefore, discontented with their terms and conditions of employment, we are now reaching the stage when, instead of our young people opting for forestry work, they refuse to enter that profession because of the lack of proper facilities for those already engaged in it. How many new foresters qualified in the past few years will benefit under Subhead A of this Supplementary Estimate?

I should like to know what the wage is of a forest manager, responsible for 3,000 acres of forest and 80 acres of nursery, with 90 employees under him. We have a case in which a forest manager is responsible for 3,000 acres of forest and an extensive nursery with a salary of only £13 per week. He has full responsibility for the forest and the nursery and for a staff of 90 men. In my view, that is a disgraceful situation and I cannot understand why the Department has not taken appropriate action to ensure that a man with such responsibilities is adequately remunerated. I should like to know what portion of this £65,000 will be devoted to improving terms and conditions of employment for forest managers and forestry workers. Is it possible to ensure that foresters will continue to take an active interest in forestry development if they are treated in this fashion?

Has any effort been made to provide houses for foresters? Under Subhead C, Forest Development and Management, the Minister is asking for £322,000. Will any part of that sum be devoted to providing housing accommodation for foresters? Perhaps the Minister would indicate to the House when and where this money will be spent. We have had statements from the Minister that suitable residences convenient to forests would be provided. So far only two such houses have been erected.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:

There is nothing in the Supplementary Estimate about housing.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

That is what I am trying to find out. I want to ask the Minister, with the permission of the Chair, if any portion of this sum——

Mr. Moran:

The Deputy knows quite well that there is not. He should know if he listened to my speech, but he wants, of course, to continue——

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

I assure you I shall drop it, now that I know none is being provided to implement the undertaking given to build houses for these people.

Mr. Moran:

There is not a halfpenny in the Supplementary Estimate for irresponsible Deputies, either.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

It is a pity there is not something for inactive Ministers because the Minister has displayed the highest possible degree of inactivity since he took office.

Mr. Moran:

In comparison with the Deputy's miserable effort, it is a European record, and I will give the figures to prove that when I reply.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

I hope the Minister will be alive and well this time ten years and I hope he will be able to review the work done by the Forestry Branch in five or seven years' time under a new Government. When the new Government take office, we will not be doing the patchwork carried on up to this. We will embark upon forestry courageously and with good results.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:

The Supplementary Estimate now.

Mr. Moran:

If the Deputy does what was done before, he will cut production by 75 per cent.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

Nobody believes that.

Mr. Moran:

The figures are there.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

The figures are not there, and the Minister knows they are not there, but he is trying to paint the same picture as he tried to paint in Roscommon and Galway, that, if there is a change of Government, everything will close down. No such thing. Surely the Minister now realises that old cock is dead and cannot crow any more?

Mr. Moran:

I know the Deputy's tail feathers will be flying when we have a general election.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

What the Cumann na nGaedheal Government did, what the British Government did, what Grattan's Parliament did, what Brian Boru did——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:

Does not arise on the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

——has nothing to do with what we are doing now. The Minister is trying to paint a picture to show the country that, if there is a change of Government, forestry work will cease, that there will be a cutting down.

Mr. Moran:

The same as in 1956-57.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

There is nothing in this Supplementary Estimate relating to 1956-57 and, if the Minister goes back to 1956-57, surely I am entitled to refer to the fact that it was the Cumann na nGaedheal Government who planted the trees now being sold for commercial timber, commercial timber in which the Minister takes great pride. We never hear him say, however, that it was the Cumann na nGaedheal Government who planted the trees he is now selling and for which he is taking all the credit. Why cannot the Minister be honest?

Mr. Moran:

So the late Mr. Justice John O'Byrne found. May the Lord have mercy on his soul, he was an honest man.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

I like to be honest. I could not play a hypocritical role, but the Minister comes in here describing his opponents as unprogressive and having made no development in relation to forestry. I give the Minister any credit that is due to him, but, going to the root of the matter, what was mainly responsible for the successful announcement he has made about increased employment and the output from our forests will not be found at his doorstep. It was Cumann na nGaedheal and the inter-Party Government who made it possible for him to stand on the forestry dunghill today and crow so loudly.

It is not honest of him to say that the future of forestry under a new Government will be gloomy and dim. I hope this will be the last Supplementary Estimate for forestry to be introduced by Fianna Fáil. One of the most courageous steps to be taken by the Fine Gael Government, as was pointed out on numerous occasions, will be a drive for the development and expansion of forestry and the employment of more men.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:

The Deputy must confine his remarks to the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

Lest I forget, may I ask the Minister whether during the past few months he refused to meet a deputation of the foresters' executive, whether such a request was made to him, why he did not see them, and if he has made any provision to permit this responsible executive to air any grievances they may have in the interests of forestry development in general?

I should also like to ask whether he has received representations from that executive in regard to promotions to the rank of forester which have been delayed in his Department. I am told the reason why such promotions have been delayed is to save money at the forester's expense. Surely we are entitled to ask—when we see provision for allowances, wages, travelling and incidental expenses in the Supplementary Estimate—why these promotions have been held up in an attempt to exercise economies and cut down expenditure. What explanation was given to the foresters' executive when they addressed queries to the Minister's Department on this matter? I put it to the Minister today that deliberately, designedly, and by order, he is responsible for preventing promotions to the rank of forester. The House is entitled to an explanation of his conduct in that regard.

I also want to ask the Minister in relation to travelling and incidental expenses, what generous allowances and expenses have been paid to foresters? I am told that was one of the problems the executive were anxious to discuss with the Minister, and I am reliably informed that he refused to discuss it with them. I know there are foresters who use their own cars, and who travel many hundred of miles at their own expense, to carry out their work efficiently and well. They drive their private cars in the course of their duties, and they are not paid for that. If we have the most expert group of foresters in the world today the least we can do is to give them a fair hearing, and let them ventilate their problems and grievances. That is why I accuse the Minister of slamming the door in the faces of those responsible for the administration of our State forests. I want to assure those people that when the change of Government takes place within the next two years, the knob of the door to the office of the Minister for Lands will be in their own hands any time they have problems.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:

That would arise under the heading of administration which is relevant to the main Vote, but does not arise on the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan:

Under subhead B.1 — Travelling and Incidental Expenses, £12,500—perhaps the Minister will be able to enlighten the House as to what portion of that sum will go to the foresters who use their own private cars in the course of work for the Minister's Department That is the point I want to raise, and that is the point on which I feel the Minister is obliged to give the House an explanation.

I have no intention of holding up the House any longer on this matter because after Christmas I expect we will be dealing with the main Estimate. I want to assure the Minister that while we are prepared to give him any money he requires for the Forestry Division, there is a great deal of dissatisfaction— and it is right that he should know about this dissatisfaction—amongst the ordinary working men employed in our forests in regard to the five-day week, sick pay, and pension schemes. The Minister may be prepared to face very critical opposition on the question of forestry, and he will need to have something better for us when he comes with his next Estimate than he has today, or has had in recent years.

When there is such a wonderful future in forestry, and when it is such a wonderful medium of employment in rural Ireland, it is high time the Minister stopped tinkering with it, and was bold and courageous enough to do something practical which will produce beneficial results all round, and advance the interests of forestry development, private planting, and all sections of planting. As Deputy Esmonde said, forestry in this country lags far behind most continental countries.

Mr. Moran:

It is true, as Deputy Esmonde says, that there is a growing shortage of timber in Europe, that the demand for timber has been increasing, and that the FAO survey for the decade 1960 to 1970 shows prospects of an ever-increasing demand for timber supplies. In addition to the reasons advanced by the Deputy, there are still further reasons why that growing demand will continue. In the new and emerging African countries, uneducated in most cases, the demand for paper, and so on, is bound to increase vastly in the years ahead. Indeed, if we were in a position now to export wood pulp—although we have not sufficient for our own use—we could do so with tremendous advantage to the economy. In reply to what Deputy Esmonde said, I have no doubt that under the present policy we will fully meet our needs, and in due course will profit from the European shortage which now exists and which will continue for very many years, so far as anyone can estimate, because new uses appear to be found year by year for the products of timber.

In connection with the development of marginal land suggested by Deputy Esmonde, the House and the country know that, notwithstanding our efforts, we have met with very little success in the private planting sector. Deputy Esmonde suggested that it was difficult to find an acre of marginal land on a small farm for planting. In order to try to induce small farmers to plant, I reduced the qualifying figure for a grant to enable them to qualify even in the case of a half acre. I had not much success.

It is true that we have succeeded in increasing private planting to approximately 1,000 acres per annum, but that is a very small amount, insignificant in the national picture. It is quite obvious that in this country, with all our peculiarities, the main drive in this field must continue to be led by the State and the main development must take place under State provisions and State guidance.

Our land structure does not, in the main, provide suitable facilities for a large amount of private planting. In other countries, particularly our nextdoor neighbour, there are landlords, very large landowners, who can devote a certain amount of their land to private planting. The farm structure here is, in the main, very different and that is partly the reason why the State must play such a very large part in afforestation. We still have quite an amount of marginal land suitable for planting.

As I told the House yesterday, we have some difficulty in maintaining our programme. Notwithstanding some of the irresponsible statements made in this House, through this Supplementary Estimate, we are maintaining the 25,000-acre per annum plan. We are planting per head of the population more than any other country in western Europe. That is a fact. That is the answer to those who claim we should embark on what they call a courageous programme. I shall get on to the courageous programme of Deputy Oliver Flanagan in a few moments. First of all, I shall stick to realities, endeavour to answer some of the points put to me by responsible Deputies.

The Forestry Division does not regard itself, as Deputy Esmonde suggested, as being the be-all and end-all in forestry. It has devoted a very large amount of time to endeavours to induce the private sector of the economy to come into this field. The only objections we have advanced to grant applications have been in cases where people were inclined to come in and acquire land between State forest blocks that would be required for the normal development of State forestry, and take advantage of the work of the Department. We have provided generous grants for people who want to plant marginal land, and there is quite an amount of it in every farm, big or small. However, as I have said, our efforts in that field have not been a success. While people are more conscious of it now than they were, the State must still keep up its efforts to intensify afforestation, to continue to maintain the steady target of 25,000 acres per annum.

I estimate that in a period of ten years the Exchequer should be relieved of the responsibility for subventions towards State forestry. If things go wrong with my calculation, I put it, at the outside, at 15 years. If things go right, ten years may be a little optimistic, but inside 15 years the position will be that our afforestation programme will be paying for itself from its income without calling on the Exchequer to come to its aid.

That position could only have been achieved through the vast efforts we have put into the programme during the past five years. Of course its continued success will depend on our being able to keep up that target. That will indicate to the House that as soon as we have reached that position, we shall be in sight of our national goal of trying to make ourselves self-supporting in this field. When we have reached that stage, it is possible that the Forestry Division will be able, through new techniques acquired from experience gained in planting areas formerly not considered plantable to increase the programme now reached. Techniques change with time and from the experiments being carried out during the past few years, all the thorny problems of exposure, particularly in western areas, should be solved in the not too distant future.

Deputy Esmonde referred to an old house, the location of which is earmarked as the site for the administration building to be erected in connection with the John Fitzgerald Kennedy Memorial Park in Wexford. I have seen it and, in my judgment, firstly, it is in a hopeless state of repair and would cost a fortune to do anything with it, and secondly, it would be completely unsuitable for the purpose for which Deputy Esmonde suggested it could be used. It would be unsuitable to house the people Deputy Esmonde suggested it should house, being beside the administration building in this Memorial Park and beside the new agricultural school being erected on that site. I am advised by those who are competent to judge these matters that the cheapest and best thing to do is to knock it down. Even if the building itself were suitable, for the reasons I have given—location and so forth—it would certainly not be suitable to house the type of people the Deputy suggested.

The point about pay was that the deductions should be made weekly. I had not received any complaints about this matter until the Deputy spoke about it. I shall have the matter examined but the Deputy will appreciate that the Revenue Commissioners come into this matter as well as the people in my Department.

The position about the intake of money towards the end of March of last year is this. Some customers, particularly public Departments like the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, paid in an amount of money. Their deadline was 31st March and they paid for stuff that we did not expect to be paid for before 31st March, which would normally come into this year's Estimate. The same occurred with a few other large customers and it is a matter which we cannot control. We have these hills and hollows in the income.

Deputy Tully has criticised the intake of money to the Department. It is not all represented by mature timber or by clear felling. Indeed, in certain years, chance plays a big part in this. For instance, if there is a very severe storm and quite a lot of timber is knocked down, which would not be mature and which would not be sold or felled for a number of years, it has to be dealt with and sold. If as a result of these storms there is a particularly bad windy sweep in a certain area, it may be necessary for the mechanics of the job of replanting to clear fell an area that would not perhaps be clear felled for ten or 15 years to come. So the Deputy will appreciate that this matter may vary, depending on circumstances from year to year. The figure is not a steady figure representing a clear felling of mature timber year by year. Those other elements come in. There are also other matters, such as thinnings, and so on, being sold.

The price of timber, and forestry products outside mature timber, is always a matter of contention between those concerned in the trade and the officials of my Department. This particularly refers to the price of timber which goes into wood pulp. There has been an increase in the price of that timber in very recent months. It is a matter, however, like other matters of this kind, that is always the subject of arguments as between those concerned in that business and the officers of my Department. Suffice it to say that my Department try to get a realistic price for their produce, as the Dáil would naturally expect them to do.

In connection with the five-day week raised by Deputy Tully, it would not be possible to do this in the winter without further reduction in the working hours or an extension of the normal workday to an undesirable extent at another time of the year. That cannot be done under the Conditions of Employment Act, as the Deputy well knows. We can work only a certain number of hours in a day and what the Deputy is advocating is that there should be still further reduction in the working hours.

Mr. Tully:

It has been done by local authorities, as the Minister is aware, and by agreement.

Mr. Moran:

The work of the Forestry Department differs from the work of local authorities. We have to work the hours as they are now to meet the agreement made. I pointed out before that under the Conditions of Employment Act we could not make up for this time in working longer hours in summer without a breach of the existing law.

I do not know who made the point— whether it was Deputy Tully or Deputy Esmonde—but there is not, in fact, any shortage of people available for work in State forests. Indeed, the contrary is the case. Notwithstanding what may be said or alleged here, wherever a new State forestry work is opening up, in my experience, there are very many more applicants seeking to get on the job, and to leave their employment in order to get on the job, than there are jobs for them. I think this is the best indication as to conditions in forestry employment generally throughout rural Ireland. That is my own experience and I am sure it is the experience of most Deputies who are familiar with areas in which forestry work is available.

The sawmill rates have, I understand, been suitably adjusted in the ninth round, under the terms acceptable to those concerned.

Mr. Tully:

The Minister just says "adjusted".

Mr. Moran:

Where cutaway bogs are available, I should like to inform the Deputy that we are very glad to get them. There is, however, as I pointed out to the House before, a certain amount of misunderstanding amongst some people who think there is a large amount of cutaway bog which is left by Bord na Móna and which is there for the taking and that something should be done with it. That is not so. We are in close touch with Bord na Móna and we are quite prepared to plan and develop any cutaway bog we can get. Generally speaking in connection with cutaway bog, from the forestry point of view, in acquiring it, one of the difficulties is there are many common owners of bogs and, secondly, perhaps there are one or two who have rights to cut a bank of turf here or there. It is for these reasons, as the Deputy will find if he has a particular bog in mind, that there are difficulties in the way of bringing them into the machine.

The money provided was questioned under the different subheads here. Subsection A has an additional sum of £65,000. Practically every penny of that, or 90 per cent of it, is going to increasing foresters' pay, as distinct from forest workers. There is £12,000 for travelling and incidental expenses which is also in the main for that same class, foresters, and there was some adjustment, I understand, in the travel or mileage allowance to which they were entitled. The big portion of this Estimate under forest development and management, which is an additional sum of £322,000, is required to meet the increase in wages to which I referred in my opening statement, and to provide for the ninth round for the ordinary forestry workers throughout the length and breadth of the country.

I am criticised for bringing in a Supplementary Estimate here. All the matters covered by this Supplementary Estimate arose in the course of the year since I introduced my original Estimate for the Department. Practically every penny of this Supplementary Estimate is due to the wage increases and the improvement in the conditions of employment for the different grades to which I have referred. If such a situation takes place during a year, how Deputy Flanagan can suggest that we can provide the money for it without coming to this House is just beyond my comprehension. The annual Estimate for the Forestry Department introduced into this House would have been quite sufficient for us only for these changes that took place during the year and it is to meet and provide for these changes that this Estimate is now before the House.

We are accused of not making any reasonable effort to carry out a good national afforestation programme. I have been invited to embark on what Deputy Flanagan says is a courageous forestry programme. I think, in view of that, Sir, it is necessary that I should run over a few figures. For the year 1959-60, 25,100 acres were planted in this country; 1960-61, 26,069 acres; 1961-62, 25,317 acres; 1962-63, 24,708 acres and in 1963-64, 25,000 acres, making a total in those years of 126,194 acres. I should like to compare that total with the miserable effort made by the Deputy who has been accusing us of not carrying out a courageous forestry programme. His Government in 1948-49 planted a miserable 7,736 acres; 1949-50, 7,393 acres and 1950-51, 9,372 acres; 1954-55, 13,845 acres; 1955-56, 14,996 acres and 1956-57, 17,407 acres. In those two periods of Coalition Government, the total amount planted by them was 70,749 acres in comparison with 126,194 acres planted under my direction over the past five years. In this very year when Deputy Flanagan accuses us of not providing money for afforestation, we have provided £3,408,700 for afforestation in this country in comparison with what the Deputy's Party did in their last year of Government—£1,755,000, for the whole staffing of the Department as well as for the miserable intake of land that they had. These are figures which neither the Deputy nor his Party can get over. When he has the neck to come into this House and allege that we are falling down on forestry, let everybody know his own record when he was in Government and his efforts in this field.

I do not know that it is necessary for me, in view of Deputy Flanagan's reputation for veracity, to say that it is a complete invention to suggest that we are finding difficulty in getting forestry students for our schools. That allegation is utterly untrue. It is completely untrue to say that foresters, because of their conditions, are leaving their employment, as alleged by the Deputy. It is completely untrue and inaccurate to say that we are not turning out the same number of trained foresters for our national requirements. We turn out trained, after their final year, approximately 30 foresters per annum which is roughly the number we need for our expanding forestry programme.

All these allegations will no doubt be repeated by Deputy Flanagan outside this House in the hope that if he keeps telling an untruth often enough some people are bound to swallow it or some people are bound to believe it.

I cannot follow Deputy Flanagan in his references to the Galway by-election. It is true that in Galway the Fine Gael octopus has, with its usual cannibalistic history, swallowed up half of a small Party. The Deputy's Party has survived in Irish public life for the past 40 years by devouring cannibalistic-like some small Party but their latest meal, I can assure the Deputy, will not give the Party sustenance for very long.

Vote put and agreed to.

Votes 23 and 37, together with Vote 40 agreed to on 24th November, 1964, reported and agreed to.

Mr. S. Dunne:

On a point of order, may I be permitted to give notice that, with the permission of the Chair, I propose to raise on the adjournment the subject matter of Question No. 16 on yesterday's Order Paper?

An Ceann Comhairle:

I shall communicate with the Deputy in the course of the day.