asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry if he will furnish the following information regarding the use of a dangerous defoliant known as 245-T indicating (a) the quantity of this substance used in forests this year; (b) the stocks of 245-T in store; (c) the quantity of 245-T on order and (d) the estimated cost of this substance under (a), (b) and (c); if he is aware of the practice in his Department whereby forest workers are expected to handle and discharge this substance without protective clothing and that forest employees who object to the use of and exposure to this substance have been subjected to disciplinary measures resulting in hardship; if he will make a statement regarding his Department's policy in relation to stringent safety measures; and the safety protection afforded to the thousands of forest workers employed by his Department.
Written Answers. - Use of Defoliant.
I have stated in reply to previous questions by the Deputy that the chemical 245-T in the formulation used by my Department poses no threat to man or his environment and conforms to the safety requirements of the FAO and WHO organisations. I do not, therefore, accept the implications in his question regarding the danger of using the chemical for the control of woody weeds in the forest. So far as the specific matters raised by the Deputy are concerned the following is the information sought.
(a) Approximately 3,000 litres of the chemical were used in State forests in the past year the value of which would be of the order of £7,000.
(b) About 6,400 litres costing £15,000 approximately are held by the Forest and Wildlife Service at present.
(c) There is no 245-T on order at present as stocks are adequate.
It is not correct to state that forest workers are required to handle and discharge 245-T without protection. Protective clothing is made available to forest workers using all non-hazardous chemicals, including 245-T. Goggles are also provided for use when mixing the concentrate. I am not aware of any case where a forest worker was requested to handle the chemical without the provision of adequate protective clothing. Neither am I aware of any instance of disciplinary action arising from a worker's refusal to handle 245-T or any other chemical. If the Deputy has information to the contrary on either of these matters and makes it available to me I will arrange to have an investigation carried out.
I am satisfied that the existing measures in operation in my Department for the safety and health of forest workers are adequate. A copy of these instructions was forwarded to the Deputy on 9 May 1980.