Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 26 Feb 1992

Vol. 416 No. 3

Energy and Labour Matters.

Mr. Nealon

Some relatively short time ago forests in my part of the country were confined to the mountains, the kind of thing one viewed through binoculars on a clear evening. That is not the case anymore. The planting of trees is the one definite growth area in the north-west, in Sligo, Leitrim, Mayo, Donegal and north Roscommon. That is a positive thing, within limitations. Much of the land being planted is good for little else and it is very good for forestry.

Difficulties are showing up. With Coillte and private forestry companies and individual landowners all in the business, people are finding trees planted literally on their doorsteps. There are very few limitations on what can be done. If a person wants to add a porch to his house to keep out the north wind he must get planning permission but it is possible to plant 100 acres of the surrounding countryside without a by-your-leave. This is creating difficulties. Many people do not want massive forests running close to their homes, farm buildings or front avenues. They object for very understandable safety and security reasons and they do not regard the present limitations as sufficient.

There is also the matter of plantations blocking off scenic views. There was even a plan to plant the only vantage point of the Lake Isle of Inishfree from the shores of Lough Gill. In fairness to the Minister, he took very decisive action in that instance and if Yeats were alive he might pen a bit of a poem in his honour.

Then there is the much bigger policy issue as to whether very scarce, good agricultural land in parts of the west should go under forestry at all when there are local farmers eager to acquire and work it and in the process become viable in the new Europe.

I believe that with the runaway development now taking place in planting in the west the time has come for the Minister to take a look at the whole issue of controls which he could operate by way of grant limitations or by way of introducing planning permission regulations. This is the time to act.

Minister for Energy (Mr. Molloy)

I, too, am concerned that residences and farm buildings should not be overwhelmed by forestry development, and grant-aid is not now available for planting within 30 metres of an occupied dwelling or associated buildings. In addition to this general provision, each case is considered on its merits and a greater distance may be applied in specific instances.

It is certainly not my intention that rural communities should be isolated or replaced by forestry, and indeed the stimulation of rural development and enhancement of the rural environment are important elements of both the forestry operational programme and the associated forestry measures of the rural development programme.

It is a general condition of grant-aid under the forestry programme that projects are compatible with the protection of the environment. Landscape and amenity aspects are among those taken into account in assessing projects, and local authorities are consulted in relation to such areas listed either in the Inventory of Outstanding Landscapes by An Foras Forbartha in 1977 or in the county development plan.

The afforestation of more than 200 hectares with conifers also requires an environmental impact assessment and planning permission because of its possible effects on the environment, including the landscape.

As a further measure, my Department are currently preparing guidelines on forestry and the landscape to advise developers on various aspects of forest design. Compliance with the guidelines will be a condition of grant aid.

I believe that forestry development can make a positive contribution to the environment and that the measures I have outlined enable this to be done.

Mr. Hogan

The Minister for Energy created some confusion some weeks ago by announcing that he intended terminating the right of the ESB to use their billing system for payments on the purchase of electrical goods in their shops. The Minister was acting as a result of representations made to him by the "stop electric campaign", indeed by Members on all sides of this House.

The Minister reversed his original decision today. I am seeking this opportunity to ask him to clarify the present status of the ESB billing system since their consumers and the electrical trade generally are very confused about its present status. In view of the fact that the Minister changed his mind on the matter on a number of occasions recently, it is now time he fully clarified the matter.

Furthermore, in view of the fact that the board of directors of the ESB meet today to consider the options open to them and because of the agreement reached today by the Minister and the financial director of the company, I want to know whether the Minister met the ESB at all before taking a formal decision to change the billing system. Would he indicate whether he agrees with the Stokes, Kennedy, Crowley report announced by the ESB in respect of job and financial losses that might be incurred by the company as a result of the proposed change in the billing system.

Would the Minister clearly indicate to the House what attitude he will be adopting to the provision of equal facilities for people involved in the private electrical trade in respect of credit facilities, indicating whether he intends meeting the "stop electric campaign" committee with a view to alleviating their concerns about this important matter, because following today's decision we are once again presented with the status quo as representing Government policy.

Minister for Energy (Mr. Molloy)

I welcome this opportunity to express my welcome for the agreement reached with the ESB on the question of bills for customers incorporating instalment repayments for goods bought in ESB shops.

The ESB will be issuing a new style invoice for these customers which will incorporate totally separate bills for electricity charges and instalment payments. These new invoices will be first issued for the September/October billing period later this year after the ESB have made the necessary modifications to their computer programmes.

I am pleased that the ESB have responded to my concern for this transparency so that their customers can distinguish clearly what is due for electricity and what is due for instalment payment for electrical appliances. This is being done in a way which does not jeopardise desirable efficiencies within their existing billing system.

I repeat — and I thought I had made this clear on many occasions — that it was never my wish to see ESB shops closed or hire purchase facilities taken away from the underprivileged as was suggested by some groups, leading to the confusion to which the Deputy referred. I note with satisfaction the ESB's reassurance, in press release today, that electrical appliances will continue to be sold in the normal way in their shops throughout the country.

This is a satisfactory conclusion in regard to the direction I gave the ESB to achieve a certain objective, now reached.

Mr. Deasy

What I have to say is very similar to the points raised by Deputy Nealon.

There is urgent need for the establishment of a land use authority here which would involve not merely the Department of Energy and Coillte Teo but also the Department of Agriculture and Food, the Wildlife Service, Bord Fáilte, and, as a corollary, the Department of Tourism.

There are no guidelines delineating which lands should be used for agriculture and which for forestry. While it may appear somewhat of a contradiction, present forestry grants are so generous they are leading to the planting of trees on land which should properly be used for agriculture, a very haphazard arrangement. I should like to see the Minister use his good offices to establish a land use authority whose mandate would be to decide which land should be used for which purpose, not merely forestry. It would entail also the setting aside of sanctuaries for game birds, of which there is a distinct lack here at present and which could be a major tourist attraction. We eliminated game birds to an extraordinary extent some years ago thereby limiting a potential tourism attraction, particularly during the months when shooting is allowed. I should add that these types of game birds were quite prolific here a 100 or even 50 years ago, but they have been eliminated by modern farming techniques.

We should endeavour to strike a balance between agriculture, afforestation and tourism, in respect of which we appear to have no plan whatsoever. I am asking the Minister to instigate the formation of a land use authority so that each sector can be satisfactorily catered for.

Minister for Energy (Mr. Molloy)

In response to Deputy Deasy I should say that no guidelines have been prepared by Government in relation to land use for forestry and/or agriculture. I do not believe there is a conflict between these uses which would warrant the preparation of such guidelines at this stage.

It is a general aim that only land suitable for forestry will be afforested and a guiding principle is that farmers and landowners should have a choice of how to use their land, subject to adhering to codes of practice for forestry and environmental protection.

The Deputy is aware of the substantial improvements in the package of incentives for forestry I announced recently. These will give a major boost to the national forestry programme and contribute to the improvement of our environment. I would like to assure the Deputy that there is no possibility that these measures will squeeze out agriculture.

The new grant structures anticipate measures being proposed by the European Commission under the Common Agricultural Policy reform package. They are essential to counter the reduction in planned planting by the private sector, especially on the part of farmers, which arose from the expectation that the Commission proposals would lead to higher grants. I could not allow the uncertainty engendered by this perception to continue.

More and more farmers are turning to forestry to supplement their incomes and to generate wealth. In 1991 full-time and part-time farmers planted over 70 per cent of the total forest area established by the private sector compared to a corresponding figure of less than 50 per cent in 1990. In my view this increase in farmer participation is very much to be welcomed.

Mr. Deenihan

Teamwork, a scheme administered by FÁS, in the year 1991 provided places for 1,200 young people and was allocated some £4,800,000. Their budget was cut back this year by £1.8 million, which will result in loss of employment as 750 places only will be available for participation in the scheme this year. Teamwork is a scheme under which voluntary organisations such as youth groups can provide one year's training and employment for those unemployed between the ages of 17 and 24, who are paid £63 per week. This scheme, which does not afford permanent and/or pensionable employment, gives young people the experience so vital if they are to be even considered for a job. The funding available for this purpose will be drastically reduced this year.

Youth organisations, such as the National Youth Council of Ireland, reckon that a £1.8 million cut will deprive approximately 450 people of a chance to work and contribute to their localities. As if that were not bad enough, the amount that may be paid to young people participating in Teamwork schemes has not been increased since July 1990, such young people at present being only paid £63 per week. At the very minimum this should be raised immediately by the inflationary rate of 5 per cent to £66. The reduction in the Teamwork budget is regrettable and should be reversed. It signifies a very negative attitude to young people and their future. Unemployment is now running at 28.5 per cent in the under 25 age group. The decision to reduce the level of funding for Teamwork is a further blow for our young people and will exacerbate the unemployment crisis for this age group.

Minister for Labour (Mr. Cowen)

Deputy Deenihan's contribution does not take into account the much improved post leaving certificate schemes which are now run by the Department of Education. In relation to the reduction in the allocation to Teamwork this year, I would point out that the reduction is not £1.8 million but rather £1.048 million.

Teamwork is a community managed scheme designed to provide temporary community based employment for young people through voluntary organisations for the mutual benefit of the young people and their communities. The scheme is operated by FÁS and is now targeted at young people on the live register.

Under the scheme funding is given to enable community based groups provide young unemployed people with work on local projects of a finite nature. Teamwork aims to help both the young unemployed people and the community through having worthwhile projects carried out which would not otherwise be undertaken.

A grant of £63 per week is available towards the employment costs of each young person taken on under the scheme. In the case of projects involving five to ten people a grant of £105 per week is available towards the employment costs of an approved supervisor. The duration of Teamwork projects can vary from a minimum of 26 weeks to a maximum of 52 weeks.

Since 1990 Teamwork has not been eligible for assistance from the European Social Fund — that is something that will have to be taken into account — and as a result is exclusively Exchequer funded. An allocation of £4 million was originally proposed for the scheme in 1992, but it is expected that activity under the scheme will be lower than originally projected as a result of the introduction of the new employment subsidy and job training schemes. As such a revised allocation of £3 million has been provided for Teamwork in 1992. It is expected that this allocation will provide some 760 man-years activity under the scheme and that up to 2,000 young people will be involved in the scheme during the current year.

I would like to suggest that local sponsors might consider the possibility of using the social employment scheme, which is ESF funded, for their projects and thereby give the older long term unemployed in their communities who may still be under 25 an opportunity to regain a foothold in the labour market while maintaining their individual locally based initiatives.

Let me repeat that Teamwork is designed to help young people in their search for secure permanent employment. The new job training scheme which I announced last week is also aimed at helping people improve their prospects of obtaining permanent employment. It will provide opportunities for all persons on the live register for more than two months to obtain work based training on employers premises. The scheme, which is EC funded, is a new approach linking the world of work and training in a practical manner and will provide full time training for between six and 12 months depending on the training requirement in each case. Trainees will be paid the appropriate FÁS training allowance while they are being trained.

The job training scheme is a departure from the more traditional manner of training provision through training centres and I would expect it to become a permanent feature of the Irish training system. I am very hopeful that with employer co-operation the scheme will be successful and that the target of 10,000 participants will be achieved.

Finally, I would draw attention to the many opportunities available for young persons in both the education and training schemes, and particularly the post leaving certificate opportunities within the educational field. The school leavers surveys carried out by my Department continuously emphasise the importance of educational qualifications in determining employment prospects and the fact that early and unqualified school leavers face the greatest difficulties in trying to find a job.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.35 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 27 February 1992.