Austin Deasy
Question:7 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry if he intends to grade land for agriculture and forestry purposes to ensure that top quality land cannot be planted. [3516/95]
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Land Use Policy.
As part of the Programme for Renewal the Government is committed to the development of a land use policy plan. The lead responsibility for implementing this commitment rests with the Minister for the Environment. This will provide guidelines for both national policy decisions and planning authorities in relation to location of agricultural, industrial, forestry, aquaculture and tourism developments.
There are however, no plans to grade agricultural land for the purpose, as the question implies, of confining forestry to particular types of land. In so far as grant/premium aids for forestry under regulation 2080/92 are concerned, there would have to be doubts as to whether it would be permissible to deny such assistance to some owners of agricultural land while affording it to others. Nor is there evidence to suggest that significant areas of top quality land are being turned over to foresty. Where top quality land is involved the range of attractive land use options available to the landowner is obviously broader.
The afforestation of agricultural land is one option available to the owners of such land, as with other agricultural land uses, it is a matter of choice for each individual landowner as to whether he or she decides to avail of that option. I would expect the decision in each case to be influenced by the personal circumstances of the landowner and by his or her assessment of the asset and income attractions of forestry, relative to the other options which may be available.
In the context of the strategic review of the forestry sector currently being undertaken by my Department issues such as the future land area requirements for forestry development and optimum tree species mix are being addressed. These issues will clearly have implications for the type of land most suited to forestry development over the period of the strategic plan for forestry which is 20 years.
The Deputy may also be aware that my Department is finalising a review, being undertaken in conjunction with the Department of the Environment, of controls on the scale of forestry development, and particularly the effectiveness of planning controls in this area. The purpose of this review is to ensure greater compatibility between forestry development and the local environment throughout the country.
I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. This is an emotive issue in many parts of the country.With generous grants being offered for planting, some of the best agricultural land is being planted although plenty of substandard land suitable for afforestation is not being planted.
I am alarmed to hear that the Department of the Environment rather than the Department of Agriculture Food and Forestry is to decide on the use of land. I would have thought that would be a matter for the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry. I respect the rights of individuals to do as they wish with their land, but it is in the national interest not to use good quality land for afforestation when inferior land is available.
I agree with the Deputy and I have ambitious plans to promote forestry. In the macro-economy, forestry, without a ceiling on production and natural climate advantages, has one of the greatest potentials of any aspect of the economy. Notwithstanding that, the objective must be to use for forestry marginal land that is not suitable for other forms of mainline agriculture. The Minister of State, Deputy Deenihan, is inviting submissions with a view to consultations we will have with the Minister for the Environment on land use. At the moment one only requires planning permission for a forestry development of 500 acres or more. I see that being greatly reduced to bring into the planning process the type of controversial area that I am aware of in County Waterford and the planning process applied to those vexed questions in localised areas.
Will the Minister put a prohibition on the afforestation of good land in congested areas and introduce measures to enable people in congested areas to sell their land?
I have already asked the IFA Farm Forestry Committee and Coillte Teoranta to have particular regard, in their land purchasing policy, to the situation outlined by the Deputy, especially where the only chance to expand their holdings that smallholders have is to buy adjacent land that comes up for sale — Coillte Teoranta can buy land anywhere but perhaps smallholders cannot. I am sympathetic to such situations and there will be sensitivity and a maximum price guideline to avoid pushing up the price of land. However, on the Continent the average amount of land afforested is between 20 per cent and 22 per cent of holdings whereas in Ireland it is 7 per cent. We have the most generous grant package — one can get up to £6,000 per hectare over 15 years for farm forestry. Why, therefore, in the light of the long term requirements of the paper milling industry and the furniture and construction industry, should Europe and Ireland import so much timber? We must support the forestry industry. The 20 year plan I hope to bring to Cabinet in a matter of months will be comprehensive. I want it to fit into the same context as it does in Europe. In Austria, for example, it is common to have eight or ten acres of forestry on a 60 acre farm as just another crop. People here think that having a farm of forestry is not a day's work. We must change our attitudes. In the context of maintaining the population in rural Ireland and of the sensitivities of congested areas I will ask Coillte Teoranta and the Department to bear the Deputy's point in mind when implementing their afforestation programmes.
Can the Minister confirm that the work of former Minister of State, Deputy Hyland, on long term plans for land use for the future is available to him and when will he bring forward proposals which were finalised by Deputy Hyland during his term of office?
We should differentiate between land structures, land mobility and land use which relate more to planning which is the responsibility of the Department of the Environment. The area of land structures and policy is the responsibility of my very busy junior Minister, Deputy Deenihan, who tells me he is not aware that this work is quite as advanced as the Deputy suggests.However, I would not wish to denigrate the work of former Minister of State, Deputy Hyland. I hope that all existing work in the Department will be part of the Government's commitment to have a new land use policy in place as soon as possible.
The Minister said the Department of the Environment has responsibility for land use but both this Minister and the Minister of State have talked about land use on many occasions in recent weeks. If the Minister will not take on board anything the former Minister, Deputy Hyland did, will he look at the last White Paper on land policy and land use?
There seems to be some confusion about this issue. On the abolition of the Land Commission, proposals about structural aspects of land policy and land mobility were put forward. In the Programme for Government there is a commitment to bring forward a land use policy outlining what is suitable for industrial or agricultural development, afforestation and so on. All the existing work done by my predecessors and the submissions and consultations in which Deputy Deenihan is involved will be put into the land use policy. There has already been interaction between the office of the Minister for the Environment, my office and Deputy Deenihan's office. I hope that by mid year or by the end of the year we will have substantial progress to report.
The Minister stated that he has spoken to Coillte Teoranta about its land acquisition policy. Has Coillte Teoranta been asked to be generous in regard to the sale of land to a farmer with adjoining land? The Minister also mentioned putting a cap on the price. Will this mean that non-nationals, who have bought up large tracts of land in the west, and some in County Meath where about 700 acres were taken over and planted about 12 months ago, will have a free hand and, uncontrolled by either the Minister or the Department, will continue to receive grants for forests that have been planted and are badly maintained.
With respect, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, we are now getting into a general debate on land policy but the specific question is about grading land for forestry. I will answer any question put to me on this issue, bearing in mind that we have only 20 minutes.
This is a separate question. Outside the operation of Coillte Teoranta in 1994, 80 per cent of afforestation was done by farm forestry.
Will the Minister confirm how much of this work was undertaken by Irish nationals?
My understanding from the figures I have is that only 20 per cent of afforestation was done by the corporate sector and 80 per cent by farm forestry.
The Minister referred to land policy. However, will he agree that in-depth studies such as the Des Maguire and Ray MacSharry surveys on land use, land mobility and so on are available in his Department and that, therefore, it should not be a big job to come up with a policy on land?
Yes.
Arising from the Minister's reply to supplementary questions, will he inform the House of the criteria applied by his Department to sanctioning grants for what the Minister referred to as marginal land? Is it departmental policy that there must be a certain predetermined yield from the land before the Department will sanction grants for it? The Minister indicated a preference for planting of marginal land only, and I would like to have the matter clarified because there seems to be a contradiction.
On the question of species mix, is it departmental policy that 10 per cent of planting should be of broadleaf trees?
We are going beyond the bounds of the question.
It is a question on the guidelines to which the Minister referred in his reply.
I can answer an extensive range of questions——
The State forestry company does not seem to be complying with the 10 per cent requirement for broadleaf tree planting.
Question 7 refers to grading land with a view to a particular problem in County Waterford.
I have already indicated that this is worthy of another question.
I will deal with the criteria for planting land if the House wishes. I have been lobbied by the IFA farm forestry division to reduce the criteria further so that poorer quality land is eligible.The Commission has resisted this on the grounds that it wants a minimum output level for forestry plantation and the matter is being reviewed.
What is the level?
With respect, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, you are allowing questions that are going way beyond this.
The Minister rose without being called.
The question relates to grading of land for agricultural and forestry purposes. Will the Minister agree that there is pressure to plant good land because planting has not been allowed in areas that are designated as NHA or areas of outstanding scenic amenity in the county development plans? Furthermore will he agree that whereas there should not be blanket afforestation of such areas that some parts are suitable for forestry and as long as they can support a crop of Sitka spruce rather than pine, they would be well worth planting?
Let me summarise by saying that forestry is one of the major priorities of my ministry. This strategic review of the forestry sector which I had hoped would be sorted out by Easter will now be ready in July, will deal with the strategic plan for afforestation from now until the year 2015. This 20 year plan will deal with all issues, the mix of species, land use, planning permission and the environmental impact study currently under way, the types of land that will be eligible for afforestation grants and premium payments. The Deputies should await that review. I welcome submissions from Deputies on particular points that can contribute to this plan.
This is not a parochial question or a County Waterford question, it is a national question.
Hear, hear.
The problem is prevalent in every county and the part of County Waterford to which the Minister is alluding will probably be in South Tipperary after the next constituency boundary review.
As long as Mount Mellery is looked after in my absence.
I am aware of the major differential between the extent of afforestation in this country, 7 per cent vis-à-vis 22 per cent in the European Union but there is considerably more than 22 per cent of marginal land in this country.I want land usage to be properly ordered and that is why I am raising the question. Will the Minister clarify what appears to be a contradictory statement — in his initial reply the Minister said he would not direct that certain lands be retained for agricultural purposes and other lands for afforestation but in response to a supplementary question he said there will be a land usage authority which obviously will do that. When will the land usage authority come into being? Will its primary aim be to designate what land can be used for agriculture and what for forestry only?
I gave no commitment to establish such an authority, nor is there any such commitment in the Programme for Government but there is a commitment to establish a land use policy plan and that it the nature of the discussions that Deputy Deenihan is having.The final deliberations will come to Cabinet from the Minister for the Environment.
I appreciate it may be a national problem but the Deputy will appreciate that a number of people have threatened to go on hunger strike in County Waterford so it is an acute problem, in the Deputy's bailiwick.
He left Waterford two years ago.
I understand that the Minister of State, Deputy Deenihan, addressed that problem on the Adjournment a few weeks ago. We should separate the forestry plans and the land use policy plan of my colleague, the Minister for the Environment.