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.