asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry if he will establish a new State-sponsored authority — An tÚdarás Adhmaid — as proposed by the Irish Timber Council in their policy statement issued on 3 July 1984; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

8.

asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry if his Department has yet completed its examination of the recommendation of the National Planning Board that a semi-State body be established to run the forestry and timber industry; the results of the examination and if he will make a statement on the matter.

9.

asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry if he will make a statement on the terms of reference etc. of the Review Group on Forestry announced by him on 7 November 1984.

10.

asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry if he has any plans to replace his Department with a semi-State body as was done with the Department of Posts and Telgraphs.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 7, 8, 9 and 10 together.

I have no plans to replace the Department of Fisheries and Forestry with a semi-State body on the lines suggested. Neither are proposals for the establishment of a timber authority or board being considered by me.

The Government's views on the latter issue were set out in paragraph 3.58 of the recent Economic Plan, Building on Reality, 1985-87. I would also refer the Deputies to my own comments in the course of the Dáil debate on the Plan on 17 October 1984, Official Report, Volume 352, column 2754 refers.

The Review Group on Forestry was established by me on 7 November 1984 with the following terms of reference.

With a view to ensuring that the country's afforestation programme and, in particular, the substantial resource which it represents, is developed and exploited to the best national advantage, having due regard to the role and functions of the National Development Corporation where relevant——

(1) to examine the present structure, organisation and operation of the Forest and Wildlife Service of the Department of Fisheries and Forestry;

(2) to consider what changes, if any, are necessary;

(3) to make specific recommendations on such changes; and

(4) to submit a report to the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry by 1 June 1985.

Are we to take it from the Minister's reply that he is neglecting the proposal from the Irish Timber Council for the establishment of An tÚdarás Adhmaid? Are we to take it that he will not consider the establishment of a State-sponsored body in charge of forestry?

I think the Deputy is misinterpreting what I said.

The Minister answered too many questions together.

I am sorry about that. Normally I am accused of not answering half the questions put to me. If I answered too many questions together I make no apology for it, and I mean that in the best sense. I do not want to be acrimonious about this.

Deputy Molloy misinterpreted what I said. The document produced by the Irish Timber Council suggested the establishment of a timber board, an tÚdarás Adhmaid. I am looking at the whole structure and I have appointed a review group on which the Irish Timber Council are represented in order to establish an independent group and the best method to approach this problem, including, if necessary, the establishment of whatever authority they deem fit. Anything I say now in relation to my own view might be seen as preempting the deliberations of this review group, who have been given seven months to produce a report with recommendations.

Are we to understand from the Minister's reply that, in spite of all the recommendations of the National Planning Board and the people involved in the timber industry, the Minister has no proposals for any change in the structure or organisation of the timber industry? He does not propose to establish a board, a semi-State body or a timber authority. How does he propose to market the increasing volume of timber which will be coming on the market when his Department are unable to give accurate estimates of what volume of timber will be coming through? There is one administrative staff member for every two in the field. This is a top heavy organisation which has no interest in marketing.

The Deputy does not seem to be asking a question.

What proposals has the Minister? My first question asked if he had examined the recommendations of the National Planning Board. I take it he has examined but rejected those recommendations. Is that a fact?

First, I do not accept the implications in the Deputy's statement that inaccurate information was given by the Department in relation to projections. Second, in relation to the National Planning Board's recommendations, I have scrutinised them in order to ensure that the industry get what they need, in other words, that they will be involved in deliberating on what is the best approach. I decided to establish a review group comprised of all interested parties operating within the industry. That includes the Irish Timber Council, private growers, processors and so on plus public servants who would have an input and make recommendations. I do not know what recommendations they will make in their report but all the interests within the industry have been included in the review group. That is the best way to go about it. I do not want to impose something that will not be acceptable to certain elements within the industry. It is much better to get the industry involved and to let them from their experience lay down the guidelines which should be followed.

Does the Minister agree that it is said that the only Irish solution to every problem seems to be the establishment of a review body? What is required here is the political will to make a decision. The Minister is unable, afraid, does not have the ability or is postponing the decision for some other reason. There have been sufficient reports on the state of the Irish timber industry already. The IDA and the National Planning board have made their views known——

The Deputy cannot make a speech.

The Minister has an abundance of information and facts upon which he could make a decision in regard to the future of the timber industry. Does the Minister agree that the State is losing £100 million yearly because of the cost of the inefficient operation of our forestry and timber industries? The information with regard to those industries has been sent to the Minister——

The Deputy is making speech after speech on supplementary questions and it is intolerable. I have said on numerous occasions that it is not possible to deal with policy at Question Time. It does not make sense.

I will endeavour to reply to Deputy Molloy's allegations — they were not questions. I am not in the business of providing Irish solutions to Irish problems; I will leave that to someone else. Is the Deputy suggesting that I should lay down the law regardless of what people in the industry think? Is he complaining because I am consulting with the people who matter in the industry, private growers, processors and so on? If he is let him say so——

They have all made their views known.

They have not. The throw away remark concerning £100 million being lost is the sort of statement that should not be made by someone with the Deputy's experience because it is not true.

It is true.

It is not true. The Deputy might as well have said £500 million.

That figure relates to the softwood industry.