asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry if he has had discussions with commercial interests regarding the possible sale, leasing or involvement of the private sector in the State forests.

27.

asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry if the Government are considering handing over to private interests any area of State forestry; if it is Government policy that areas of State forestry should be sold to private interests; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

54.

asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry the discussions he or officials of his Department have had on the disposal of State forestry to private banking, financial or other institutions; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 22 and 27 and Priority Question No. 54 together.

I have had no discussions with any private interests in regard to the disposal of State forests. Over the years officials of my Department have had meetings from time to time with private interests who had expressed a wish to explore the possibility of investing in the State forest enterprise but to date nothing positive has emerged from such discussions.

Can the Minister clarify the confusion that has arisen as a result of statements made by the Minister for Finance in Killarney to the effect that this issue was discussed by the Government at a recent meeting at Barretstown Castle?

Some of the Deputies interventions at the time did not help to clear up the confusion.

I did not create it.

There is no confusion. The fact is that this year in Barretstown as the Minister said, many things were discussed in relation to the economy, including the development of forestry. The selling off of State forests came up in the context of on-going discussions which were commenced in 1980 by the then Minister for Finance, Deputy Fitzgerald, and from the Deputy's time in my Department he is well aware that discussions took place which were not concluded when he left office. They are still not concluded simply because I am not satisfied that the proposals put to us from the private sector are satisfactory and that the taxpayers' interests are being looked after. The Deputy is well aware of the context in which this discussion took place. These discussions were started when he was in office, during the time of his immediate predecessor and the office holder before him.

Deputy Mac Giolla has a question down and I am calling him.

There is further confusion——

I am calling Deputy Mac Giolla.

I have a priority question down.

Will the Minister tell the House the names of the private interests with whom he has been having talks? What is the extent of the forestry involved in these discussions?

I repeat that I have had no discussions personally with any private interests, but my Department's officials have had discussions with different groups who have shown an interest, one of them being the group which publicly stated they had £X billion available for the purchase of State forests.

As regards the second part of the Deputy's question — what extent of the State forests are being discussed — there is no detailed discussion of that nature going on.

Is it just the current mature forests?

We are talking about leasing and whether private investment is available for the leasing of non-afforested areas where land could be leased and afforested by the private sector. It is not true that State forests are being sold to the private sector.

The Minister must be aware that there are two separate issues involved. The issue about which the Minister is making accusations——

A question, please, Deputy.

——relates to encouraging private individuals and private financial institutions to invest in the development of new forestry, but we want to find out about a separate issue. Are the Minister and the Government involved in discussions to sell off mature forests, or forests which are about to mature, to private financial institutions? The Minister should not try to confuse the situation further.

The Minister and the Government are not involved in discussions on the sale of mature forests at the moment.

I am glad to have that clarified.

The Deputy's predecessor, in this House castigated the then Minister, the present Ceann Comhairle, for not taking up an offer of £10 million for the sale of mature forests.

Will the Minister give a definite yes or no? Have the Government discussed the possibility of selling off mature forests?

That is repetition.

We cannot get an answer.

That is not my fault.

Does the Deputy understand "No".

If Deputy Seán Treacy has a short question I will allow it.

I want to ascertain if the Minister forgot to mention that he was replying also to Question No. 50, which deals with the same subject, or will he come to Question No. 50 later?

The Minister did not say he was taking it.

I asked the Minister if he will desist from any attempt to dispose of any vestige of State forests to private interests until Dáil Éireann is consulted and decides on such a proposal; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

That question has not been called. The Minister did not say he was taking it.

Is it not strange that it was not taken with these questions?

I cannot help the Deputy.

Will the Minister reassure us that this precious State asset will not merely be preserved but will be expanded upon by the rigorous acquisition of additional land and the provision of more jobs? Can he give the House an assurance that the livelihood of the existing employees and their pension rights will be safeguarded now and in the future?

The Deputy is asking a supplementary question on a question which has not been called.

It is the same subject matter.

The Deputy knows he should not persist in this.

I should be grateful if the Minister would give me a reply.

I am calling Question No. 23.