Carol Nolan calls deal a 'land grab', demands Queelche be instructed

Thanks very much Chair, I really appreciate you letting me in here. I just want to start off by saying that I strongly oppose this land grab, that's exactly what it is. Minister, I'm very concerned about this and I'm concerned about your wording and you trying to, I've sat here for the entire debate here and the entire statements this evening, and you know, you're saying it's not the preferred deal, as is the tea shop, by the way, you're sharing the script, obviously, but yet, if you feel it's not the preferred deal, and if that's the view of government, why are you not, as Minister for Agriculture, expressing your concerns to Queelche and instructing them? I mean, Queelche is a semi-state body and you're the Minister for Agriculture, but what seems to have happened is the coin has flipped. Queelche are instructing you, clearly, because this script that I'm reading here, that you presented to us, is like a press release from Queelche or Gresham House, or both together, to me. It's not from a minister showing leadership. Your job is to show leadership. This deal is flawed and everybody can see that, cross-party, your own party have said it, you know, opposition, not just us. As I said, there's consensus here, Minister. Would you not issue an instruction to Queelche, or have you gone in there blindly and approved this without knowing what the pitfalls were, or without knowing that there are very real concerns in terms of young farmers being outbidded, or locked out in terms of access to land? I mean, they're very real issues, Minister. I don't feel that it cuts it because you're saying it's not an ideal deal. You're Minister for Agriculture. Surely, to God, your job is to direct semi-state bodies like Queelche, or are you just caving in and giving them their way? That's what the impression I'm getting. As I said, I've sat here since half past five. It's very concerning, Minister. I would also like to know, you're talking about leadership, and leadership is important. But leadership requires listening to all views, whether you agree or not. Now, have you met with farming organisations who have serious concerns? Have you met with MACRA? Have you met with all of the different organisations? You haven't met with some of the forestry organisations such as CIFA, and I'm disappointed, and I'm asking you to reconsider that immediately, because there are legitimate concerns there. I know some of those people. They're good people from my own constituency. They're involved in forestry a long time. They have more expertise than you or I have on this issue. Please meet them. That concerns me. You're talking about leadership. You're trotting out lines here. I'm very worried. Did you express any concern at all to Queelche about this? Any concern at all? Because it is a big thing. And also, Minister, I just want to ask you about carbon credits. OK, we have a foreign entity coming in here, a land grab taking place. At the moment, it's 3.5 per cent of the 100,000 hectares of forest at the moment. But, Minister, nobody is naive enough here to think that that's going to stop at that, unless you stop it as Minister for Agriculture. You know, that's the reality here. But, you know, I just want to know, like, where is this whole thing going? Have you expressed any disapproval? And could you please issue an instruction to a semi-state body, which is what you should be doing? The carbon credits, Minister, where does that leave the agriculture sector? Is this foreign entity who are entitled, I believe, to get farm entitlements? Are they also going to avail of carbon credits as well, to the detriment of our sector? And our sector has already been unfairly punished. I said I didn't agree with the carbon emissions. I was here that day when we had the debate. Again, another long debate. Also, Minister, you must bear in mind and show leadership here. And you must also realise that £2.1 billion of taxpayers' money is being used here in assisting a foreign entity. Now, it's crazy stuff. I read something in The Independent during the week, and they said that clearly Queelche isn't fit for purpose if it's calling in a foreign entity for assistance. It's crazy stuff what's happening here. And I think that, Minister, this is going to be a massive scandal down the road that's going to come back to bite you if you don't deal with it and if you don't answer these questions honestly that we have. And as I said, back to my main question, did you express any concerns to Queelche or did you go in and just sign a form and approve it there and then? Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Minister. So, listen, this is a deal Queelche did. We didn't send any form in relation to this deal. We met Queelche last week and had a very in-depth conversation in relation to the deal, but also particularly in relation to how we can step out the situation from here on in relation to how we can enable them more closely as a state to do the afforestation and to have a role in afforestation, something that they haven't been able to do since 2004. So, listening in relation to CIFA, I dealt with that question earlier. Did you hear me? I did. I did. And I was stunned because you were talking about leadership and then you were dismissing. I heard Senator Boyhan quite clearly. You were talking about leadership. CIFA is one organisation that I would ask you to give serious consideration to. But back to that piece, you know, I was using the metaphor of signing as in, did you give full approval to Queelche, whether it be verbal or whatever? Or did you express any concerns? Did you express any concerns, Minister, when they set out before you in a briefing that this is what they intended to do? Listen, I think that's an important question. I didn't give approval to this. As I said to you, and I know you said you were listening to the committee earlier on. I absolutely was, and I read this twice. This is like a press release from the Queen's Congressional House. I'm not sure if you were listening earlier on, but if you would, then I'll go over the same territory again, Deputy Nolan. No, Minister, no, no, don't get smart. I'm trying to do my job on behalf of my constituents. No, no, that's what I'm called for. I was listening quite clearly to you, Minister, but I will continue to challenge you until you answer the questions. I would like my questions answered, please. I won't go back over again. In relation to CIFA, as I said earlier on, they are a new organisation. There is an approach that if a new organisation springs up, you don't simply start to meet. It's something that the protocol has been, and I give the example of the INHFA, who are a very strong, credible organisation in the agriculture sector, took time to establish themselves. Likewise with the Beef Plan and the Irish Beef and Lamb Association in the agriculture side. They don't have the same credentials yet as the other farm organisations because they have to establish themselves. Likewise with CIFA. I know there are some very good people in it. I've met many of those people on many occasions. They're very much involved in other organisations as well. Indeed, many honour Project Woodland committees and boards and contributing very strongly. I'm not saying I won't meet them. I'm monitoring the situation. If they continue to be a strong, credible organisation that endures, then I'll certainly respond to that. But they're a very new organisation at the moment. And then in relation to carbon credits, all carbon is accounted for by the state at the moment. We do want to, in the time ahead, put in place a mechanism whereby we can have those who are capturing the carbon benefit from it within the state and support that. That's something we'll look at. So is that our own agriculture sector or is that a foreign entity that comes in then? What happens in that situation? There is no system in place yet, but as we develop a system… Well, should it not be put in place before the state goes ahead? Yeah, absolutely. That's my concern and it's the concern of my farmers. I'm glad as somebody who has been very much anti-climate change and who's voted against the climate change bill and who's basically voted against and opposed everything to do with climate change from what I've seen and observed so far, I'm glad to see that you're in favour of carbon capture. Excuse me, excuse me, you are taking completely what I said out of context, OK? No, I'm just… I have concerns for farmers and you should have done more and shown more leadership when it came to the calculation of emissions. You didn't show leadership there. Now, I asked you particular questions about what organisations you had met. You were condescending and you ran down the new organisations. Minister, you came in as a new minister. If people adopted that approach to you, he's a new minister, let's give him time to establish. Would you like it? No, I've asked a fair question. I'm not sure what your question is. I would not agree to punishing our farming families and that's why I voted down that bill, because you did not do enough and there wasn't enough in your policies. What's your question? No, my question is, what organisations did you meet? Oh, so listen, I'm meeting… Clearly you didn't meet the new ones because you felt they weren't good enough or they weren't established. No, no, no. So let's see, what ones did you meet? You asked that question to the minister. But that's fair enough, the chair. That's a fair question. Yeah, I said let him answer. Right. If he answers it. Right, Minister. I'm sure as somebody who's voted against our carbon targets… Rightly so. Minister, Minister. Scapegoated farmers do not. Oh, wait. Minister, she asked you a question. Did you meet some of the farming organisations? All the time. For example, I met IFA yesterday and you'll have noticed, I'm sure you'll have paid close attention to the president's speech where he indicated that he feels that farmers can reach the 25%. What other organisations? Was it just the IFA? Where he feels that they can reach the 25% target which I negotiated. I didn't ask you what the president said. What? Can I just have a list of the organisations? Give the minister a chance to answer then. Which are he's waffling? Which I negotiated. I think you… Can I just have a list of the organisations that you met? Isn't that a clear question? Whenever you have a bit of respect, I'll… You have a bit of respect. Don't think you're going to talk me down either. Stop. Stop. Stop. Stop. That's not leadership. Minister, what organisation did you meet on this? On which in particular? On the deal with Gresham House? What hope do we have? We're only meeting there on the agricultural and rotters committee today. That's a question. I'm happy to meet all the farming organisations on this. You met the IFA and discussed it. Yesterday, yeah. But I mean, you're one of the first to make a request, and I respect the role this committee has, so that's why I'm here today to discuss it with you. Can I have the list of the organisations that you've met? I didn't ask for the IFA president's speech, I get that myself, but can I please have a list? I've met you first today because I respect the role of the directives committee and I'm happy to meet any of the farming organisations that I have to meet on this. So you haven't met anyone else apart from the IFA? I've met you first. If I didn't meet you first, you'd be giving out yards as well. I'm here today to discuss it with you. No, but I'm asking for the part of other organisations. I'm meeting them all the time, but specifically on the Gresham House deal, which has only been published in the last week to ten days or two weeks. I will meet the others, meet any of the farm organisations, discuss that as they do in all issues. That's good, so they can all come in and they can't be a new organisation or they won't get it? Okay. Okay. I thought it would have been that clear as well, Deputy Nolan. Okay. The usual rules apply in relation to organisations. Okay. Deputy Healy. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.