Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 6 Jul 2011

Vol. 737 No. 4

Foreshore (Amendment) Bill 2011 [Seanad]: Second Stage

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

This Bill is being enacted for the benefit of all foreshore matters currently dealt with by my Department and the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. It is bringing greater clarity to the operation of the existing administrative functions of the two Departments in this area. It is hoped this will facilitate the speedy determination of foreshore applications made to both Departments in a sector which is of immense economic benefit to and growth in the economy. The Bill will transfer all foreshore functions under the Foreshore Acts 1933 to 2009 to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government with the exception of: designated fishery harbour centres; activities which are wholly or primarily for the use, development or support of aquaculture; and activities which are wholly or primarily for the use, development or support of sea fishing, including the processing and sale of sea fish and manufacture of products derived from sea fish.

The Foreshore Acts 1933 to 2009 require that a lease or licence must be obtained from the relevant Minister prior to undertaking any works and placing any structures or materials in or on, or for the application of, or removal of material from, State owned foreshore. The foreshore consists of the land from the high water mark to the 12 nautical mile limit, and is 39,000 sq. km in size. In recent years, the size, scale and complexity of projects developed on the foreshore has changed considerably. At one time, foreshore consents covered primarily small piers and jetties. In recent years, however, applications received concern major State and private sector infrastructure projects, such as municipal waste water treatment plants, large commercial harbour developments, gas pipelines and large-scale offshore wind, wave and tidal energy projects.

To deal with this increasing scale and complexity, it is vital the development of these large projects accord with the development plans for the functional areas of the local authorities to which they are contiguous. Both land-based and offshore developments in the coastal zone impact each other in significant ways, despite the different environmental conditions in each zone. Balancing the impact on one zone of a development in the other zone is a major component of the impact assessment of such projects. At a higher level it is also essential to align and integrate the strategic development plans for both zones.

While it is acknowledged that some elements of the Foreshore Acts, first enacted in 1933 and often amended, require modernisation, it is important to note that, in relation to large projects, the assessment of environmental impact statements and the public participation and consultation elements are fully up to date and in accordance with all environmental directives. Regulations in respect of the Foreshore Acts have been implemented under the European Communities Acts dealing with the environmental impact assessment directive, the public access to environmental information directive, and the public participation in decision making and access to justice in environmental matters directive. Therefore, the Foreshore Acts are at this time in compliance with the Aarhus Convention.

Administration of the foreshore under the Foreshore Acts generally involves two distinct components. First, the licensing of the activity or development on the foreshore, which is a regulatory role akin to the role of a planning department and second, the vast majority of the foreshore is State owned and managed on behalf of the Minister for Finance. Property management is a key role under the Foreshore Acts. This role of property manager on behalf of the State can, in very rare circumstances, give rise to competing applications for the same area of State foreshore. The Foreshore Acts have always provided for this situation. Sections 2 and 3 of the Foreshore Act 1933 stipulate that all decisions must be made solely in the public interest. For this reason the 2009 Act made specific provision for co-ordination between Departments before any decisions or consents are made. Both Departments are deeply committed to the establishment of an efficient and effective structure designed to ensure that information on applications is managed in a co-ordinated fashion.

The cumulative effect of developments in the coastal zone has been a major challenge for national governments throughout Europe, leading the European Commission to issue recommendations in this regard. Integration of the onshore and offshore development process has proven quite difficult in all countries. The Foreshore and Dumping at Sea (Amendment) Act 2009 amended the Foreshore Acts 1933 to 2009 to the effect that foreshore responsibilities were split between the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, now the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. It provides for a complex division of responsibilities for foreshore licensing between the relevant Ministers based on the nature of the application. As a result, a significant element of the foreshore licensing function was transferred to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government while others were retained in my Department. It is accepted that the wording of the Act is difficult for business to clearly understand and follow. This outcome is not good for people wishing to do business in Ireland or to develop our green and other energy sectors.

The core functions transferred to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government in 2009 include all energy related developments, including oil, gas, wind, wave and tidal energy on the foreshore; aggregate and mineral extraction developments on the foreshore; foreshore projects in respect of port companies and Harbours Acts, other than development in fishery harbour centres, including expansion or relocation of such port or harbour or development intended for commercial trade; all other foreshore projects, other than those relating to aquaculture, designated fishery harbour centres and sea fisheries. The transfer was effected to provide proper and effective co-ordination and consistency with the land-based planning process.

Provision was made in the 2009 Act for Ministers to consult each other in respect of all foreshore applications received. This consultative approach has been working reasonably well since the Act took effect on 15 January 2010. Since the transfer of foreshore functions in 2010, in excess of 60 foreshore consents have been granted by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government and a further 96 cases are as we speak being progressed through the formal foreshore application process in the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government.

Certain sections of the Foreshore Act 1933 concern the overall management of the coastal zone rather than the licensing of developments on the foreshore. For example, section 6 of the Foreshore Act 1933 provides the means to prohibit the removal of beach material and section 11 provides for the removal of dilapidated structures. To provide for the coherent management of the coastal zone under one administration, these and other coastal management functions were transferred in full to the then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

As an island nation, the status of the sea fishing and aquaculture industry is hugely important from an economic and social perspective. It is a development to which I am committed, as Minister. The future of aquaculture and sea-fishing related projects needs to be secured given the often isolated locations of the coastal communities which these industries support. The grant of a foreshore licence for an aquaculture project is currently an outcome of the detailed consideration of the aquaculture licence application process. In certain circumstances an Environmental Impact Statement must accompany the aquaculture licence application. I assure the House that the licensing of aquaculture sites, including foreshore licensing for such sites, remains with my Department. This is particularly important given my Department's role in food production. It is also worth noting, that the Department is building up a great deal of expertise around aquaculture and its potential. It makes sense to keep all the elements of the application process for an aquaculture licence within the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food be it in respect of foreshore or licensing of the project.

I have decided to introduce this short Bill for various reasons, including the increasing number of applications being made year on year for foreshore consents to each Department; the need to facilitate a streamlined and clearly defined decision making process to ensure the ongoing and sustainable development of foreshore for the benefit of the State and future generations; the ongoing challenge for Government to examine existing procedures and practices with a view to eliminating red tape and unnecessary bureaucracy or confusion; the provision, where possible, of clearer and more easily understandable legislation for those who have to use it, of which there are many people; and developing the faster consent system we all want to maximise the employment potential of the foreshore in a sustainable and green manner. As part of this, we must encourage development within the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government of streamlining between the foreshore and planning application processes. Many interests, when applying for a development that involves foreshore, also need to apply for planning permission. It makes sense for one Department to deal with both applications.

It is important that any perceived obstacles to achieving what I have outlined are removed. To achieve these objectives I am introducing this legislation today, before the summer recess, to ensure that a clearer legislative framework will be in place as soon as possible. This Bill will bring greater clarity to the management of foreshore matters, which is very much in line with the thrust of the programme for Government. It is hoped it will help stimulate the sector and the economy and provide much needed employment in many rural areas of the country that do not have too many options.

I will now deal in greater detail with the sections of the Bill. Section 1 provides for the transfer of all foreshore functions under the Foreshore Acts 1933 to 2009 from the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. The only exceptions are functions relating to designated fishery harbour centres; functions in respect of activities which are wholly or primarily for the use, development or support of aquaculture and functions in respect of activities which are wholly or primarily for the use, development or support of sea-fishing, including the processing and sale of sea-fish and manufacture of products derived of sea-fish, all of which remain with the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

Section 2 provides for the amendment of the Foreshore Act 1933 by substituting a new section 1B for existing section 1B which was inserted by the 2009 Act. The new section defines the functions to be carried out by the relevant Ministers. Section 3 provides for the preservation of certain continuing contracts and the adaptation of certain references to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in certain documents in relation to the transfer of foreshore functions to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government.

Section 4 provides for the saving and amendment of certain Statutory Instruments made by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in relation to functions to be taken over by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. Section 5 provides for the transfer of certain property and liabilities of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government which are connected with the functions being transferred.

Section 6 deals with the effect of the transfer of foreshore functions of certain acts performed and documents which relate to the matters so transferred. Section 7 provides for the substitution or addition of the name of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to any pending legal proceedings to enable those proceedings to continue. Section 8 provides for completion by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, in relation to functions transferred, of matters commenced by or under the authority of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

Section 9 provides that any foreshore function exercised in whole or in part by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government since 15 January 2010, including any consultation and other requirements under the Foreshore Acts 1933 to 2009, are deemed to have been exercised as if that Minister was the appropriate Minister for the purposes of the Acts. In addition, anything commenced but not completed may be carried on or completed by that Minister after the enactment of the Bill. Section 10 provides for the short title of the Bill when enacted and a collective citation for the Acts as amended.

In summary, therefore, this is short but important amending legislation to clarify and copperfasten the transfer of specific foreshore functions from my Department to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. I am introducing it now for the approval of the House to bring absolute clarity to the administration of foreshore functions within the two Departments and to facilitate the ongoing work of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government in integrating the foreshore consent process for major infrastructure projects with the strategic consent process operated by An Bord Pleanála, as well as the wider planning consent process in the case of non-strategic projects. In other words the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government wants to integrate the planning process with the foreshore process for obvious reasons as I mentioned already. The Bill will assist in the further development of a strategic focus on aquaculture licensing by my Department in the months ahead. We wish to complete this now in advance of the very busy autumn schedule for my Department and the Oireachtas.

Deputy John Browne

I wish to share time with Deputy Moynihan.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy John Browne

I welcome the Bill and thank the Minister for introducing it. From this side of the House we will support the Minister in getting it passed as quickly as possible. Having spent some time in that Department particularly when the original Bill was introduced to divide the functions between the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, I am well aware of the difficulties in the area of foreshore licensing, and the aquaculture and fishing industry. I wish the Minister well in his efforts to clear the backlog of licence applications. When I was at the Department I made several attempts to deal with the backlog of licence applications and always found it very difficult. This was partly because of a lack of resources, particularly inadequate staff numbers, but also because of all the hoops — approximately 16 or 17 — through which an applicant was required to go before getting an aquaculture licence. I will return to that matter shortly.

The Bill gives us an opportunity to put on the record of the House the importance of the fishing industry to coastal communities. It is not just aquaculture, but all areas of the fishing industry. We have the six major harbours, including Kilmore Quay in my county. Earlier in the Seanad, Senators paid tribute to the Minister's late father. When he was Minister for the Marine he played a very important role in making money available for the development of Kilmore fishery harbour. Several years ago I attended a meeting in Kilmore Quay with the Minister's late father and the fishery people there appreciated his efforts at that time. I say this because Kilmore Quay is now seeking more money to develop the harbour further. Those fishermen are very important to the fishing industry and when the Minister is dishing out the funds — if he has any funds available — I hope he will not forget Kilmore Quay, Ballyhack and Duncannon. I invite the Minister to come and meet the fishermen in those areas, which is a very important part of the Wexford coastline. We also have the Bannow Bay mussels, which is a very important industry and I am sure the Minister will visit that area in coming months when he gets the opportunity.

I have visited most of the aquaculture centres in the west of Ireland. Aquaculture is a very important industry employing approximately 2,000 people with opportunities to expand it further. During my time in the Department, approximately 1,000 tonnes or 1,100 tonnes of fish were produced through aquaculture. Deputy Moynihan and I recently travelled to Brussels to meet some of the Commission's fishery people. They pointed out the opportunities that exist in the aquaculture industry. Scotland has developed greatly and Norway is the leader in the field. We should be in a position to expand and develop. However, the licensing system is a problem. There was a large number of new and renewal licence applications in the Department when I was there and I am sure it is still the same. What additional staff will the Minister make available to deal with the licence renewal applications and new applications? When responding in the Seanad, the Minister said he was anxious to consider pushing the farms further out to sea.

Deputy Simon Coveney

I was not referring to the existing ones.

Deputy John Browne

No, it will only apply to the new ones. I would like him to clarify his views on new applications, which have been very contentious, particularly in bays and harbours also used by the general public. There has been a kind of "them and us" situation and we need to have some kind of consensus in the aquaculture industry. I am sure Mr. Richie Flynn has met the Minister since he came into office — he came a number of times when I was there. He is very dedicated to the aquaculture industry as are all the aquaculture people along the coastline. It is important that the communities would work together and reach consensus. We had the very successful CLAMS project where people in the community and the producers met and agreed on the way forward which is the appropriate way to proceed.

When we went into Government with the Green Party, I strongly objected to the split of responsibility between the Departments. I felt it would cause problems with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government dealing with certain sectors and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food dealing with other sectors. It was only divided because of the Green Party input at the time, and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government demanded to have control of certain sections. That may be one of the reasons we now have such a backlog.

If there is an application for a foreshore licence and a planning application for the same project, there should be co-operation in that area. I always felt that by the time the planning application was approved the foreshore licence application should also be approved. However, in one case in St. Helen's Bay in my county the planning permission had been granted 18 months earlier and the foreshore licence was held up, not in the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, but in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. As a result the development did not proceed when it should have and now I doubt if it will ever proceed given the economic situation of the country. There should be contact between the planning application process and the foreshore licence application. There is also involvement from the EPA and other NGOs, and various hoops through which an applicant must rightly go to protect our foreshore and coastline.

During the boom era of development some built illegally on the foreshore and others took short cuts, and some bad decisions may have been made. I hope this legislation will clarify once and for all what is in the remit of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and what is in the remit of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. There will be times when there will be an overlap and the Departments will have to consult each other, which is the way it should be.

At the end of the day, the role of the Minister, Deputy Coveney, and the role of those from maritime communities is to ensure the development of both sides of the fishing industry, namely, conventional fishing, as I would call it, and the aquaculture industry. If we can work hand in hand on those two areas, we can develop the fishing industry in a planned way that will create extra jobs. In the present climate, the farming and fishing industries are probably the two areas where there is huge potential for food development. As the Commissioner's officials in Brussels pointed out to us, 65% to 70% of fish must be imported into the EU so there are obviously tremendous opportunities for adding value to products and developing products. I hope this legislation will make life easier for the people.

To come back to my original point, the Minister must put extra staff and financial resources into the Department to ensure the backlog is cleared as quickly as possible. We in Fianna Fáil will facilitate the passing of the Bill as quickly as possible today. The Bill will make the Minister's life easier in the Department and, I hope we will see the backlog cleared as quickly as possible.

Deputy Michael Moynihan

I, like my colleague, welcome the Bill and do not intend to delay it going through the House. I wish to raise a number of points. We cannot under-estimate the potential of aquaculture and the amount of work done in that area. Some of the issues raised with us concern delays in processing foreshore licences in the Department. If this Bill goes any way towards speeding up that process, we must welcome it and ensure its passage.

Deputy Browne, referring to his time in the Department, noted that this area was moved incorrectly to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and is now back in its rightful place in the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Again this week, as we were last week, we are tidying up issues that were left over from that process. It is important that at every hand's turn we acknowledge the work done on foreshore licences.

An issue I want to highlight in this regard is the harvesting of offshore wind and wave energy, which was raised in the Seanad earlier today. As we go forward, we must consider innovative ways of getting cheap energy into this country as well as into the world economy. Ireland has huge potential in offshore wind and wave energy. As procedures develop over time and applications are made, we must ensure the Departments which will grant and scrutinise these licences have their systems streamlined so that, if somebody has a huge commitment to one of these projects and is willing to put resources behind it, it is not delayed by bureaucracy. Over time, we have seen cases where onshore wind energy has been delayed due to bureaucratic nightmares and planning issues that have stifled badly needed development which would bring energy on to the national grid. It is important to remove any unnecessary bureaucracy.

During the last Dáil, one of the committees investigated the level of bureaucracy that was stifling not just this but other projects and considered the ways we could reduce bureaucracy within Departments and systems. If the Bill goes any way towards removing and streamlining any amount of bureaucratic legislation, and brings all of this process into one Department, it will be an important step. We have no problem with the Bill as bringing all the legislation under the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will ensure all of these issues are dealt with in one location. For too long, we have had a fragmented structure. I could point to other cases where issues fall under the remit of three or four Departments. For example, at an earlier stage, child care came under the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the Department of Education and Science and the Department of Health and Children, but it has now been streamlined. This is the direction we are taking, which I welcome.

To turn to the detail of the Bill, section 5 provides for the transfer of certain property and liabilities of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. This is the fundamental issue, in that the Bill is moving responsibilities back to where they rightfully belong.

If we consider how Government adapts to specific issues in the community, we may need to examine the work of Departments overall and the way they mirror what is happening in a particular industry, whether in regard to education or any other issue. For example, the nitrates directive wrongly comes under the remit of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. Any issue related to agriculture or the fishing industries should be streamlined and put under the Department that has the title in regard to dealing with that issue, which would streamline the position for those who go out every day to work and provide employment and investment in those sectors. I welcome the Bill and hope it passes all Stages and is enacted for the betterment of the society we represent.

Deputy Michael Colreavy

Officials from both Departments have informed us that the Bill is simply a housekeeping issue, clarifying issues in the current legislation. I always welcome clarity and note that we need to ensure that legislation as laid down is clear and comprehensive. Any legislation that claims to clarify previous legislation would always be welcomed, particularly in a situation where there had previously been some confusion. This is an area that needs to be managed in as efficient a way as possible because it is of huge importance to the State.

The foreshore in Ireland covers 39,000 sq. km. Within this area, there are many possibilities for different sorts of activities, many of which would be of tremendous potential to all. In Sinn Féin, we want to protect and promote all of our natural resources so we understand the need for legislation in this area. We appreciate the need for licensing and for leasing in terms of facilitating wind and wave power. We look forward to a greater promotion of this type of energy because it is time we all put our backs to the wheel and got behind the promotion of our own natural resources. These are the future, and we all need to understand this. The State as owner of the foreshore must make arrangements to ensure that this resource is utilised. However, it must be utilised in a responsible and controlled manner.

Our fishing industry certainly has tremendous potential, although we would argue that it is not being fully exploited. The industry will thrive if it is given sufficient support and organised in an efficient and business like manner; if not, it will fall away and become defunct. If the west, in particular, is to become more prosperous, the industry needs to be reinvigorated and made ready for business. The review of the Common Fisheries Policy does not fully support its development. This needs to change in order that the industry and ancillary activities can achieve their full income and employment generating potential.

If the Bill provides for greater protection and promotion of the foreshore, I welcome it. However, I ask the Minister to clarify certain issues that arise. Will the Bill finally provide an answer for those waiting for licences and leases? In excess of 60 foreshore consents were granted in 2010 and a further 96 are being processed. These figures do not give me confidence in the efficiency of the processing mechanism. How will it be ensured licences will be granted in a fair and transparent manner? We do not want to see a repeat of the process that led to the granting of the Corrib licence, in which regard information was difficult to come by.

I hope the division of duties between the Departments of the Environment, Community and Local Government and Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will be as clear as the Minister and his officials have claimed. The last thing we want is for people who are trying to set up businesses to be sent from Billy to Jack and the decisions to fall somewhere between the two Departments. As public representatives, we are all familiar with the phenomenon of one Department kicking the ball to another. I seek the Minister's assurance that there will be clarity from the point of view of the customer who deals with the organs of government.

There is a considerable number of small fishermen around the coast. We do not want conflict between large industry and local fishermen. I acknowledge the importance of attracting large companies, but they should not be the winners because small fishermen are the losers. Good legislation which is implemented fairly would ensure everyone was a winner, whether large industry, a medium-sized company or a small fisherman. The Government has promised real change and we expect it to protect small as much as larger interests. We will be holding it to account in this regard.

The transfer of functions from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government should not create a threat to the use of lobster pots or nets. We seek assurances that the amendment clarifies responsibilities and does exactly what it says on the tin because otherwise it will benefit no one. Will it impact on decisions on consents, for example? I welcome the Minister's assurance that responsibility for the licensing of aquaculture sites, including foreshore licences, will remain with his Department. When applications for leases and rentals are being processed, the need to generate business in the areas concerned must be taken into account. There is no greater indictment of the Government or the industry than the availability of vacant sites. Weed killer costs money but industry brings income. It is heartbreaking to see vacant sites which could be the base for thriving businesses. The State owns the foreshore and, naturally, expects a return from it. We welcome a return from all foreshore activities, but we need to ensure the governance of licences and leases will allow for transparency and fairness in order that the fishing industry will be treated with the respect it deserves and the foreshore will be protected and promoted. All of us would benefit from such a policy.

I ask the Minister to clarify, if possible, whether those who will monitor adherence to the revised legislation will have a cross-departmental mandate. We do not need and cannot afford an army of monitors if each of them brings only the perspective of his or her respective Department. Subject to clarification on the issues I have raised, Sinn Féin will be supporting the Bill on Second Stage.

An Ceann Comhairle

I call Deputy Tom Fleming who is sharing time with Deputy Mattie McGrath.

Deputy Tom Fleming

I welcome the amending legislation. It is more relevant for the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to be in charge of the physical infrastructure around the coast and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to play a role in developing sea fishing, aquaculture and seafood products.

The acquisition of foreshore licences for projects around the coast has been the responsibility of various Departments, with the result that the process has been lengthy and tedious for organisations and individuals applying for licences. For example, a major development was proposed in County Kerry by Shannon LNG which wanted to locate its activities on the Tarbert land bank. The land bank was purchased approximately 30 years ago for industrial development purposes, but the prospects for attracting viable industry to the area were bleak until Shannon LNG made its proposal. From the date of application for a foreshore licence, it took two and three quarter years for the licence to be issued by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The irony is that there were no objections to the application. It is ridiculous to treat a long awaited viable proposition in this manner. For instance, the planning process through Kerry County Council and An Bord Pleanála took approximately six months, which puts the whole thing into perspective. The company would probably never have located in Kerry, or even in Ireland, if they envisaged that these impediments involving the foreshore licence would occur. Fortunately, the company persisted and against all the odds and obstacles, 400 people are to be employed over the next few years during construction, reaching up to 600 at its peak. This is a typical example of the lack of joined up thinking, where An Bord Pleanála and the local authority were expediting matters, while the Department was falling down and causing major obstacles.

In the first phase, an investment of €600 million will be made in the terminal, while the second project will see an investment of €400 million, and this €1 billion investment is much needed in the south west. It is a major coup for Kerry and Ireland, but due to the unnecessary impediments that were put in place and the bureaucracy involved, it could easily have been lost to the UK or some other EU country. We are very fortunate that it is proceeding.

The sensible thing is to have foreshore licence legislation amalgamated under the planning Acts, which would allow for a more straightforward and quicker procedure. I am aware of difficulties for Kerry County Council in acquiring foreshore licences, and the council had to endure long hold ups under the previous Administration. In many cases, some of the emergency work to be carried out by the council would not be of any great significance, and I am sure this applies to all other county councils along the coasts of our country. In the case of emergency works of a small nature that would be below the high water mark, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government should display flexibility on this in the future, allow county councils to carry them out and exempt such works from any planning requirements. This process would be much closer to the county councils if responsibility for these issues was moved to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. There is a need for co-operation and close links between the Department and county councils.

Our new Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has a great interest in his portfolio. As we are talking about his responsibilities regarding aquaculture and sea fishing, I do not have to tell him the huge potential out there. At county council level along the coast, there is probably a need to set up the fisheries committees that were present before. They had a good function to work closely with the Department and I am sure the Minister will take note of that. There is also potential for the development of our food products on the coastline, as well as our fishing potential.

There is a number of designated harbours around the country, such as Dingle, Killybegs and Castletownbere, which are still under our portfolio. There is an ongoing matter regarding the ice plant in Dingle. There was a recent announcement that it will be retained for the short term and funded by Bord Iascaigh Mhara. The Minister should seriously consider taking this under his Department, provide the necessary funding and work with the local harbour board to ensure the future of a very necessary plant in Dingle.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

I am delighted to be able to contribute. I do not come from a marine county, although I am not too far away from one. I will support the Bill, like most members of the Technical Group. I welcome the appointment of Deputy Coveney as Minister in this area. I compliment his late father on the positive actions he took in the past in this area. I know it is an area that is close to his heart. I note he has a bit of a tan. I hope he got some of it last Sunday at our spectacular show in Clonmel. I am sorry I was not able to meet him. He had gone when I arrived, but he is welcome in Tipperary anytime.

Deputy Simon Coveney

Thanks.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

Deputy Browne might want him in Wexford, but he can always stop off in Clonmel on the way.

He has a good feel for the industry. Fishing, agriculture and licensing should be closely linked. The Foreshore Act 1933 requires that a licence must be obtained from the State in advance of any works on State owned foreshore. It applies to jetties, slipways, marinas, fish farms, coastal wind and wave projects and to larger projects such as the Corrib gas development and the Ringsend incinerator. We can understand the reasons this is needed.

As of February 2011, there were 521 aquaculture licence applications awaiting determination, consisting of 271 applications for first-time licences and 250 renewal applications. That is a very positive situation, but it is unacceptable to have that many stacked up. The backlog for new licences and renewal applications arose from a number of things, but most areas for which the licences are being sought have been designated as special areas of conservation under the EU habitats directive, or special protection areas under the EU birds directive. We are all for preservation and conservation, and commend the previous Ministers of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, Seán Connick, and Deputy Browne, and the honest efforts they made to deal with issues. I know from talking to them that it is a very hard area to crack.

However bad that was, it was made 1,000 times worse by the attempts of the former Minister, John Gormley, to rein it in under his Department and his ideas. I had major issues with the efforts made by the Green Party to implement policy and control different policies from different Departments. We had a similar problem with the nitrates directive. I know he did not bring in that directive, but he was adamant when enforcing them. It was the same regarding the time limits on spreading slurry. A farmer in Monaghan might not be allowed to spread his fertilizer, while a farmer in Fermanagh would be allowed to do so, even though there might be only an open drain dividing the two farms. These were nonsensical ideas. We were meeting with the former Minister and begging him to change his mind. Those issues should be related to the climate, rather than to calendar months, due to the kind of weather we have.

I would like to hear the Minister clarify his views on the new licence holders and what kind of stimulus he has in mind. There are jobs in this area waiting to go. It is wonderful that we have businesspeople, whether they are sole traders or co-operative groups, who are willing, ready and able to put a licence application together. They do not do this for fun. It is right that there are planning applications, but we need to cut out the bureaucracy. The fact that two Departments were involved the last time has left us a very bad legacy. I compliment the Government for putting it all back under one Department. It is a very wise move. We should support self-employed persons, who are mainly sole traders, and encourage them rather than try to frustrate them. There are instances of bad planning and we cannot have this. However, we need to cut out the bureaucracy. The planning process normally takes three months, although it could take up to 12 months. Surely if an application for a foreshore licence is made at the same time as a planning application, they should run in tandem. The Environmental Protection Agency is rightly involved, as are the NGOs. However, we may have lost investments as a result of too much bureaucracy.

The previous speaker, Deputy Colreavy, said that it cost a great deal to supply weed killer and to keep villages and towns tidy, but some of them are desolate. People who are interested in investing and have put plans together and secured funding should be facilitated. However, I do not know if they can wait and hold on to that funding. If one gets approval for funding from a bank for investment, one would want to spend it the following day because the next day and it might be cancelled, the manager might have been moved or somebody else could decide the investment is not viable.

We need to support these fishermen as there are many jobs involved. We are told by our colleagues who travel to Brussels to meet the Commission that imports into the EU total 50%. We know how badly the fishing industry fared from the deals during the years. It is the poor relation, although it has huge potential. Every job created is needed. The employment may be seasonal but it will be good employment and will result in spin off industry.

We must cut out the bureaucracy and have joined up thinking between the local authorities and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. If we must have consultation with the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, which is over the local authorities anyway, it must be logical. It must not be on silly issues and to satisfy the whim of some party of idealists. The Green Party in government was idealistic. It was fine in opposition but it was dangerous in government because it raised too many issues which frustrated the enthusiasm of business people in many areas.

There are 500 applications for licences stacked up in the system and I am surprised the European Union and the IMF are not looking at these areas and seeing the inefficiencies. I do not want to bash public servants, civil servants and local authorities but it is not acceptable in a modern economy, especially at a time like this, to have such backlogs and impediments put in the way of business people. I wish the Minister well.

Deputy Joe McHugh

I welcome the legislation and commend the Minister for being proactive in this area. In his first term in office, he has articulated his passion to do something to realise the potential in aquaculture and to tackle the aquaculture licensing challenges, on which I congratulate him.

This legislation will increase the productive capacity if the Department focuses on food. Shellfish and finfish from Malin Head to Carlingford Lough will be the focus of Department staff in Clonakilty. I am sure this line in the sand will result in a positive outcome in terms of tackling head on and formalising the process.

The Minister has stated on numerous occasions since taking office that our biggest challenge is volume, including the marine harvest from my constituency heading to elsewhere in Europe. We do not have enough salmon for the market. The same applies to shellfish, including oysters and scallops. There is considerable demand but we are not producing the volume. This is where the challenge lies.

From a technical point of view, a positive development is needed in the Department. A cultural shift is needed to address what we can do rather than what people in the industry cannot do. We differ from the United States in that any time there is a change of government there, there is a complete change at an administrative level. That does not happen here. Many of my constituents allude to this point not only in respect of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food but in respect of other Departments. If the same people remain in the Department, is there a shift in the way they do things?

I understand leadership comes from the Cabinet and the Minister. I believe the Minister will follow up on his conviction that things will be done differently. That will require a complete cultural shift in the way people in the Department think. That must happen because there has been a negative relationship between people in the Department and those in the industry. I am confident that there are good people in the Department with years of experience. It is up to the Legislature to show leadership, and the Department will not be found wanting.

There must be a new template for licence renewal. There are questions as to why licence renewal is not progressing in SAC areas. The Aquaculture Licences Appeals Board should be up and running for new applications. That could be done straightaway. It is important that licence renewal does not go through ALAB and that the Department takes a hands-on approach in regard to renewal. New applications will have to go through ALAB but it is important the Department deals with renewal directly.

I spoke to a young man in the oyster business today. He works in probably one of the most isolated parts of Europe, never mind in Ireland, Trawbreaga Bay. He employes two people and seeks to expand his oyster business. In the next four to five years, he seeks to increase the number of employees from two to 12. That is a massive increase in capacity. He is positive he will do that but he needs the break in terms of volume. He has markets in France telephoning him daily looking for oysters but he cannot supply them even though he has potential sites for which he cannot get licences and these are in non-SAC areas.

These are the real challenges. We say the major task of government is to create jobs. If someone in a rural isolated place like Trawbreaga Bay in north Inishowen can increase employment from two to 12 employees, what could we do from Malin Head to Carlingford Lough? I am glad the Minister appreciates the potential because he knows the marine and the challenges in the coastal zone.

Those in my constituency will not even enter the Asian market or market in China because they know they cannot provide the volume. Norway produces almost 1 million tonnes of salmon per annum while we produce 12,000 tonnes. These are the areas of potential which we are not addressing and they must be looked at closely in the future.

Bureaucracy has driven everybody mad and not only those in the marine and agriculture industries. Bureaucracy went completely crazy in this country in the past ten to 15 years. There has been too much Government and State involvement, with too many pen pushers deciding the fate of an industry. That is the cultural challenge we have and the creation of a leaner Government will bring its own challenges. Government became too fat and heavy and the industry relationship was tarnished, especially in the marine industry involving aquaculture and sea fisheries.

There was too much of an intrinsic State link in the introduction of layers of procedure and bureaucracy. The lame duck excuse used in the past was that it was a European problem and the European Union was to blame. I know the Minister will face the challenge head on, as we must take responsibility for our own actions in sea fisheries and aquaculture. We have only to consider the statistics. In Irish waters alone since 1973, we have lost up to €500 billion in revenue from fisheries. We have given up much in this country. The Italians and French have not given up their natural resources, such as their wine-producing regions.

As we gave up so much, we must embrace the worldwide demand, especially in Far East countries such as China and India, as their middle income classes demand more fish. There is such potential and we must face it head on. We must take responsibility and control of our own actions and I know the Minister will do this. He has already initiated a new vision within the Department.

It is easy to be critical of the past, although the public is more interested in the future. A former Minister of State, Deputy John Browne, is in the Dáil, and I acknowledge the challenging portfolio he had. He took a personal involvement in it and he should be commended on the positive action he brought about. We are now at a juncture where we want to sell our food, and not just as a raw material. We are sending oysters to France which are being processed and labelled as French. The French are commenting on the great quality of oysters they have in France but we should not forget those oysters come from Ireland.

Deputy Brian Stanley

I begin by signalling the support of Sinn Féin for the amending legislation, as anything that clarifies legislation is always welcome. I am glad the Bill sets out exactly what will stay with the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and what will be transferred to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government.

This area must be managed as efficiently as possible as it is very important to the State and its citizens. The foreshore in Ireland covers a vast area and is very significant. We in Sinn Féin want to protect and promote all our natural resources and we understand the need for legislation in the area. I hope the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government will give the foreshore the same importance accorded to it by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. I look forward to the exploitation of wind and wave power in the near future and look forward to a greater promotion of this type of energy production. They are the future and we must realise this.

The State owns the foreshore and the resource must be utilised in order that the people can gain from it. We must ensure the fishing industry is given enough support to thrive rather than left to fall away and become defunct. There has been a significant reduction in the fishing industry since we joined the European Union, or the Common Market as it was called. If we are to help this sector become more prosperous, we must reinvigorate our fishing industry and make it ready for business.

The current common fisheries review group prevents the development of the fishing sector and this must change. If the Bill allows for greater protection and promotion of our foreshore, we should welcome it. I am a little sceptical of the Bill, however, and we must be assured that the granting of licences and leases will be done with as much transparency as possible. There can no longer be a question mark over the manner in which some are granted because that is unacceptable.

I hope that dividing the duties is as clear as the officials have indicated. We do not want a position where people will be passed from one Department to another or Departments deal with issues on a geographical basis, as opposed to the activities taking place. Under the new Government, which promised real change in its election manifesto, we expect that smaller interests will be protected as much as the larger examples. We assume the Government will stand by these promises and we will hold the Government to account in this respect.

We do not want a scenario where local fishermen cannot go about their daily work because the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government interferes with their rights. We do not want a position where because responsibility has been transferred from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, there will be a real threat to the use of lobster pots or use of certain nets.

The previous speaker from the Government benches noted there is significant potential in the fishing industry and mentioned the lobster sector. In raising the point that there are untapped markets, he complained about EU interference. I remind those on the Government benches that during their parties' terms in Government, not much was done to stop EU interference. It is good to be part of Europe but we should be mindful that the big foot of the European Union must not stamp so heavily that it will squeeze the economic life from the country.

We must be assured this amending legislation can clarify responsibility and does exactly as promised. Otherwise it will be of no use to us. We welcome the amending legislation nonetheless.

Deputy Andrew Doyle

I welcome the speedy introduction of this Bill by the Minister, which demonstrates a serious commitment on his behalf to ensuring the parts of the foreshore that are correctly the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will remain at that Department. It will bring clarity to the functions which are not the responsibility of that Department.

There are two elements to the Bill and because it has been introduced by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, it is natural that we have tended to focus on the agriculture and aquaculture potential. We should also remember that the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government is probably a far more appropriate home for many of the other functions for the area, especially those relating to natural resources and energy.

One argument has been that the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources should bear some responsibility and it was argued earlier that many applications for non-agricultural activities, such as wind farms, would come forward. I do not have the same parochial interest in the Bill as some of the commentators but we do have potential for further wind farm development on the Arklow Banks. There is also the possibility of locating an additional interconnector at my constituency, if and when the time arises for it.

The Ceann Comhairle was Chairman of a committee in the previous Dáil dealing with energy security and climate change, and he led the initiative to develop a foreshore licence Bill that would transfer all the functions for foreshore licensing to the Department dealing with the environment. It was presented to the former Minister in the Department who showed little regard for it and commenced drafting another foreshore licensing Bill. The idea behind it was that a framework plan would be prepared for the zoning of the foreshore rather than the marine.

It was intended that the plan would identify the areas most suitable for wind farm and wave energy developments and the landing of the power onshore. When that process was completed, the intention was that any application would be seen as relating to critical infrastructure and forwarded straight to An Bord Pleanála. Therefore, it is appropriate that responsibility for these foreshore functions is being transferred to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government which is responsible for An Bord Pleanála. There is huge potential. The greatest natural resource is available to us, onshore and offshore, for the supply of energy. I should acknowledge that the Minister was a member of the committee also. There is huge potential to generate far more energy than we will ever need. If interconnection proceeds, we will have the ability to offer a significant amount of wind and wave energy to the European grid.

I would like to speak about the functions being retained by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food under the Bill. As others said — it goes without saying — we have huge potential in the aquaculture sector. Every health nutritionist says we should be eating more fish because it is good for us. As a nation, we do not eat enough of it. The reality is that if everybody on the planet ate the appropriate amount of fish from natural fish resources, there would be no fish left in the sea. We would actually plunder the resource. The only alternative is to develop a fish farming or aquaculture industry. As mentioned, when Norway was in a state of economic depression, it decided to develop its aquaculture industry which now accounts for a significant part of its GDP, notwithstanding the fact that the country has extensive oil resources. We should examine the Norwegian model which operates in an environmentally friendly and sustainable manner and adds value to all of its products.

Deputy McHugh mentioned that Irish oysters were sometimes labelled as French. Perhaps they are labelled as coming from Mediterranean areas of France, even though they come from the North Atlantic. This is replicated all over the place. The Deputy also spoke about one of the biggest problems we were facing in trying to market and process our fish products. Our scale of production is not big enough to allow us to offer Ireland to major suppliers as an attractive source of such products. I note that the Minister was in Clonakilty on Monday. Someone had managed to bring a significant number of French and Irish fisheries organisations together. They were in the same place at the same time and the building is still standing. It was an achievement to recognise that common good could result from landing more fish from off the Irish coast in Irish harbours for processing. The same can be said in the case of aquaculture.

A good job was done when the SACs were drawn up. Significant territories in harbours and inlets were designated as SACs. When one completes an SAC assessment before proceeding with an application for an aquaculture or fish farming licence, the problem is that one is not sure what the authorities were trying to conserve in the special areas designated for conservation purposes. This issue has to be addressed. The figures speak for themselves. Some 271 new applications are awaiting approval. I have been told no significant inroads in that regard will be made until 2014, at the earliest. I hope that, as a result of this Bill, the officials in the Minister's Department who specialise in this area will be able to concentrate on expediting these applications which need to be addressed urgently. There is huge potential to create jobs and add value which will help people in remote coastal areas in which there are few employment options other than moving away or emigrating. These scattered communities can survive if they receive support and industries of this nature are developed.

I do not doubt the commitment of the Minister to the marine and fisheries sector and wish him well in his endeavours. Other speakers have mentioned that bureaucracy has been a deterrent. It will continue to be, unless those Ministers and departmental officials in charge are willing to streamline the process. That has to be done because bureaucracy is a nightmare for those who do not have a steely determination to proceed with ventures in which they believe. It is clear when one looks at the length of the waiting list to have one's licence application expedited that solid determination is needed to bring such projects to fruition. A hands-on, proactive approach is needed. The officials in the Department who have the power to do this must realise that such industries need to be promoted. At the end of the day, their salaries are paid from the proceeds from these industries. That is the relationship we have to build and the understanding we have to create.

I commend the Bill which has been welcomed by Deputies on all sides of the House. I find that the simplest and most effective legislation is usually welcomed. I congratulate and commend the Minister for the introduction of this legislation. The fact that it will be enacted before the summer break is a statement of intent on his behalf. I commend the Bill to the House.

Deputy Thomas Pringle

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the Foreshore (Amendment) Bill 2011. Like other Deputies, I welcome the Bill, the intention of which is to bring clarity to the overall position on foreshore licence applications. It is vitally important that it map clearly the responsibilities and roles of the Departments of the Environment, Community and Local Government and Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in adjudicating on such applications, including those from local authorities. As other Deputies said, difficulties are being caused by the backlog. A large number of foreshore licence applications, particularly those relating to aquaculture developments, are awaiting adjudication.

As the Minister said a couple of weeks ago, when Bord Bia brought representatives of 30 companies to a seafood show in Brussels, the companies' order books were filled on the first day of the event. This country's industry is unable to deliver enough produce and secure enough raw material to fill greater numbers of orders. Coastal areas, particularly in the north west and along the west coast, have huge potential in the fisheries sector. If the logjam can be broken and more licences brought on stream, such businesses can be developed. I know of a couple of companies in south-west Donegal which would be in a position to employ people immediately — to create between 25 and 30 jobs — if licence applications could be moved forward. This is an example of the huge potential that can be developed, particularly in rural Ireland. It is vitally important that we ensure people can have a sustainable future. As an island nation, we should be in a position to create jobs by adding value to this natural product and promoting it to the best of our ability.

After the Bill sets out clear lines of responsibility, we need to see progress in developing appropriate assessments of aquaculture developments in order that when applications for licences are made, the applicants will be able to receive clear instructions from the Department as to the requirements to be met in terms of the overall area and the particular SAC in which they might be looking to carry out a development. By doing this, we can open up the industry for significant development and create employment, which is vitally important. I hope the Minister will make these moves after the Bill has been enacted. I imagine there are other Departments which need to work together with him. I hope he will work to ensure this happens in order that appropriate assessments can be made and the logjam removed to ensure movement. It is difficult enough in the current climate to create jobs. We see the attempts being made in the jobs initiative, but here are initiatives that are ready to go. The Government has been slow within various Departments to map out the route to be taken by the promoters of developments. We need to get moving to ensure applicants for licences will be able to move forward as quickly as possible to allow development to take place. From looking at the background to the Bill, it is an attempt to break what might be one of the stumbling blocks in order that it will be clear within a Department whose responsibility it is to move applications forward. That stumbling block can be removed. If the appropriate assessments are made, we will see movement and a real jobs initiative in areas of the country crying out and badly in need of such an initiative. I fully support the Bill.

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney)

I thank everybody for his or her support. I acknowledge that this is not the ideal way to steer legislation through the House which normally would take more time. There would be a time period between the different Stages to allow Members to bring forward amendments and make suggestions for change, although this is amending legislation that is short and sharp and it is unlikely amendments would have been tabled. That is why we were anxious to get it through the House today in order that we would have it finished before the summer and I could get on and do my job with reference to some of the things Members have asked me to do.

Everyone raised the issue of aquaculture development. There are a number of points that need to be understood. The licensing and foreshore processes are different. The reason we have not seen the granting of an aquaculture licence in two years is Ireland was taken to court by the European Commission for not having in place appropriate licensing mechanisms. Unless we put in place a system that will satisfy the Commission, it will start to impose fines and, potentially, shut down the aquaculture industry. We are in a vulnerable position and the Commission is literally holding a stick over our head in asking us to put in place a gold-plated system for accepting applications for aquaculture licences.

Ireland has a series of what are called Natura areas, special areas of conservation. Practically every harbour and port in the country, with a few exceptions — Bantry Bay being an obvious one — is now an SAC. Within SACs there is a process that has to be gone through in either renewing a licence or applying for a new one. To start with, an environmental impact assessment must be made in the bay before there is even consideration of the invitation of applications for licences. The National Parks and Wildlife Service is involved with my Department.

For what it is worth, I am as frustrated as anybody else in the House. Deputy Browne experienced this when he was in the Department. It is not due to a lack of urgency among staff in the Department who want to make it happen. We are trying to streamline a system to allow us to provide for environmental assessments of harbours and bays as quickly as possible. We will have a number done and dusted by the end of the year and aquaculture licence applications under consideration, some of which I hope will be granted. There is no one who wants to progress this issue more than me, but there is a process that we must follow. If we do not, unfortunately, the Commission which has already won a court case on the issue will come down on us like a ton of bricks.

The frustration stems from the fact that what we are expected and being asked to do is not replicated in other European countries. That is why last year Ireland produced only 12,000 tonnes of farmed salmon, whereas Scotland, one of our closest neighbours, produced 150,000 tonnes. That is why processors in Ireland have to spend hundreds of thousands of euro on importing farmed salmon each week from Scotland in order to be able to process the amount of salmon demanded by consumers. Norway, as mentioned by Deputy McHugh, is producing 1 million tonnes of farmed salmon per annum. Within five years, it wants this figure to be 2 million tonnes. We are still at a figure of 12,000 tonnes, despite the fact, to which Deputy Pringle referred, that Irish organic farmed salmon is in extraordinary demand. The biggest argument aimed at Irish seafood companies at the European Seafood Expo in Brussels recently was what were they doing there if they did not have volumes of fish to sell.

This is a growth industry waiting to be exploited to create employment and wealth in coastal communities which can take advantage of it. We want to do this in a sustainable way in order to allow people with concerns about these developments to have their say. We will develop Natura areas and SACs in a way that is responsible in terms of proper environmental management but which will allow businesses to grow. We will also try to move to a new playing pitch to try to encourage some of the new applicants for licences for large developments, in particular, fin-fish farming, to do so outside Natura areas and SACs, slightly offshore in the lee of islands and elsewhere.

The Ceann Comhairle will remember the debate we had about offshore zoning and spatial planning at the Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security when looking at foreshore legislation. In the case of aquaculture, we are asking the Marine Institute to earmark certain suitable areas which are sheltered but also far enough offshore to be outside SACs to allow us to look at new fish farming developments that could dramatically increase volumes without causing any environmental damage. That is the kind of project we are trying to progress.

There is much enthusiasm for measures aimed at facilitating a dramatic expansion of the aquaculture industry. I intend to continue to try to give leadership to allow this to happen. However, we are constrained in SACs and Natura areas and need to find a solution in working with the Commission. It is not purely a question of human resources, unless one wants to introduce hundreds of people to make environmental assessments of every bay in the country for which my Department does not have the required level of resources.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am afraid I must now put the question.

Deputy Simon Coveney

If Members have specific issues or concerns, they should put them to me, either in writing or verbally, and I will try to answer them. I thank everybody for his or her understanding of the way in which we have brought the Bill before the House and, obviously, for his or her support for it.

Question put and agreed to.