I welcome the Minister for the Marine, Deputy Woods, to the House.
Foreshore (Amendment) Bill, 1992: Second and Subsequent Stages.
Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
The Irish coastline is an irreplaceable national treasure which is entrusted to our care. It is our responsibility as well as our privilege to cherish and preserve this unique and beautiful heritage of sands, sand dunes, cliff systems and the ecosystems which they support.
This Bill provides new and long required means to safeguard that resource. Its provisions are designed to ensure that our beaches and sand dunes are protected from thoughtless or wilful destruction and damage. Its provisions represent a clear message that our preservation of this fragile resource must be the common shared objective, for its own sake as well as for the benefit of all those who know and use our beaches.
Neither thoughtlessness nor greed must be allowed to place that resource at risk. I am confident that the very tough penalties provided for in this Bill will act as a real deterrent to those who would pillage our sands for short term gain. The maximum fines, of £5 and £10, which were laid down in the original Act of 1933, were substantial by reference to the earnings and purchasing powers of the day but almost 60 years on, they no longer reflect economic and commercial realities and this is one of the fundamental issues which this Bill seeks to urgently redress.
The new penalties contained in the Bill are: up to £1,000 and six months imprisonment on summary conviction; up to £200,000 (£100,000 for a first offence) and five years imprisonment on conviction on indictment. These are substantial, severe penalties and it is necessary to set them at these levels to underline the message that it is the firm intention to protect and safeguard the resource. Much more than just the erosive power of inflation was taken into account in setting these penalties. Changes in technology since 1933 were a fundamental concern also. Sixty years ago, a couple of men with shovels and a horse and cart would have made little inroads into any beach but modern earth-moving machinery can physically alter a landscape and wreak untold damage within hours. The Bill, therefore, also addresses the question of specified means of removal.
I would like to emphasise, however, that this Bill will not interfere with any legitimate, sustainable use of the seashore. It is not proposed to change existing patterns of seaweed harvesting which is an important traditional activity along parts of our coast.
I have stressed thus far the substantial increases in penalties for breaches of prohibitory orders and notices. I want to turn now to the question of disturbance of the seashore.
I have introduced this new concept into the Bill because it is very clear to me that the removal of beach material is, regrettably, not the only way of causing fundamental damage to our shores and dunes. For example, the destruction to vegetation from the sheer weight of heavy equipment greatly increases the risk of erosion of sand as the protective root systems break down. It is also the case that regular and concentrated traffic by lighter vehicles can do untold damage to the flora as well as the fauna of the seashore.
There have been recent examples also of people moving sand dunes to find sites for caravans, dwelling extensions or whatever, without realising the appalling damage that results to the beach system. I am determined to prevent this kind of destruction by the prohibition of specified disturbance. The provision reflects the growing understanding of the fragility and interdependent nature of the marine ecosystem and the losses which can occur through the movement of sand on a given beach. I very much hope that it will also create a greater appreciation and awareness of the risks to the resource from such movements. It is vitally important that there be a local involvement in the safeguarding and protection of the local beach resource. In order to achieve this purpose the Bill provides that, in addition to the Minister, a local authority would have recourse to the courts to prosecute offences or to obtain injunctions to prevent further damage to a beach or dune system. The Bill provides also that the court may order works within a specified time limit to make good or prevent further damage. This will provide the means to ensure that any future damage can be reversed or remedied as speedily and as effectively as possible.
I would summarise the main provisions of the Bill as follows. First, they give the Minister power to ban sand removal from any beach or classes of beaches. They also provide for the banning of any specified method of sand removal. I have particularly in mind the use of mechanical diggers and the like, as well as inordinately large removals of material. Provision is also made for obtaining an order from any court to stop removal or disturbance of beach material or to compel an offender to make good the damage within a specified time. Not just the Minister but also any local authority or any other concerned body or individual would be able to seek such an order. If an offender subseqently fails to carry out such an order, there is provision that the remedial work be carried out otherwise and the offenders be billed for the cost of such work.
The Bill also provides that the Minister or the relevant local authority may prosecute an offender in the District Court. Under the provisions of the Bill, the Minister may license, or refuse to license, the removal or disturbance of beach material. The Bill also provides for the setting of conditions on quantities, methods of removal, vehicles, times, the giving of notice and other related matters.
I would like to draw particular attention to the new and important concepts contained in section 3 of the Bill. This would give the Minister power to include damage to flora, fauna and amenities as criteria in reaching a decision on whether to allow, or to prohibit, any removal or disturbance of beach material. This is a key change, broadening the original concept of the 1933 Act to reflect the environmental concerns and realities of today.
Our commitment to preserve and protect our beaches is absolute and the provisions in this Bill reflect that commitment. Our beaches are the envy of Europe. We now have 52 European blue flag beaches as well as 27 beaches recently awarded the national green flag status. Our blue flag beaches are found right around the coast: in Counties Wicklow, Waterford, Wexford and Cork as well as Counties Kerry, Clare and Galway. These beaches, and indeed every stretch of beach, sand dunes and seashore around the coast, require to be fostered, maintained and protected. The urgent action which we are now taking, and which will be backed up later in the year by the introduction of a further substantial Bill in this area, marks an effective and critical step in this process. I want to stress that point because some of the comments I heard before the start of this debate seemed to indicate a misunderstanding in this regard.
The Bill received full support in Dáil Éireann. The legislation is being introduced as an urgent measure to take action now, before the summer is over. We do not want to delay. The Dáil recognised that fact and I am very glad the Seanad recognise it as well. I want to make it clear that the Government will proceed later in the year with much wider legislation to preserve and protect the foreshore; I hope to have it available for debate before the end of the year. The Bill being considered today will strengthen the Minister's powers, and the power of all of us, to ensure that this marvellous resource is protected for present and future generations.
If this Bill is passed by the House the Government will produce fact sheets next week. That will be done now, not the week after next or the week after that; the summer is here and we want to take action now. The fact sheets will be produced immediately because, throughout the summer, we intend to create a new and important awareness of the problems created by the removal of sand. I ask the news media to assist in highlighting this issue. There is also a very important safety element involved. For example, the mechanical diggers that dig holes in beaches — which they are doing and have been doing — pose a very serious danger to swimmers and, in particular, to children. That danger is present now, this summer.
My reason for bringing forward these three small measures at this time is to take urgent action now. I note that on previous occasions the House asked that we take quick action when possible rather than wait until all the complications surrounding major Bills are sorted out and the legislation is put together. This legislation is an example of quick action and I commend the Bill to the House. I welcome the support of the House.
I am glad the Minister has referred to forthcoming foreshore legislation. We are delighted to hear that legislation and that the fact sheets will be available for this summer.
I compliment the Minister for being extremely innovative in his short few months as Minister for the Marine. He has given that portfolio a profile acknowledged by everyone. I met the Minister in Shannon yesterday, when he launched the Irish Helicopter Rescue Service. That was another illustration of the tremendous amount of work the Minister has done in a very short time.
It was prophetic of Arklow Urban District Council some weeks ago to run a seminar during which two very good papers on coastal erosion and coast protection caught the imagination of all who attended. I was lucky to attend that seminar. One of the papers concentrated on sensitivity in coastal protection planning and the other on coastal erosion and protection. We all respect and acknowledge that Karen Dubsky has been the flagship — to use a nautical term in the context of the marine — in bringing us all to the awareness of the need to protect the coastline.
We are happy to wish this legislation a speedy passage through the House and we are glad it will be implemented before the holiday season commences. There is a tremendous awareness of the need to protect and preserve the coastline which is one of our most magnificent assets. For a small country, with a very wide and long coastline, we have disparate coastal features — fjords and rheos just a few miles apart, rolling mountains coming down to beaches and stark cliffs. We have the quieter east and south-east coastline and also the splendid nature of the coastline from Donegal to Kerry. As the Minister stated, we should realise that the coastline is very fragile resource that needs to be protected for future generations.
The Minister has covered several elements in this legislation, which is a welcome development. The banning of disturbance or removal of sand is particularly welcome. Moving to the broader criteria, the impact on flora and fauna is recognised, that element might not have been to the fore in the past. The increase in penalties is also to be welcomed, although in this regard I would sound a note of caution. There are penalties, and penalties will be imposed, but it is the implementation of the law that we will have to follow closely and carefully. Although the penalties proposed are high in today's monetary terms, we can never impose too high a penalty on damage to an asset that we hold in trust for future generations.
Three bodies will be responsible for injunctions under this legislation: the courts, the Minister and the local authorities. They will have to co-operate closely. Will the local authorities deal directly with the Minister for the Marine or the Department of the Environment? We need to know that now.
This legislation concerns itself with damage to flora and fauna and amenities, the seashore neighbourhood, amenities of public rights and injuries to any land, building, wall, pier or other structure. The Bill is comprehensive. There is also the issue of the prohibition by order and the imposition of substantial fines. There is a fine of £100,000 for a first offence, a fine of £200,000 for subsequent offences and provision for imprisonment not exceeding five years.
The Dáil debate concentrated on North County Dublin and Donabate. I wish to concentrate on the west coast. I wish to refer to The Burren area. As we know The Burren has not yet been declared a national scientific area of interest; it is recognised but it is not statutorily. The beach at Fanore which I would know pretty well, the jewel in the crown of the Clare coastline, is not just of local importance. Fanore is located on the edge of the Burren; its sand is seashell sand, not eroded sandstone sand, which makes it quite unique. What I find disturbing is the fact that people, when they say "we must go down to the sea" take it literally. They actually drive out to the edges of the sand dunes there and are in danger of toppling over.
Clare County Council have provided an excellent large car park but it is extraordinary that people tend to drive to the very edge of sand dunes, disturbing the marram grass and the unique flora and fauna. Yet, nobody seems to stop them. If one Irish person dares to reprimand another Irish person it is not taken very kindly and they still stay there. Continentals do not do that. Probably because of the disasters they have experienced on their beaches they have been more aware for a much longer period of the importance of protection and probably have to pay for access to some of their beaches. They are not the culprits here. Rather it is the native Irish. That type of erosion is as dramatic, being incipient and insidious, slowly but surely disturbing the balance of the ecosystem of one of the most unique beaches on the west coast.
How will the Minister deal with that day-to-day occurrence? I doubt whether local authorities would have the necessary resources and the manpower to patrol our beaches and catch offenders, not merely those people who drive to the sea but also those who engage in the type of Mondello Park motorbike racing up and down the beaches, which is destroying and rutting the sand dunes. I know beaches change physically and naturally from year to year. I suppose we must respect the power of the sea, but the human intrusion is far greater because it is continuous.
I should like to pay tribute to officials of Lahinch golf course who, in liaison and co-operation with Clare County Council, have made a great effort to protect the land on the edges of that golf course at substantial cost. There they have used the gabion method utilising cubes of wire filled with stones. That is an amenity being used by international golfers who are playing their part in protecting the adjoining lands. The same is true of Ballybunion. There should be a stop put to individuals who, on a yearly basis stake their claim to removal of sand in order to ensure their statutory obligation does not lapse. Whether that practice is engaged in for profit or to sustain one's rights, it must be eliminated.
Perhaps the Minister will say whether there will be the same surveillance of beaches that are not amenity beaches as such, where sand is removed, where there is danger in relation to swimming but where perhaps there is not the same number of people using them? Can the Minister assure me that those beaches will be patrolled also because we have a very long coastline.
I want to ask the Minister a question in relation to this no-go area, between high water mark and low mark. I still do not know, nor would it appear do local authorities, who precisely owns that nomans' land. I am very worried about it. That is the danger area between high and low water mark. It would need to be specifically defined who has ultimate responsibility.
I am glad that the penalties being provided in the Bill are very severe. I hope the resources will be made available in the Department of the Marine and to local authorities to patrol beaches. I hope that somebody with a sand bucket digging for lugworms will not be prosecuted but will be seen as somebody who is quite entitled to do so.
I agree totally with the Minister that we must protect our shores and beaches for our tourism industry but we must also do so for future generations. I look forward to the amendment being passed.
I join other Members in welcoming the Minister for the Marine to the Seanad. I particularly welcome this Bill which is of great significance to my county when one bears in mind that one-third of all the beaches in the country are in County Donegal. We have many blue flag beaches in the county. Indeed we consider our shores and beaches a great asset in a county which has yet to develop its full potential in tourism.
I understand fully the Minister's intentions and welcome the importance he gives to the Bill. When the Minister expresses his intention of issuing documentation, giving specific instructions to members of the public who may remove sand or gravel from our beaches it is clear he intends to get the message across.
This Bill will be most welcome in County Donegal. I say that having been a member of Donegal County Council which has experienced considerable difficulties on our beaches for years in that they were not in a position to police or use their authority to prosecute and bring offenders to court. Quite a number of people have set up in the sand and gravel business in the county. How does the Minister propose dealing with such people who have set up very lucrative illegal businesses, selling and grading sand and gravel? Their activities have been eaten into the foreshore, especially Lough Foyle where its beaches are being destroyed and where its spawning areas are being destroyed in the process of a few people rich in the sand and gravel business.
I could give the Minister many instances of serious problems in my county. I hope that the provisions of the Bill are clear-cut to allow the authorities to take positive action against offenders. Like Senator Jackman, I do not anticipate that its provisions will be regarded as unreasonable. I know of a family who took sand from a river using a bucket and a donkey and cart. They brought the sand to their house. Subsequently the absentee landlord heard that a small quantity of sand had been taken from the river and he hired a tractor and trailer to take back the sand to plaster a house. This is a sensible Bill and it will deal with the problems. I will be asking my local authority to take enormous interest in its provisions. Marinas are being developed practically nationwide and their promoters will be very interested in knowing how far they can go in developing the foreshore.
Ten years ago I attended an EC conference when coastal erosion was one of the main items on the agenda. The Scots were very interested in seeking EC support for coastal erosion protection works. My county has spent substantial funding on protection from coastal erosion in Fahan, County Donegal, and has been very successful in placing heavy boulders along the foreshore. The Bill will be most welcome for County Donegal which has spent a very substantial part of its resources trying to protect its shores and beaches. Will the Minister indicate how we will deal with people who are in breach of every law and regulation regarding sand and gravel? It is a pity the Bill does not extend to places like Barna's Gap, the beauty of which has been destroyed by gravel and sand pits. The late Erskine Childers was horrified by the devastation in Barna's Gap as a result of the removal of sand and sand pits. I am glad this Bill will prevent the same from happening to beaches in County Donegal. There will be a great response from my local authority who will work in very close co-operation with the Minister and I wish him success with the new Bill.
On a point of order, I should like a ruling on a technical matter. Normally a person who tables an amendment on Committee Stage has spoken on Second Stage. If Senator Ó Foighil does not get a chance to speak on Second Stage I presume he will be entitled to table an amendment on Committee Stage.
That does not apply on Committee Stage; it applies on Report Stage.
I share in the general welcome for this legislation. I was reared beside a beach and I never let a week go by, now that I am living in Dublin, without walking along Donabate Strand or on some of the beaches in north Dublin and County Meath which are an extraordinary amenity, particularly in the winter.
I wish to make general points in relation to the legislation. It is very useful legislation but it should be accompanied by a programme of education. Dublin County Council have a travelling road show which, despite what Senator Jackman said, they bring to the beaches to educate people on the importance of their surroundings and the environment. Young people learn a considerable amount from it and that is the way in which an awareness is created. However, it should be developed further.
It is very important that the provisions of this legislation are brought home to ordinary people because the extraordinary power they give to individual members of the public has not been fully recognised. An application can be made to the High Court, not just by the Minister but — under section 5 — by anyone regardless of whether that person has an interest in the seashore concerned. That is a very welcome development. However there is a danger that this Bill when enacted will not be enforced because there is no enforcement agency referred to in the Bill except "the Minister or any person". Should there be an element of enforcement in this regard?
The Title of the Bill is extraordinary "in accordance with the exigencies of the common good ..." I have difficulty with that phrase in legislation because that is implied in all legislation.
I want to make a very strong point which I would ask the Minister to bring to the attention of the officials in his own Department and to the people who drafted this Bill. In terms of sexist language and sex sterotyping, this is the least offensive we have seen for some time. Since there is only one "him" in the Bill I congratulate the people who drafted it. It is good that we can talk about a person without the person being a "he" or a "she", and that comes through in this legislation. There is an indication in one part that the Minister would have to be a "he" but generally it certainly is a very positive move in the direction of nonsexist language in legislation. This is refreshing.
In terms of the language of the legislation, in section 3 of the Bill — I am taking the lazy option here because I confess I did not bother to read the Principal Act — there is a reference to the enforcement of the carrying out of regulations. It is not clear whether those regulations are in this instance brought into operation in the affirmative or negative mode; in other words, do the Houses of the Oireachtas have power in this area? Will he or she be required to bring it to the House before making a regulation because, if so, there would be a weakness in the Bill.
I do not know if some clever lawyer can grammatically make a case of the phrase "every person". There used to be a convention that the phrase was "any and every person". One could make a case that if you did not prosecute "every person" then you cannot prosecute "some person". I would like to hear the Minister's comments on that.
Section 3 of the Bill relates to flora and the fauna. Senator Jackman referred to some person with a sand bucket digging for lugworms, which is harmless, but some people with large barrels who dig for lugworms do a lot of damage to the foreshore. How will fish life on the foreshore be dealt with in this legislation? Perhaps it is dealt with in the Principal Act.
Senator McGowan said that Donegal had more beaches than any other county in Ireland. That may well be, but it does not have more blue flags than any other county. The two counties with the most blue flag beaches are those with which I have had most contact, Kerry, where I was born and reared, and Mayo, with my strongest ancestral roots. Kerry ties with Mayo this year for the very sad reason that it lost two blue flag beaches because of the lack of implementation of the spirit of this legislation. Banna Beach, the best example, lost its blue flag this year because of interference with sand dunes; the same thing is likely to happen in Portmarnock. There is major debate on that. There are pluses and minuses. I do not want to go into that but, Ballybunion has also been damaged significantly.
I would ask the Minister to respond to the point made by Senator Jackman regarding the requirement of a person who has rights to the beach to take sand from the beach every year in order not to lose that right. That is a catch 22. It is like a right of way; if it is not used once a year or a couple of days every year, one loses the right. That nettle has to be grasped. We have to take a decision on it.
Senator Fitzgerald is getting ready to deal with the Dingle question. It would be remiss of us to deal with the foreshore legislation without Senator Fitzgerald and I giving both sides of the argument about the wonderful foreshore along which we were both raised and had many of our early experiences. We take different viewpoints on this but I believe the foreshore and the piece below the high watermark, is the property of the people and should remain the property of the people, and there can never be a case of privatising that.
I oppose the proposal of the second Dingle marina to privatise a section of the foreshore. I know the Minister has heard this ad nauseum and that it is the last thing he wants to hear, but he is going to have to listen to it one more time. As late as this morning I had five phone calls from people who became aware that this legislation was being dealt with here. They want to know if the Minister is aware of what is proposed. I know he is because he got letters, phone calls and met representation as late as last week. The proposal to give 27 or 35 acres of the foreshore to a private contractor — I will put this on the record one more time to allow my colleague and good friend Senator Fitzgerald to levitate from his seat — would have the same damaging effect and the same impact on the Dingle people as giving 35 acres of the Phoenix Park for a caravan site.
That is rubbish.
There is no easy way out. No matter how many inquiries we make the net effect will be the same and Senator Fitzgerald knows that. A private individual should not get his hands on the foreshore. I still cannot figure out who the beneficial owners might be of a proposal that was put to the Minister regarding the foreshore in Dingle Harbour and the building of the second marina, and I have gone through five different companies and holding companies.
I was raised in Dingle and come from a business background. I understand the pluses and minuses of a business deal. I saw a case where, for £5 million of public money a facility worth £3 million was put together and immediately there was a £2 million spin off for those involved, without a start being made. That kind of operation cannot happen anymore. The Dingle foreshore belongs to the people and must always remain the property of the people. The State does not give life to private enterprise but it should welcome it and give it sustenance in every possible way.
Skellig Hotel has done a marvellous job. I stay there regularly and have nothing but the best of relations with the authorities there. They still provide the best of food. However, on this issue they are wrong. It can never be right to give away the foreshore. I walk that foreshore every time I am in Dingle. I was raised in the area; I spent every summer of my life on that foreshore; and now a new generation can enjoy it. People come to Dingle for that clear beautiful harbour, which is not to be impacted upon by privatisation. It is not acceptable to give away what is a natural amenity belonging to the people. We must defend their interests at all times.
The spirit of this legislation is welcome. It is superb legislation. As somebody who every week spends some time on a beach — I have been involved in sub-aqua sports on every part of the coastline of this island — and having being born and raised in Dingle I ask the Minister to let the spirit of this legislation permeate decisions that may need to be taken in future in the Dingle foreshore and ensure that Dingle continues to spoil its tourists and visitors, and not its harbour and foreshore.
In common with other speakers I welcome this legislation and congratulate the Minister on its introduction. It is very enlightened legislation and is a step in the right direction. As someone from a land locked county, I can be a little more objective and detached than some of the other speakers. I know the Minister, given his academic background, will be aware of the delicate ecosystem which exists on our foreshore and on our beaches, and particularly where the dunes are anchored by the generation of grasses, and it is very important to protect those grasses if we are to protect the dunes.
We can all cite examples where, without removing sand from dune areas of the seashore, human traffic is causing difficulties. If sand dune areas are subject to a great deal of human traffic that can destroy the resource we desire to protect. From that point of view, any measures, however severe, that can save our dunes is to be welcomed.
Craving the Cathaoirleach's indulgence, and by way of an aside, could I say to the Minister there is another very delicate ecosystem which is under threat, and has been severely damaged, and that is the ecosystem which sustains sea trout. That is an example of how neglect can destroy a resource. This is a similar situation to the one we are discussing. That resource and the resource of our beaches and foreshores can be exploited in a very positive way to national advantage in terms of the promotion of tourism and leisure activities. I ask the Minister to give the utmost attention to that delicate matter and to try restore sea trout to the waters of the west.
The Minister made a very good point when he spoke about the differences between 1992 and 1933 when the original legislation was introduced. At that time a few men with a cart and shovels could go on the beach and take sand. It had a very positive effect at a time when agricultural fertilizer was not available, because sand spread on land improved it. Now there is sophisticated machinery which can move large quantities of sand in a very short time and can literally destroy a beach. It is obvious, from the tone of the legislation, that it is the intention to prevent that type of activity.
The Minister also mentioned that he did not wish to interfere with the legitimate sustainable uses of the seashore. He mentioned the removal of seaweed. I find it difficult to think of other sustainable uses of the seashore, but perhaps he could elaborate on that in his reply.
One way of dealing with the protection of our dunes and our foreshore would be to designate them as environmentally sensitive areas or areas of scientific interest. Under those headings it must be possible to secure Structural Funding or EC funding to protect and sustain these very delicate ecosystems.
The Minister also spoke about circulating information to people and I commend him on the speed with which he intends to act. My concern is that some of the people at whom the information might be best directed, are those who are perhaps least interested in hearing it and least interested in receiving it. I think the sterner measures of the Bill must be directed at them. We are faced with the difficulty of achieving a balance. In the interest of the prosperity of the national economy we must promote tourism and exploit our very significant natural resources. However, in doing so we have to be very careful that we do not destroy the very resource we are attempting to exploit. In that respect I am sympathetic to Senator Costello's observations on the need to protect the foreshore and to ensure that it cannot be used by private individuals for their own selfish and personal advantage. We have to leave this resource for the benefit of successive generations.
There is a principle involved which is much more widely applicable to society than to this Bill and that is: how are we going to bring large numbers of people to this country to enjoy our unspoilt beaches, seashore, waterways and hills and, at the same time, ensure that this resource is maintained in its pristine condition. One can think of examples where natural resources were very severely threatened — the hills in the Lake District have almost been levelled, so to speak, by the pressure of tourist numbers. We have to strike a balance. I accept Senator Fitzgerald's point that many natural resources exist in very deprived areas from which people have had to emigrate. While we wish to ensure that people can survive and prosper in areas that are otherwise economically depressed, we must protect the natural environment so that it is handed on to the next generation in as good a condition as we found it.
The Minister has made provision to grant or refuse to grant a licence for the removal or disturbance of beach material. I can see a difficulty arising in this area. We all know the pressures that can be exerted on local politicians and public representatives. Indeed, we are well aware of the pressures exerted by the salmon fishing sector. Therefore, I appeal to the Minister, although I am sure I do not have to appeal to him in any vigorous way, to ensure that the licensing of this type of activity is extremely curtailed, if granted at all, and is given only in the most exceptional circumstances. The argument could be made that some of these activities are traditional to the area and on that basis should be allowed to continue but, as I said earlier, because of the machinery available now that argument does not hold up. In any event, I do not think it is necessary in a modern technological society to have to resort to removing sand from the seashore.
It is acknowledged that there is more to the foreshore environment than sand and sand dunes; the flora and fauna of the area have to be considered. Some of the flora is extremely rare and there may be a need to designate some beaches as areas of scientific interest — indeed, we could designate our entire shoreline in that way.
The mechanism is already available whereby a case can be taken to the District Court or to the High Court but this tends to be a slow and expensive procedure and the local authorities sometimes wonder if it is worth the candle because they have to spend a great deal of time and money and at the end of the day their action may be of limited benefit. I must say it is good to see in this Bill that people will have to pay more than just the court costs, as section 6 (1) (c) provides that those who are successfully prosecuted will have:
to pay to the applicant or such other person as may be specified in the order a specified amount to defray all or part of any costs incurred by the applicant or that other person in investigating, mitigating or remedying the effects of such removal or disturbance.
It is similar to the principle that in cases of pollution the person causing the pollution pays. This is how it should be, and it is very welcome.
Members of the Oireachtas discuss Bills and enact the laws which we hope will be of benefit to the community as a whole and it is then incumbent on the relevant authority to ensure the laws are implemented. It will not serve us very well if we spend our time enacting laws which we believe to be good if they are not implemented at the end of the day. I am sure the Minister will show his determination to take action against people who blatantly flout the law which we are discussing here today.
This is a straightforward, simple, short Bill which is very welcome. The present law badly needs to be updated as it is over 60 years old. The fines and sanctions therein are now totally obsolete and it is appropriate that the Minister should act so that the law accords with the realities of modern life. Our beaches are a valuable resource and it is imperative that they be protected and developed. They are an essential amenity and the Minister in his speech referred to the distinctions which Irish beaches enjoy. They play a vital role in the tourism industry.
In addition, the Minister and Senator Dardis, who are particularly well qualified in this area, spoke about the compositional state of the flora and fauna. I am pleased to see the Minister introducing measures to cover that aspect in the Bill because our flora and fauna have a very important role to play in education and scientific knowledge and it would be a great pity if through an oversight these aspects of our beaches were neglected. For that reason it is especially welcome that the Minister has broadened the concept of beaches to include that very important and interesting aspect of beach life.
As I have already said, the original legislation is totally outdated. It dates from a society which only had the ass and cart and the wheelbarrow. However, we now live in a technological society and present-day machinery could change the structure and nature of a beach in a few hours. Therefore, it is important that there should be worthwhile sanctions to restrict people from doing this. The Bill is also necessary because some people ignore the present law as the fines are very low and they ride rough-shod over the desires of the people of the vicinity and the local authorities to protect the natural resources. They exploit this resource in a greedy and selfish manner and they would clear out whole sections of the beach in order to develop their own business, be it a sand or quarrying gravel business. It is important that the actions of these people should be curbed and that significant deterrents be put in place so that they are restrained and prevented from damaging an essential resource.
I am pleased to see the Minister intends to provide fact sheets on the beaches as this is very desirable. This will play an important role in broadening the awareness and knowledge of the young and not so young and it will also help people to have a better appreciation of an immensely valuable resource, namely, our beaches.
A previous speaker said beaches are located in areas which are not perhaps as well developed as others and are in areas from which there has been considerable emigration over the years. We should make a greater effort to try to develop and exploit this resource. The only way forward is through preserving what we have and developing it. We must make the most of it and make people aware of its tremendous significance both from an amenity and an ecological point of view. For all those reasons the Bill is very welcome and I hope it will have a rapid passage through the House.
I, too, welcome the Bill and the many sections in it that bring it up to date. I particularly welcome section 6 which increases the penalties. Such penalties were probably realistic in 1933 but in this day and age they are totally out of tune. It is the size of the penalty that stops people from breaking the law.
I also welcome the fact that local authorities can now apply to the court for an injunction against the removal of beach material. I have to be quite critical of local authorities because of their use of beach material to build roads. I am going back 30 years when many by-roads were built with beach material and there was nobody to prevent it.
The removal of beach material is one of the causes of coastal erosion and we know all about that in County Kerry. I refer in particular to the Maharees; indeed, we are very grateful for £1 million received from the Minister's Department for the prevention of coastal erosion down there. Senator O'Toole might not agree with many of the things I would say but I am sure he would agree that the removal of beach material was a major problem. As far back as 1974 when I was in Kerry County Council time and time again I looked for a prohibition order to prevent the removal of beach material from the Maharees. It is not the farmers who are to blame for the removal of beach material. What the ordinary farmer takes away from the beach is harmless. It is the outsiders who come in with tractors and trailers and big machines that really go to town on the beaches.
While Senator O'Toole is in the House, let me go back to Dingle for a while.
(Interruptions.)
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Senator Fitzgerald, without interruption.
Let me ask the Minister a question. The harbour in Dingle is under the jurisdiction of Dingle Harbour Commissioners. Are they empowered to take action against the removal of beach material or is that the responsibility of the Minister or of the local authority?
Senator O'Toole mentioned the marina in Dingle. There is no sense at all in comparing that with a car park in the Phoenix Park——
A caravan park.
If the Senator looks at any old chart or map of Dingle that was drawn up at the turn of the century, he will realise that from the mouth of the harbour in as far as the Skellig Hotel at least 30 acres of land have been lost to the sea. Any amadán can see that the land along the seashore is long gone as a result of the removal of beach material. One of the claims made in the protest against the marina was that there was a right-of-way to the beach for the removal of beach material. Do the anti-marina people in Dingle want to keep open a right-of-way to allow the removal of beach material? The Senator knows in his heart and soul that he never walked along the foreshore in Dingle but walked out along the old pathway which goes out through the land. If one went down there tomorrow morning or any day during the rest of the year one would not see a single person walking along the foreshore in Dingle. A marina is the most natural thing in the world. Boats belong to the sea and the building of a marina there would be far better——
It is as natural as the Ballymun tower blocks. It will grow overnight.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Senator Fitzgerald, without interruption.
It would be far better to see 150 or 200 yachts floating outside in the harbour than to see that corner which is in front of the Skellig Hotel left as it is. The protesters would be far better off to go down and clean the rubbish there. Because of the prevailing wind every bit of rubbish is gathered down in that corner and it would be a god-send to get the place cleaned up.
I have one last remark. I am delighted Senator O'Toole goes down to Dingle for a fortnight every year and that he lived there until he was 11 years of age. I want to remind the Senator——
I lived there until I was 20. For the record, I did not even get out of the road until I was 20 years of age. I was born, raised and lived there longer than the Senator.
I grew up with the Senator and I want to point out that I have lived on the Dingle Peninsula for 53 years. Three times in my life I have gone out of this country on a holiday. Anything I have done in my political life and prior to it always took cognisance of the environment.
(Interruptions.)
I have lived all my life down there. I am aware of the environment. I would remind the House that it was not so long ago that I and all the other parties in the House got through a prohibition order for the banning of strychnine. I grasped the nettle on that one. I know it has nothing to do with this; what I am trying to say is that I am not a person to damage the environment. The day the Minister will be down at the Skellig Hotel to open the marina will be the happiest day of my life because we had to double up boats in the new marina last night. It was absolutely chock-a-block.
I have straightened out a few facts with Senator O'Toole. There are a few things the Minister could remind other Departments to do. He could inform Roinn na Gaeltachta, the local authorities and the Department of Agriculture that in the future any buildings for which beach material has been used will not qualify for a grant. If beach sand is used for plastering a dwelling house there tends to be condensation in the winter. It might be no harm to inform these other Departments that if a house is to qualify for a grant beach material will not be acceptable any more. That would do much to prevent the removal of beach material.
I do not disagree with Senator McGowan. We have some fantastic beaches in Kerry but unfortunately they have been raped and that is the only way I could describe it. I have no qualms about naming Ballybunion and the problems there. The nettle must be grasped and a halt called to the removal of beach material. I remember being over there one day — I play some golf now and again — and looking down at the beach where several JCBs were removing beach material. This is one of the places we are very proud of along with Barrow and all the other places that qualified this year for the European blue flag. The chairman of the local council, Deputy Tom MacEllistrim, presented these flags recently. This is to be welcomed. Unfortunately, the Atlantic Ocean makes the west coast very vulnerable to coastal erosion. I welcome the Bill.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Now that we have finished with Dingle, I call Senator Staunton.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. I come from County Mayo, which I understand was awarded more blue flags than any other county.
They are trying in Kerry——
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Senator Staunton, without interruption.
I am very interested in this issue as many of the beaches in my area were awarded the blue flag. This award means a lot to Irish people and is a valuable asset in the development of our tourism industry. In recent months I have read articles in the national newspapers about beaches in Europe and their designation as blue flag beaches. Unfortunately many Irish people do not appreciate our beaches. I have looked at maps of western Europe which show the level of pollution of beaches in Italy, the Riviera, the Mediterranean, Scotland, England and Wales. There are very few blue flag beaches in the United Kingdom: there are one or two in Wales and Scotland where the environment is similar to ours. Our beaches are a very valuable resource.
It is timely that the Minister is introducing this Bill. I enthusiastically support it in general terms. In the past people abused our beaches. Because the equipment used to remove sand from beaches is more advanced than it was two generations ago, the potential to cause damage is greater. Having said that, I believe people now have a better appreciation of our beaches than they did 30 or 40 years ago. I do not see much abuse of the beaches in County Mayo. It is timely to update the penalties for abuse of our beaches and to allow the local authorities and the Minister to take action.
In this context I should like to compliment Mayo Councy Council for their husbandry of the beaches in their area over the past 15 years or so. They regard these beaches as a very significant resource. They have provided toilet facilities, built barriers to stop coastal erosian and laid pathways to the foreshore. We should stress the quality of our beaches in promoting our tourism industry.
I am glad the Minister emphasised that this Bill would not interfere with any legitimate sustainable use of the seashore and that it is not proposed to change existing patterns of seaweed harvesting which is an important traditional activity. However, this statement does not give the full story because section 3 (d) provides that penalties may be imposed for the taking away from the foreshore of what are described as flora, including algae; seaweed is an algae. Therefore, the Bill can potentially give the Minister or a local authority the power to prohibit the collection of seaweed and impose very substantial penalties. The Minister's statement that the Bill will not interfere with this activity is not strictly true because it has the potential to interfere with it. The Minister may have no intention of interfering with this activity during his tenure in office but some future Minister could do so under the Bill as it stands. In view of this, I ask the Minister to consider removing the word "algae" from this subsection.
The vast proportion of seaweed is harvested in the inter-tidal zone, that is, between the high water mark and the low water mark. This is 99 per cent owned by the State. In very exceptional cases the inter-tidal zone is owned by people with deeds to the property along the sea shore. The vast proportion of the inter-tidal zone is covered with stones. Seaweed will only grow on stones; it is extremely rare to see seaweed growing in areas near the beach.
The inclusion of the word "algae" in that subsection has the potential to give rise to difficulty. I ask the Minister to address this anomaly in the Bill. I take it that the Minister has no intention of interfering in this activity but one of his successors may have a different attitude. This suggestion is worth examining. The cutting of seaweed can be beneficial to the ecology along the coast. For example, if bladder-wrack, a seaweed technically called ascophyllum, is not cut storms will inevitably toss it on to the foreshore where it will rot and cause more damage.
Under section 3 (d) the word "fauna" is defined as, will animals, both aquatic and terrestrial. I do not know what is meant by aquatic wild animals. A whale is an aquatic animal. Does this definition include winkles, scallops and other shell fish in the inter-tidal zone? I ask the Minister to address that issue. Can he or the local authority ban the harvesting of winkles and scallops? There is a certain ambiguity in the section which needs to be cleared up.
The Minister said we have 52 European blue flag beaches located in Counties Wicklow, Waterford, Wexford, Cork, Kerry, Clare and Galway. Cork features twice and Mayo has a huge number of blue flag beaches, but Donegal does not feature at all. I cannot understand why County Donegal is not included in that list.
I welcome the thrust of the legislation. I believe it has the support of all Members of the House. I hope the publicity it engenders will lead to a greater appreciation of our beaches.
I represent the coastal constituency of Dublin North which, like many other constituencies, has some of the best beaches in the country. While a number of those beaches were nominated for blue flags unfortunately the number granted was not as high as I would have liked. One of the problems about the blue flag competition is to establish the criteria. Dublin County Council feel that the goal-posts are changed every year. The Minister might look into that matter.
I compliment the Minister on this Bill and thank the House for dealing with it today. The Taoiseach and several Ministers recently attended the conference in Rio. This type of legislation gives real meaning to the topics which were deliberated at that conference on the environment and, in a practical way, the Minister is endorsing the sentiments expressed at that conference.
This Bill focuses attention on the singular importance of our coastal heritage, including its flora and fauna. The removal of material such as sand and gravel from the foreshore is a particularly damaging form of vandalism. The cumulative effects of this wanton practice destroy a great leisure amenity, hasten erosion and impact on flora and fauna. It is an offence against the thousands of citizens who care for, value and enjoy this irreplaceable natural amenity.
Certain damage has been done recently in the Donabate and Portrane areas. Most of these Acts of vandalism seem to happen at weekends. I have asked if there is some channel of communication for those who are concerned. It seems that action cannot be taken until well into the following week. I asked the county manager about an emergency phone line for concerned citizens or organisations. These acts of vandalism are of such importance that there should be an emergency service to deal with them during the weekend.
One of the important aspects of this Bill relates to private ownership and the high water line. I hope the problem in this area has been eliminated. One of the difficulties facing enforcement officers is to define the limit of private property and the high water line. The Minister might refer to this in his reply. Unless this matter is clearly resolved, there will be difficulties implementing the provisions of the Bill. This is the kernel of the problem.
I urge the Minister to ensure that the information about this Bill is disseminated to the citizen, through local authorities, community councils or otherwise. The Bill provides that the citizen has a right to bring a case and it is vitally important and he or she is aware of this right. Tidy towns committees and community councils will ensure that public representatives are made aware of any problems and it is important that they should understand that in this Bill they are being given the absolute right to bring court proceedings if necessary.
When an application is made for a licence, it is important that information should be sought as to the effect the granting of such licence would have on the foreshore. Everyone should understand exactly what is involved.
We have in our beaches a unique asset. We are well ahead of other countries whose beaches are badly polluted. A high number of our beaches qualify for blue flags. We should capitalise on our unique asset. This legislation will help to protect the amenity which many of our citizens enjoy.
Ba mhaith liom cead cainte a thabhairt don Seanadóir Costello, ar chríochnú dom. Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire anseo agus cuirim fáilte mhór roimh an Bhille atá os ár gcomhair inniu. Tá mé ag ceapadh gurb é ceann de na rudaí is tábhachtaí, ó thaobh acmhainní nádúrtha agus iarthar na hÉireann de go speisialta, ná forálacha an Bhille ghearr seo — agus más maith ann é is mithid. Dá mbeadh a leithéid de reachtaíocht ann trí nó ceithre scór de bhlianta ó shin bheadh i bhfad níos mó de thránna na tíre níos sláintiúla agus níos fearr ná mar atá siad faoi láthair.
Mar dhuine go bhfuil cónaí orm ar imeall na farraige agus in aice le trá iontach deas a mbíonn an bratach gorm ar foluain chuile lá, agus é le feiceáil ó mo theach féin, cuireann sé gliondar orm go bhfuil rialacha agus Bille nua á dtabhairt isteach anseo inniu chun tránna agus chuile rud atá ar na tránna a chaomhnú — bíodh gur gaineamh, nó clocha, nó bláthanna, nó rud ar bith a bhfuil beocht ann atá i gceist. Tá sé fíorthábhachtach go ndéanfaí a leithéid. Is í aidhm shimplí an Bhille ná milleadh na trá a chosc, scrios a rinne daoine gan scrupall le blianta fada anuas. Ach caithfimid idirdhealú a dhéanamh idir mhuintir na háite agus daoine nó conraitheoirí, a thagann isteach le hinnealra mór trom agus a mhilleann na tránna trí ghoid a dhéanamh ar an rud is luachmhaire dá bhfuil ann, an gaineamh.
Tá sé feicthe agam i mo cheantar féin an chaoi ar tháinig na JCBs agus chuile shórt eile. Chun sampla amháin a lua, tháinig leoraithe ón Eoraip go dtí Conamara, gar do Chloch na Rón, i lár na hoíche le cuid den ghaineamh speisialta atá ansin a ghoid agus é a thabhairt leo faoi choim na hoíche, ach thug muintir na háite seo faoi deara agus bhí siad in ann stad a chur leis. De réir an Bhille seo ní cheadófar a leithéid de ghoid feasta agus is maith an rud é sin.
Cúpla bliain ó shin bhí stoirm ann agus an chaoi a ndeachaigh an ghaoth agus an fharraige ag obair ar na dumhcha, folmhaíodh amach cuid de na hiarsmaí seandálaíochta, a chuaigh siar na mílte bliain dár stair. Nach gcuireann sé seo ar ár súile dúinn, dá ligfí leis na leoraithe a bhí ann tuairim is sé mhí roimhe sin, dul isteach agus an scrios a bhí fúthu a dhéanamh, bheadh an tseandacht sin a bhí tugtha chun solais ag an storim, caillte go deo.
Labhair cuid de na Seanadóirí inniu ar the wheelbarrow society a bhaint den trá. Anois, maidir le muintir na Gaeltachta, is daoine iad sin a bhfuil tránna thart timpeall orthu, agus tá sé fíorthábhachtach go dtabharfaí aitheantas dóibh siúd, daoine nár mhill na tránna riamh. Ní raibh ach rudaí beaga nádúrtha á mbaint acu le cuidiú le fataí a chur ag fás ina ngarraí, agus rudaí mar sin, agus tá cuid de na daoine sin fós ann. Níl deireadh leis an wheelbarrow society, leis an charr capaill ná an charr asail. Tá muintir na n-oileán timpeall an chósta seo, ar nós oileáin Árann, Toraí agus na hoileáin eile ó dheas, ag brath ar an bhfarraige, ar na tránna, ar imeall na dtránna, atá timpeall orthu. Is cúis imní domsa go bhfuil riail nó dlí le teacht isteacht a dhéanfaidh dochar do ghnáthmhuintir na háite maidir le gnás atá ar bun acu leis na cianta. Níor mhaith liom go dtarlódh sé sin. Freisin feicim na mílte scoláire ag teacht chun na Gaeltachta chuile bhliain — bhí mé ag breathnú orthu inné fiú amháin — agus is iontach go deo an saibhreas agus an pléisiúr a bhaineann siad as an trá. Ní snámh amháin a bhíonn i gceist mar bíonn na múinteoirí in éineacht leo agus taispeánann siad na bláthanna seo dóibh a bheas anois caomhnaithe agus gach dá mbaineann leo.
Tá go leor buntáistí ag baint leis an mBille seo. Tá buntáistí ann dúinne a bhfuil cónaí orainn in aice na dtránna, do na daoine a thagann ar saoire chugainn agus don tír ar fad. Tugtar deis dúinn tránna a chaomhnú agus a fheabhsú. Ach é sin uilig ráite agam, ná déanaimi dearmad go bhfuil muintir na háite fós ann, agus ba chóir an ceart bheith acu, ceart traidisiúnta, an trá a shaothrú. Mar sin, cuirim fáilte roimh an Bhille i gcoitinne mar tá céim réasúnta láidir tógtha le haghaidh caomhnaithe, agus go n-éirí leis.
Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil leis an Seanadóir Ó Foighil as ucht an ama a thug sé dom chun an cheist seo a phlé.
I welcome the Minister and the Bill. Our beaches are a wonderful resource for our own people and for our tourism industry and we should take every step necessary to protect them. Undoubtedly, we have cowboys around who treat the beaches as though they were personal quarries to be used for taking materials such as sand and gravel for their own purposes and for commercial purposes. We should ensure that such practices do not continue and that there is no interference with flora and fauna. I welcome the provisions relating to licensing and those increasing the penalties that may be imposed. There is no doubt that the existing penalties are ridiculous.
In many ways it would have been nice if the matters covered under this Bill could have been brought within the scope of the derelict sites legislation because, effectively, the damage caused to beaches, piers, to flora and fauna and to all other amenities, creates derelict sites.
The Bill does not state clearly the way in which the legislation will be implemented: how are we going to patrol the beaches? It is extremely important that local authorities and individual citizens are aware of the provisions of the Bill. Therefore, the Minister should make sure that when the Bill is passed, as it will be today, the news media are informed about it, that videos are made to be sent to schools and a notice is put up in a prominent place on all beaches to ensure that everybody is made aware of this legislation. It is only by the vigilance of the citizens that the Bill will be implemented.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
As it is now 4.26 p.m. and as I understand that by order of the House the Bill was to conclude by 4.30 p.m., I call on the Minister.
We implore a further few minutes for Senator McMahon as I understand that there was to be no guillotine imposed on this debate.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
I have called on the Minister, Senator.
May I ask for just two minutes?
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
I have called on the Minister, and that is in line with the Order of Business.
I understand on the Order of Business that this would not happen today. I regret it very much.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
The Order of Business was very clear, that this Bill was to conclude at 4.30 p.m. and, therefore, I call on the Minister.
We agree to the provision of two minutes for the Senator.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Is that agreed? Agreed. The Minister will then have two minutes to reply.
I shall not waste time in welcoming the Minister to the House. He is very welcome, as is this Bill.
The Minister said he had the pamphlets and fact sheets almost ready so that people would be made aware of the provisions of the Bill. It is my contention that the onus should be put on local authorities and that the leaflets should be distributed to the local authorities as quickly as possible.
I am looking forward to the more substantial foreshore legislation the Minister has promised is forthcoming and I look forward to the opportunity presented by such legislation for a much longer debate. It is my hope that local authorities will be required to list all beaches and foreshores accessible to the public within their areas, that regular inspections will take place and that reports will be sent into the Department of the Marine. I also hope that the provisions of this Bill will extend to the islands off our shores.
In the past some individuals and some local authorities removed small items of interest from the beaches for display in homes or in public areas in local villages and towns. I hope the provisions of the Bill will not prevent people from doing that, because the material is in that instance being removed for greater public awareness and interest.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Thank you, Senator. I now have to call on the Minister.
Could I please ask for five minutes for the Minister's contribution?
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I thank Senators for their varied and interesting comments. They have been very relevant.
Senator Jackman talked about some excellent seminars that had been held and she made particular reference to a seminar held in Arklow. The Arklow Urban District Council have given a very good example to other local authorities. The Senator also mentioned Karen Dubsky. I join Senator Jackman in praising Karen Dubsky for the pioneering work she has done and the way in which she has persevered over a long period.
I am particularly happy with the welcome given to the Bill generally. Senator Jackman had a query relating to local authorities. The local authorities will be able to continue to deal directly with the Department of the Marine and there will be no need for any delay in that regard. It is hoped that the forthcoming legislation will provide an opportunity to address the role of local authorities in much greater detail.
There was also a question in relation to day-to-day events. The Garda will have an ongoing role and various agents and environmental officers will also be involved. The Bill gives real power to many different people to take action. We cannot solve all of the problems immediately but at least we can ensure the penalties are substantial and effective.
While extolling the benefits of Donegal's wonderful beaches, with which I agree, Senator McGowan pointed to a specific difficulty in relation to Lough Foyle. I can have that case investigated. If damage is being caused, I can assure him appropriate action will be taken. I have made a note of that.
A number of Members asked who owns the area between the high and low water marks. This is State foreshore. It is clear that local authorities have a role to play as have the Department for the Marine, as organs of the State, in protecting and developing local amenities. They have always and will continue to play a role in the protection and maintenance of the foreshore. There was another aspect to that, some of these are owned privately and have been over a long period. That is one of the issues we have noted and will address in the major Bill.
A question was raised about the regulations. The orders are published in Iris Oifigiúil under section 21 of the Principal Act of 1933. They are also published locally. Senator O'Toole raised a number of questions about enforcement, expressing the view that if everybody can enforce the provisions, nobody will do so. It is really the other way around.
Senator Fitzgerald referred to harbour commissioners. As a corporate body they would have a right to bring in an injunction with specific rights within their area. Corporate bodies, individuals or the Minister can act. They are very wide powers. Senator O'Toole referred to the cleanliness of the Bill, which is appropriate in this case. He wanted to convey congratulations to its draftsman on its non-sexist language. I should like to compliment the draftsman not only on that account but also on bringing the Bill forward so quickly in such a professional way. I will convey the views of the House to the parliamentary draftsman.
I hope they will work on the substantial Bill.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
The Minister without interruption, please.
That is proceeding. The definition of "fauna" does include all wild animals, both aquatic and terrestrial, and will comprehend any life forms likely to live on or in the foreshore.
The exercising of common rights every year — that is the removal of sand— traditional common law usages, in modest amounts, are not necessarily affected. We will be re-examining these rather complex rights in additional legislation.
Senator Dardis raised a number of questions and welcomed the Bill. He pointed out that the licensing, or refusal to license, the removal of material could put pressure on local representatives, and, he said, permission should be given in exceptional circumstances only. We have observed from what other Senators have said the circumstances in which such arrangements would be appropriate. I take it the Senator will be happy with that.
What other sustainable, legitimate uses are there of the foreshore apart from seaweed? "Sustainable" and "legitimate" are the key words here. There are existing licensed or traditional rights to remove beach material, including sand in small amounts. I am particularly concerned to tackle the scale and pace of removal at this time. We can examine that more generally subsequently.
Senator Ó Foighil has circulated an amendment. I assure him that this is already covered in the Bill. The Minister would have power to license or prohibit, as may be, the removal of stones for such purposes. These are the kinds of purposes for which we wanted to retain that power in respect of which Senator Dardis was worried. Circumstances do arise such as those mentioned by Senator Ó Foighil, which need to be covered. We have the requisite power to do so. I have noted the Senator's comments in that regard.
I will not stray into the subject of the Dingle Harbour Commissioners. Informing Roinn na Gaeltachta, the Department of Agriculture and Food and so on about beach material is a very good suggestion of Senator Fitzgerald's which I will take up.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
While I regret having to interrupt the Minister, the Order of Business was extended for five minutes. Does the House wish to extend it further?
In conclusion, a Leas-Chathaoirligh: I thank Senators for their interesting valuable comments which we have noted. We will press ahéad with the fact sheets. Senator McMahon's suggestion is very relevant in that local authorities have a function here. We should at least communicate with them as widely as we can in the first instance.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
As it is now 4.35 p.m., in accordance with the Order of the House today I must now put the question: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time; that the Bill is hereby agreed to in Committee and is reported to the House, without amendment; and Fourth Stage is hereby completed and the Bill is hereby passed."
Question put and agreed to.
Níl.
I am taken aback; I did not know we were taking all Stages in guillotine fashion.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
The Order of Business was quite clear that——
The Leader of the House said there would be no guillotine.
By agreement.
That all stages would be taken——
By agreement.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
The question has been declared carried. The business has been concluded.
I am now calling item No. 2, the Health (Family Planning) (Amendment) Bill, 1992.
A Chathaoirligh, cén fáth nach dtugtar cead dom labhairt ar phointe eolais? Chuir mé isteach leasú agus níor tógadh é.
I welcome the Minister for Health to the House.
Ar phointe eolais——
Senator Ó Foighil, on a point of order.
Chuir mé isteach leasú don Bhille agus, bhí mé ag iarraidh go dtógfaí é ach níor tugadh cead dom.
Tá a fhios agam, Senator Ó Foighil. Clearly the position on the Order of Business today was that all Stages of the Foreshore (Amendment) Bill, would pass at 4.30 p.m. I understand that was extended by a further four or five minutes. The question was put and the Bill has been carried.
By agreement.
By agreement between the Whips and the House. The question was declared carried.
Cén fath mar sin gur scríobhadh síos an leasú agus gur cuireadh ceist orm an raibh sé ceart?
It is clear, Senator Ó Foighil, your amendment would have been dealt with had it been taken before 4.30 p.m., but the Order of Business stipulated, by agreement, that the Bill would pass all Stages. The question was put at 4.30 p.m., or four minutes thereafter by the Leas-Chathaoirleach. It was carried and that is the position.
Glacaim leis an freagra atá á thabhairt ach ní thuigim é.
Sin é. I am calling item No. 2.