Public Business. - Game Preservation Bill, 1929—From the Seanad. – Dáil Éireann (6th Dáil) – Wednesday, 12 Feb 1930

Public Business. - Game Preservation Bill, 1929—From the Seanad.

The Dáil went into Committee.

Minister for Justice (Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney)

I move that the Committee agree with amendment No. 1:—

Section 11. The word "grouse" deleted wherever it occurs and the word "hares" substituted therefor.

This is an amendment to Section 11, which enables game birds to be caught for the purpose of restocking lands. It was pointed out in the Seanad that it is not really practicable to net grouse; that the number of grouse that escape alive when you attempt to net them are very few, that a great number of them are killed, and that the word ought not to be inserted in the section. On hearing expert views expressed in the Seanad, it appeared to me that it would be wise to delete the word "grouse." The Seanad also suggested and carried an amendment to the effect that it should be possible legally to trap hares for the purpose of re-stocking. That appears to me to be quite reasonable, and I ask the House to agree to both. Amendment No. 2, which follows, is consequential on No. 1. I beg to move agreement with amendment 2 at the same time; it reads:—

Section 11, sub-section (2). After the word "birds" in line 54 the words "or hares" inserted.

Amendments 1 and 2 agreed to.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I beg to move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment 3:—

Section 15, sub-section (2). After the word "thereof" in line 56 the words "(given in writing)" inserted in brackets.

Section 15, to which this is an amendment, gives certain powers to game associations where the owner of land has given them exclusive rights to shoot over that land. The Seanad came to the conclusion that the consent of the owner of the land should be given in writing and that appears to be reasonable.

Amendment 3 agreed to.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I beg to move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment 4, which is purely consequential:—

Section 19, sub-section (2). After the word "thereof" in line 56 the words "(given in writing)" inserted in brackets.

Amendment 4 agreed to.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I beg to move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment 5:—

Section 28, sub-section (1). After the word "person" in line 51 the following words inserted: —"save with the permission in writing of the Superintendent of the Gárda Síochána for the District."

Section 28 is the section which prohibits the burning of gorse, furze, whin, heath, fern or greg-ling during certain periods. The prohibited periods is between the 1st April and the 14th July. The Seanad thought there might be stretches of country in which there are no birds of any kind in respect of which it would be unnecessary to have a provision of this nature. In consequence, power is given to the local Superintendent to issue a permit if he is satisfied that there is no reason why a burning should not take place during those months.

Dr. Ryan

I would like to know from the Minister if the Superintendent of the Civic Guard is supposed to be the sole judge of whether or not the district is inhabited by birds. Will the Superintendent be directed in accordance with any policy on the part of the Ministry, is he to seek advice from some consultative council, or act entirely on his own judgment?

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Some person with local knowledge will have to be selected for the purpose of deciding whether or not the land is frequented by game. There does not seem to be any other person in a position to exercise authority of that nature except the Superintendent. Of course he will naturally receive from my Department, through his own headquarters, instruction as to the principles on which he is to act. Permission will not be given if there are game birds on the lands in question, and it may be given if there are not. This is really put in in relief of the farmer and in order that there may be somebody who can give, as it were, an exemption order. The Superintendent is the person on the spot and he will have some knowledge.

Dr. Ryan

I am very glad to see the amendment put in. I welcome the amendment, because when the Bill was going through the Dáil I pointed out the serious hardship that might be inflicted on certain people if they were not permitted to burn furze at certain times. At the same time, I do not like to see the Superintendent of the Civic Guards selected as the sole judge of what is right or wrong. Even if he is a just man he may not be very long in the district, and he may not know very much about the local conditions. I would like to know whether the Department itself is going to take a hand in this matter and advise the Superintendent what to do. Would it be possible, if the owner of land felt he had a grievance, for an appeal to be lodged with the Ministry over the Superintendent's head?

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

The owner could do so if the Superintendent refused. Just as under the Firearms Act, he could make an appeal to the Ministry and the Superintendent would be asked for an explanation. Just as under the Firearms Act the power is with the Superintendent to decide. You must have persons with local knowledge. Let us say that there is a certain area of mountain in the Deputy's constituency. As to whether or not there are grouse on it, I could not know personally, and I would have to get the views of some person in the locality.

Mr. Law

Will the Minister be kind enough to explain what is greg-ling?

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

It is a species of fern.

Mr. Allen

Will the Minister accept an amendment to the Seanad amendment adding the words "with an appeal to the District Justice"?

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I think that would be a serious matter. I do not think that a person who wants to burn those things on his land should have to go to Court.

Mr. Allen

But in case it was refused by the Superintendent of the Civic Guards and the person felt he had a grievance, he has no court of appeal. Would it not be well to let him go to court to argue out the case?

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I do not think it is a matter that ought to go to court. There are a whole lot of powers given to the Superintendent of the Civic Guard, and this is not by any means the only power. It works in harmony with the whole Bill.

Amendment 5 agreed to.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I beg to move amendment 6:—

New section. Before Section 31 a new section inserted as follows:

"31.—(1) The Minister may establish by order a Consultative Council for the purpose of giving advice and assistance to the Minister in connection with any matter in relation to the making of regulations under, or otherwise carrying into execution, the provisions of this Act, or any other matter affecting the preservation and propagation of game or any other matter affecting the game industry.

(2) The said Consultative Council, if and when appointed, shall consist of such persons (being persons having experience or special knowledge in relation to the matters on which the Council may give advice or assistance to the Minister) as the Minister shall from time to time nominate to be members thereof, and shall include representatives of both Houses of the Oireachtas and of the General Council of County Councils.

(3) Each member of the said Consultative Council shall, unless he previously dies or resigns, retain his membership for two years only from the date of his nomination, but shall be eligible for renomination.

(4) The said Consultative Council shall meet whenever summoned by the Minister and also on such occasions as the Council may from time to time determine.

(5) Payments may be made by the Minister out of moneys to be provided by the Oireachtas to the members of the said Consultative Council and Committees thereof to such extent as may be sanctioned by the Minister for Finance in respect of repayment of travelling expenses and payment of subsistence allowance."

This is a new section which was inserted in the Seanad. It enables—it does not force—the Minister for Justice, if he thinks it advisable in administering this Act, to call in a council of experts to advise him. Personally, I cannot see that the existence of that power could do any harm. If it turns out in the working of the Act that a council of this nature could be helpful and that it was advisable to appoint such a council, I think it is well that there should be power to call in these experts.

Progress reported.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 12 Feb 1930