Vol. 473 No. 3
6 Mr. Clohessy asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht if his attention has been drawn to the growing concern of the farming organisations regarding proposals to designate lands as national heritage areas and special areas of conservation without full consultation and without an agreed compensation mechanism having been put in place; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24896/96]
7 D'fhiafraigh Ms Keogh den Aire Ealaíon, Cultúir agus Gaeltachta an bhfuair sé uiríolla thar ceann Chraobh d'Fheirmeóiri na hÉireann ag cur imní mhór in iúl maidir leis an togra Treoir 92/43/CEE ón Aontas Eorpach a chur isteach i ndlí na hÉireann le héifeacht ón 1 Feabhra 1997, chun limistéir chaomhnaithe a bhunú gan faisnéis roimh ré a thabhairt d'fheirmeóirí ar thailte ainmnithe; na limistéir talún le gaibhniú; an obair a iarrtar ar gach feirmeoir; costas achomhare eolaíochtbhunaithe; na comhsocraíoctaí, más ann, maidir le cúiteamh agus conas é a chainíochtú; agus an gcuirfeadh sé tabhairt isteach an dlí nua siar go dtí go gcuirfear léarscáileanna mionsonraithe de na Limistéir Chaomhnaithe Speisialta ar fáil agus go dtí to mbeidh comhchomairle ann a beidh bunaithe ar fhaisnéis iomlán; agus an ndéanfaidh sé ráiteas ina thaobh. [24900/96]
9 D'fhiafraigh Mr. M. McDowell den Aire Ealaíon, Cultúir agus Gaeltachta an bhfuair sé uiríolla thar ceann Chraobh d'Fheirmeóiri na hÉireann ag cur imní mhór in iúl maidir leis an togra Treoir 92/43/CEE ón Aontas Eorpach a chur isteach i ndlí na hÉireann le héifeacht ón 1 Feabhra 1997, chun limistéir chaomhnaithe a bhunú gan faisnéis roimh ré a thabhairt d'fheirmeóirí ar thailte ainmnithe; na limistéir talún le gaibhniú; an obair a iarrtar ar gach feirmeoir; costas achomharc eolaíochtbhunaithe; na comhsocraíochtaí, más ann, maidir le cúiteamh agus conas é a chainíochtú; agus an gcuirfeadh sé tabhairt isteach an dlí nua siar go dtí go gcuirfear léarscáileanna mionsonraithe de na Limistéir Chaomhnaithe Speisialta ar fáil agus go dtí to mbeidh comhchomhairle ann a bheidh bunaithe ar fhaisnéis iomlán; agus an ndéanfaidh sé ráiteas ina thaobh. [24899/96]
10 Mr. Molloy asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht if he has received representations on behalf of the Connemara branch of the Irish Farmers Association expressing grave concern at the proposal to transpose EU Directive 92/43/EEC into Irish law with effect from 1 February 1997, to establish areas of conservation without giving farmers prior information on the land designations; the areas of land to be impounded; the work required from each farmer; the cost of scientifically-based appeals; the arrangements, if any, for compensation and the way in which it will be quantified; if he will postpone the introduction of this new law until detailed maps of special areas of conservation are made available and until consultation based on full information has taken place; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24894/96]
13 Mr. O'Malley asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht if he has received representations on behalf of the Connemara branch of the Irish Farmers Association expressing grave concern at the proposal to transpose EU Directive 92/43/EEC into Irish law with effect from 1 February 1997, to establish areas of conservation without giving farmers prior information on the land designations; the areas of land to be impounded; the work required from each farmer; the cost of scientifically-based appeals; the arrangements, if any, for compensation and the way in which it will be quantified; if he will postpone the introduction of this new law until detailed maps of special areas of conservation are made available and until consultation based on full information has taken place; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24895/96]
18 D'fhiafraigh Mr. Molloy den Aire Ealaíon, Cultúir agus Gaeltachta an bhfuair sé uiríolla thar ceann Chraobh d'Fheirmeóiri na hÉireann ag cur imní mhór in iúl maidir leis an togra Treoir 92/43/CEE ón Aontas Eorpach a chur isteach i ndlí na hÉireann le héifeacht ón 1 Feabhra 1997, chun limistéir chaomhnaithe a bhunú gan faisnéis roimh ré a thabhairt d'fheirmeóirí ar thailte ainmnithe; na limistéir talún le gaibhniú; an obair a iarrtar ar gach feirmeoir; costas achomharc eolaíochtbhunaithe; na comhsocraíochtaí, más ann, maidir le cúiteamh agus conas é a chainíochtú; agus an gcuirfeadh sé tabhairt isteach an dlí nua siar go dtí go gcuirfear léarscáileanna mionsonraithe de na Limistéir Chaomhnaithe Speisialta ar fáil agus go dtí go mbeidh comhchomhairle ann a bheidh bunaithe ar fhaisnéis iomlán; agus an ndéanfaidh sé ráiteas ina thaobh. [24898/96]
Tógfaidh mé Ceisteanna Uimh. 6, 7, 9, 10, 13 agus 18 le chéile.
Cé go bhfuil cuid de na ceisteanna seo i nGaeilge agus cuid eile i mBéarla, tá i gceist agam an freagra a thabhairt sa chéad áit i mBéarla. Beidh mé lán-sásta, ar ndóigh, ceisteanna forlíontacha a fhreagairt i gceachtar den dá theanga, de réir mar a oireann do Theachtaí.
I am aware of the concerns of the farming community about the transposition into Irish law of Directive 92/43/EEC and the subsequent designation of special areas of conservation — SACs — and I have received representations from the Connemara IFA among others in the matter. Directive 92/43/EEC was due to be implemented in Ireland in June 1994. However, despite the fact that we are already behind schedule and because of the possible institution of legal proceedings by the EU Commission, I have undertaken not to bring the directive into effect until February 1997, to ensure adequate time is given to consultations in respect of the compensation requirements and the proposals in general.
Before any designation of special areas of conservation occurs there will be full consultation. There has already been substantial consultation with farm organisations and this week with a number of local authorities. All land owners and land users, identified as having land included in the sites, will be provided with a site map, site description and details of the conditions applying to the site. There is no question of land being impounded, as suggested in one of the questions. The restrictions arising, if any, will be the minimum that will achieve the conservation of the site. For example, the conditions applied to blanket bogs, heaths, upland grasslands and to the Burren will be identical to those already agreed by the farming organisations for REPS in proposed natural heritage areas. These prescriptions for environmentally friendly farming for twothirds of the areas involved have already been agreed with farming organisations. Other prescriptions will be discussed and agreed in the same way. Farmers who are farming their lands in a sustainable manner will not need to make changes.
The sites have been selected on the criteria required under the habitats directive and the directive allows only for the consideration of scientific objections to designation. The cost of objections will vary from case to case and the question of how these costs should be borne is the subject of ongoing discussions with the farming organisations. Maps of the special areas of conservation will be published when the directive comes into effect.
I am pleased to inform the Deputies that the Government is agreeable as part of a new programme replacing the current PCW to pay a fair and proper level of compensation, having regard to the level and extent of restrictions and all reasonable losses arising as a result of the SAC designations. I shall appoint an independent arbitrator to adjudicate on disputes in relation to the level of compensation. In the interest of equity I will be proposing that the State should bear the cost of the arbitrator.
Natural heritage areas are still only at the proposal stage. There will be no designation until new legislation has been introduced and passed by the Oireachtas. There will be provisions for full consultation in the Wildlife (Amendment) Bill, 1997.
Is the Minister aware of the widespread concern and anger among farmers, who live where the national heritage areas have been designated or are proposed to be designated and where the conservation areas are most likely to come into effect, about the absence of specific information relating to the individual farmer which would indicate what area of his land would be included, what restrictions would be placed on his farming practices, the likely effect on his income and the provisions to compensate him for any loss arising from the restrictions? The anger arises from the lack of real information available to individual land owners. In view of this point, which the Minister did not address, I ask him to postpone the transposition of this directive into Irish law until maps are made available to farmers, all these questions are adequately answered, a proper consultation process is available for individual farmers as distinct from the organisations representing them and details of compensation are supplied.
That is adequate for the time being, Deputy Molloy.
There are a number of questions.
I am anxious to give the maximum information to the Deputy and the public. It is some time since I met the representatives of the Irish Farmers' Association, Connemara branch, in Galway, when we discussed a number of the issues to which I referred in my reply. Today we are distributing to all Deputies, Senators and public representatives a booklet written in Irish and English called Farming in Nature, which sets out the basis, background and procedures taking place.
I will give an example because I want to be as positive as possible about the information sought by the Deputy. It is my hope that the maps will be distributed before February but I have to confirm how far that has progressed technically. On objections to designation there will be an appeals mechanism — that was one point about which the farming organisations were concerned. That will include a farming representative, a representative of conservation interests and an independent chair. After designation, where there is disagreement on the level of compensation, for example, it will be decided by an arbitrator who will be independent of the Minister. Then, as a gesture to make sure that mechanism of appeal for compensation will be fair, the cost will be borne by the Department.
It may be helpful to note that in most cases — perhaps as many as 70 per cent — agreements already exist within the REPS mechanism. One then comes to the remaining cases, about which there will be discussion and debate at different meetings. Where there is no danger or where existing practices are sustainable there will be no problem. One is then left with the smaller proportion where there is a threat to sustainability, in which case the person can use the informal mechanism of approaching the ranger, who will bring up any opinions, or he may invoke the formal appeal mechanism which we have put in place. If there must be a change of practice and the compensation level is disputed, there will be an independent arbitrator, the cost of whom will be borne by the Department.
An consultation atá i gceist mar an Ghaeilge a chuirfinn ar "consultation" ná "dul i gcomhairle" nó "comhairle a ghlacadh". Is dóigh liom nach bhfuiltear ag glacach comhairle na bhfeirmeoirí, go bhfuil siad dá gcur ar an eolas faoi rud atá réamh-shocraithe ag an Roinn. Ciallaíonn "comhairle a ghlacadh" ná go nglactar leis an gcomhairle agus go ndéantar cinní air.
An bhfuil i gceist ag an Aire a dhul i gcomhairle leis an Teach seo nó le coiste de chuid an Tí seo tar éis na rialacháin agus an pacáiste compensation a bheith foilsithe, agus sula dtiocfaidh na rialacháin seo i bhfeidhm ó tharla gurb iad atá ionadaíoch don phobal uilig, na feirmeoirí ar fad ina measc? Tá ceist an chúitimh an-tábhachtach.
Maidir le cúiteamh, an féidir leis an Aire a dheimhniú nach mbeidh aon chúiteamh as caillteanas deontaisí? Is é sin a rá nach mbeidh cúiteamh le fáil, mar shampla, ag na daoine sna ceantair seo ar dheontaisí caorach a mbíodh siad in ann a fháil, nó deontaisí foraoiseachta.
An nglacadh an tAire leis nó an admhódh sé nach mairfidh an scéim REPS go deo, agus mar atá rudaí i láthair na huaire, nach bhfuil ach trí bliana le dul ar an scéim REPS agus cad a tharlóidh ina dhiaidh sin? Ní fios ach go mbeidh an rialachán seo ann go deo.
Tabhairfaidh mé freagra chomh sciopthe agus chomh díreach agus is féidir liom. Maidir leis an gceist dheireannach, tuigim go mbeidh deireadh leis an scéim REPS mar atá sé faoi láthair taobh istigh de thrí bhliain. Tá mé lán cinnte, ó na cainteanna a bhí agam féin le mo chomhleacaí, an tAire Talmhaíochta, Bia agus Foraoiseachta, go mbeadh scéim ag teacht in áit an scéim atá ann faoi láthair.
Pig in a poke.
Maidir leis an gceist eile, caithfidh mé cloí leis an dlí mar atá sé faoin gcomhbhonntreoir atá ann ón gComhphobal, na directives. Tá sé leagtha síos an bonn ar ar féidir cúiteamh a chur ar fáil. Tá cainteanna ar siúl faoi sin agus leanfaidh siad leis na heagrais atá ag plé le cúrsaí talmhaíochta.
Freagair an cheist, níl cúis ar fáil.
Maidir leis an gcéad cheann, thug an Teachta ceacht bheag ar an bhrí atá le "comhairle". Ní amháin go raibh cruinniú agam leis na feirmeoirí i gcathair na Gaillimhe, is é sin craobh Chonamara den IFA, ach chomh maith le sin i nDáil Éireann ar leibhéal náisiúnta bhí cruinnithe ag mo oifigigh agus oifigigh éagsúla an ICMSA, an IFA agus leis an Roinn Talmhaíochta, Bia agus Foraoiseachta. Bhí cruinniú inné i gCorcaigh, i Nenagh agus in áiteanna mar sin. Leanfaidh na cruinnuithe sin agus is féidir liom a rá gur tháinig a lán de na moltaí a léirigh mé ós comhair an Tí trathnóna as na cruinnithe sin leis na heagrais i gceist.
It is disappointing that the Minister has not answered some of the specific questions I put to him. As is shown on these maps——
Gan aon taispeántas.
——practically three-quarters of the constituency of Galway West is proposed to be designated as a national heritage area. Nearly all of Connemara is included. All the farmers living in those areas are being left in the dark with regard to the effect this will have on their ability to continue their farming enterprise and practices in that region. The Minister says he met the Connemara branch of the IFA but that was quite some time ago. He did not attend a major meeting held in Galway a number of weeks ago when this matter was under discussion. We will not be shown maps of the area, the land designations or the areas of land to be impounded. We do not know the work required for each farmer or the cost of our scientific appeal——
The Deputy seems to be quoting. That is not in order.
——until after this law is brought into operation. The Minister must accept that the details of the appeals mechanism he refers to are not sufficiently clear to allay the fears of farmers. He said the appeal must be scientifically based but how can a farmer on a poor holding in Connemara afford the expense of having a scientific appeal prepared against the designation of his farm? Will farmers have to pay for the preservation of these areas or is it not more properly a matter for society to pay through proper, adequate, permanent compensation for farmers arising out of the possible loss of the opportunity to gain an income from their holding?
Let us hear the Minister's reply.
It is a long speech.
These issues are not being addressed. I ask the Minister to postpone the transposition of this directive into Irish law for at least six months until all these issues have been satisfactorily resolved.
One must first draw a distinction between the NHAs and the SACs. In relation to national heritage areas, enabling legislation will be the Wildlife (Amendment) Bill, 1997, which I hope to introduce early in 1997. On the special areas of conservation which are a subset of the larger NHAs, a number of farmers in those areas are already practising farming under the REP scheme. I am sure the Deputy is not suggesting a division between ecological concern and farming, but farmers are anxious to practise responsible farming in a changed way. Sustainability is under threat in the special areas of conservation. The meetings with farmers have been useful and have been followed with meetings at which agreement was reached on stocking levels in relation to sheep in mountainous areas where whole sides of mountains had deteriorated. Proposals came from the farmers as to how they might be managed and they were accepted.
The details of how the appeal scheme might work arose from talks. I had a meeting at which I suggested that in circumstances where a farmer in an area of special conservation has trained a member of his family to farm in a particular way, and that person must now be retrained, there might be an ex gratia power to deal with such exceptions. We have so far supplied all the information sought by the IFA. I intend to have more meetings around the country and to provide all the information requested.
It would be wrong to think we had to make a choice between responsible ecological management, in which I believe farmers want to play a lead role as they are closest to the land, and practices that put sustainability at risk. We will be able to provide all the information people want and we will continue to place advertisements and hold seminars and meetings. In relation to maps and designations, I will try to ensure these are made available at local offices for consultation.
I felt I had to come into the House this evening to dilute the virtual Clare-Galway monopoly of the House.
I do not see any questions down from the Deputy.
I am about to put one that is more direct and better than those put by the Deputy, and in a shorter time. As the Minister is aware, in certain circumstances where agreement cannot be reached on development in national heritage areas, the State may have to purchase the property. Will the Minister outline the criteria that will be used in the valuation? Will the valuation be based on the existing undeveloped situation or on the potential after development? Also, what does the Minister propose to do with the properties taken over by the State?
Even the Government backbenchers do not know, so how are the farmers supposed to know?
I agree with Deputy Molloy that his party took a greater interest in this Question Time than any other party; that is the reason seven of its members tabled the same question.
We had to make sure it was reached. We have a lottery system here.
To answer Deputy Nealon's question, the enabling legislation which I hope will be the Wildlife (Amendment) Act, 1997 — I am equally confident of getting that Bill through the House before I disappear — places a minimal disadvantage in relation to designation because it is a requirement to give notice of a proposed usage, and the delay which might ensue would be approximately six months. The difference between the special areas of conservation and the NHAs is that a special area of conservation, constructed on the legal basis of the directives, is such as to say a person may have to cease an activity if that activity contravened sustainability. It seemed reasonable, therefore, that there was a clear case for compensation for having to cease or redirect activity in special areas of conservation. The same case does not apply in relation to NHAs. If, however, a great deal of the territory comprising NHAs already falls within State ownership, the manner in which the State would acquire property would be in accordance with the procedures that prevailed up to now.
I welcome the Minister's Uturn on the proposed SACs and the habitats directive because on 8 October we were told that the directive was to be signed within one month. We now have a stay on that thanks to the Fianna Fáil Private Members' motion on this issue. The Minister will remember the advertisements he placed in the national newspapers the day that Private Members' motion was debated. Will the Minister tell us the cost of those advertisements? Does the Minister not accept that was a damage limitation exercise? Furthermore, consultation is not consultation if it is retrospective. Consultation is extremely important both with farming and other groups. Will the Minister accept it is important that such discussions take place in the Oireachtas as well as with lobby groups and individuals seeking further information?
The Fianna Fáil Private Members' motion provided me with an opportunity of outlining the eight occasions on which I had already met the farming organisations. The advertisements had been booked before I saw that motion.
I had asked the Minister a number of times in the House before the Private Members' motion.
As regards the cost of the advertisements, I do not have that information before me; it will be my pleasure to send it to the Deputy for Christmas.
I thank the Minister.
I reject the idea that placing the advertisements was a damage limitation exercise. The notion that consultations were not held prior to the Private Members' motion being debated is untrue. The eight occasions on which I met the farming organisations are on record.
Why is there such confusion among the general public?
The Deputy would know much more about that than I do because she seems to talk about it a great deal.
I attend the meetings.
Let us hear the reply without interruption.
Deputy de Valera and I asked a straight question — is it intended to give the House or a committee of the Oireachtas an opportunity to debate all the information in relation to SACs, including the compensation package, before they are implemented and to be part of the consultation process?
There will be opportunities to discuss this in general. We discussed it recently at a meeting of the Select Committee on Social Affairs, at which Deputy Quill was present. Unfortunately, the Deputies opposite could not be present on that day. I am sure there will be other opportunities, both in committees and in general——
We do not have the necessary documentation.
We are discussing it in a vacuum.
Let us hear the reply to the question which was put.
In relation to the other matter, there are ongoing discussions with the farming organisations on the construction of the compensation package. The regulations will be made under the legislation governing Ireland's accession to the European Union.
Sheer incompetence.
Rather than discussing the precise detail before it is finished, I will examine the best and most appropriate way of having a discussion on this matter in the House.
Is it correct that the Minister cannot give us an undertaking to have the matter debated by the Oireachtas after the final proposals are made, but before they are implemented?
It would be reckless to give such an undertaking this afternoon.
Another case of retrospective consultation.
Will the Minister accept that nothing I have heard from him today is likely to ease the fears of individual farmers who have a cloud hanging over them due to this pending legislation because they have not been fully informed of the effect it will have on them? We have already had an indication from Deputy Nealon that, as a Government backbencher, he does not understand the proposals and has asked the Minister for information on them.
I was in Sligo last Sunday to select a candidate for the Progressive Democrats; perhaps when the new Deputy comes to the House we will have more information to convey to the people of Sligo. I was met there by a delegation from the Sligo IFA which expressed serious anger and concern at the introduction of this legislation without information.
We must proceed by way of question.
I have asked the Minister on three or four occasions to agree, at the request of Deputies, to postpone the introduction of this legislation after 1 February, until all these matters are fully out in the open so that people can see how the appeal mechanism, restrictions and compensation will work.
Thank you, Deputy; that should be adequate.
I have asked that question three times already but it has not been answered yet.
We will get the answer now. I want to move on to other business after this.
It would be highly irresponsible to say one could postpone the implementation of something when the European Commission has expressed an opinion on our delay in implementing it. These matters now fall to me to be implemented.
What about our national democracy?
What about the national interest?
The national interest is very important but it would be irresponsible to suggest one could have an open ended deferral. I have already said my reason for postponing the decision until February was to give an opportunity for the very good consultation process, which has already started, to be spread and widened to answer all the questions. I will review the situation in January but I am quite confident all the information to which the Deputy reasonably referred can be provided before 1 February.
I will call Deputy de Valera after Deputy Quill for a concluding question; we really should move on after that.
Will the Minister accept it is more important to enlist the goodwill, trust, support and co-operation of farmers on this issue than it is to meet an official deadline set on the European stage? Will he further accept that much of what we quite rightly seek to preserve and protect has been endangered by farming habits over generations and grazing practices? Will he further accept that if this process is to be successful, he must enter into ongoing dialogue with the farmers because they are the custodians of our environment who are in situ day after day? The success of this legislation will rest on them at the end of the day.
I decided to postpone it until 1 February in response to a request at a meeting I had with farming organisations. I have already stated what the Deputy suggested. We do not have to make a choice between farming as a practice and responsible ecological management. We owe a great deal to the achievement of those closest to the land. The dialogue has already commenced and will continue. I intend to use the period after Christmas and during January to answer all the questions which are reasonably posed.
Does the Minister intend to give all the available information to Members? He said he is prepared to review the situation over Christmas and into the new year. He is aware there are no plenary sessions of this House during that time. Will he be prepared to give all the available information in early January to Members and other interested groups before a decision is taken?
A booklet called "Farming in Nature", or "An Feirmeoireacht agus an Nádúr" in Irish, which explains the procedures which have been the substance of these parliamentary questions will be distributed to every Deputy and Senator. I hope it will be of some assistance.
When will a committee have an opportunity to discuss it?
I will be delighted to come into this House on any occassion to discuss any of these matters.
That will be on 22 January at the earliest; that will be too late if the decision has to be taken by 1 February.
If the Deputy is suggesting we recall the Dáil on Christmas Day or St. Stephen's Day——
I suggest we have a committee meeting to deal with the issue; I am disappointed by the Minister's failure to agree to that.
(Donegal South-West): I wish to express the concern of the people I represent in Donegal and in Connacht-Ulster.
A question.
(Donegal South-West): When the House decides that the Minister of State should be the Ceann Comhairle, I will abide by that; but as long as you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, are in the Chair I will take my directions from you.
Thank you.
(Donegal South-West): There is grave concern throughout the country in regard to Directive 92/43/EEC. I know the Minister is also concerned about it but he——
Let us proceed by way of question.
(Donegal South-West): Will the Minister put the national interest before any EU directive? He will have the full support of this House and every Irish MEP if he so does. This legislation should not be expedited. Will the Minister confirm his earlier indication that he will review the situation in January and provide an extension if one is required?
I assure Deputy Gallagher that my decision to defer signature until February was not taken lightly, given that an opinion had been expressed in Europe at what is perceived as being the delay in Ireland in implementing these directives. I am trying to achieve a balanced approach towards it. I appreciate Opposition Deputies' right to express concerns. Such meetings as are appropriate will take place. In reply to Deputy de Valera, I would have no hesitation in going to a committee at any time to answer questions.
I would suggest to the Minister that we are the most compliant member state in the European Union and need have no fear that we are not living up to our responsibilities. The Commission would surely accept that there is grave concern among the farming community in Ireland about what is being proposed. I would ask it to reconsider postponing the implementation date and give further opportunity for longer discussions.
We are having repetition.
Would the Minister agree that the valuable natural habitat, that is now considered by Commission and by everybody to be worth preserving and which is the subject of these directives, is there because of the traditional farming practices of generations of Irish farmers? It was not the European Commission that put it there. It was the farming community through the centuries and they have a much greater vested interest in preserving it than those who want to impose restrictions upon them.
What will be achieved will involve farmers. One does not have to choose between ecological responsibility and farming. As to Deputy Molloy's point, nobody is imposing and nobody is impounding.
The word "impounding" came from the Connemara IFA.
Where there is activity that is not consistent with sustainability within a special area of conservation, that has to be resolved by methods that would include using a compensation mechanism. This has to be discussed. Already there has been a considerable attempt to facilitate all the different people involved by setting up an appeals mechanism and independent arbitration on any appeal. We will continue in that spirit, in partnership with the farming community.
