Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 3 Jun 1981

Vol. 95 No. 21

Turf Development Bill, 1980 Committee and Final Stages.

Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2.
Question proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill."

Section 2(5) (a) reads:

For the purposes of this section — [(a) the provision of access roads to bogs, or drainage (including outfall drainage) as regards bogs, shall be regarded as development of bogs...

On the drainage issue, while I appreciate that, presumably under paragraph (b), the cost of purchasing drainage equipment is eligible, does paragraph (a) mean that, apart from capital grants being available for drainage equipment, grants are available for a proportion of the operational cost of carrying out drainage works?

I do not quite understand the Senator's point.

Paragraph (b) talks about the cost of purchasing, leasing or hiring equipment. There are two aspects to the drainage section of grants. There is capital investment, and I am presuming that grants are available in the first instance for a proportion of the cost of the purchase of drainage equipment; but paragraph (a) seems to imply that the provision of the drainage would be regarded as development of bogs. If a co-operative society, a limited company or an individual is developing a drainage scheme, does it mean that, in addition to grants being available for a proportion of the capital cost of the drainage equipment, grants are also available at the same proportion for the operational cost of carrying it out?

Yes, that is for the cost of the work.

Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 3.
Question proposed: "That section 3 stand part of the Bill."

I take the Minister's point that it is reasonable to have a deal favourable to the smallholder working on turbary in combination with his neighbours and I approve of the 60 per cent in that case. The Minister's purpose might be better served if there was, for example, an amendment which would suggest that the 60 per cent is available to a qualified society developing 200 acres or less, which would meet the Minister's point and still protect the competitive aspect that might arise in the case of the larger acreage.

Question put and agreed to.
Sections 4 to 6, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 7.
Question proposed: "That section 7 stand part of the Bill."

This section deals with the committee which the Minister of the day is going to appoint to advise him in relation to the performance of the function assigned to him by section 2. I take the Minister's point that the committee will be broadly based and with vocational interests. The Bill apparently gives the Minister powers arbitrarily to choose all the members of that committee without, for example, specifying the vocational groups which it might be reasonable to suggest should be on it. I am merely making the point, and the Minister with whom we are dealing now would establish a broadly based committee with good intent. However, the Bill leaves the Minister of the day with too wide a scope should he decide, for his own purposes, to establish a committee of a certain type or flavour, for example. It might have been wiser to have included clauses spelling out that the Minister would have a member of that committee from, for example, Bord na Móna, from ACOT, from the County Development Committee. Had it been spelt out, his interests might have been better served.

Senator Staunton has made a very strong point here on an important aspect of this Bill. I am sorry that I was not present to welcome it on Second Stage as others welcomed it. The Bill establishes our bogs as a great natural resource and not something of which we would be ashamed. There was a period in Ireland when the word "bogman" meant an uncultivated person and it is fortunate that at present one of our greatest poets. Séamus Heaney, regards the bogs as his finest metaphor for the exploration of our ancestral past. He has turned the old cliché of Ireland being a bog into something honorific and admirable. It is also interesting that the Boomtown Rats group has a performer in it who rejoices in the name of Pete Briquette. Within the context of the Bill, if there is to be a committee it should consist of not just people appointed at the Minister's dictate. It would give the committee considerable force and strength if there were to be somebody from Bord na Móna, from An Foras Forbartha, and from An Foras Talúntais.

This Bill has brought a new perspective into the whole question of the development of bogs. I listened with enormous admiration to Senator Staunton. He is the man who has visited bogs everywhere over the known globe. For the first time in the history of the House, we have a globetrotting bogtrotter, if I might put it that way, in Senator Staunton. These few points have been flippantly made, but meant with great sincerity. The Minister should, perhaps, entertain the possibility of having one or two designated nominees, or categories, for that committee mentioned under section 7.

I will not attempt to follow Senator Martin into the rarefied atmosphere into which he ventured in company with the Boomtown Rats and others. With regard to the point about this committee, let me try to put it into perspective. I would hope that this committee would never have to operate. It will only operate where there is a conflict of interest between Bord na Móna and somebody who has applied for a grant, where Bord na Móna refuse the grant on specific grounds that are provided for in the Bill. If it happens, then the committee will advise the Minister. It is interesting that Senator Staunton and Senator Martin differed regarding possible nominations as to who should be represented. If every other Senator in the House gave his views, we would have even more bodies mentioned. That is one of the reasons why we did not specify this in the Bill. You could tie yourself down in a way that would be quite unsatisfactory afterwards. I have, however, endeavoured in what I have said in both Houses, to put on the record the general principles that we envisage being behind the setting up of this committee. The only specific body mentioned as being represented is Bord na Móna. I just referred to the general principles on which we would base membership, but did not mention any other specific body. That is the best way to approach the subject but I repeat that I hope this Committee will never have to work.

Very briefly, I just want to reiterate that I accept that the Minister is acting absolutely in good faith when he talks about a broad-based committee of which Bord na Móna would be a member. The facts are that we are here enacting legislation that goes into the Statute Book. The Minister may not then be the Minister for Energy but I shall not develop that point at this time. A situation where all of the members of a committee may be appointed arbitrarily by the Minister makes for bad law. I take the Minister's point, of course. Senator Martin's views and my views may be different, but it is not the function of the Minister to make these basic decisions in legislation. It may not be good law but, presumably, it can be amended at some later stage. We have semi-State committees, for example, and vocational appointments to many of these semi-State boards, and what are loosely described as political appointments in all Governments, some of which are good, some very much less than good. To develop it to an extreme, the Minister could arbitrarily appoint seven of the boys to this committee, should he so choose. It is not good law. There will come a stage——

Does the Senator think that, in such circumstances, they would be prejudiced for or against Bord na Móna?

I am not developing the point. I simply reiterate that view. There will probably come a time when it will be changed.

They could appoint the Boomtown Rats.

Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 8.
Question proposed: "That section 8 stand part of the Bill."

Section 8(2) specifies that the amount of a grant made under this section shall not exceed, in the case where the applicant is a qualified group or qualified society, 60 per cent. What has the Minister in mind as a qualified society, or how many people could make up a group? Two or three individuals could come together and make up a group to qualify for the higher percentage, whereas if they went individually for development they would qualify for only the lower percentage, which is 45 per cent.

If the Senator would refer to section 1, he will see there a definition of qualified society, which means an industrial and provident society registered under the Act of that name of 1893 which has for, or amongst its purposes or objects, the provision of turf for fuel. A qualified group is defined as meaning a group consisting of not fewer than three individual persons as regards which the board is satisfied that there is in force for the time being an agreement, in a form approved of by the board and to which each member of the group is a party, whereby it is agreed by the group to do either or both of the following: (a) by purchase, lease, hire or otherwise to acquire, or acquire the use of, turf development equipment and to use the equipment for the production of turf or turf products for fuel, and (b) to develop a bog for the production of turf or turf products for fuel.

Now, if the Senator is concerned that perhaps just a few people could get together and call themselves a group, thereby qualifying for 60 per cent instead of 45 per cent, it will not be quite that simple. As I have indicated, each member of the group would have to have signed an agreement which has been approved by Bord na Móna binding them to carry out the kind of purposes set out in the definition.

One point raised in the other House was that of a man who had a right of turbary and who might group with his wife and child and thereby get the higher grant. Of course, they would not be contributing any additional turf, or right of turbary. Each person would have to be contributing, for the agreement to be acceptable to Bord na Móna. The object of the exercise is to get a large enough section of bogland to make it an economic proposition, particularly for the use of mechanised methods of winning turf. A device simply to get a higher level of grant would not be acceptable and will not be accepted by Bord na Móna in executing this section.

There are two points I want to raise on section 8. One is very simple and I think it was answered in the Dáil, but I need clarification of it, and the other is a little technical. Section 8 talks about machinery for the extraction of turf for fuel. The word "turf" in this Bill covers all types of fuel products, including milled peat. Is this correct?

Yes, that is correct.

The second point is more technical and it might be a little unfair to ask the Minister to spell it out now. In the production of milled peat there are methods by which implements can be used — they are basically the implements used by Bord na Móna — but the mechanised unit, for example, engines and tracks, is not part of the machine. Therefore a subcontract is arranged, so that if one were developing a bog for milled peat, one would have the implements and would subcontract to the local agricultural contractors to carry out the towing of these machines in the milling and harvesting seasons. These types of tractors need to be special in the sense that they may need to be geared with half tracks for this type of work. If an individual, a company or a co-operative were developing a bog and a subcontracting element was involved as an integral part of the policy of the company, are the people to whom the subcontract was given, for example, the local agricultural community, eligible for grants on the equipment they need to do this job under the scheme envisaged by the Minister?

As the Senator said, the question he is raising is rather technical. It may be that it would be necessary to go into detailed consultation to get the precise answer he requires and it is not possible to do that across the floor of the House. I can only enunciate the general principle involved. Grants are available either to contractors or to other applicants, of the kind found in the Bill, in respect of machinery. Where the machinery is designed and intended by the manufacturer for the production of turf, or where what is involved is the addition to a machine, say to an ordinary tractor, of an attachment designed and intended to be for the production of turf, the attachment will qualify for a grant, whereas the tractor will not. They are the general principles but I do not think I can answer precisely the specific problem the Senator raised.

I take the point. Thank you.

Question put and agreed to.
Sections 9 to 12, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 13.
Question proposed: "That section 13 stand part of the Bill."

When does the Minister envisage that Bord na Móna will have a structure to administer the scheme?

Bord na Móna are in the process of setting up a section to deal with this and have already appointed one man who will be in charge of that section. I have received from Bord na Móna application forms for grants and hopefully, they will very shortly be in a position to receive and process those applications.

Question put and agreed to.
Section 14 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment, received for final consideration and passed.
Barr
Roinn