Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

There is a significant issue here that needs to be dealt with. If I understand correctly, the substance of the issue is that the income per hectare from designated land is now very low. If a scheme had continued with amendments, as existed under the NPWS, such that a decent rate per hectare was available, the delegates would probably be a lot happier than they are today. If a landowner with a lot of land has to protect 100 ha or 200 ha, every hectare is equally important, so his payment per hectare should be based on a flat rate rather than on a system that reduces the payment to €5 for each hectare in excess of 120 ha. One would be doing a lot of work for the State for free. Can I take it that the delegation has no objection to my point?

One of the most sensitive issues is compensation, which is a word the delegates keep repeating. Determining whether moneys are payment for work done or compensation is like counting how many angels can dance on a pinhead. Money is money. As with the previous scheme, I take it that the landowners have no problem with what the payment for actions done to the benefit of the hen harrier is called if they are getting paid over a period, preferably a longer period. Unless they are prepared to adopt this position, they will not make any progress.