Mr. Neil Foulkes:

Section 8 grants a permanent and complete unregulated exemption for essentially the same purpose, which is very confusing. The proposed changes are inconsistent with the provisions of European Law that protect wild birds which permit the granting of a derogation but limit action to what is strictly necessary and which must enable the Commission to supervise them. Section 7(2) does not refer specifically to safety, even though that has been much stated as the intention. Section 8, the provisions of which will not be subject to oversight or monitoring, blurs the lines of the closed period and is not subject to the two-year pilot period.

The Minister's working group stated it would be important to engage with the European Commission on the proposed changes, but no formal consultation has taken place. Section 70 of the Roads Act provides for dealing with safety issues caused by vegetation along public roads. The Wildlife Act is just a subset of its provisions. If the section 70 mechanism does not work - it is clear from the debate that there are failings - will a proper exercise be carried out to determine how and where there is failure? The Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport has not evaluated the extent, scale or causes of road safety issues due to roadside vegetation. We firmly believe that if one does not diagnose the problem, one is unlikely to find the cure.

Tipperary County Council has an ongoing project which is relevant to this matter. I have acquired, under access to information on the environment, AIE, regulations, completed questionnaires completed by 27 roads engineers on the project.

An evaluation of the responses points to much wider issues than those dealt with in the Bill. The proposed changes permit but do not compel landowners to cut hedges. Roads engineers whom we have consulted indicate that the main problem presented by roadside hedgerows is not landowners who want to cut their hedges and cannot do so but by landowners who should cut their hedges and do not do so. If a hedge presents a safety issue and the landowner chooses not to act, the Bill will be of no assistance.

We must view roadside hedgerows as assets to be managed, not problems to be dealt with. We fully agree that roadside vegetation creates some road safety problems. However, it also offers some road safety benefits, as was acknowledged by 80% of the roads engineers who responded to the survey.

The Roads Act gives the National Roads Authority the power to serve notice on a landowner to preserve trees, hedges and shrubs on his or her land to ensure road safety. Dealing with safety issues is about the assessment of risk. We cannot avoid risk. Irrespective of roadside vegetation, there are risks involved in travelling on public roads. Risk is a subjective evaluation and there is no formula for calculating it. Under the Roads Act, the ultimate authority in assessing risk is, as the name suggests, the National Roads Authority which is in the best position to make an objective assessment of safety issues.

We have concerns about the scientific validity of the proposed two-year pilot scheme. The first working group submission to the Minister acknowledged the lack of scientific data to underpin the changes and stated significant time and resources would be required over a number of years to put them in place. Issues with definitions, references and the language used in section 40 of the Wildlife Act have not been addressed in the Bill and they lead to issues with interpretation of the law.

While the HLAI recognises the intent of sections 7(2) and 8, we consider that the Bill needs to be restructured to provide for the legally required safeguards that give the maximum degree of protection for wildlife within the scope of dealing with public health and safety issues. The HLAI does not consider that any of the justifications presented for cutting hedges during the closed period, other than public health and safety, would be valid in an Act intended to conserve wildlife. If farming systems cannot operate without the need to impinge on wildlife during the breeding and rearing season, any claim that they are sustainable becomes highly questionable.

Section 40 of the Wildlife Act is part of Ireland's general system of protection for wild birds under the birds directive. However, a number of the key exemptions from section 40 are not consistent with the directive. I can elaborate on these exemptions, if necessary. To align the Wildlife Act with the birds directive significant amendments will be required. I wonder whether it would be better to remove sections 7 and 8 from the Bill, with a view to having a comprehensive revision of section 40 of the Wildlife Act.

The HLAI is not comfortable opposing the farming organisations on the Bill as we view farmers as strong allies in our work. The farmer is caught between a rock and a hard place, but we cannot allow nature to be collateral damage. We need to address wider issues. Interaction is required between stakeholders and the relevant Departments and a proper and full review of section 70 of the Roads Act is needed to examine all of the issues that affect road safety.

I will hand over to Mr. Swan.