Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

The discussion has been really interesting. I will pick up on a couple of the wider framing issues. The legislative issue Dr. Lynn mentioned with regard to putting the biodiversity plan on a solid statutory basis is really important. Things like the pollinator plan also need more teeth. Dr. Lynn might comment on things like that. We could then move from these things being aspirational to being very solidly reflected in design.

I was struck by what Dr. Lynn said about 10% of the funding for biodiversity coming through the National Parks and Wildlife Service while 78% comes through the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. Do we need a little bit more to go through the National Parks and Wildlife Service? The €108 million for the rehabilitation scheme seems very small when we consider the €600 million given out in jet kerosene tax reliefs in Ireland. I am talking about scaling up. It comes back to the idea of the mechanisms. Dr. Lynn has mentioned that there are investors and so on and that a financial mechanism in respect of this work is being created but I am concerned that, in waiting to create this financial mechanism, we may not be doing what we can in the immediate and short term, when those actions are needed. I am talking about public leadership on this issue with, perhaps, space for investors and about the need for scaling up. Will Dr. Lynn comment on the issue of not just rehabilitation, but also rewetting and full restoration of peatlands so that there is no further degradation? This strikes me as something that can either do good or do harm.

I have a concern about over-reliance on the agriculture frame, even though it is important. I refer to the carbon farming frame. We might end up in a situation where we are measuring the protection of areas but solely in terms of carbon units. Ecological care is slightly harder to measure but it is really important. I am talking about the biodiversity piece. Will Dr. Lynn comment on the importance of ecological care, biodiversity work and not just considering units of trees that may store carbon in 15 years' time but forests and areas of rich biodiversity and the role that they play? Will she comment on the importance of making sure that these issues are not sublimated? I am really interested because these are really important frames in terms of what we can do now and what could be done now, were €300 million or €400 million more put into peatlands, for example.

The National Parks and Wildlife Service and its resources must be strengthened to make sure it has independence and the required resources with regard to staff and so on. That would be really useful. There has been some engagement and a review on that issue. Where is that going?

That complements another issue that has come up a lot in this committee's meetings, the issue of things like environmental impact assessments. There is an under-resourcing with regard to ecologists, people who can deliver that work. That is one of the reasons for the bottleneck. It is not that we should be doing fewer environmental impact assessments. We have even had wind energy companies tell us that they just want the area to be better resourced so that they can be carried out more efficiently.

I have two last points. One relates to the part sound pollution, sonar and seismic activity in marine protected areas, MPAs, play in terms of biodiversity protection. The other point is really important for right now, in June. As Dr. Lynn has said, there are new global negotiations in Nairobi. There seems to be a big international debate. One piece relates to the protection of 30% of land and sea areas. I am concerned that a conflict is being allowed to develop with regard to these 30% targets being achieved through working with different partners, including commercial partners, as Dr. Lynn mentioned, and the possibility of an effective land grab from indigenous peoples. We know that indigenous people make up 5% of the global population but protect 80% of the world's biodiversity and 25% of the land. We are talking about Nairobi, which is in Kenya, where Masai people live. We are now seeing Masai people in Tanzania being evicted from their ancestral lands to allow those lands to become a conservation park, which will also be a hunting park for those who might bankroll it. How do we resolve those tensions? Can Ireland, which does not have as much tension in that regard, be a constructive voice on the issue within the international negotiations on the role of indigenous persons and protection?