Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

It is good to see Professor Crowe again. I thank him for his presentation. My series of questions follows on from Senator Fitzpatrick’s. The general scheme, while welcome, is general so there is a good deal of detail that is not in it. We are hoping, through the various hearings, to start to fill out what that detail might look like so that it feeds its way not only into the Bill but also into the implementation of the legislation. There are approximately nine key areas of the scheme and so far we have been speaking about one, the expert body. Does Professor Crowe have any knowledge, experience or opinions, particularly derived from international best practice, on some of the other themes in the Bill in regard to what would be the best approach for us to take to move from what is in the scheme to real life, for example, with regard to marine protected areas, MPAs, architecture and so on? For me, the key issues include public engagement and co-creation. In an ideal world, from Professor Crowe's knowledge of how this operates in other jurisdictions, what is the best way to do that? That is the first issue.

The second issue is the policy statement because that is crucial to ensure we have a proper plan-led approach. Based on Professor Crowe's knowledge of other jurisdictions, where has that worked well and which jurisdictions should we follow? On the designation process, does Professor Crowe have any information from other jurisdictions about how that operates in real time and in the real world?

There is an issue with existing authorisations. There is provision in the general scheme whereby existing authorisations that may not be consistent with conservation requirements could still be allowed to continue. We discuss this with the officials last week. Is Professor Crowe aware of other jurisdictions or EU member states which have managed that tension and have the strongest possible conservation of marine protected areas, while also having provisions in place that would permit certain types of existing authorisations and activities? We had a big conversation about enforcement, who does what and how to do it. The way the Department set that out for us is very complicated. When the range of management authorities is added in it becomes a complex area to understand and navigate. Again, do other jurisdictions have a guide to how we could follow those?

The final two issues are monitoring and restoration. Professor Crowe referred to monitoring in six-year cycles and so on. We had some discussion on whether we should be monitoring the network, the individual MPAs, who does it, how they do it and so on. With regard to restoration, when the formal regime is introduced do we start to identify problems where the existing designations have not been adhered to? How do we ensure restoration is not something that is possible but something that is required where it needs to be done? Does Professor Crowe have any reflections on those issues, particularly as regards countries that are already ahead of the game? He and I have spoken about some of those countries before. Anything he could share with the committee would be very welcome.