Ms Attracta U? Bhroin:

I am joined by my colleagues Dr. Donal Griffin, marine policy officer for Fair Seas Ireland, Mr. Pádraic Fogarty, campaigns officer for the Irish Wildlife Trust, Ms Sinéad Loughran, marine policy and advocacy officer for BirdWatch Ireland, and online by Mr. Patrick Lyne, officer for the Irish Whale and Dolphin Group. We wish to express our sincere appreciation for the invitation to engage with the committee in this hearing for the pre-legislative scrutiny of the general scheme of the Bill. This invitation is a welcome acknowledgement that the Irish Environmental Network, IEN, the coalition of national e-NGOs in Ireland, represents a key constituency of stakeholders with interest, experience and expertise on these matters. We welcome the publication of this long-awaited general scheme. Ireland is already approximately nine years late delivering on the obligation to provide for MPAs under the EU marine strategy framework directive, MSFD. This delay further compromises Ireland’s implementation of the maritime spatial planning directive, including Ireland’s maritime spatial plan, the national marine planning framework, NMPF, and the certainty maritime developments and activities need to advance under the Maritime Area Planning Act 2021 and other legislation, knowing where they can and cannot hope to operate. The importance of new national legislation allowing for the identification, designation and management of new protected areas cannot be overstated. In addition to the above, some further benefits and relevant considerations are outlined. We would be happy to elaborate on them today if it is useful for the committee. Further information is included in our detailed submissions.

Marine protected areas are an essential conservation tool employed by countries across the world to deliver a healthy planet through healthy seas, reversing biodiversity loss and decline and, among other things, by helping to mitigate the impacts of climate change and in the maintenance of the atmosphere essential to all life on earth.

As this committee will well understand, Ireland is among one of the EU’s largest countries when our marine territory is also considered. Therefore, we have a huge moral responsibility for the stewardship of this area not just in the context of the European Union, but in a planetary context. I welcomed the Department's remarks in its opening statement in that regard.

Successful and effective marine protected areas can be a driver of good biodiversity, climate, community, social, economic and health outcomes. Therefore, creating new marine protected areas in Irish waters that effectively protect and restore Ireland’s seas is not only an investment in nature, but also in sustainable economies and societies in Ireland and a healthy future, particularly for all the communities in constituencies all around our coast.

However, Ireland has failed to meet good environmental status, GES, which is the fundamental objective of the marine strategy framework directive from which the requirements for MPAs derive, for biodiversity, commercial fish and shellfish, as well as sea-floor integrity, while the environmental status of food webs in Ireland’s marine environment is unknown. We can expand further on this and other areas of concern.

However, these categorisations hide the shocking actual figures behind them. Moreover, the National Biodiversity Data Centre has highlighted 1 million species worldwide are now in danger of extinction. In Ireland, we have 31,000 species recorded to date, of which only 10% have had their conservation status assessed and yet, there is still a fundamental lack of knowledge of what needs protecting and how to protect it. We also need to act to protect that which is unknown, rigorously apply the precautionary principle and increase our investment in independent scientific research in order that we can safely and appropriately use, conserve and restore our marine environment.

Turning then to the general scheme, the basic framework includes a number of positive ingredients essential for delivery and implementation of marine protected areas, for example: the concept of targets; highlighting key legislative tools such as strategic environmental assessment; provisions on public participation; involvement of expertise; and objectives for individual MPAs, together with considerations related to monitoring and enforcement. These are welcome in principle. However, we wish to be clear that even in respect of these basics, there is a grave concern on the overall lack of robustness, ambition and detail undermining their ultimate contribution within the legislation.

Additionally, there are serious gaps and weaknesses in other fundamental ingredients necessary for effective MPA designation and implementation. These issues are, for example, but not limited to, weaknesses in respect of designation targets; timelines and time limits within the scheme for key actions and decisions; requirements on data collation and information; inadequacies on the species and habitats and other protections considered; considerations and processes informing designations; nature of MPA designations, types and hierarchies and provision of an ecologically coherent and representative network; management; monitoring; enforcement; and resourcing. These, together with matters which seriously limit or puncture the protections to be afforded by an MPA are compounded by weak and ambiguous language overall and an extraordinary level of ministerial discretion throughout.

Evaluated as basic legislation in terms of what it can deliver as an outcome, it falls very short, leaving scope for delay, weak implementation and poor, inadequate protection. It falls far short of the expectations of our members focused on this area. In particular, of the most serious concern are issues such as the failure to permeate and link the general scheme with the wider legislative architecture necessary to clearly inform the legal purpose of this MPA legislation and which should inform key actions and decisions by various actors throughout the legislation; serious transposition issues; and a failure to address issues within other legislation, for example, aquaculture. This is compounded by two further failures. First, a failure to provide clearly for access to justice provisions, that is, the ability to hold to account before our courts in respect of public authorities, private bodies and individuals, and second, the failure to adequately address the issue when delayed MPA designations intersect with authorisations already granted.

We will be happy to expand on our concerns in respect of these and other areas of interest to the committee and our recommendations accordingly. We welcome members' questions and will do our best to answer them or revert with any further detail or clarifications required or both. I thank members for their attention.