Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Wednesday, 12 November 2025
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport
Active Travel and Greenways: Discussion
2:00 am
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Today's meeting will be in two separate public sessions. The first session will be with representatives of the community and landowners. The purpose of today's meeting is to discuss the planning, delivery and impact of Ireland's active travel and greenway programme, a subject that inspires both enthusiasm and unease across the country. The committee recognises the potential of greenways as a positive national asset and the extent to which they support active travel, sustainable tourism, rural enterprise and healthier communities but it is also really important to acknowledge that the experience on the ground, particularly in rural and agricultural areas, has raised serious and genuine concerns. Those concerns are around consultation, compensation, the use of compulsory purchase orders and the effect on private property, livelihoods and trust between local communities and State bodies.
This morning, our task is to explore how we can achieve balance between national policy objectives and local realities and between public benefit and private rights, as well as the difference between progress and respect. I will call on the witnesses to make their opening statements in the following order: the Irish Farmers Association followed by the National Greenway Action Association and finally, the Déise Greenway group. On behalf of the committee, I am pleased to welcome from the Irish Farmers Association Mr. Paul O'Brien, regional chair and chair of the IFA infrastructure project team; and Ms Geraldine O'Sullivan, senior policy executive. On behalf of the National Greenway Action Association, the committee is delighted to welcome Ms. Cleona O'Shea, Mr. Morgan Lyne and Ms Lucy Fabby. Finally, from the Déise Greenway group, I welcome Mr. Garvan Cummins.
I will read a note on privilege for members and witnesses. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of that person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative they comply with any such direction.
Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where they are not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting. In this regard, I ask members partaking via MS Teams that prior to making their contribution to the meeting, they confirm they are on the grounds of the Leinster House campus.
I invite Mr. O'Brien to make his opening statement on behalf of the IFA. The standard time for opening statements is five minutes.
Mr. Paul O'Brien:
I thank the Chairman and committee members for inviting the Irish Farmers Association to address their meeting on this very important issue for farmers. I am joined by Ms Geraldine O'Sullivan, IFA senior policy executive.
The IFA welcomes the opportunity to outline its views and concerns regarding the development of greenways across rural Ireland and to highlight the serious implications these projects have for farm families, rural communities and the agricultural sector. The IFA's position is clear and constant: greenways should, wherever possible, be developed on public lands and not on privately owned farmland. This principle is aligned with the Government's Strategy for the Future Development of National and Regional Greenways of 2018, which states, "The preferred model for future Greenways is to use lands already in the undisputed ownership or control of the State, either through Government Agencies, Government Departments or Local Authorities." Unfortunately, this principle is not being upheld in practice. Many proposed greenway routes are being planned across privately owned farmland rather than public or State lands. This approach is deeply problematic and is causing significant anxiety and hardship for farm families, whose livelihoods depend on those lands. The impact of greenways cutting through a working farm can be severe, including disrupting normal operations; dividing holdings; creating safety risks; and undermining the long-term viability of farm enterprises.
The IFA is totally opposed to the use of compulsory purchase orders, CPOs, for greenway projects. Greenways are an amenity project, not essential public infrastructure, such as national roads or power lines. The code of practice for greenways agreed between the IFA and Transport Infrastructure Ireland clearly provides for voluntary land acquisition agreements as the appropriate mechanism for securing access when required. This approach ensures that projects proceed based on mutual agreement, respect for landowners and community consent, not compulsion.
Many of the proposed greenway routes, if implemented as planned, would sever and divide active farms. This is wholly unacceptable. Dividing a farm disrupts its physical layout, management and animal movement. It creates new and unnecessary biosecurity and safety challenges and may make some farms unviable. The severance of farmland cannot be justified for recreational projects and must be avoided in all cases.
It has been suggested by some local authorities that certain greenways would follow old or abandoned rail lines. However, in most cases, these lands have long since been reintegrated into active farm enterprises. In many areas, the original railway corridor has been incorporated into private holdings for decades and is now home to houses, yards and productive farmland. It is therefore misleading to suggest that these routes are available for public use or that they constitute abandoned infrastructure. In reality, they are essential to the day-to-day operation of family farms and cannot simply be reclaimed without causing major disruption and loss.
Greenways can only succeed where there is genuine community support. Farmers are key members of rural communities and have a long and positive history of co-operation, including facilitating public access on permitted walks throughout the country.
However, that goodwill must not be taken for granted. Successful greenway developments require trust, transparency and voluntary agreement. The imposition of routes across farmland without consent damages that trust and erodes community cohesion.
Across the country, IFA members have reported a lack of meaningful and practical consultation and engagement on greenway projects. In many cases, farmers have had no direct contact from project promoters until a project has gone too far and has reached the preferred emerging route corridor stage. Prior to this, farmers feel the consultation is a box-ticking exercise and a lot of work and design on the route is a desktop exercise. Most local authorities have declined to attend IFA-organised meetings with affected landowners. This approach is unacceptable.
Constructive dialogue and not confrontation should be the starting point for all greenway planning. Early, open and respectful engagement is essential if projects are to gain the confidence and co-operation of local communities. Farmers have raised a range of genuine concerns relating to greenway developments, including: loss of privacy and intrusion on family homes and farmyards; security risks and potential for antisocial behaviour; rural crime concerns, with greenways providing new access routes to private lands; animal disease risks, particularly the spread of tuberculosis through disruption of wildlife habitats; environmental disruption, especially where work impacts badger populations or established field systems; and littering and dog control issues, with implications for livestock welfare and local amenities.
These are not theoretical issues, but daily realities for rural communities and they must be taken seriously in project design and management. The IFA continues to engage constructively with local authorities across Ireland in highlighting farmers' concerns and seeking practical and fair solutions. Our approach is based on co-operation, respect for private property and the recognition that the people who live and work on the land must be partners in any development that affects them. The IFA has assisted farmers on greenways in many counties across the country, including in Kerry, Galway, Louth, Clare, Sligo, Leitrim, Cork, Donegal, Mayo, Westmeath, Dublin, Kildare, Offaly, Laois and Limerick.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask Mr. O'Brien to conclude. Time is of the essence. I just want to be fair to the other witnesses as well.
Mr. Paul O'Brien:
Very quickly, while the Government has legal powers to use CPOs for public infrastructure, it is important to recognise that greenways are not comparable to roads or utilities. In recognition of this, the IFA engaged with TII and local authority representatives to negotiate a code for greenways. The code establishes a fair and transparent framework for voluntary land acquisition agreements, providing an alternative to compulsory purchase and ensuring the rights and interests of landowners are respected.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. O’Brien. I call Ms O’Shea to make her opening statement on behalf of the National Greenway Action Association.
Ms Cleona O'Shea:
I thank the Chair. I wish the Chair, Deputies and Senators a good morning. I speak today on behalf of the farmers, homeowners and rural communities who are under relentless pressure from TII's greenway programme. We support sustainable recreation but not at the cost of private property, livelihoods or constitutional rights. What is happening across rural Ireland is a State-led encroachment on land that has been paid for by families over generations disguised as so-called greenway development. Councils and TII are placing property owners under undue pressure, issuing threats of CPO and ignoring viable public land options. This is not balanced planning. It has become an abuse of process. Projects that should unite communities are dividing them and are creating fear, stress and generational conflict. People cannot invest, sleep or plan under the constant shadow of CPO. Many older property owners are finding this process deeply distressing. It has become all-consuming, leaving them feeling isolated, threatened and fearful for their homes and their future.
Across the country, the pattern is the same: budgets spiral out of control. The cost of south Kerry's greenway has risen from €4.5 million in 2014 to more than €22 million today, and not one kilometre has been completed yet.
Consultants are paid millions on receipt of invoices while property owners wait years for compensation, which fails to reflect the true loss and lasting impact on families and livelihoods, and then are taxed on it. Communities live in limbo, property is destroyed and devalued, environmental regulations are ignored and through it all, there is no accountability.
TII claims to provide oversight, yet councils act unchecked. Public consultation has become a formality. Maps are drawn by people who have never walked the land they plan to take. The very people who secure Ireland's food supply are being treated as criminals and dragged through costly court cases. Meanwhile, State-owned bodies like Iarnród Éireann can refuse access without fear of CPO, while private citizens face an immediate threat. There is one rule for the State, another for its citizens. That runs counter to the rule of law itself. Let us be clear. The abandoned rail line narrative must end. These lands are not abandoned. They were bought, paid for and reclaimed through generations of work, sweat and tears. Families invested their lives in restoring and integrating these lands into productive farms and rural livelihoods. They are not TII’s to take back by stealth or by policy.
This entire process is Cromwellian in nature, rooted in a colonial system that was never on the side of the Irish people. It is a mechanism of dispossession, a relic of a past when land was taken from those who worked it and handed to those who ruled over it. Generations fought and died for the right to own and protect their property. That right must never again be undermined by the State. No forced project will succeed. The resentment will outlast the Tarmac.
Greenways, as they are now being delivered, cut through productive farmland, wildlife habitats and protected areas. Livestock, machinery and chemicals all create safety risks that are being ignored. There is little or no thought given to biosecurity and how opening corridors and displacing wildlife increases the risk of TB and other diseases. Who carries the liability when disease spreads or accidents occur? It will be the farmer, not TII.
The code of practice is a box-ticking exercise. Public land is disregarded, engagement with property owners is minimal and desktop studies replace real environmental assessments. Routes are predetermined and so-called voluntary agreements are often made under undue pressure or implied threat of CPO.
We call for the following immediate actions: remove CPO powers permanently from all greenway developments; suspend all current greenway projects involving private property until a new framework is in place; restrict future greenways to public land only, except where a property owner freely consents without pressure or threat; establish independent oversight of TII and all councils involved in greenway delivery; and commission a national audit of economic, mental health and community damage caused by current greenway practices.
Until these reforms are made, there can be no access to, mapping of or surveying of private land. Without trust, there can be no progress, no dialogue and no agreement. An Taoiseach himself warned that when we get into CPOs for greenways, we are in trouble. That trouble is now here. It is eroding trust, destroying relationships and deepening division in rural Ireland. Let me remind this committee that we are the public good. For generations, it has been property owners who provided land for essential infrastructure, often freely and in good faith. That goodwill built modern Ireland but it is now being eroded by the misuse of authority and disregard for fairness. When the State places pressure on those who have long co-operated in the public interest, it undermines the trust that is essential to genuine partnership. It is time to act. It is time to end the intimidation, end the misuse of power and restore fairness and respect for the people who sustain this nation, the very people members were elected to represent. Even today, TII has chosen not to sit at the table with us, a decision that speaks volumes.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Thank you. I call Mr. Cummins on behalf of Déise Greenway.
Mr. Garvan Cummins:
I thank the committee for the invitation to the meeting. I co-founded the voluntary community campaign group, Déise Greenway, in 2013 for the repurposing of the old Waterford to Dungarvan railway line into a greenway. We were very much inspired by the Great Southern Trail group in Limerick, who created the first greenway in the country in the early 1990s. Our campaign led Waterford City and County Council, led by CEO Michael Walsh, to construct a 46 km greenway. He predicted at the time that it would be an economic driver and a game-changer for Waterford. Almost nine years after its opening, it has proved to be exactly that.
The Waterford greenway is well up there as one of the most popular tourist attractions in the country. Waterford is a beautiful county, with lots to see and do but we did not have a hook to bring tourists and visitors in to stay for a number of days or longer.
For example, Clare has the Cliffs of Moher. Galway has Connemara and the Aran Islands. Now we have the greenway as our hook and tourists coming to us enjoy the many other attractions and activities in our county. The transformation in rural Waterford along the greenway route and beyond has been phenomenal. We are getting massive rural spend with accommodations, cafés and restaurants flourishing, and a spinoff to many other activities and attractions in the county. An old workhouse and a railway cottage have been converted into very popular restaurants. There are dozens of new accommodations throughout the county because of the greenway. There are bike-hire businesses, including one I run.
Dungarvan is now a bright colourful town, busy with visitors. A new hotel has just opened and an extension is being built on another hotel. There is also planning for another hotel. Existing hospitality businesses are on a stronger financial footing. Dungarvan has now become a foodie and hospitality town. Kilmacthomas, which faced challenging times over the past decades, has now become vibrant and bright with new restaurants, facilities and hope. The Suir Valley Railway at Kilmeaden has increased business massively and next door is the Mount Congreve house and gardens with a pathway to the greenway. Waterford city has now a new impressive greenway approach into the city and a bridge to bring cyclists and walkers across the River Suir to continue on the newly opened greenway to New Ross. It will be 70 km in total. Waterford city will benefit massively, as will Glenmore, New Ross and all the little townlands along the way.
Our farming communities have many opportunities for added income to their farming business. One farmer said, "A parade of tired hungry tourists passing your gate is a cash crop, it seems. They need food and somewhere to sleep." The greenway has brought great community spirit and cohesion to our rural areas. Our townlands are alive. Our proposed greenway 15 years ago was described as a monstrosity, with all kinds of unwanted and undesirables coming to our areas. Predictions of privacy issues, antisocial behaviour, disruption of daily farming, crime and robbery of houses, dogs roaming, insurance problems, arson, devaluing of houses, elderly people feeling vulnerable, etc., were all proved untrue; the opposite happened. The greenway brings wholesome people, be they tourists or locals, who bring great vibes to our area and are a higher spending group.
Locals have made the greenway their walking and cycling oasis away from the stresses of working and family life. We get many school trips from all parts of the country. People and groups with special needs use this traffic-free pathway in huge numbers. Multigenerational family groups and older adults, active retirement groups and even choirs are coming. Sports clubs are using it as a training facility. Greenways are ideal safe paths because rural roads are just not safe for cycling or walking. It has had very positive effects on rural isolation, particularly for our farming community.
The health and leisure benefits of cycling and walking are clear to be seen. Transport policy must be connected to health policy. We need people to be more active now rather than storing up problems for the future leading to increased healthcare costs, obesity, infirmity etc. Mental health is a big issue in our communities now and infrastructure like greenways have been proven to reduce stress, anxiety, drug use, etc., while promoting self-esteem, well-being, social and community cohesion and interaction. Rural areas of Mayo, Louth, Limerick, Kerry, Cork, Kilkenny, Tipperary and the midland counties are all benefiting massively from greenways but we need more.
Greenways are not just pathways for people to walk and cycle on; they are much more than that. They are essential infrastructure for both rural and urban areas. We need more corridors through our countryside other than roads for rural Ireland to remain alive. Dependency on fossil fuel transport must decline. Future generations will thank us for what we construct now. The positives will massively outweigh the negatives. Let us leave a positive legacy.
Our greenway was a former railway line that was still technically in CIÉ ownership and I appreciate that other ones are not. They are obviously not all the same.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Cummins. I think the biggest challenge I will have today is the management of time, bearing in mind we have a second witness group coming in at 11 o'clock. We have approximately 40 minutes. I acknowledge the many people in the Public Gallery. We received many requests from other stakeholders to appear as witnesses but, unfortunately, the committee could not invite everybody. I have no doubt there will be further hearings in this regard. With the permission of the members and bearing in mind the time we have available, I propose an initial slot of four minutes for each member.
I ask members to stick rigidly to this. Deputy Boland has emailed the committee and allocated her slot to Senator Duffy and I call on him now.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the witnesses to the committee. Greenways have proliferated throughout the country over the past number of years and there have been various challenges in various locations. There have also been very positive interventions in various communities. A lot of the time, having experienced this in my community, a phrase used very regularly is "consultation over confrontation", and this is always a good way to operate. In north Mayo in particular, I have had experiences of greenway developments that were very heavy-handed by the local authority. They ultimately failed because of this heavy-handedness. There are other very positive examples that have had great success.
My first question is for Mr. O'Brien. He identified the issue of fear, such as the fear of certain projects dividing farms or having biosecurity, litter control, crime or privacy issues. These issues naturally breathe a lot of fear into projects. Are there examples of existing greenways that have experienced this? Are there live issues he is aware of or that his members have communicated to him?
Mr. Paul O'Brien:
I thank Senator Duffy. I am aware of number of littering offences that have happened. I am a sheep farmer and one of our biggest fears is dog attacks. There does not seem to be what I would suggest is enough comfort for farmers, landowners or people in rural communities that this will be policed in future. The question is-----
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would like to hear about current or past issues.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What about other issues, such as biosecurity?
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does Mr. O'Brien have statistics or data on this?
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
With regard to the national greenway group, is the purpose of the group to support some greenways and to object to others? What is the general constitution of the group?
Ms Cleona O'Shea:
We are not anti-greenway. We are against the process of delivery. The way councils and TII approach CPO is way too heavy-handed. There is a lack of consultation and the veiled threat of CPO is constant. It is supposed to be a very last resort but it is what comes first. When we go to public consultation, those involved explain what they are going to do, and if we say we do not want it on our land, the next thing we are told is that there can be CPO. This is constant and it is not good enough. As I said, Iarnród Éireann can say "No", so why can I not say "No"?
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The main purpose of the group is more to change the implementation of greenways as opposed to-----
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will be rigid with the four minutes. Senator Duffy will be coming back in for his own slot, if that is okay.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
No, they have to be separate. That is the way we have always worked in the committee. When Senator Duffy's slot becomes available, I will bring him back in. Next is Deputy Michael Collins. I have forgone my own slot and I will come in at the end.
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Cathaoirleach and I appreciate it. The four-minute slot is tight and we would want four hours here. I thank the hundreds of people who came here today and are very concerned. They have been treated horribly over the past number of years and they have a right to speak. I welcome all of the witnesses, even on both sides of the argument. We have to listen to both sides. My first questions, which will be yes-no questions, are for the IFA.
If the IFA had known how TII would enforce the greenways, would it have signed the code of practice?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It would still have signed the code of practice, even with the CPO.
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes, briefly.
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does Mr. O'Brien think property owners are being treated fairly?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is it his opinion that the TII and the councils are too heavy handed?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does Mr. O'Brien think property rights are being protected fairly by the State?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will move on to the National Greenway Action Association. We have three minutes. I have nothing against Mr. Cummins personally, but my time is tight. If I had ten minutes, I would have questions for him as well. The witnesses know the clock is ticking. What is Mr. Lyne's experience of CPOs? What is Ms Fabby's situation? How is Ms O'Shea personally affected?
Mr. Morgan Lyne:
My experience of CPOs on the south Kerry greenway is not good. The south Kerry greenway was first proposed by South Kerry Development Partnership in 2011. Kerry County Council took it over in 2014 and it held meetings locally in all the different areas. I attended a meeting in Kells. Before ever coming out to meet landowners, the council engineer said at that meeting "if we do not get it by agreement, we will go for a CPO". That was like a red rag to a bull. It went belly up from there. In 2015, Kerry County Council took a vote on the CPO. Many landowners were there on that occasion and we did not want it to go for a CPO at that stage. We wanted it to appoint a negotiator on both sides so a route could be agreed. I was not opposed to the greenway, but I was totally opposed to the CPO because it has ripped the community apart.
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Lyne. I will move to Ms Fabby as time is tight. I will come back to Mr. Lyne if I get a chance later.
Ms Lucy Fabby:
I am from Mayo. We have a greenway running along the R335 to Belclare. It runs along the roadside and was to be continued in 2021. Plans were made up and money was allocated to it and approved. The money disappeared. The greenway to Belclare was never finished. The next thing was in 2023, there was a new route going up the hill into a flood plain valley and onto the side of Croagh Patrick. Our situation now is that we are in limbo for another year. This is the third year. We found out by way of a local newspaper that, at a municipal meeting in Castlebar, the county council admitted the project could not be moved forward because it did not own one length of the land.
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would like to give Ms O'Shea her chance.
Ms Cleona O'Shea:
If the greenway comes through my land, my land will be cut completely in half. I will have 750 m of greenway right through the middle of my farm. I will have 50 acres locked between the River Blackwater and the greenway and 70 acres on the other side. In our system, we do all our own work. We have our own gear. We raise beef and do tillage and there are two of us. The 50 acres by the river is silage ground because it is too wet for grazing early in the year. With two of us doing silage, that will be a week's work going over the greenway and back every day. We just cannot do it. We cannot work.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I hope we can get back in for a second round.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the witnesses. Are there any specific reforms Ms O'Shea thinks might restore trust between rural communities around greenways and the State?
Ms Cleona O'Shea:
For a start, the State needs to speak to us and there should not be severance of any farm. If we have to have it, it should go roadside where it has the least impact. The towns and villages the greenway project wants to connect have a connection on the road. If the State wants to put in a greenway, by all means it can take the road ditch and go along there, but it should not go through the middle of my farm, destroy it and totally devalue it.
They have the code of practice.
They just do not follow it. They do not do anything that is on it.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
My next question is for Mr. Lyne. I know that accommodation works have been an issue in developing the south Kerry greenway. Are there improvements that could be made in dealing with the snags and delays?
Mr. Morgan Lyne:
In my case, no. In our area they have been constructing a 3.5 km section of the greenway for about 12 months. At this stage my farm is quite fragmented. I have two land parcels in those 3.5 km. It is tarmacked at present and it is permanently fenced. Originally the permanent fence was to be along a greenway of 5 m width , with 3 m of tarmac and a metre of gravel on each side. Yesterday I measured a section on my land where 14.5 m have been taken in. There is another section where 17 m have been taken in. Then they speak about cost overruns. You will not buy a width of 5 m for the same cost as a width of 17 m. In my case I have no agreement on accommodation works or on compensation.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does the code of practice demand that all of the payments to Mr. Lyne are at the end of the project? Is there provision for part payment? Can this be changed?
Mr. Morgan Lyne:
We are in the CPO process, obviously, but we are not being dealt with correctly. Mr. O'Brien would concur on the code of practice. In the code of practice people have to be dealt with in a fair manner. Just because there is a CPO it does not mean they can ride roughshod through a farm.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I also want to ask a question of Mr. Cummins. As far as I remember, the Waterford greenway funding was announced on the same day as the south Kerry greenway. We still do not have the south Kerry greenway.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Obviously the route where Mr. Cummins is has been very successful. Has he heard any specific concern about other projects that were dealt with in a better way in Waterford? Is there any way he thinks that concerns could be improved going forward for new projects?
Mr. Garvan Cummins:
I suppose it was a lot different from some of the other greenways because it was still technically owned by CIÉ. There were 13 litigants. The then Waterford County and City Council CEO, Michael Walsh, had a very hands-on approach. He went out to all of the farmers and spoke to them. He then created an arbitration group of himself, a man from Teagasc and a leader of the litigants. Anyone with a problem would go to them.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
So there was direct contact from an early stage between the promoter-----
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Was it the communication aspect or what was it that was more successful there?
Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am really struck listening to Mr. Cummins speak about the success and benefits the Waterford greenway has brought to a range of communities and then hearing the real anger from people regarding how they have been treated by TII. There does seem to be general consensus that people are not against greenways in general but the issue is the process and particularly the CPO hanging over people. I might follow up on what Deputy Daly was exploring as to how the Waterford process worked. I came across Michael Walsh in some of my own dealings and I know how hands-on he was.
Did TII have any involvement in the Waterford greenway in the same way as it did elsewhere? Was it led on the local authority side? I recognise that Mr. Cummins said CIÉ still owned the land and there was a difference there from some of the other situations. I think he said that approximately 13 landowners were engaged with. At the end of the process did any CPO have to be applied to the Waterford greenway or was it completely by agreement in the end?
Was the code of practice that is causing so much unhappiness in place during the greenway one or has it come in subsequently?
Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It was about the code of conduct.
Mr. Garvan Cummins:
The arbitration group brought out a charter. The charter involved different landowners along the way and concerned what they were entitled to, be it fencing, cattle crossings, underpasses or overpasses. It depended. For example, a farmer might have a milking parlour on one side and the main body of his or her land on the other, so underpasses and overpasses were allowed for. The main thing was that daily farming practices would not be affected and that farmers along the way would not be put out.
Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Was CPO used in the end?
Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Those litigants-----
Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It was not their direct land.
Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Cummins.
Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will turn to the witnesses from the National Greenway Action Association. While I recognise that the land situation is different, is the sort of process that seems to have worked well in Waterford, where there is a process with some element of arbitration and a charter that sets out landowners’ rights, and trying to develop that on a greenway-by-greenway basis something they think has some prospect of success?
Ms Cleona O'Shea:
Many landowners will agree to it. In my situation, the gradient on which they want to go means that they cannot go any other way except through the middle of my land. I cannot have that because it will destroy my farm. We will not be able to work our farm the way we are working it. We bought our land back in 1982. There are two acres. Two acres out of the middle of the farm means two acres off the nitrates derogation and the single farm payment. It means two less cows and their produce that I will never have again for the lifetime of the farm. We will not be compensated for that. It just will not work.
I am on the N72. The only road frontage I have is the N72. My child cannot get planning because TII will not give planning permission where land goes onto a national road. That road needs to be upgraded, however. Upgrade the road, take my road ditch and a stretch of land inside the N72, put the greenway out by the road and everyone will be happy.
Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for all their contributions today. We have seen both the positives of greenway development and the significant issues around engagement and consultation with landowners. From my experience in my constituency, we have the Athlone to Galway greenway. I am aware of the need for these to be done through meaningful consultation rather than consultation that is a box-ticking exercise. We have seen a lot of issues in terms of privately owned farmland and the threat of CPO. Certainly, the people affected are not anti-greenway. The most frustrating aspect is the communication issues that have been raised.
Ms Cleona O'Shea and Mr. Paul O'Brien both raised issues with the consultation process. The national code of practice outlines the steps that are involved in finalising a route. It says that consultations are supposed to take place from the very beginning and there should be multiple rounds of consultation. The witnesses have provided some of their personal experiences. When the local authority, TII or whoever it is engages with landowners on the rationale for the route selection and alternatives are put forward by landowners to prevent the farm being split or whatever the case may be, do the witnesses feel there is real engagement and negotiation on these alternatives?
Ms Cleona O'Shea:
No. They come with four or five lines on a map.
Most of them are dummy routes. They are coming for the rail line. They want the rail line. We are under no other illusion. It is not going to work anymore. They want it because of the gradient, viaducts, and the tunnels. All the other lines on a map are just ticking a box. They have no intention of ever going to any of those other-----
Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does Ms O'Shea think they have their minds made up?
Mr. Paul O'Brien:
We need to understand the process as well. The first part of the process is the constraints study by the relevant county council and its consultants. That is to see if a greenway is feasible. We are suggesting, and it was always our ask, that there should be an inventory of State-owned lands taken at that stage to see how much State, semi-State or council-owned land there is to develop a greenway. We are finding that by the time you get to the second phase, which is the corridor options, and the third phase, which is the preferred route corridors, you could be two years into the process and nobody has had an interaction between the project promoter and individual farmers. We are saying that part of the code is not being implemented as it was envisaged and as it should be.
Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that right across the board? Is it across every local authority or is it being implemented in different ways in different areas?
Mr. Paul O'Brien:
This is a common theme throughout the country. We have met many county councils on behalf of our members and it seems to be a common theme. While there might be 1,200 envelopes sent to people living within the constraint area, none of them are addressed to anybody. Only 50 people may turn up to that consultation. That is not what I would class as a proper consultation given the dramatic impact it could have on people's farm businesses.
Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The code of best practice is supposed to be reviewed annually. What role does the IFA play in those reviews and how have they gone?
Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I apologise for missing the witnesses' opening statements and I thank them for their briefing documents. I live in Sligo. There is a big push for the different development stages of the Sligo, Leitrim, Northern Counties Railway Greenway. I am a cyclist and a member of Sligo Cycling Campaign. I am very much in favour of greenways not being left on their own and that there are part of active travel. They should go in front of schools rather than having them stuck out in the middle of nowhere. No one can deny that. I totally get the witnesses' concerns. Local farmers have raised an issue relating to land registration with me. If land is not registered in their names, they are concerned about compensation around that. Am I right about that? I would love to find out more about that. Is that something that can be overcome?
Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is an issue. People may have registered their land but the ownership process is taking too long.
Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that something that needs to be addressed?
Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We have an ageing population and we need to get healthier as a nation. We have to try and come up with the best possible way to work. I suppose that is what these committees are for. I recognise that having greenways out beside public roads nearly goes against the grain of what that are supposed to be. It is a very difficult-----
Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Compulsory purchase orders are the last resort and the most expensive option.
Ms Cleona O'Shea:
Anyone who has let them in is now hit with a CPO. Those let in to do any investigation were talking and were working on permissive access or whatever. In Kerry, Mayo, Achill and Connemara they were working on permissive access. As soon as they got planning permission, CPOs were enforced on them. We do not trust them. We are not letting them in. They are not coming into any of our properties unless they engage with us properly and before they put anything out in the public realm.
Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is the big message that there is not proper engagement?
Ms Geraldine O'Sullivan:
I might just come in. The issue is that there needs to be a review of CPOs on the greenways because it seems to be the default position. Rather than going through the proper steps in the guide and the code and having the engagement, it seems to be the default which is stopping proper meaningful engagement with communities. A good point was made; we were discussing it before we came in here. The farmers involved are not the public; they are directly involved in the process. The default seems to be if we do not get agreement, we are going straight to the CPO. CPOs on greenways and those kinds of projects need to be reviewed and considered by the committee.
Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have cycled on the greenway down in Mr. Cummins's area and it is wonderful. Greenways are not the answer to all active travel in my opinion. I think everyone would agree it should be linking up with routes.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I need to be very strict with time. I call Senator Mark Duffy followed by Deputies Currie and Moynihan. Deputy Healy-Rae has waited patiently as well. I did not get a slot myself yet. We will then conclude after that. I am happy to run until 11.05 a.m. or 11.10 a.m. before we invite in the representatives from TII.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I wish to go back to the general discussion about the proposals for linking settlement A with settlement B, and all the different possible lines on the map or routes to make that happen. The best approach generally is to welcome engagement from landowners who can suggest and propose different ways to make that happen. We do not have to be blinkered and tied into one particular route all the time. When the council or consultants engage, are members of the organisations represented here encouraged to engage with the council or the consultant on the proposals? Are there instances where members or landowners are refusing to engage in the process?
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does Mr. O'Brien have anything to add?
Mr. Paul O'Brien:
One of the key things we have found is that there is a major difference with the interpretation - a disused railway, an abandoned railway, a greenway over farmland. That needs to be clear. The difference is the disused rail line has come to its economic end for whatever reason that was. It is typical of the Waterford greenway and the greenway that goes up to Kingscourt in Cavan. Those still had sleepers and tracks on them which were lifted. There is no dispute about those.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am not referencing those. I am just talking about linking two settlements without a defined route. There are old disused laneways and boreens that can be used as part of the greenway link which is a smart and pragmatic route. However, if there is not engagement, there cannot be a discussion on that.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have seen some greenways where the solution was the splitting of a farm with an overpass or underpass. That is very impressive and requires huge investment. If that is the objective in trying to address the problem but the landowner does not engage in the process, that solution cannot be afforded to a landowner.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Before I finish, do the witnesses have any questions they would like me to ask TII? They have regretted the fact that they are not in the room at the same time as TII.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am sorry to interrupt. It is because of the time. Does Ms O'Shea have any questions she would like me to ask TII?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If Deputy Currie wants to use less time than four minutes, she is welcome to. We still have Deputy Shane Moynihan and I have not taken my slot yet and TII is coming at 11 a.m. Deputy Danny Healy-Rae has been here since the start so I will allow him to contribute. Perhaps Deputy Conway-Walsh can contribute in the TII session.
Emer Currie (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is unfortunate to feel the tension between the stakeholders of greenways and landowners. How prevalent are CPOs? Do the witnesses have data on the number of CPOs that have taken place?
Mr. Paul O'Brien:
CPOs have not taken place because it has not got to a stage where it has been possible to develop a greenway using the code. Effectively, what has happened is that there is a process, which is clearly marked out. We are maybe at number three and a lot of these have met a dead end. The reason is poor interaction between the project promoter, consultants and landowners. They are meeting objections at that stage.
Emer Currie (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is the fear of CPOs, rather than CPOs happening.
Mr. Paul O'Brien:
We know of CPOs, particularly in Kerry. The code was developed because of problems in places like Kerry and along the routes in Galway and Athlone. That is the reason the code was developed. Unfortunately, the people in Kerry never had an opportunity to use the code. It was only designed after the CPO process happened for them. Using the code, where we are now, none of the projects that have happened have got to the stage of a CPO process. I wanted to clarify that.
Mr. Morgan Lyne:
It is important to understand that the route of the south Kerry greenway was the first railway that was in private ownership. Kerry County Council said it was an abandoned rail line. It was not. It closed in 1960 and, immediately, the rail tracks and sleepers were taken up and the land was sold back to the landowners. It was therefore back in private ownership. It was part of the farms. In many locations, the rail line was taken away completely. There was no sign of it. People could walk through it without realising it had been a railway at any stage. In other places, houses and farmyards had been built on it. One stretch from Glenbeigh to Mountain Stage runs quite close to the N70. There are four bridges on the N70 that can only take one lane of traffic. Kerry County Council or TII have plans to widen that stretch of road. I was at a public consultation meeting in the Towers Hotel in Glenbeigh where I proposed that the road be widened and the greenway put parallel to it. That is done in many parts of Europe. It is done in the UK. I was told by a council engineer that would never happen.
We did put proposals forward. I stress that I am not opposed to greenways, but I am totally opposed to the way it is being done, where land is being severed. In one location, I have six acres on the offside of the greenway. I have looked for accommodation works. An engineer working on my behalf has done drawings, which cost me €1,500. Kerry County Council said a roadway would not work there because it is a steep embankment.
Shane Moynihan (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I apologise for being late. I read the introductory documents in advance. I have two quick questions. The first relates to the use of CPOs. I have heard the worry and concern in the witnesses' voices. What alternatives would they suggest? We know that greenways bring benefits. How else can we design the policy intervention-----
Shane Moynihan (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will just finish the question, if that is all right. How else can we design an intervention that allows us to deliver what is ultimately something for the common good, without necessarily impinging and creating a situation whereby there is a tension between the IFA and TII?
Ms Lucy Fabby:
It is all permissive access and the farmers still own the land. The greenway goes around the land of anybody who did not want it. You can see where that happened. Some 60% of that old railway line is along the road to Newport. It is right beside the road. That was one of the first greenways.
Shane Moynihan (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I read Mr. Cummins's briefing note on the Dungarvan greenway. Do we have any lessons from how that process was led or adopted? I was on the Dungarvan greenway last year and the general sentiment I heard about it from people was hugely positive. I do not know much about the process that led to it. Do we have any lessons from that process that we could apply to other greenways around the country?
Mr. Garvan Cummins:
It has been extremely successful as a greenway. It is about the buy-in of the community. There was a lot of consultation in Waterford by the county manager at the time, Mr. Michael Walsh, and the council. He wanted to get everyone on board and did not want people, including the farming community, to be unhappy as tourists were coming. He did not want to be meeting farmers at their gates and being told the council did something to them by pushing through the greenway. His whole thing was about keeping everyone on board and happy. There were different things about its construction, but that is not what we are here for today. For example, car parks were put in so hundred of cars were not parked at the sides of roads. There are 14 car parks along the way. Different services are available along the way. It was done really well. It was also aided by natural territory because it is beside the sea and a river, and under the Comeragh Mountains. There were a number of other features.
Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am glad of the opportunity to welcome the witnesses and the concerned people behind my back. As is well known, the south Kerry greenway is in progress and has been for three or four years. Going back to 2014 and 2015, I was a councillor. There was a vote at Kerry County Council about the CPO at the end of 2014 and in early 2015. Along with Councillor Johnny Healy-Rae and a few others, I voted against the CPO. While we are for the greenway, we are against the notion of a CPO because you have to recognise that if a person owns his land, he owns his land and he should have the last say on it. These greenways are fine and grand for the people who want to walk and get out in the open air. However, you must have the agreement of the landowners. That is what I believe. TII has enough to do with roadways. Our national roads are in a desperate state. Killarney, for instance, is clogged. At the end of 2014, we begged the local authority to send down its people to meet those - there were only six or seven of them - who were not agreeing at that time. Before Christmas, at the Christmas meeting, we suggested very hard that they go down and talk to those people and get agreement. That did not happen. Now I know why it did not happen. As I understand it, the CPO is a very crude instrument because when the CPO is in place, the people in charge do not have to, and will not, talk to the landowners. I ask Mr. Lyne to answer one question. Are landowners paid for their land when a greenway goes through it?
Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Can you imagine that? Someone creates a path in your land and you are not paid for it.
That is wrong and, from what I know, when something is wrong, it cannot be right. We are for the greenway. A lot of people in south Kerry are looking for the greenway. Cahersiveen town is on its knees and a lot of other tourism along the way is on its knees. However, some other way will have to be found and this will have to be done by agreement.
I will give an example of what is happening. At present, the Garda is being used to threaten certain individual farmers. These are people who never saw a Garda car in their yards. They never contravened the law in any way in the world. Imagine now, this is what is happening when some of them are at the end of their days. A Garda car is going in after a judge has made an order. The gardaí are only doing their duty. That is their job. It is hurtful when I hear this. These are people who have never crossed the law or crossed the line. I am saying loud and clear that some other system by agreement will have to be developed to speak to the landowners. They own the land in the first place. They fought hard to keep it at one time. Maybe they have struggled to keep it. In many cases, people are still paying back what they owe on it. The system will have to be reviewed and looked at. The Taoiseach said something will have to be done. We are appealing to him as well to get out there and sort it out.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We will move on shortly to our second engagement as part of this module, which is with TII. I apologise for the time constraints. We could talk about this all day. I do not think this will be the last hearing we will have on it. We as legislators and policymakers will take away an awful lot from today. I will take away a number of things. There is an inconsistency of approach with regard to certain project teams and certain local authorities. Some projects are working well, while others are working not so well. There is an impact on property rights and livelihoods. Mental health was not mentioned today but I can only imagine the impact on people's mental health. It is important to acknowledge this.
In terms of the code of practice, the threat of CPO at the final stage and the default final position, I have researched it and there are steps such as mediation but they are not in relation to the route. They are in relation to compensation. I do not know whether there is an area to be explored with regard to an additional step of arbitration, not in the context of financial compensation but in terms of alternative routes where there are real challenges. The committee has a lot of takeaways.
I thank all of the witnesses. I reiterate my apologies for being so time constrained. We have to finish the meeting at 12 noon. It is important that we now engage with TII. We will have robust engagement with it between now and 12 noon. I thank the individuals in the Public Gallery. I presume all of them are stakeholders in this. I thank everybody. I also thank the members for respecting the time constraints. We will conclude this particular section and we will invite in Transport Infrastructure Ireland. I acknowledge that Deputies Aird and Conway-Walsh are present but I could not give them time in this slot. They may have time to engage with TII.
William Aird (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is a pity the Cathaoirleach could not give us more time.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This is the second part of today's meeting on active travel and greenways. From Transport Infrastructure Ireland, I welcome Mr. Lorcan O'Connor, chief executive, Ms Geraldine Fitzpatrick, head of roads and greenways capital programme, and Ms Mary Flynn, regional manager for the west region.
I will read a note on privilege for members and witnesses. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of that person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.
Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.
I invite Mr. O'Connor to make his opening statement.
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
I am grateful for the opportunity to appear today to discuss TII’s role in delivering active travel and greenway projects. I am acutely aware of how sensitive this issue is from listening to the previous speakers, and not least from the number of people outside Leinster House this morning.
I am joined by my colleagues Geraldine Fitzpatrick, TII’s head of roads and greenways capital programme, and Mary Flynn, regional manager. I am heartened, notwithstanding some of the feedback earlier this morning, that there seems to be a consensus generally on the merits and value of having greenways. What we need to do is try to ensure they are delivered in a fair and balanced way. We will certainly try to identify ways to improve that process during the course of this morning’s interaction.
The committee has my opening statement. I appreciate the time pressure the committee is under, so I might summarise the statement that we submitted. To begin with, that would be to clarify TII's role with regard to greenways. Unlike TII's remit for national roads, where TII has a legal remit set out in law, our remit in relation to greenways is as directed by the Minister for Transport and extends to that of an approving authority. The delivery of the greenways is ultimately the responsibility of local authorities as sponsoring agencies. That means TII does not own the greenway asset or have responsibility for its long-term maintenance.
To turn to the policy context, in 2018, the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, as it then was, published a strategy for the future development of national and regional greenways. Under that strategy, greenways would qualify for funding provided they were strategic, scenic, sustainable, segregated and with lots to see and do, which were ultimately known as the 5S criteria. The strategy also sets out the consultation process and standards required, and requires TII to devise a code of best practice for greenways. This was developed through a working group comprising the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, the Department of Rural and Community Development, rural recreation officers and representatives of various landowners. That is the code we have been hearing about this morning.
The strategy recognises that despite everybody's best efforts, there may be instances where voluntary agreement cannot be reached and an economically feasible alternative route that meets the requirements of greenway users in terms of gradient, access and things to see - to go back to the original criteria - does not exist. In such circumstances, and when efforts to arrive at a mutually agreeable solution have been exhausted, the purchase of the land using the available legal mechanisms may need to be considered.
The greenway strategy complements the national cycling network, which was developed by TII and published in 2024. That plan proposes approximately 3,500 km of cycle network connecting the main populations, transport, tourism and employment and educational hubs, and proposes making use of existing and proposed cycling infrastructure wherever possible.
I turn to the code of practice, which has been discussed already this morning. That was published at the end of 2021 and was agreed through a working group consisting of the IFA, ICMSA, ICSA, various Departments, Sport Ireland, Fáilte Ireland, local authorities and TII. Regarding compulsory purchase orders, the code outlines that the preferred mechanism to acquire land is by way of voluntary agreement. However, compulsory purchase mechanisms are allowed, albeit as a last resort to ensure the delivery of a continuous route. The code set out an agreed collaborative approach for delivering national and regional greenways aimed at achieving a balanced outcome for landowners, local authorities, stakeholders and other users. It is incumbent on the parties that agreed the code to implement it and ensure we progress greenways around the country.
A total of 186 km of greenway has been opened for public use since TII became the approving authority in 2021. TII is funding over 90 sections of greenway at various stages of delivery, 88% of which are at planning and design stage. The average funding available to the programme is in the order of €60 million each year. Greenways have been shown to offer substantial economic benefits, including increased tourism and local business growth. The committee heard about the success of the Waterford greenway earlier. Fáilte Ireland, in its greenway visitor experience and interpretation toolkit, states that the experience of Waterford, Westmeath and Mayo has been extremely positive, with transformative effects on small businesses and towns adjacent to the greenways. As stated in the greenway strategy, greenways are for everyone. They are used by pedestrians, wheelchair users, children in buggies and people on all types of bicycle. TII is committed to continuing to engage with all stakeholders to deliver more greenways across the country.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. O'Connor. We all recognise the potential of greenways, blueways and cycleways. I want to champion the blueway between Clonmel and Carrick-on-Suir in my constituency. All of them are positive national assets. This morning we have heard from many stakeholders, all of whom raised serious and genuine concerns with consultation, compensation, the use of CPO, the effects on private property, rural livelihoods and mental health - we cannot ignore that - and the importance of maintaining trust between communities and State bodies as we deliver our greenway programme. We can all work together to look at the code of practice and see what additional steps we can put in place, particularly in terms of that last resort which stakeholders spoke of this morning, namely, the threat of CPO. In terms of the existing code of practice, there was reference to the lack of consistency of approach by local authorities and project teams. That needs to be looked at again.
We will straight go to members. There is a lot of interest. There will be three minutes each, I am afraid, because I want to let everybody in, including the couple of additional members in attendance. I am first up but will defer my slot until the end. Deputy Boland has emailed the committee. She is allocating her slot to Senator Duffy.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome Mr. O'Connor, Ms Flynn and Ms Fitzpatrick. I will speak on projects in County Mayo, in particular the Clew Bay greenway development. What is the estimated cost of that project? Is that known?
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Perfect, thank you. Is TII satisfied so far with the public consultation element? I believe Barry Transportation did the consultancy on it. Is TII satisfied with that process?
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
What we understand to be the case is that the consultation process is undertaken in accordance with the code, which envisages a number of different stages of consultation. I heard from the committee's guests earlier that they are not satisfied with the way in which some of those consultations, not necessarily for the specific project the Senator is speaking about but in general, are being undertaken. In that regard, that is something we will certainly look into. In my mind, the way in which the code envisages various stages of consultation and the other initiatives that need to happen to deliver the greenway are carefully calibrated in terms of the interests of landowners, the local community, etc. If the consultation is conducted in accordance with the code, I would be happy with the way in which that has played out, but if the Senator has any specific concerns, I am happy to take those on board.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. O'Connor. I am tight on time here. In relation to the process, does he believe it will go before a Part 8 process or through An Bord Pleanála? If it is refused either through the Part 8 process or the board, is that project then dead in the water? Will the funding and money that has been allocated - it is a 6 km trail and a €12 million investment, but probably a lot more than that - be lost to County Mayo if the project is refused?
Ms Mary Flynn:
I will take that question. Specifically in regard to the Clew Bay greenway, I think the section the Senator is referring to is from Belclare to Murrisk, at the moment it is at the preferred option stage. All indications are that it will be Part 8 but that is not certain because there is a bit more to be done in terms of environmental evaluation. As for funding, we work on an annual funding model so every year TII gets confirmation of the funding available to a greenway. Beyond commitments, it is annually that we find out how much money we have in order to-----
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Ms Flynn but I have to be very strict on the three-minute time slot. I am really sorry. Deputy Cathal Crowe is next.
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Chair. I apologise to the witnesses and the committee. UHL Hospital Group representatives are next door and I am attending that meeting as well. It is a bit of a juggle here sometimes on Wednesdays. At the outset, for transparency I want to say that, beyond being a TD, I am a farmer and IFA member, so I want to put that on public record today. When I have met farmers, I always thought they were on the pig's back if they had one of these greenways proposed through their areas or their fields. I recently met a farmer and he asked me to guess how much was on offer to him to bring a greenway through his land. I told him an agricultural acre at home is about €6,000 so I said presumably it is one third of that and he would be getting some good money. I was appalled to hear what was being offered. It was an insult. For farmers and landowners reading in the local newspaper that such-and-such a greenway would be worth €12 million or €20 million to the local economy, it is an outright insult that they would then be offered a pittance from that purse.
Other speakers have asked about the reassigning of money. How much money has been moved from one project to another? It seems that only a few are being completed and yet the project hangs over landowners and local authorities without many of them progressing at this time. To what extent are funds being reassigned?
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
Obviously we are dependent on annual allocations from the Department of Transport, but that averages around €60 million per year for greenways. The money goes to where the projects are ready to actually incur the cost. We have more than 80% of the projects now at planning and design stage and it is really a factor of which ones are ready in terms of where the allocations will go.
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
One of the reasons I ask is that, during the previous Government, the then Minister, Eamon Ryan, famously came out and said there would be a 2:1 ratio of spending on sustainable travel versus traditional roads and rail, but the new Government, of which I am a member, has changed that. Has that been reflected in the spending purse TII has? Has there been a reduction?
Ms Geraldine Fitzpatrick:
We have not been advised of the actual specific breakdown of the funding, but we anticipate it will be around the same amount of €60 million per year and that is what is projected. This has not been advised or confirmed yet, and not until the sectoral plans are published, which will define what the actual amount TII will get will be.
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
And when TII talks about landowners, does it use intermediaries?
What valuation system is used when TII goes to landowners?
Ms Geraldine Fitzpatrick:
There are two parts to what happens. There are the payments under the code for a voluntary acquisition as part of the voluntary acquisition agreement. The valuation is actually determined by the CPO process, which looks at market value among other things. It is a formal process and the same process we used for the roads acquisition under CPO.
Emer Currie (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The witnesses are all very welcome. I ask about the Royal Canal urban greenway going through my constituency of Dublin West. When I first became a councillor on Fingal County Council, there was a non-statutory public consultation. That was back in 2019. In January, 2023, my colleague, Councillor Siobhan Shovlin, had an update to say they were currently in phase 3, preliminary design, and the next stage would be the statutory process and an application was due to An Bord Pleanála in 2023. It is now late 2025 and we are still at the preliminary design stage. Why has it taken so long to progress that greenway?
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
That particular greenway is within the greater Dublin area and is considered an urban project. It is actually led by the National Transport Authority. However, I can speak more generally in terms of projects.
It is all about trying to get the balance right with the application of the code and get the right balance between consultation and implementation. The Deputy is describing the various stages of a project life cycle, which include significant consultations at various stages. That means that a project takes several years. There could be other factors in relation to the project the Deputy is taking about there, whether they are technical challenges or uncertain aspects of the route. It could be about funding availability and so on. Even if the challenges did not exist, there is quite a significant period involved from when you first start looking at the potential of a project through to actual delivery.
Emer Currie (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There have been seven years of those ongoing consultations. Is that the norm?
Ms Geraldine Fitzpatrick:
It can be if there are environmental impacts as well or if there is environmental servicing required. There could be engagement with service bodies needed. There are a multitude of issues that arise. Things may have to change and policies change. It all adds time to the delivery.
Emer Currie (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The main stakeholder in this case is Waterways Ireland. Would it normally take that long to engage with Waterways Ireland?
Ms Geraldine Fitzpatrick:
There may be other issues, such as funding. I cannot comment on that particular greenway but normally, our experience of dealing with Waterways Ireland is positive. It has done a lot of work on developing greenways along the canals. It is the NTA that is the responsible body for the greenway the Deputy is talking about.
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the members of TII who are here with us today. There are hundreds of people outside and those people left home at 2 o'clock or 3 o'clock in the morning to come up here. They are here because they are seriously concerned about what will happen to their land. They have mental health issues because of this. They have massive stress issues. Some people are not eating and some are not sleeping because they do not know the future. Their future is hugely important to these people and it is important that they pass on the land. There are children outside there today and that is what the people want to do: pass on a farm that is not divided and split in two. It does not work. There are ways of doing it.
There are fantastic walks where CPO was never used. I personally have no issue with walkways and cycleways. They are a great idea but not with a CPO hanging over anybody's head. I have a number of questions and I would love more time but I am afraid I can only ask for a yes-no answer with these questions. I cannot go any further than that because I only have two minutes and I have 30 questions. That could be counted as one question, I do not care. Does the code of practice not clearly state that State-owned lands must be used first for greenway developments, yes or no?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Can TII confirm whether projects are progressing where property owners have not consented, despite councils publicly stating they will not use CPOs, yes or no?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does TII accept that the current model of delivering greenways is not working and is causing serious community division, yes or no?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Can TII confirm that property owners, who are defined in the code as major stakeholders, are only formally consulted after route maps are drawn and consultants engaged, yes or no?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have to get a yes or no answer, sorry, I only have a minute left. Yes or no?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has TII visited the committee in relation to the Beara Way and the Sheep's Head Way?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has TII ever met the committee in relation to the Beara Way and the Sheep's Head Way?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has TII met them?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would advise TII to do that because the committee has the world's best known walkways, without CPOs. That is the reason I asked that question. Has TII completed a national assessment of the number of farms that will be severed or rendered non-viable by current and proposed greenway routes?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does TII accept that farm severance represents a permanent loss of operational efficiency, not merely a temporary inconvenience?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does TII accept the permanent severance of farmland will reduce its market value and harm its potential and future productivity?
Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has TII provided guidance to councils or consultants on avoiding severance entirely by prioritising public or roadside lands, yes or no?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Thank you, Deputy Pa Daly is next.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for coming in. In our office in Tralee, we get a lot of people who are seeking more access to the greenway and we also have people who want to build higher fences to stop access, even from their own properties, onto the greenway. There is a mixed view. I know there are many people who just do not want a greenway coming near them. My experience of the Tralee to Fenit greenway is that it has been a very successful one. There is a lot of frustration in the Cahersiveen area about the delay in providing the south Kerry greenway due to the issues outlined earlier. The funding was announced the same day as the Waterford greenway. The problem is that the costs have spiralled since then. There is a serious issue in south Kerry in particular with depopulation. The three most prominent tourist hotels are all for sale at the moment - the Moorings, the Butler Arms and the Royal. It is an area that could benefit hugely, like we saw in Dungarvan, from extra tourists not only using the greenway but staying overnight in the area.
In order to move forward, is TII happy with the amount of oversight it has in making the decision to launch or establish a CPO or does it think there should be more that-----
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
I think it is worth clarifying again the role of TII versus the local authorities. TII is responsible for overall co-ordination as an approving authority for a particular project and then the grant funding to a local authority, but it is the local authority that sponsors the project and ultimately would seek the planning and run with it.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes, but given the difficulties with CPOs that we all accept, should TII maybe have more input to that?
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
The full implementation of the code is designed to ensure that it is undertaken in an appropriate manner. What I am hearing from the committee's earlier guests is that there appears to be instances where initial engagement leads to a discussion like, "Well, if you're not happy we will just CPO it." That is not what the code envisages. That is not what should be happening. I am certainly happy to engage with local authorities to ensure that is not the case.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will give Deputy Daly additional time. I ask members in the Public Gallery to remain silent please during testimony.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
So, does Mr. O'Connor feel the code of practice needs to be updated in any way or that it just needs to be enforced the way it is? Are there plans to amend it?
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
In fairness, the code was put together in a spirit of engagement and collaboration with a whole host of stakeholders, including the IFA and other farming organisations. It is subject to an annual review, and this is now up again. We are more than happy to sit down with those organisations to see whether tweaks or changes are required to the code to ensure we actually achieve the objectives that underpin the original code, which were to deliver greenways and be respectful of landowners.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Will the INHFA, the hill farmers group, also be invited in for consultation?
Shane Moynihan (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank everybody very much for coming in. I have three quick questions. I will ask all of them in one go and I can get one answer at the end. What does the current interaction and consultation process look like with regard to engaging with landowners? What touch points are there? What sort of substantive engagement is there with the landowners?
Turning to my constituency, I would like to get a progress report on when the extension of the Grand Canal greenway from the 12th lock to Hazelhatch will be completed. I know there were issues with ducting and water during previous stages of the plan.
What is the role of TII with regard to the acquisition of old structures that could be repurposed for greenways? I know that Palmerstown is inside the greater Dublin area, so it would not necessarily sit under the organisation’s responsibility, but there is the Silver Bridge, or Guinness Bridge, that spans the River Liffey between Farmleigh and Waterstown Park. I think it is an ideal structure for the facilitation of walking and cycling. Does TII have a remit or a role in the acquisition and upgrading of those structures to enable them to be used?
Ms Geraldine Fitzpatrick:
First, to address the different touch points through the code, it starts with a very broad area called the constraints study. It looks at the whole general area. At that point, what generally happens is that there are mailshots and public consultation in that regard. As the process goes through, the area being considered is brought down to a more confined version. It starts with route options, and then there is consultation with the public in general and affected landowners in terms of public engagement meetings. It is only at the point where we get to the more confined, preferred corridor, which is the next section, that the affected landowners are engaged with directly. There is also the appointment of a liaison officer, whose job it is to engage directly with the landowners and to be there to deal directly with them. If we consider, however, that we are starting from a broad area and confining it as it goes through the different steps, when we are talking about the large area, the level of engagement is less. It gets more involved as it gets to the point where a corridor has actually been picked.
In terms of the structures the Deputy is asking about, it must be remembered that we have a confined budget of €60 million per year for the whole programme. We do engage and look at park areas, but again it must be remembered that this is happening within the confines of a limited budget. The priority would be the delivery of the kilometres of greenway before we would look at the purchase of other facilities associated with it.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I call Deputy O'Gorman.
Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. O'Connor began his contribution by highlighting that there is general support for the concept of greenways. This is important. Significant capital has been allocated to the programme, some €60 million per year. Hopefully, that will not get cut but, rather, will remain and, potentially, grow in future. We know many rural towns and villages could benefit from the boost in business that we have heard has been experienced in Waterford and other areas. A big part of our national tourism strategy is to try to get tourists out of our cities and spending money in other parts of the country too.
We have also, however, heard the very real concerns from local groups and the IFA. How do we actually get this back on track? That is my central question. Do we have an opportunity with the annual review of the code? In particular, this sounds like it is about how the code is being implemented on the county-by-county basis. It was stated very clearly that its implementation, the day-to-day work on engaging with landowners, is undertaken by the local authority. We heard from the Déise group and how the chief decision-maker in the local authority, the chief executive himself, got involved, got hands-on and was actually able to address many of the issues. From what has been heard today, are there any views in terms of how the process on a county-by-county basis can be improved? How can we perhaps move away from what clearly has become quite confrontational in some areas to something that actually gets greenways and their benefits delivered more quickly but in a way that allows everybody to feel satisfied and heard?
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
As the Chair said in his introduction, there are generally positive views as to the concept of greenways. The first few successful greenways that we have had in this country have, in large part, gone along old railway lines or otherwise. These are State lands and were relatively straightforward to deliver. I suspect at the time the people involved would not have thought so, but perhaps compared with the kind of complexities we are dealing with now.
The vast majority of greenways that we are looking at into the future will involve small parcels of private land, in all likelihood, for those greenways to actually be delivered. Therefore, the code is critical to their actual delivery. By sitting down with the IFA, the other farming organisations and other stakeholders as we look to update this code in this new phase of greenway delivery, it is incumbent on all to try to navigate a way through that works for all sides. We very much still believe that the code, based on collaboration, close engagement and ultimately voluntary agreements, is the way to go. Trying to do it any other way does not work in reality on the ground. You need the community support for these kinds of projects to actually get delivered.
Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We all recognise the benefits of these projects. What we heard earlier today demonstrates the issues in terms of how these projects are being carried out. In my own constituency, we have the proposed Athlone to Galway greenway that is causing a lot of concern. Local landowners feel pressured in terms of CPO and so on. In response to Deputy Daly, it was suggested that many local authorities are not following the code based on what we have heard earlier today. Is that the case, in Mr O'Connor's view?
Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
From what we have heard, the issue is that this is not happening across the State. How can the local authorities be held accountable if they are not following the correct process? How would Mr. O'Connor suggest that this is addressed?
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
It goes back to the foundations of the code. It is an attempt, taking all stakeholders together and working together to try to find a way forward. The vast majority of people want to see these projects delivered. It is a matter of recalibrating the code or re-emphasising elements of the code if either of those are needed, to try to get people that bit more confident. I cannot sit here today and tell the Deputy that there will never be a need for a CPO. As you are delivering hundreds of kilometres of greenways, there may well be instances required. It may well even be just to tidy up title or legal issues. The point is the code does not envisage wholesale CPOs. It is a last resort and should be-----
Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What we are hearing today is that this is being suggested at a very early stage in the process to landowners. Should-----
Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Should TII have oversight of the process if that is happening?
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
The way we can deliver that oversight and hopefully be impactful in terms of changing things is through the annual review that we do not do in isolation, that we do with local authorities and landowner representative groups, that we can try to ensure that this gets back on track.
Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Are those annual reviews published?
Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
During last year's review, did the issues we heard today arise?
Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They did not arise. I find that very difficult to understand because these issues are well documented. Where is the transparency in terms of this process?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Thank you. I call Senator Cosgrove.
Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for their time and for coming in. From listening to the views expressed this morning, it is clear that everyone is in favour of greenways, but a blockage has definitely occurred.
I am based in Sligo. The first thing I want to find out about is that there was a consultation process that happened about the Bellaghy to Collooney greenway. There were three stages of that and it was going to be used as a greenway. There was only one owner and that was Irish Rail. I would like to know how much all those stages cost. Now, it is just left there. What stage is the project at now? Is it going back to phase 1? It still says on the website that it is at phase 2 but we now know it will be retained as rail and only used for rail. To me, it seems like a savage waste of money that it was allowed to go that far.
That was a consultation with just one entity. It seems there is a disconnect between consultations with landowners. I have represented someone myself who had concerns that the Sligo, Leitrim, Northern Counties Railway, SLNCR, greenway would go through their land. I raised a representation but they still have not heard anything back about it. They were raising concerns because it was actually going through their garden. They are very much in favour of having a greenway and they see the benefits of it. When will the annual review be published this year? We are coming to the end of the year. Is it private consultants rather than local authorities who are actually doing these consultations? Should there be a uniform approach across all local authorities such that it is employees of local authorities rather than private consultants? Do private consultants come in or is it people employed by the local authority?
Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Maybe that is an issue that could be looked at. If it is a private consultancy company, maybe there should be more oversight from the local authority or from TII.
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
As I said, local authorities are ultimately responsible as the sponsoring authority. You only had to listen to the guests at this committee earlier talking about the CEO of Waterford City and County Council and their direct involvement to try to ensure community support. I agree with that. To go to the Senator's point about railway lines, we obviously have successful greenways that we can point to now that used unused railway lines. There is clearly significant investment going in to both existing rail line services and their expansion. Anything that is earmarked in the all-island rail strategy would be reserved for rail.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Following on from where we left off on the proposed Clew Bay greenway, if it is turned down by either Part 8 or by An Coimisiún Pleanála, is it dead in the water?
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is a binary choice, whether it is the councillors or An Coimisiún Pleanála.
Ms Geraldine Fitzpatrick:
That is determined by the environmental side of things. If it requires an environmental impact assessment, the coimisiún will determine both the CPO and environmental sides. If it is just to do with a CPO and approval by the council, the coimisiún approves the CPO and the council approves the greenway in principle. There are a number of process, depending on the scheme.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Perfect. Okay, I am clear on that. On a more general point, how does TII select what projects to pursue? There are many examples in my own area of Mayo - I know this is county-wide - where there are community groups that are leading and engaging with landowners and have a route identified that has full community support and is being led by them. It seems that in other projects, TII pursues routes that cause a lot of consternation within communities. I am not saying that is intentional but it is obviously reality. Today is an example of it. How is the decision on what to pursue and what not to pursue made when there are many projects around the country that can be delivered with full community support?
Ms Geraldine Fitzpatrick:
The projects we are currently delivering were proposed by the local authorities in the first instance and I presume that would be fed from the communities.
They are all local authority proposed greenways. The greenways we fund have to be over 20 km long, or more than 100 km in the case of a national greenway. Smaller greenways are not funded by TII. That is a distinction. We are only involved in the regional and national. However, they would have been proposed initially by local authorities and submitted to us for funding.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In relation to the proposed Westport to Ballina greenway, is that still progressing? There were consultants working on it. I ask for a status update on that.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The feeling in north Mayo generally is that there has been a lot of investment in, say, the Great Western Greenway, but in the north of the county there has been very little investment. There is a huge opportunity. A specific project between Ballina and Mount Falcon and on to Foxford comes to mind. It could connect thousands of people and businesses. It would be positive from the perspective of tourism and active travel and needs to be pursued.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Senator Duffy.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have my own three-minute slot. I will leave that to the end. We have three non-members of the committee who have been with us from the start. I am going to give two minutes to Deputy Healy-Rae, two minutes to Deputy Aird and two minutes to Deputy Conway-Walsh. I apologise to the other members but I have to finish at 12 noon. I have not even taken my own three minute-slot yet. This will not be the last of it today.
I call Deputy Healy-Rae.
Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for coming in. They have a job to do. People are very concerned. The south Kerry greenway is well under way and many people have not been paid. If there are machines working and their land fenced off, at what stage will they be paid?
Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am sorry, when they went down the CPO route there was no more talking to the farmers and the landowners. The machines are working inside in their places. Some of them are finished; they have gone through the farms. They are fenced off. They have received no money and it has been going on three or four years. If I bought a piece of land from someone, I would have to pay upfront before I went into it. It is the same for everyone else. What is different about this?
Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am sorry, I have to interrupt Ms Fitzpatrick because my time is almost gone. They cannot talk to anyone. If they talk to anyone, the Garda will be called on them. That is what has happened and it is not good enough. Fair is fair. People had to fight to keep their small places. In one man's place they went through the middle of the only field he had for silage. He wanted them to go along the top or the bottom. He wanted to refuse to let them come in at all but they went straight through where they wanted to. There is no more talking once the CPO is in place and they are going way more than the width.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. O'Connor.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Two minutes to Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh.
Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I really appreciate this, given that I am not a member of the committee, but I come from Mayo. Something has gone seriously wrong since we had the first greenway from Mallaranny to Newport as to where we are today. People have to take responsibility for that. We have to get the CPO taken off the table. Is that a ministerial decision to get the CPO taken off the table until we pull this back and get some common sense into it?
Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We are in such a serious situation here. We need to have the CPO taken off the table.
Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If we had the CPO taken off the table it would force people into proper consultation. The quality of the consultation that is being done is disrespectful to my constituents and to the landowners who are involved here.
There are constitutional and property rights to protect people. What is happening here is totally wrong. I am all for greenways and the benefit of them is wonderful, but there is an inherent laziness and disrespect here that has to be addressed.
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
The Deputy's question goes to the nub of the issue. It is important that I get an opportunity to clarify the TII position. It appears, from the feedback of guests to this committee earlier, that the application of the existing code is not where it should be at. It also appears, in light of the various experiences that people are seeing, that updates to the code are required. That is going to happen with all of the stakeholders who were the original makers of that code.
Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Can Mr. O'Connor give me a commitment here today that the INHFA will be involved in updating the code? It is disgraceful it was not involved in the first instance.
Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Irish Natura and Hill Farmers Association, INHFA. We need it involved.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. Is it a "Yes" or a "No"?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Thank you, Deputy.
William Aird (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I only have one minute and I am sharing with Deputy Paula Butterly. I am not a member of this committee, but I have one thing to say to the witnesses from TII. Please take the CPO off the radar immediately because progress is being stopped by having it. I speak from my experience as a farmer and person who received a CPO on my land. The minute that letter came through the door, it was panic stations for me and everyone else who was associated with it. Getting a CPO is the worst single thing that can happen. It was done way back over 100 years ago and we all know the history of that. Please take it off the board at the moment. There is no need for it. TII will eventually get agreement with everyone who is associated because everyone wants greenways and walkways. They are a new thing in Ireland and they are working great. Please do not walk up to a farmer and tell him, "If you do not agree with me, I will serve a CPO on you". That does not work and it is not going to work. It gets the backs up of everybody on that greenway straight away. I am telling the TII that. Why do some of the greenways work straight away without any confusion? It is because there were no threats of CPOs. I will ask the TII one thing. Does it have to serve Bord na Móna with CPOs, or does it agree with it, given that it is State land? That is a quick question.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask Mr. O'Connor to provide a quick answer.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I call on Deputy Butterly.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask those in the Public Gallery not to intervene, please. I call on Deputy Butterly. Time is of the essence.
Paula Butterly (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Chair. I am not a member of this committee so I really appreciate this minute. I will be very quick. I have one minute. I agree with my colleagues here with regard to the CPO, but I accept that it is a policy matter and we have to take it back to look at amending it.
With regard to TII, my understanding is that once funding is approved, a route has to be decided but if it is not viable, the money has to be returned. I have been a huge advocate of blueways. I represent County Louth and east Meath. We have greenways coming out of our ears up in the Cooley Peninsula. There is a core issue here. We have spent years regenerating rural communities. We have greenways but we also have families who have held onto plots of land in order to give a site to their children so they can build beside them. This is important because the Cooley area is in rural zone 1. The cost of what will be CPO-ed is agricultural land. That is about €17,000 in the Cooley area. To buy a site in Carlingford costs between €100,000 and €120,000. If we split those sites and lands, those children will not have a home. They will not take care of their families and they will be pushed into competing for houses in County Louth that they cannot afford. Who is going to make up the gap between €17,000 and a minimum of €100,000? I am delighted to see that TII is going to look for a way forward in collaboration, but public consultation-----
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Deputy Butterly.
Paula Butterly (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I apologise to the Chair. I know I am being greedy.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have to finish. I have not had my own speaking slot yet.
Paula Butterly (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Public consultations right from the get-go show when a community is with you or not. It is at that point that we have to decide to step away or move forward.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have the final three-minute slot. I am going to take an unusual step. The witnesses said that there are a number of takeaways from today. Mr. O’Connor saw the contributions this morning. I am going to give him two of my three minutes to make a final statement and, in particular, to address the stakeholders who are present in the Public Gallery.
I will give Mr. O'Connor two minutes. What are the takeaways from today? What did he take away from this morning's discussion?
Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:
I hear that the code is not being implemented in the way it was envisaged. I hear that we need to ensure that the review that is to be undertaken in the next few weeks is thorough and hopefully gets us to a point where all parties can move forward. Not dismissing any of the points that were made here earlier, I would equally like to make the point that CPO as a last resort is necessary in certain circumstances to protect the taxpayer, but only as a very last resort and in exceptional circumstances.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. O'Connor and all of the participants. It has been a robust, candid and very necessary discussion. I apologise to members, the stakeholders and the witnesses who appeared earlier for the time management issues. This will not be the last discussion on the matter. While greenways hold enormous promise, it is clear that the process by which they are delivered must be trusted, transparent and fair. The evidence presented today shows that communication and engagement are at the heart of the progress but also at the heart of the conflict.
The committee will carefully reflect on the balance between voluntary participation and serious statutory powers. It will also reflect on how consultation can move beyond formality to genuine dialogue and how oversight mechanisms can ensure fairness to communities and the taxpayer. We will consider the code of best practice and whether it is sufficient to protect property rights, rural livelihoods, mental health, an issue I am very conscious of, and whether reform is needed.
Greenways should be a pathway of connection. They should not be about division. I will engage with the members, but I suggest we plan to engage with all sides, including local authorities and other stakeholders to ensure that we find the right balance in the code of practice between national ambition and local respect. It is very important that they co-exist. I thank everybody for their attendance, including all of the witnesses, members and the support staff as well.