Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I wish the Minister the best of luck with it.

The cessation of the turf cutting compensation scheme has caused much concern for quite some time, and major concern in recent weeks because legal agreements were sent to those who signed up to the scheme. A frequently asked questions document was sent with the legal agreement and one of the questions was with regard to what the letter was about. The answer stated under the cessation of turf cutting compensation scheme in order to finalise - a very important word - compensation arrangements applicants must sign a legal agreement with the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht. It also stated the letter included the legal agreement the person was being asked to sign, with the instruction to return both copies of the agreement to the Department within four months.

One of the implications of signing this finalising legal agreement is that if the more than 700 families who wanted to be relocated, or signed up to be relocated under the compensation scheme, sign up they will be told that if an alternative bog is not found by 2017 in the case of the first bogs designated, or 2018 otherwise, then the Minister may move these people to another scheme. This other scheme is financial compensation, something to which they did not sign up and something about which we warned them, but now their eyes have been firmly opened.

Some people will say 2018 is a long way away and all of the relocation bogs will be organised by then. Perhaps if we had a competent National Parks and Wildlife Service it would happen and perhaps if we had a Minister who would really work with turf cutters it might happen, but this is not what is happening. As a result, since 1997 none of the 53 supposedly special area of conservation bogs has been successfully organised with regard to relocation for the turf cutters affected. The idea that between now and 2018 something will happen all of a sudden and all of these people will be satisfied is barely credible to say the least. The Turf Cutters and Contractors Association warned - I am bringing in its message; these are not my words but those I have been asked to bring in - that all the Government was trying to do was slowly but surely stop people cutting turf. Now it transpires, and is quite clear, that the scheme was a halfway house to stop people cutting turf.

Other concerns have been raised in this regard, one of which is whether it will put a burden on the land. It will and there will be a cost to this. Who will bear it? It looks like it will be the turf cutter. There is also an issue with regard to indemnity but we will return to this.

See this speech in context