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

The organisation that the Minister accuses of working against him is the only organisation in this country which, in the 17 years that this issue has gone on, has produced proposals for a solution. Less than 18 months ago, the chairman of our organisation, Mr. Michael Fitzmaurice, was described in a telephone call by the Taoiseach as a patriot. What has changed? Was there something to be gained from calling him a patriot then, while now suggesting that the same people are working against the Government? I do not really understand that.

The Minister says the legal agreements are modelled on those which have been agreed with groups of turf cutters from Clara bog, Carrownagappul bog and Curraghlehanagh bog. I am very familiar with what is going on there. The Minister may well have come to an agreement with some turf cutters on Clara bog, but he has not come to an agreement with all of them. In fact, the ones the Minister has not come to an agreement with are people who own large amounts of that bog. Is it fair that they are being left out?

The Minister referred to Carrownagappul bog which was held up as an example of one that was working. It was said that if only we would all do what they were doing, the problem would be solved. Deputy Paul Connaughton is connected with that bog. If that bog is solved, why in the last month have people gone back to cut turf on it? Last year, they did not do so because they believed that the Minister was trying to accommodate them. Subsequently, they have discovered that the deal on offer is not like-for-like. A 65 year licence is not the same thing as owning a bog. If a licence-holder dies, it is non-transferable, which is not the same. If the National Parks and Wildlife Service deemed that a person had cut very little turf, they would be out on their ear after a couple of years.

There is a serious question to be answered here about indemnification of bog owners. One of the major concerns expressed at the Peatlands Forum was the issue of flooding neighbouring lands and damaging livestock. We were seeking indemnification for those people. It seems that the Minister sorted out the indemnification for the State and to hell with the turf cutters, but we are not buying it.

See this speech in context