Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 41a:

In page 14, between lines 10 and 11, to insert the following:

"(4) On proof by the owner of the land concerned that the steps taken in relation to that land by a person authorised under subsection (2) needlessly resulted in damage or loss of a significant character to that owner in respect of that land, the person so authorised shall be liable to pay compensation to him or her therefor and, if the person so authorised is not the owner of the trees referred to in subsection (1), the person shall be entitled to be reimbursed by the owner of the trees in respect of any payment the person has properly made to the first-mentioned owner under this subsection.".

Amendments Nos. 41a, 41b and 41care replicated in amendments Nos. 41d, 41e and 41f.

Amendments Nos. 41a and 41d arise as a consequence of legal advice received from the Office of the Attorney General to the effect that provision should be made for payment of compensation to a landowner whose land has been entered for the purpose of removal of vegetation or vermin from that land and where such action has needlessly resulted in damage or loss to the owner of that land. The compensation is payable by the person who was authorised to enter the land. Compensation will not be payable by the Minister. Amendments Nos. 41b, 41c, 41e and 41f are grammatical changes and make no material change to the subsection.

Amendment No. 71a introduces a new section to deal with compensation. Deputies will recall that on Committee Stage there was lengthy discussion on the need for the Bill to provide for payment of compensation in circumstances where there is refusal of an application for a felling licence. In light of those concerns, particularly from Deputy McNamara, who fought a lengthy argument on this issue, I sought the advice of the Office of the Attorney General in the matter and the advice I received was that there would be a risk of a finding that the provisions of the Bill permitting refusals of felling licences would be unconstitutional if they failed to provide for compensation.

The purpose of this proposed amendment, for which I have received Government approval, is to give effect to this legal advice to provide for compensation where it is legally necessary to do so. While the outright refusal of an application for approval or licence is infrequent, there are, and will continue to be, instances where an approval or a licence may be refused by the Minister, usually for reasons of environmental protection.

It is intended that compensation will be provided through regulations to be made by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine which will require the consent of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. The proposed amendment limits the circumstances in which compensation will be payable. In the case of refusal of a felling licence or forest road licence, compensation will be limited to the depreciation in the value of the trees that is attributable to the deterioration in the quality of the timber as a consequence of the refusal. This is similar to the provision included in Northern Ireland and UK legislation. Restrictions on the payment of compensation are also listed, including where a licence is refused for environmental reasons, for example, in a designated nature conservation area or for reasons of public health or safety.

I am confident that the measures outlined here, which will be expanded upon by way of regulations, will address the legal concerns previously raised. It is my intention to have the necessary regulations completed within six months of the passage of this Bill through the Oireachtas.

I acknowledge the contribution of Deputy McNamara, who has arrived in the Chamber, and his insistence, and that of others, on seeking clarification from a legal perspective.

See this speech in context