Holly Cairns (Cork South West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Rural Independent Group for bringing forward this motion. I do not agree with all aspects of it but I welcome that it is highlighting the issue of flooding impacting families, communities and businesses across Ireland. Last weekend we had the first of the winter storms, Storm Aiden, but west Cork has already been hit by wave after wave of flood events. Bantry in particular has been flooded multiple times, but so many other towns and areas have been affected as well, including Skibbereen, Dunmanway and Rosscarbery. The list goes on and this happened over the summer as well. Families and businesses in these areas are deeply concerned about the risk of more floods as the winter storm season starts. As the motion states, flooding has far-reaching and devastating impacts across a range of factors from the economic to the emotional toll. Flooding is desperate at the best of times, never mind in the midst of one of the hardest years for communities and small businesses. It is imperative that they are supported and that immediate action is taken to address the underlying issues.

The Government needs to develop a two-pronged strategy that addresses the underlying issues and the immediate needs. Policies that cause climate change, building on flood plains, poor maintenance of infrastructure, poor management of agricultural land and a lack of forestry all contribute to the increase in flooding. We need to address causes as well as building defences. Our planning, land use and agricultural policies need to reflect this reality. We need to start looking at issues more comprehensively. We need to adopt a watershed approach to river flooding which takes an integrated view of the whole river system. Flood management projects must be rolled out alongside afforestation, habitat restoration, water quality improvements and better planning. In coastal areas, wetlands and beaches need to be preserved and protected. Over the summer, I was moving back and forth between local authorities, the EPA and the National Parks and Wildlife Service trying to ensure the law was being enforced for beaches such as Long Strand and the Garrylucas marsh. We need a commitment for action in these areas. We need to prioritise and use natural flood management measures strategically.

For a people who claim to value the land, we do not value nature-based landscape solutions. Forestry, bog restoration, planting hedgerows and sustainable urban drainage are essential and established cost-effective solutions. When larger projects are necessary, they must happen in a timely manner and in consultation with local communities. Too often, decisions are made for communities leading to unnecessary delays and objections, whereas a more participatory approach would help address local concerns at the outset. Our flood management planning needs to adhere to the Aarhus Convention and EU directives on public participation to enable individuals, groups and small businesses to be involved in the decision-making process. Local people have a deep understanding of the problems and potential solutions in their areas. If the OPW took a more inclusive and proactive approach by involving the public in many of these issues, planning delays, reviews and objections would be avoided in the first place.

As this motion states, the Government needs to accelerate its planned flood defence projects. Currently, Bantry, which floods regularly, will not have the culverts to prevent fluvial flooding until at least 2022 or 2023 and the flood relief scheme for tidal flooding is not expected to be finished until 2027. Those schemes are under way. According to information provided to me by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, the proposed schemes for Castletownbere, Inishannon and Schull are not even at the design and planning stage yet and are scheduled to be completed by 2027. This is incredibly worrying for those communities. In the meantime, the Government needs to put in temporary infrastructure and targeted supports. If the square in Bantry is going to keep flooding for the next seven years, the county council should be funded to provide flood gates, at the very least, for premises and small businesses, as well as other small-scale but necessary interventions.

As the motion states, the current approach to flood insurance is not fit for purpose and the Minister for Finance needs to work with the industry to come up with a solution for this. While the emergency humanitarian scheme is welcome, it needs to be reviewed. In response to a parliamentary question, the Tánaiste informed me that 27 businesses from County Cork applied for the scheme relating to flooding events in August. Of those, 17 have been successful, which is great, but four were unsuccessful and six are pending. We need that system to be accessible to everyone who needs it. Of the completed applications, almost one fifth are rejected. A case in Bantry related to a technical requirement. These places will flood again and again. We should have systems that work for everybody and not against some. Every business affected should get support. The process needs to reflect the reality on the ground.

The motion also references the predicted increase in flooding events both in terms of frequency and scale in the coming years. This increase, needless to say, is due to climate change. Any action to address flooding must also include clearly defined, enforceable and just climate action. Ireland has repeatedly failed to meet its moral and legal obligations to reduce emissions. By this year, we were supposed to have achieved a 20% reduction in emissions on 2005 levels. However, the Government's annual transition statement projects it will be in the range of 5% to 6%. The current focus on efficiencies over achievements and placing responsibility on individuals rather than big industries has failed. If we are serious about addressing floods and keeping people on the land, we need climate action.

People in rural areas, farmers and fishing communities understand the situation. They know that change is inevitable and they have always responded to these challenges. A just transition needs to be at the centre of all climate policy and rural areas really need that reassurance. Without proper support and assistance in moving to more sustainable practices, climate action will be punitive, punishing the disadvantaged and those with no choice. While the Government’s climate action Bill is welcome, it is already clear that it has serious issues, with shortcomings on climate governance, accountability, target ambition and a glaring insufficiency with regard to just transition, which is important for rural areas.

Experts speaking before the Joint Committee on Climate Action, such as UCC's Dr. Áine Ryall and Maynooth University's Professor John Sweeney, have highlighted issues with vague language and the absence of accountability in the Bill. These criticisms are especially relevant given the Supreme Court's unanimous climate case ruling that the Government's unlawful national mitigation plan was deficient in detail on reaching targets. I can only hope that the current Government has learned from this and will introduce the necessary detailed and precise legislation, which has accountability and a just transition at its centre.

Communities are going to experience flooding. Homes, shops and business will be damaged. This motion rightly demands action to mitigate these occurrences, and in the meantime to provide the necessary support for communities. We need small-scale interventions now, not next year. We need guarantee schemes and supports while we wait for large projects.

This motion has the right intention but I certainly do not agree with all aspects of it. It is worth highlighting that it calls on the Government to, for example:

— immediately introduce a ‘ring-fenced’ budget to each local authority to allow for cutting back road-side verges, hedges, and fences in rural communities, in the interests of flood risk prevention and road user public safety;

The motion contradicts itself. Damaging hedgerows is not in the interest of flood risk prevention. If anything, we need to look at planting more. The fewer roots there are in the ground, the less the soil is able to hold the water. That is the basic science. I am, however, in favour of its intent to address flooding and support rural communities. People simply cannot continue to go through the trauma of flooding without more support.

See this speech in context