Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chairman.

Deputy Howlin mentioned the State. I have no difficulty with 30 years and increasing the period of time for the State. In contrast to what was said, my experience as a councillor was that I saw State land being taken over by private interests, particularly near the sea. It was just appalling. I have no problem if it is done properly but it seems to be stuck into this limbo legislation and I am unsure why that is. I am not sure how seaweed harvesters will be affected. If we are going into the 60-year period immediately on the passing of this Bill, how does that affect the seaweed harvesters? Are they in limbo or are they not? It is clear from this that we will be going back to ground zero, back to pre-2009, when the three ways that one could register and have a right were set out. First, there was the doctrine of the lost modern grant under the Prescription Act 1832. I can see that the Minister’s colleague in the Seanad went through that Act. There were various commentaries from various experts in law, including Professor Wylie, who called it an impenetrable Act, to put it mildly. That was one of the Acts. The other two ways were by prescription and by common law. I understand that all three ways have been brought back from the dead temporarily, two for a transition period in relation to what is pending or before the courts. When the set-up under the new Part starts again, we will be looking at the lost modern grant as the way forward.

As one can imagine, I am having difficulty with this. I used to think that Kafka was difficult but Kafka is very easy compared with all of this stuff. I was caught by surprise today. I am very grateful to Deputy Howlin. My major point is in regard to seaweed and those who gather it. I am very disappointed, and it is not the Minister's fault, that we have no policy on seaweed. In the previous Dáil, my colleague and I tabled a motion with the help of Sinn Féin and other Deputies on this side of the House. I tried to make that motion as non-argumentative and inclusive as possible. We highlighted and read out all of the reports that had been done. The interdepartmental committees and the cross-party committees recognised the importance of what traditional harvesters had achieved on the ground in the first instance. Of equal importance was the potential that there is in seaweed. I do not know how many years later it is now, but we have no policy on seaweed. They were utterly forgotten within all of this limbo legislation as well. I will leave it at that. I thank the Acting Chairman for giving me opportunity to jump in here. The Minister might clarify the points I have made.

See this speech in context