Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will try to respond to as many comments and queries as possible. Where I cannot or do not, Deputies can, of course, come back to me. I am grateful for what has been the overwhelmingly positive response to this legislation and the support for its passage through the House as quickly as possible. I take on board the comments about, and frustration at, the timeframe involved. There has been a considerable amount of engagement with stakeholders to ensure this legislation is as complete and informed as possible. I take on board the comments, particularly with regard to the review and the requests for further engagement with Deputies, either though the Joint Committee on Justice or in another format. That engagement will feed into the terms of reference and the review itself.

There is agreement that the previous Act of 2009 has, in general, been very successful in progressing and modernising outdated and old law. At the same time, the particular piece of the Act we are addressing has not worked in the way it was intended. The motivation behind it was to make an old and complex system easier but the opposite has transpired. The amendment in 2011, taking into account that difficulties were already arising, extended the deadline to 2021. It also got rid of the issue around the court but even since then, what has transpired is complex. We know, as I said earlier, that approximately 75% of those who have tried to register have failed. As Deputy Harkin has just outlined, many people do not realise this is something they must do. It was not the intention of the previous Act but that legislation has not worked and that is why we are looking to amend it here.

A number of issues have been raised specifically with reference to public rights of way. I stress that this particular Bill is very specific to private rights of way. The issues raised by Deputies Mac Lochlainn and Canney and others relating to the PRA are matters for the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Deputy Darragh O'Brien. I undertake to relay to him some of those concerns relating to the PRA and public rights of way, which were addressed in a number of different contributions.

Deputy Howlin mentioned the transposition of EU directives. To veer off slightly, the only point I would make about that is that there is generally an enormous amount of work and engagement between officials in Departments and the Commission. There is a lot of back and forth and a lot of time elapses in that regard. By the time directives come to the Dáil, there is a huge amount of pressure and in many instances, fines have already accrued so there is an urgency around it. I appreciate that allowing Deputies as much time as possible is preferable.

I have dealt with the issue of extending the deadline. I am happy to engage with Deputies on the review through the committee to make sure the terms of reference are clearly set out and everybody has involvement in that.

I will deal specifically with State-owned lands and foreshore, before moving to the issue of seaweed. The Law Reform Commission recommended the longer 30-year and 60-year prescription periods for the State-owned lands. Perhaps some people do not agree with this point, but the reason for it is that it is more difficult for the State than for a private person to be aware of any prescriptive use affecting what is often a widespread and very fragmented portfolio. It is not the same as an individual with a farm or piece of land. People can see and know what is happening on their land and where there is a private right of way. The difficulty particularly applies with regard to foreshore because, by its nature, such land is often submerged and difficult to see or access. There is also a public interest in ensuring effective State control over the foreshore. Even in my discussions with Senators, there is sometimes a crossover in the discussion of private rights on beaches or foreshores as opposed to public rights. I stress that this Bill deals only with private access.

Seaweed harvesting is done under a licence. Where it is done under traditional rights, it can be a profit à prendreand that is specifically covered in this Bill. I assure the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and all the Deputies who raised this matter that anyone who exercised traditional seaweed harvesting rights for the traditional period of 20 years required to establish a right before December 2009, when this Act was initially brought in, will retain those rights under this Bill. The time period will not start from scratch. It will not be the case that as of 1 December, the clock will be set back. Anyone who had not established the 20 years before that date will have the full period they have established taken into account. It will not be erased, so to speak. The Bill does not set back the clock. Nobody will lose any established rights they had before this legislation. If anything, this Bill actually strengthens the rights for those who have established rights over 30, 40 or 60 years. It does not in any way take away from them. In fact, it strengthens those rights for them whereas the Act we are repealing would obviously have had significant negative consequences for many such people.

Many Deputies mentioned uplands, issues around mountain access and Coillte. They are matters for the Minister for Rural and Community Development. I will bring those issues back to her.

Questions were also raised about the difficulty in the language. Some Deputies observed that arcane and technical terms arise in this area. Through my officials, Ms Madelaine Dennison and others, we have tried to make the explanation as easy as possible. We obviously have to make sure that we are accurate in our language and that the correct terms are used in the Bill. I agree that legislation in this area should be made much more understandable. We are talking about everyday life. I mentioned a case earlier whereby a family is, essentially, not able to sell their home at the moment. It is a house that has stood down a laneway since the 1800s and because of the complexities of registering and the difficulties that have arisen among different landowners along the route, they simply cannot sell their house. For all of the language, the complexities, the Act from 1832 and everything else, it boils down to people being able to sell their homes. That is why this legislation is desperately needed now to ensure the situation does not become even more complex for those individuals.

I hope the review will start early in the new year. What we are now putting in place will allow for that in a transitionary period. The reason the 2009 Act was brought in originally has not disappeared. There are still complexities here and the review will consider how we deal with them. In the interim period, I thank all Deputies for their support in progressing this legislation as quickly as possible. It is extremely important that we do not end up facing the cliff edge. We must rectify issues that are arising and causing great concern for many people. I again thank the Deputies for their support and commit to bringing back some of the issues they have raised to my colleagues where our remits cross over regarding issues of public rights of way.

See this speech in context