Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for putting down the amendment and for the opportunity to speak on it. With regard to marine protected areas, members of the committee will remember, and Members of the House will have seen, the report from the Oireachtas committee and the recommendations we made when we were carrying out the pre-legislative scrutiny on the marine development management Bill, as it was known at that stage. The first recommendation of that report was that marine protected areas would be included in this Bill or that we would designate marine protected areas under separate parallel legislation, which is exactly what is happening at the moment. That is exactly what we are doing. We are taking that committee recommendation and putting together a fit-for-purpose and very clear planning Bill for how we are going to develop Ireland's offshore area. It is not just about wind turbines; it is also about laying cables and anything that might happen in our massive marine area, which is 500,000 sq. km. This legislation is needed because all we had previously was the Foreshore (Amendment) Act, which is pretty outdated now and not fit for purpose.

The committee spent a lot of time on Committee Stage of this Bill. The marine protected areas were discussed on Committee Stage. The committee agreed that we would have an update from the Department on the progress on marine protected areas. Yesterday we had a very long, interesting and comprehensive presentation on marine protected areas from the Department by a very knowledgeable contributor, and we heard about the progress that is being made on that.

Contrary to Deputy Ó Broin's expression earlier that he is more worried now, I am actually more confident now because we are not starting from scratch with regard to marine protected areas. Yesterday we heard that we will look to those other countries that lead on this, and we will take their learning experience and apply it to the Irish situation. To me that makes a lot of sense. One does not reinvent the wheel. I am heartened by the amount of support and the attention that the protection of the marine area is getting lately. I am aware that this is prompted by consideration of offshore renewable development, but for many of us who have been at this for the past 20 or 30 years, including with terrestrial protection, aquatic marine protection and marine protection, this is positive.

If we create a marine protected area, it does not mean we ignore everything that is outside that marine protected area. One applies a precautionary principle where such designations are not done. We know this, we heard this yesterday and it makes sense. One of the tenets of environmental protection across European directives is that one applies the precautionary principle. Any planning application out there at the moment will have gone through a lot of hoops to get to the planning application stage. There are surveys to be done and a lot of scientific data and information that we do not have at the moment to be generated. That would be helpful for us in protecting our marine areas. One applies the precautionary principle and carries out stringent environmental impact assessments on any type of development proposed in the marine area. We know this has to be done, regardless of the fact that a line is drawn or a marker is put out to say that this is a marine protected area. At the moment we do not have a definition of what a marine protected area is. We do not know what we are going to have to apply to marine protected areas. We do not know what one can do in a marine protected area. We do not know whether there are activities that might be complementary to each other. We do not know if there are activities that should be suspended for a certain period of time. These things will change over time. It is not a matter of just drawing a line on a map and saying "It is a protected area, job done and away we go." One of the concepts of environmental management is the constant monitoring and addressing of issues as they arise. One goes through that and then there is the plan. This is what we are doing at the moment. We heard that yesterday and the planning is advanced on this.

We are aware that the general scheme for the marine protected areas Bill will be coming to us sometime next year. The committee will meet on that, and we agreed on this yesterday. I look forward to the pre-legislative scrutiny. I have no doubt that the three Members opposite me in the Chamber today will also be in attendance for that. It is very important. We will get it right because it is vital, critical and important that we get it right.

On the review of the national marine planning framework, I believe this is the most comprehensive document out there. I have said many times on the record that if somebody came to me and asked me for information about our marine area, the first document I would direct them to is the national marine planning framework. We are aware of the amount of mapping that has been done and the amount of information that has been gathered in that regard. That is our overarching policy.

That is how we intertwine everything we are going to do in the marine area. We know that one of the core tenets of that document is the protection of the environment, which comes first in every heading on that document. We know that is the overarching principle we are going to apply to development we do in that sea area, namely, to protect the environment.

I heard the contribution from Deputy Danny Healy-Rae and concerns about fishermen. Environmentalists, those who want to protect the sea, and fishermen want the same thing. They want to see the marine area healthy, whether it is for their livelihood or for all the other benefits that a healthy marine and healthy seas bring, such as carbon sequestration, tourism and recreation. Everybody wants the same thing out of the marine area and I think we are all united on that in this House. However, with regard to the national marine planning framework, NMPF, we know that document will be reviewed. We know these planning documents generally get reviewed every six years but we did hear, when we had the briefing in committee, that we expect that national marine planning framework review to happen in a shorter timeframe than six years and I am confident we will see that happen.

It is the first iteration of that document. The consultation and the putting together of that document took a long time. I think it started in 2017, a wide range of stakeholders were involved and the stakeholder group still meets on it. However, because of how comprehensive the first document is, it makes sense to review it in a shorter term than that six years. I believe we heard a commitment to do that when we discussed it in committee the last time.

See this speech in context