Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Dáil Éireann:

notes that: — while preventing further decline in the current state of biodiversity is an essential element in ensuring the resilience of our planet and our food production systems, we recognise that certain steps must be taken to improve the state of biodiversity across the Europe Union (EU);

— the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 already sets out a commitment to legally protect a minimum of 30 per cent of its land, including inland waters and 30 per cent of the sea in the EU, of which at least one third should be under strict protection;

— therefore, under the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, 10 per cent of the land in Ireland will be strictly protected and the definition of strictly protected areas by the European Commission ensures they are fully and legally protected, and that natural processes are therefore left essentially undisturbed from human pressures, and they further state that many strictly protected areas will be non-intervention areas, where only limited and well controlled activities that either do not interfere with natural processes or enhance them, will be allowed;

— under the draft Nature Restoration Regulation for organic soils in agricultural use constituting drained peatlands, EU member states shall put in place restoration measures on at least:

— 30 per cent of such areas by 2030, of which at least a quarter shall be rewetted;

— 50 per cent of such areas by 2040, of which at least half shall be rewetted; and

— 70 per cent of such areas by 2050, of which at least half shall be rewetted;

— EU member states may put these restoration measures, including rewetting, in areas of peat extraction sites and also may rewet organic soils that constitute drained peatland under land uses other than agricultural use and peat extraction, and count those rewetted areas as contributing to achieving the respective targets up to a maximum of 20 per cent of the area;

— the improved negotiating position of the European Council on reducing those targets to 40 per cent of such areas by 2040, of which at least half shall be rewetted, and 50 per cent of such areas by 2050, of which at least half shall be rewetted and that a maximum of 40 per cent of the area that constitutes drained peatlands under land uses, other than agricultural use and peat extraction, can contribute to the rewetting targets and further notes the further, though restricted, flexibilities introduced in Article 9(4);

— according to the European Commission Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, it is proposed that at least 25,000 kilometres of rivers will be restored into free-flowing rivers by 2030, through the removal of primarily obsolete barriers and the restoration of floodplains and wetlands, and therefore recognises the possible impacts this will have at various points along the River Shannon, particularly where it is slow moving and shallow;

— the Government's strategy to increase from 11.6 per cent of the country under forestry cover to planting 18 per cent of the country by 2050, an increase of 55 per cent in the current area that is planted; and

— the cumulative impacts of the Nature Restoration Law, the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, both the Irish and EU forestry strategies, as well as significant changes already under way in the current Common Agricultural Policy, where, for example, 46,000 farmers have joined an environmental scheme to protect nature and biodiversity, must be assessed and taken into consideration before we commit to any new requirements, so that we can ensure we are in a position to deliver on our commitments in the near-, medium- and long-term future; further notes that: — the EU Commission State of Nature 2020 report states that the decline of protected habitat types and species, whose conservation is of concern, is caused mostly by abandonment of extensive agriculture, intensifying management practices, the modification of hydrological regimes, urbanisation and pollution as well as unsustainable forestry activities, species exploitation, invasive alien species and climate change, and believes that all of these issues must be dealt with in a coherent and co-ordinated way to help restore nature, and that a proportionate and societal response is needed across many different sectors to protect biodiversity, rather than a disproportionate attempt to make agriculture shoulder most of the responsibility; and

— the Nature Restoration Law has been rejected by three separate committees in the European Parliament, resulting in no amended proposals coming from any of the three committees, and that such an unprecedented outcome indicates that a wide variety of members in the European Parliament consider this to be a seriously flawed piece of legislation; furthermore, notes that: — the common position of the European Council is a much improved, though still problematic, amended version of the draft Commission proposal, and while a qualified majority was reached, this majority was wafer thin, with the population majority in the EU member states voting to support the proposal being just 1.13 per cent above the requirement level of 65 per cent support, again indicating serious reservations among many member states, even some who in the final analysis voted to support it, with Denmark, for example, having serious reservations about any funding to support farmers participating in the scheme; and

— this is by far the most significant land use change proposal put forward by the European Commission, with massive implications not just for agriculture, food production, food security, rural and regional development, but also for urban and rural planning, and that the proposals put forward were of such scale and overreach that, so far, agreement has not been possible in the European Parliament and is on a knife edge in the European Council; and calls on the Government to: — unequivocally reject the European Commission draft Regulation; and

— agree a number of significant changes to the European Council common position including:

— inserting a guarantee in the legal text that while certain measures may be mandatory for EU member states, those measures in all and every circumstance will be voluntary for all farmers and landowners;

— a guarantee that any farmers or landowners participating in schemes under the Nature Restoration Law will be adequately paid for delivering nature-based services and solutions;

— to conduct an immediate audit of all State lands and all lands owned by Bord na Móna and Coillte, and make a full and complete assessment as to how much of these lands can be restored/rewetted before reaching any final agreement on the Nature Restoration Law, as given it will be voluntary for farmers/landowners, it would be a dereliction of duty for any Government to sign up to commitments that a future Government might be unable to deliver;

— to ensure the protection of present farming practices, such as hill grazing, particularly in the context of the definition of favourable reference area in Article 3(5), and its further refinement in Article 12(2)(a)(iii) where records of historical distribution are taken into account;

— to ensure that where State lands are rewetted, that adjoining lands will not be adversely affected;

— to ensure that there is full coherence between EU trade deals, current and new, and the Nature Restoration Law requirements in particular, to avoid carbon leakage, loss of agricultural production capability, disproportionate impacts on rural communities, and also to ensure food security and sovereignty; and

— to ensure that no farmers on privately owned land, be it hill or low-lands of peat soil, will be compelled to rewet any of their lands.

I am sharing time with Deputy Pringle. Which Minister is taking this?

See this speech in context