Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I move:

That the Committee do not agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 3 to the Wildlife (Amendment) Bill 2016.

Amendments Nos. 3, 3c and 4 to 11, inclusive, are grouped and I propose to talk through these together. The Bill amends the Wildlife (Amendment) Act 2000 by the insertion of a new section - section 18A - after section 18 of that Act. Section 18A sets out how the 2014 review is to be completed and the requirements for future reviews of blanket bog NHAs.

Seanad amendments Nos. 3 and 4 propose changes to the criteria to be utilised in selecting the most suitable bog habitats to be designated or to cease to be designated as natural heritage areas. The changes brought in additional criteria, including recreational and sporting needs and greenways. Amendment No. 4 also added further criteria in relation to facilities and projects which can be of significant benefit to a community. Having considered all of these matters, an amendment to section 18A is proposed which will strike a balance between the requests made in the Seanad and an appropriate selection process for nature conservation. It is considered that the specific references in the proposed Seanad amendment to recreational and sporting needs and greenways are not appropriate for inclusion in the Bill as they are considered too prescriptive.

It could be argued that Seanad amendment No. 4 be rejected entirely as the amendment itself is legally flawed. It would potentially make it more difficult to de-designate NHAs when the opposite effect was intended in the amendment. The proposed counter-amendment, amendment No. 3c, is a compromise. It retains most of Seanad amendment No. 3 and captures as much as possible of the intention behind Seanad amendment No. 4 in that it would include facilities and projects which can be of significant benefit to a community or to strategic infrastructure development.

I believe this amendment strikes a better balance between the various issues raised during the Seanad phases and the central role of the Minister in conserving nature. As I have set out, Seanad amendments Nos. 3 and 4 are interlinked. The amendment to Seanad amendment No. 3 has been drafted so that it also incorporates the replacement wording for Seanad amendment No. 4. Therefore, it is proposed to reject Seanad amendments Nos. 3 and 4, and to replace these with amendment No. 3c.

Amendment No. 5 is a relatively minor amendment proposed in the Seanad by the Government and passed there. This was brought forward on Report Stage in the Seanad. It provides that when the Minister makes an order to de-designate all or part of a site as a natural heritage area, the Minister will, to inform the public of the making of the order, publish or cause to be published a notice of the making of the order in Iris Oifigiúil, in a national newspaper, and in at least one newspaper circulating in the locality in which the land to which the order applies is situated and on the Minister's departmental website. The amendment provides for wider dissemination than the Bill originally provided for of notice of the making of an order to amend or revoke a natural heritage area order to de-designate all or part of a site as a natural heritage area.

The Bill already provides that a copy of the order will be sent to various Ministers, public bodies, defined owners or occupiers of land and defined holders of prospecting or exploration licences.

Seanad amendment No. 6 is a minor amendment that seeks to ensure the relevant Oireachtas committee is informed of any dedesignation orders made under the legislation.

Seanad amendments Nos. 7 to 10, inclusive, are minor technical amendments that simply renumber paragraphs. They are all consequential on Seanad amendment No. 6.

Seanad amendment No. 11 was introduced by the Government in the Seanad in response to the early part of the debate there. A definition of "greenway" was required at that point because an earlier proposed amendment, Seanad amendment No. 3, included the possibility of allowing NHAs to be considered for dedesignation on the basis, in part, of greenways being provided. However, with the

evolution of the Bill, the term "greenway" is no longer contained in the Bill and, therefore, this definition is not required. It should be noted that the Bill still allows for dedesignations to be considered on the basis of national, regional and local economic, social and cultural needs and other criteria set down in the Bill. It is proposed to reject this Seanad amendment.

See this speech in context