Holly Cairns (Cork South West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

The nature restoration law is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for the EU to take action on the massive loss in biodiversity over recent decades. The intention of the law to restore damaged ecosystems to a healthy state in Ireland and throughout Europe, and to attempt to prevent the collapse of our wildlife and slow the progress of the climate crisis. The measure will cover at least 20% of the EU's lands and sea areas by 2030 and, ultimately, all ecosystems in need of restoration by 2050.

At this point, however, we do not know what the finalised law will be or whether it will even be passed when it goes forward to a vote of all 705 MEPs on 11 July. If it is fatally undermined, there will be plenty of blame to go around because there has been an incredible level of scaremongering with regard to its content, with the rewetting of peatlands being the main point of tension. I can understand the confusion and worry of many farmers with regard to this law. Farmers deserve clarity and reassurance on the potential impact the process will have on them, their land and their livelihoods. Over recent months, the law has been through several committees of the European Parliament, with roughly 2,500 amendments proposed, so it is no wonder people are trying to keep up with the progress and are unclear as to what is going on.

This confusion has been made much worse, however, by the spread of misinformation by politicians within the process, that is, politicians who should know better. The most serious opposition has come from the EPP, the grouping Fine Gael calls home at the European Parliament, which has led the effort to block the Bill on committee stage. It is concerning to see centre-right parties, including Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, move to the right on climate issues at the European Parliament. Unfortunately, they are not alone in taking an environmentally unfriendly stance. Sinn Féin's Chris MacManus voted against one of the most important items of EU legislation in the Union's history at the agriculture committee. He said there was too much ambiguity about the impact the law would have on farmers. A question I keep coming back to is why MEPs from Government parties are fighting against measures proposed by the nature restoration law, while simultaneously backing their own climate action plan, which is more ambitious on targets for biodiversity than the ones they rail against at the EU. The coalition parties appear to be odds with one another on the issue. The Minister of State has indicated nature restoration will happen, whereas the Taoiseach believes it goes too far and it is not clear where the Government as a whole stands on this issue.

It is important to look at some of the facts. The need for far-reaching climate action simply could not be more urgent. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's recent assessment report shows a temperature rise of 1.1°C. This has resulted in more frequent and hazardous weather events and the increasing destruction of our planet. To date, we have not done a fraction of what is required. Ireland's emissions are increasing, not decreasing and if we continue on our current path, it will result in the unthinkable. The scale of biodiversity damage is frightening. Figures from the National Parks and Wildlife Service show 91% of protected habitats are in poor or inadequate condition and more than 50% are declining, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA. Half of our rivers, lakes and coastal waters are ecologically substandard, with 18.5% of monitored rivers severely polluted. The recommendations of the Citizens' Assembly on Biodiversity Loss are unequivocal. They urge the State to take prompt, decisive and urgent action to address biodiversity loss and restoration and seek leadership on protecting Ireland's biodiversity for future generations. On the nature restoration law, such leadership has, sadly, been lacking in many parties.

The nature restoration law is a direct response to the climate and biodiversity crises. The proposal acknowledges that certain groups, such as farmers, will be impacted more than others, and consequently, national EU funding is proposed as part of its implementation. Many of the fears surrounding the law are unfounded. The Government's own climate action plan commits to peatland restoration. In fact, as the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine pointed out, the commitments on rewetting peatland can be met on State-owned land, and it is absolutely vital those commitments be met. When these bogs were in their natural condition, the carbon within the bog was contained. Once they were drained, the same carbon they once stored was released into the atmosphere. According to the International Peatland Society, Ireland’s peatlands are estimated to emit the equivalent of about 8.4 million tonnes of carbon dioxide every year. Bringing these bogs back to a state where they can once again store carbon is essential for meeting our climate targets and restoring the native biodiversity that used to flourish on these lands.

The targets are relatively modest. The 2030 targets under the law are lower than the coalition's own targets and lower than those set out in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine's Acclimatize programme. It is astounding that we are debating targets that are lower than the ones we have already set in Ireland, ones that have been set by some of the very parties that are arguing so strongly against them at the EU. This narrative being created around rewetting proposals in the Bill, whereby the Government will acquire private lands by compulsory purchase order, CPO, or destroy farmland, is not backed up by fact. Rather, the nature restoration law has the potential to be transformative. It will provide new funding streams for farmers to ensure the viability of farming long into the future.

To be clear, there will be no future for farming unless we protect our ecosystems and our biodiversity. Comments from elected representatives regarding how any kind of climate action is bad for Irish agriculture, is irresponsible and so on contribute to a narrative that results in the people and communities who will be most affected by climate change being the most reluctant to take climate action. When these conversations happen, you would swear farming communities have nothing at stake in respect of climate action, but the opposite is true. Arguably, they have the most to lose from extreme weather events and biodiversity loss. Most people agree on the need for substantial action to address the climate and biodiversity crises, including many farmers I speak to, so I find it deeply frustrating when this discussion pits farmer against farmer and farmers against environmentalists. It presumes farmers either do not care or perhaps do not understand the impact of climate change.

This is insulting to farming communities and it is also simply untrue.

Finally, I must ask the Deputies in this Chamber who oppose the nature restoration law what their plan is for the agriculture sector if we fail to take climate action. Where do they see the future of the industry if we keep letting emissions rise and allow soil degradation to continue, alongside more and more biodiversity loss? Our planet is facing an existential crisis. The debate on climate change and biodiversity loss deserves nothing less than honesty, at least from our politicians.

See this speech in context