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

At the outset, before I go into my scripted speech, I would like to thank all the Deputies. I want to thank Deputy Fitzmaurice, and I would like to state that it is not the Government's intention to cause division by tabling a countermotion. I really appreciate the constructive engagement the Deputy has consistently shown down the years with the peatlands in particular. I thank Deputy Harkin as well for tabling this.

We need unity on this across the House. I have had good engagement over the weekend with most of our MEPs. I have not been able to speak to all of them. There are genuine concerns among our Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil MEPs, and it is important to listen to those as well. However, I think we are heading into a place of collective general agreement with the long-held Government position on the nature restoration regulation in this House, both through the statements here a few weeks ago and the debate that has been held here today. I welcome this.

I welcome the Sinn Féin amendment. It is effectively a cut-and-paste from our direction on the nature restoration law around the issues of voluntary and public participation. That will form the basis of the nature restoration plan, and that will be, in itself, a participative process. The plan itself will be binding. That is the consistent commitment we have given over these debates in recent months around the voluntary aspect of it. Our unity here today, and our unity generally in this House, will allay the genuine fears of farmers. Going back to the figures, I cannot keep stressing it, but the EU Council adopted a proposal a few weeks ago that would see 86,000 ha for Ireland, and all met on State land. In fact, we are well on the way there, with a lot of the activities that are already under way.

The proposed nature restoration regulation provides an opportunity for transformative change with regard to restoring nature in Ireland and the EU as a whole. Nature restoration will also deliver substantial co-benefits for climate action such as carbon emissions reductions from land use sectors, climate adaptation and resilience, and enhancement of natural buffers against flooding and coastal inundation. Furthermore, it will deliver significant co-benefits for water equality and the overall ecological health of our rivers, lakes and streams.

The nature restoration law presents significant opportunities to support the achievement of nature, water and climate objectives, as well as substantial co-benefits in rural economies and communities. Its detail is quite intricate, however, and the original drafting did not lend to clarity of objective, measurable outcomes, or means of measurement assessment or accountability. This is why Ireland engaged closely with the EU Council and the EU Commission to develop a text that maintains the high ambition for nature set out by the EU Commission, while providing flexibility with regard to implementation at a national level, by allowing member states to define appropriate restoration measures to reach the targets through the preparation, content assessment and review of the nature restoration plans.The Government has made several drafting proposals. In response to Deputy Harkin, I think we should thank the Irish as well as the Belgians and others for the negotiations. In those negotiations, in the interests of Ireland's nature and people we have sought to ensure we take account of the particular landscape, seascape and land use climate challenges and opportunities for nature restoration in this country. Ireland's contributions have also underlined the important role that agriculture and food production holds both economically and culturally, and the need to balance the future viability of farming with the restoration of nature.

I will now turn specifically to the concerns of farmers. I appreciate that there has been uncertainty arising from Article 9, which concerns agricultural ecosystems, and particularly the requirement to fulfil targets regarding the restoration of drained peatlands in agricultural use. I know Deputy Harkin raised issues around Articles 3(3) and 4(2), and she is absolutely right. We are working towards them. There has been confusion in the past around the targets for restoration being equated to areas to be rewetted, and this was never the case. Even the original Commission proposal saw rewetting as part of the restoration measure, but not all of it. The restoration of drained peatlands does not necessarily mean bringing the water table to surface level, and rewetting is just one of several tools available for the restoration of target ecosystems.

As my colleague the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Calleary stated earlier, the definition of rewetting proposed in the EU Council's general approach is the process of changing drained peat soil towards wet soil. There is no reference in this definition to water tables or land being permanently wet or pickled in this definition. In fact, this allows Ireland to determine for ourselves what rewetting means in national circumstances. Overall, I am satisfied that the bulk of the targets for rewetting proposed in the EU Council text can be reached on State lands. I keep reiterating this.

Rewetting is already under way as part of the restoration of raised bogs and natural heritage areas, and this work includes restoration plans that have been developed to ensure the impact of the restoration works on surrounding lands is kept to a minimum. I have visited many of the sites over recent years, and there is really fantastic work under way. Notwithstanding this, there will be an opportunity for voluntary participation in the restoration effort. It has always been the position that any contribution to rewetting targets from private landowners would be voluntary and incentivised. The nature and scale of the incentive will be developed as part of the nature restoration plan. Any additional measures needed will be developed in consultation and collaboration with landowners. A consideration of the impact of any measures of the landowners' ability to continue the economic use of their land will be at the core of the nature restoration plan. It is important to reiterate that the undertaking of such measures will be voluntary and resourced.

The development of the plan will require an all-of-government response, and each key Department will have to undertake, as a priority, an analysis of the likely sectoral impacts in order to inform the coherent national impact assessment, including the economic costs arising, as relevant. Stakeholder engagement and participation will also be key to developing a robust, collaborative and implementable plan. The regulation, once ratified, will come into force by the end of the year, and member states, including Ireland, will have two years to prepare national restoration plans. This plan will be developed in close partnership with stakeholders from every sector, and we encourage all interested parties to engage positively and constructively in that process.

This goes back to the Sinn Féin requirement for having public participation. The plan will be developed in a step-wise approach. This means that instead of submitting full plans until 2050, within two years of the regulation entering into force, member states will submit national restoration plans covering the period until June 2032, with strategic overview over the period beyond June 2032 and further iterations in 2042.

Knowledge gaps will need to be addressed and this will form part of the plan. For terrestrial habitats, member states will have until 2030 to determine 90% of the condition of the habitats. For marine habitats, 50% of the knowledge gaps will have to be closed by 2030. This concession was of particular interest to Ireland as we have a significant marine area of some 500,000 sq. km, much of which is uncharted.

We need nature and we need food. The scientific evidence is definitive that the security of both are interconnected, even more so in a climate-changed world. We should be mindful of that. The EU Council's general approach to the proposed nature restoration law is the best chance we have of achieving this. I again ask all Members of this House to engage positively and constructively in the coming weeks and months. I also urge our MEPs to support the law in the European Parliament.

See this speech in context