Dáil debates

Wednesday, 13 December 2006

Priority Questions

Countryside Access.

1:00 pm

Photo of Dan BoyleDan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 40: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the state of negotiations with the Irish Farmers Association regarding access to land for walkers; if he has committed to paying farmers for access; and if so, if this represents a U-turn in his position on the issue. [42956/06]

Photo of Éamon Ó CuívÉamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy is aware Comhairle na Tuaithe has completed its work on the development of a national countryside recreation strategy. The members of Comhairle na Tuaithe, with the exception of the Irish Farmers' Association, have endorsed the report.

I met the President of the IFA, Mr. Pádraig Walshe, the week before last to discuss the issue of access to land for recreational purposes. The meeting was very positive. The key issue to be addressed is payment to farmers for work carried out by them, to an agreed standard, on the upkeep and maintenance of walks on their lands. Following my meeting with Mr. Walshe I have asked that officials of my Department and representatives of the IFA would meet to progress the issue and report back to me before the new year, if possible.

Payment for access is not under discussion and therefore there is no question of a U-turn on my part. The fact is that since summer 2005, when the IFA published its document on its proposed walkways initiative there has been very little difference between my position and that of the IFA on this issue. What the IFA has sought is a payment for the maintenance of specific walks throughout the country and I am fully in agreement that there should be no cost burden on farmers from the maintenance of permissive ways open to the public at no charge.

Mr. Walshe has gone on record following our meeting stating that payment must be related to the amount of maintenance and amount of development that has to be done on a walkway.

I see progress on this issue being based on recognised walks such as waymarked ways or shorter walks which would be promoted by Fáilte Ireland. The walks would be managed by local community groups in the context of local development strategies which are to the drawn up under the rural development programme 2007-13. I have time and again made clear my view that a local community-based approach is the best way forward where issues of access to the countryside arise. Where it is not possible to reach agreement, in a particular location, alternative routes should be explored and developed so landowners' rights over access to their lands are not interfered with.

In light of the outcome of my recent meeting with the president of the IFA, I believe the IFA is now approaching this issue in a positive spirit with a view to implementing the countryside recreation strategy put forward by Comhairle na Tuaithe and already endorsed by the other farming organisations on that body.

Photo of Dan BoyleDan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It could be a question of terminology, but it seems that when the Minister says "access", they say "upkeep and maintenance". As has been subsequently reported in the media, the reality is that the expectation now exists for the Government to provide an annual payment towards landowners for the use of these particular walkways. Unless the Minister can publish clear criteria on how the money will be made available and for what purposes, we can only presume that this is the nature of the discussions he has been having with the farming organisations.

In a radio interview subsequent to the meeting, the IFA president talked about a cost per metre of walkway. He stated that the agreement being reached depended on the length of each walkway and such a cost was being agreed with the Department. To what extent is maintenance needed on these walkways? Can he give examples where maintenance is needed? The walkers and tourists who use such walkways are attracted to them because they are as undeveloped as possible. Unless the Minister is referring to work that needs to be done to cover health and safety regulations, the upkeep and maintenance of many of these would be too minimal to justify an ongoing payment.

Media outlets have reported that this could cost the taxpayer €15 million on an ongoing basis. Does the Minister envisage such costs? If so, why would they be paid on an ongoing basis if the upkeep and maintenance needed on these routes are minimal?

Photo of Éamon Ó CuívÉamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy has asked a lot of questions. Any payment will be based on the cost of materials and labour in doing the works that are necessary. We will get competent people to calculate exactly what work is needed.

I heard the interview Mr. Walshe gave on "Morning Ireland" and I obtained the transcript afterwards. I will provide a copy of it to the Deputy. Mr. Walshe was very clear that the payment was related to the work. The interviewer tried to draw him into commenting on the cost, the amount of the payment and the previous proposal put forward by the IFA. He alluded to the fact that there had been a proposal, but he reiterated clearly that his understanding was that the payment was related to the work. That being the case, I cannot put a figure on the work until it is costed.

I cannot stop members of the media writing whatever they want to write. Every Deputy in this House knows that. However, they cannot control what is said when we speak about issues related to the media. I did not issue any statement on this matter at the time of the meeting. I have done a number of interviews and I have reiterated that the basis of discussions was on the cost of doing the work. If there is no cost to maintain a stretch of 300 m because it is self-containing, then there is no cost. However, if a swampy bit of land needs continuous maintenance, such as filling it with gravel, then there is a cost. I do not see why the farmer should lose money to maintain it.

I cannot answer for the spin that is put on things in the media. The interview with Mr. Pádraig Walshe reinforces the point I have made in this House. He was clear and I am clear that this is a payment related to the actual cost of doing the work. I have not put a cost of €15 million on it and, to be honest, I do not have €15 million to spend in the manner suggested. However, it is vital that we have well maintained walkways available nationally and that they are maintained on an ongoing basis. Someone should be there to resolve any problem that arises, be it people leaving litter behind them, breaking styles or whatever. This will be done on a cost basis.

Photo of Dan BoyleDan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am grateful for some aspects of the Minister's answer. It was also stated in the media that it is hoped that many of these walkways could be in greater use by the start of the 2007 tourist season. Can the Minister comment on that point? As January is just around the corner, does he accept that the criteria for whatever scheme he puts in place need to be available to the public as soon as possible? Final decisions need to be made and the House should be informed of them.

Photo of Éamon Ó CuívÉamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is much more work going on behind the scenes than people realise. As I outlined when I launched the report at a meeting of Comhairle na Tuaithe at the ploughing championships, Fáilte Ireland has been working on getting agreement on a series of walks. It has also outlined the required works that need to be done in many cases. The option to use the rural social scheme is a very live one because many farmers are not particularly interested in doing it. Some of them have too much work and they would rather local farmers did it through the rural social scheme. We are still in line to achieve our objective and I hope we can do this with Fáilte Ireland in the new year.

Many of these walks do not need a great amount of work — just signage and bits and pieces here and there. Many of them are over open countryside and people often do not want the walkway to be very developed. The international experience has been that they often want the obstructions made surmountable rather than removed. They are not looking for a walkway that is a pathway. In other words, they want to walk over the mountains. I am fairly confident we can deliver on that aspect.

I also discussed with the IFA the unsatisfactory situation where people access mountains and hills through enclosed land by going over field gates and across fields. We will try to get local solutions to the problem of accessing a hill through a little passageway without going through someone's field that might have cattle or crops in it. That would ease many of the difficulties that were there in the past. If I had an open mountain and a closed field, I would not consider them as the same thing. In legal terms they are the same, but in practical terms they are very different.