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

Question 42: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs when he expects that agreement will be reached on access for walkers and open access will be available. [15086/07]

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

In February 2004, I established Comhairle na Tuaithe to address the three priority issues of access to the countryside, developing a countryside code and developing a countryside recreation strategy. Comhairle na Tuaithe comprises representatives of the farming organisations, recreational users of the countryside and State bodies with an interest in the countryside.

To date, Comhairle na Tuaithe has identified and reviewed a set of access parameters in the countryside, which it believes will serve as a basis for conflict prevention and integrate a variety of needs and responsibilities. It has also agreed the key features necessary for countryside code development, with a focus on the potential application of the internationally recognised Leave No Trace initiative. Details of the access parameters and the countryside code are available in a booklet and on my Department's website at www.pobail.ie. It has also completed its work on the development of a national countryside recreation strategy.

In its report, Comhairle na Tuaithe made the following recommendations in relation to access: that the Attorney General be requested to examine restating and-or reflecting in legislation the current common law position in relation to the protection of landowners' property rights where recreational access is allowed on their land; that the Law Reform Commission be requested to make recommendations on the broader issues of access to the countryside for recreational users focusing on the constitutional and legal position pertaining in Ireland; that Comhairle na Tuaithe considered that no cost burden or liability, within the meaning of the Occupiers Liability Act 1995, should attach to farmers-landowners as a result of allowing recreational users on their land; and that Comhairle na Tuaithe also recognised that farming organisations would continue to pursue direct compensation for access to land by recreational users of the countryside.

When I received its report in early September, I considered that these recommendations would be my first priority. To ensure that these issues were addressed as a matter of urgency, I established an expert group, comprising a senior counsel and officials from the Office of the Attorney General, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and my Department to urgently advise on tackling the legal issues raised in the report and to report back to me by the end of this month. When I receive the report from the expert group, I will carefully consider any recommendations it may make.

I have repeatedly 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 that landowners' rights over access to their lands are not interfered with.

I again restate that any proposal for direct Exchequer payment for access is not acceptable and is not under discussion.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

I have met representatives of the farming organisations in the past few months to discuss their views on the matter of access to the countryside in particular and countryside recreation in general. I am fully in agreement that there should be no cost burden on farmers for the maintenance of permissive ways open to the public at no charge.

The Deputy should note that I recently attended a meeting with Comhairle na Tuaithe and following from those discussions, my Department has drafted proposals in relation to the development and maintenance of new and existing waymarked ways and looped walks. These draft proposals were circulated for observations to the members of Comhairle na Tuaithe in the past few days.

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

I thank the Minister for his reply. As this is the last time Priority Questions to the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs will be taken in the 29th Dáil, I thank him and the Minister of State for their engagement on this and other issues.

Dinny McGinley (Donegal South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

One never knows.

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

Getting back to the matter in hand, has the Minister a sense of urgency in bringing this issue to some degree of finality? His reply refers to his establishment of an advisory group to report back to him at the end of this month. None of us expects that to be acted upon considering the current electoral cycle. To what extent does the formation of the advisory group advance the timescale given in the recommendations of Comhairle na Tuaithe? What advice has the Minister or his Department sought from the Attorney General on the first recommendations? Will the Minister or his Department ask the Law Reform Commission to undertake a report on this matter? Have any timescales been provided in respect of either of those two measures? There is an impression that this is an issue that will continue to rumble on because of a lack of appropriate political leadership.

His response about the lack of the refusal of direct State intervention for the use of walkways and rights of way in these circumstances seems to be a new nuance on the part of the Minister as the issue at hand is whether landowners will have the right to directly charge for their use. I would have thought the Minister was more emphatic on this issue in the past. No one involved in this issue has had any difficulty with the idea of compensation or the need for assistance in making the routes accessible for walkers but there is a great deal of controversy about being able to charge and to continue to charge for using open walkways in the countryside. I ask the Minister to be emphatic on that point in particular.

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

It amazes me the Deputy does not understand that we set up the expert group with a tight reporting timeframe by the end of April because of our opinion that if we went by the Law Reform Commission route, we would be waiting years for a comprehensive report, which would probably be very detailed——

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

The Minister will still need to go to the Law Reform Commission.

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

We will not do that. The reason for setting up the expert group was to get the answers we needed to our questions within four months. I announced at the ploughing championships last September that I would not go to the Law Reform Commission. I stated that when we examined its proposal we thought we could short-circuit it and have a report by the end of April. Even if the Law Reform Commission had taken on the job, there is no possibility of its report being ready by the end of April. We have instead focused on the key issues and we are obtaining the expert legal advice. The Office of the Attorney General is involved in this expert group. The nature of legal advice is that until any such advice is tested in a court of law, one does not know whether it stands up.

I recently had a meeting with Comhairle na Tuaithe and we discussed the development of walkways and their maintenance, which is an important issue. All the parties engaged in a positive manner. I pay tribute to the members of Comhairle na Tuaithe who have moved this forward so far, considering where we all started from. These proposals were recently circulated for observation to the members of Comhairle na Tuaithe. People often confuse the issue of the walkways with the top of the mountain issue, but they are two separate issues that have become entangled. I have circulated my proposals on the walkways issue and I will await the response with interest. Before I circulated them I explained the general thrust of them to Comhairle na Tuaithe and I allowed it a few days to reply as to whether it considered them worth circulating. I hope this will progress the issue.

On the final issue, it is amazing that one can repeat something hundreds of times, and every time I repeated this statement I used the same formulation, that there will be no national State scheme of support for access. I deliberately used that formulation because it would be ridiculous if I, for example, prevented a local Leader company from purchasing or obtaining a lengthy lease on 100 metres of land relating to a monument or needed for access purposes. If I intervened in this way, people could say that I was using State money, directly or indirectly, having stated that no such money would be provided in respect of access. I am stating that there will be no scheme under which people will be paid a certain amount of money for access. I ruled out such a development from the beginning.

The Deputy also inquired about charging for entry. It is easy to state that one should never charge for access to land. However, one is charged for entry to Dublin Zoo, which is on land that is owned by somebody. One of the fundamental mistakes the Deputy could make would be to in some way infer that land that does not happen to be blessed by God with great fertility is any less owned by a farmer than that which is so blessed.

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

Is the Deputy stating that if I invested a great deal of money establishing a park on my land, I should not be allowed to charge people for entry? Is he of the view that people should not be charged entry to golf courses that are located on rough land? The Deputy must be extremely careful as regards definitions. I am fascinated by his question.

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

I wish to ask a brief supplementary.

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

The Minister is deliberately misrepresenting the position. This issue relates to rights of way and traditional walking routes, which exist in urban areas as much as they do in rural areas. There would be a major public reaction against any attempt to introduce a charge in respect of a right of way in an urban area. In trying to seek a resolution to this problem, the Minister should once and for all state that he is not prepared to accept the principle of charging in respect of a right of way or a traditional walking route. I do not believe he is saying that; I am of the view that he is leaving the matter open.

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

The Deputy is aware that it would be illegal to charge people for using a right of way. I happen to live in one of the few parishes in which people have successfully defended their rights of way in the courts. I do not, therefore, need to repeat what the law states in this regard. I am no lawyer but, as I understand it, if a public right of way exists, it is illegal to charge anybody for using it.

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

I do not understand the Deputy's question because what I have said is a statement of fact.