Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this item, which might be described as a niche issue but potentially affects tens of thousands of people across the country.

As the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, may be aware, a vote was supposed to take place today at the European committee on the registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals, known as the REACH committee, on a draft Commission regulation which would essentially see the banning of lead shot bullets. According to the context of the regulation, this prohibition would apply specifically in wetlands, but the provision is so broad that it would essentially mean the ban would apply across the board. The fundamental problem I have is that the vote was to take place today. Most of the people who would have been affected by it had absolutely no idea that it was due to take place. It has been postponed now. I urge the Government to ensure, first of all, that a consultation with those people who would be affected by this regulation takes place - I had been calling on the previous Government to do this for a number of years - because the costs and the impact could be quite substantial.

In the first instance, can the Minister of State confirm that the Government will follow on from the previous Government's intention to vote "No" on this regulation when it comes before it? When it gets the opportunity, will it reject this regulation? Will the Minister of State outline what the Government has been doing to defeat this regulation, knowing that it is unworkable and unthinkable and would add a hugely significant cost to farmers, who account for half of the ownership of guns in the State, and game club members? These are precisely the people we need on board if we are to ensure these types of conservation policies work. Enacting such a proposition without any consultation for them is counterproductive when it comes to promoting good conservation policies.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not at all surprised that the European Commission has been unable to get support in the REACH committee due to the fundamental problems with the proposals. Did the European Commission forget about the presumption of innocence? An extremely important principle in EU law is that the burden of proof is on the prosecution, yet these proposals would have seen that burden move to the person. The person would have been responsible for proving that he or she had been outside wetlands when he or she used lead shot. There was nothing in the proposal to give a clear and precise understanding of people's rights and obligations and nothing in it to require the courts to ensure those rights and obligations are observed.

The definition of wetlands under the Ramsar Convention could not be less clear. It includes peatlands - all of them - and a 1 sq. m area of temporary water. Where I come from, they are called puddles. They come from rain, and then they disappear. When one adds on to this the 100 m buffer zone, not only does one get widespread confusion but one gets something that is completely unenforceable. That definition meant wetlands would literally change with the weather. Bizarrely, the proposal meant it would have been perfectly fine to fire lead shot towards a wetland as long as it was 100 m away.

It is also strange that there was no reference in any way, either explicit or implied, to the use of lead gunshot by military or by the police falling under these regulations. It seems to be one of many oversights in the proposals.

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the two Deputies for raising this important issue. If it is okay, I will provide the House with some background information in relation to it.

The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds, AEWA, was developed under the UN Convention on Migratory Species. Ireland signed up to the agreement in 2003. The agreement includes a commitment that "Parties shall endeavour to phase out the use of lead shot for hunting in wetlands as soon as possible in accordance with self-imposed and published timetables." Ireland's position is to support the AEWA commitment to phase out the use of lead shot over wetlands. Separately, the European Commission published a set of draft regulations in early 2019 for consideration by member states on the use of lead shot in and around wetlands. The draft regulation has been discussed by member states at some meetings of the REACH committee.

Following a discussion at the most recent REACH committee meeting in June 2020, the Commission submitted a draft set of regulations for a vote by member states by written procedure. The main proposals in the regulation published in June 2020 on the use of lead gun shot in and around wetlands would involve a transitional period of 24 months for those member states banning the use of lead gun shot in and around wetlands. The transition time for member states with wetlands that exceed 20% of their territory would be extended to 36 months, as long as they ban the purchase and use of lead shot in all their territory and not just wetlands. The regulation also proposes that there would be fixed buffer zones of 100 m around wetlands, where lead shot possession and shooting would be prohibited. Finally, as Deputy Clarke has mentioned, it is proposed to adopt the definition of wetlands that is used in the Ramsar Convention.

I fully support the underlying thrust of the regulation and its protection for the environment and water birds. Like some other member states, we currently have no restrictions on the use of lead shot over wetlands. In those member states which have already introduced some national regulation, gun owners would already have non-lead ammunition and the lead-in time set out in the draft regulations would seem appropriate.

However, as we currently have no restriction, statutory or otherwise, in place on the use of lead in gunshot, we would be placed in the most difficult position of having to catch up to implement and properly enforce a new EU regulation in 24 months in an area in which other member states are already advanced in respect of national regulation on the transition to new weapons, of compliance and of education of the public, and gun users in particular. The guns of many Irish farmers and hunters are not capable of using lead shot substitutes. These farmers and hunters would need to purchase new guns. In addition, the proposed definition of wetlands is that of the Ramsar convention on wetlands of international importance, which includes peatlands. This would cover extensive areas around the country. Unfortunately, these Ramsar areas are not all mapped and, given the scale of wetlands in Ireland, this would take some time so action on enforcement would present real problems.

While the Commission has proposed to progress this measure, I believe it is time we received some support on this matter. Although Ireland is supportive of the aims of the regulation and is committed to implementing them, the lead-in time proposed by the Commission would present Ireland with difficulties and we will seek to have this addressed.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Beidh nóiméad amháin agam agus nóiméad ag an Teachta Clarke. What the Minister of State has outlined would probably make sense were it the case that some consultation had taken place. The Government cannot take anything other than outright opposition to this regulation prior to consultation with those people who will be affected by it. As is the case with any legislation, and particularly with EU regulations, there are always unforeseen consequences that only people at the coalface will be able to address. There is a major financial implication but there are also major conservation implications for those who are carrying out very positive conservation functions for us all in their local areas. I again request that the Minister of State commit the Government to opposing this at every turn and, in the interim, carrying out a full consultation process with those who will potentially be affected by its inaction.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have heard and listened to what the Minister of State has said. The problem, however, is that the Ramsar convention, when applied to Ireland, takes in everything but the kitchen sink. It is not designed to be used at a local level. It is designed to be used on a broad, global scale. I ask the Minister of State to commit to come to the midlands and to meet with groups like the National Association of Regional Game Councils. As a result of today's delayed vote, we have been given an opportunity to engage with such groups. They know these areas like the back of their hands. These are the real experts on the ground. Will the Minister of State engage with them? Will he listen to what they say to him and take it on board?

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputies Carthy and Clarke for raising this issue. I accept the points they have raised. As I have already stated in my response, my Department is fully aware of the difficulties hunters and landowners may encounter in sourcing alternative ammunition or guns should the Commission regulation come into force. We are fully supportive of the ban on the use of lead shot in and around wetlands given the environmental threats posed by lead in the environment. At the same time, my Department has liaised directly with farming and hunting stakeholders and is acutely aware of the challenges involved. In addition to the challenges I have already outlined, the Commission's proposals for buffer zones of 100 m around wetlands add difficulty in trying to resolve these issues and enforce new restrictions.

We believe that the transition period of two years proposed by the Commission before the regulation comes into force in member states is too short, given that we are one of four members states that do not currently have any restrictions. Given the difficulties in terms of implementation, Ireland has argued that the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals, REACH, committee could push for a longer transition period. I cannot specify how long that period would be but we will continue to seek a longer transition period to incorporate the regulation. I will certainly take up Deputy Clarke's offer. I am more than happy to meet with the lobby on this issue.