David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I would like to address two issues first. One was raised by the Inland Waterways Association of Ireland, which has complained about a poor consultation process, despite what the Minister said. It made a number of other points, but I am sure it has also made them to the Minister. I want to concentrate on section 40, but Inland Fisheries Ireland has also contacted me. It approves of paragraph 40(2)(d) about the management of noxious weeds, but suggests it should be expanded to cover invasive plant species. I ask the Minister to consider that point, because there is a serious problem with invasive plant species.

The real problem that concerns me is the fact that the Bill will give the Minister the power to make regulations to permit the burning of vegetation during a specified time or times in March in specified areas of the State and, in addition, to allow landowners or their agents to cut, grub or destroy vegetation in any hedge or ditch during August. These are very serious matters. In a press statement, the Minister discussed the submissions received. She also referred to them in her speech. However, she failed to mention that the vast majority of them were opposed to section 40 and they were from the most concerned areas - from Birdwatch Ireland, An Taisce and so on. All these groups opposed section 40. This is just a gesture for the farmers, coming up to an election. That is all it is. It is perfectly naked.

The Minister said "[m]anaged hedge cutting will be allowed, under strict criteria, during August to help ensure issues such as overgrown hedges impacting on roads can be tackled". For God's sake, can they not be done at any time of the year? I was the person in this House who raised the issue of the danger to pedestrians and road traffic from overgrown hedges because I was briefed on it by somebody who was involved in a serious accident, so I know all about it, but it does not have to be done in August. It is laughable to think of it being done in August when the farmers are harvesting. They are busy at work. Why do they need to do it then, which is right in the middle of the nesting season?

There are a number of threatened birds. We have already been up before the European court and we have been found guilty. The Minister actually quoted section 40 as a protection in that case, but the European court found it was not strong enough and was not sufficient. I do not know what the Minister has to say about that. Then she has the amazing gall to quote biodiversity. How in the name of God is the Minister encouraging biodiversity by pulling down the hedgerows that are full of biodiversity, not only in terms of birds' nests, but also seeds, plants, and all that kind of stuff? Every survey has shown that more intensive hedgerow cutting leads to a catastrophic decline of up to 75% in species of berry and so on, and also in bird life.How this can be described as biodiversity is beyond me. We already have section 40, which allows for a wide range of exemptions, so I wonder why the Minister is introducing this. There is already a catalogue of exemptions from this restriction. They allow for: the destroying, in the ordinary course of agriculture or forestry, of any vegetation growing on or in any ditch or hedge; the cutting or grubbing of isolated bushes or clumps of gorse, furze or whin or the mowing of isolated growths of fern in the ordinary course of agriculture; the cutting, grubbing or destroying of vegetation in the course of any works being duly carried out for reasons of public health or safety by a Minister of the Government or a body established or regulated by or under that statute; the clearance of vegetation in the course of fisheries development; the destroying of any noxious weeds; the clearance of vegetation in the course of road or other construction; the removal or destruction of vegetation required by a notice served by the Minister under section 62(1) of the Wildlife Act of 1946. All of these exemptions are already in place. What is to prevent the Minister implementing them properly? They are in the targeted areas where it is necessary. It is not a type of wholesale unlimited destruction of the natural environment.

The closed dates for burning and cutting are based, in a generic way, on what the Department calls "the generally recognised nesting and breeding period for wild birds". In fact, there is a strong case for the precautionary principle to be introduced and for an extension of the closed period to protect early nesting and breeding species in the nest building period, not least in the face of climate change which is already affecting the situation here. A number of birds nest well into August. I refer, in particularly, to the yellowhammer, which nests into September. In the case of burning controls on ground nesting birds, the hen harrier nests well into September. The exemptions are framed so broadly, for example, for public health and safety, and appear to be regulated so poorly that they arguably provide almost a carte blanchefor cutting during the closed period already, without any tampering. I am extremely concerned about this.

With regard to burning, I remember as a child going to the strand in Sandymount to watch Howth burning after the farmers had set a torch to the furze. It was always very exciting. However, fire is estimated to have destroyed 16,000 hectares of land in Ireland in 2011. Despite it being illegal, Coillte has reported that in the space of one week in April 2010, approximately 1,500 areas of forest had been burnt, putting properties, wildlife and habitats at risk. This is what we have already. Research carried out on 100 peatland sites in Ireland indicated that burning was evident in 19% of the sites surveyed with severe damage evident in 8% of the cases.

I have also received submissions from An Taisce, which is opposed to this. In less than one day it had 4,000 signatures on a petition against these measures. Hedgerows are critical to our landscape, which is an important aspect of our tourism. They are important for land protection, including management of soil erosion, land drains and flood management. They are also critical to biodiversity. How can the Minister continue to mention biodiversity in this Bill, when it is mentioned so often in the situation referred to by An Taisce? Seanad Éireann is expected in the run up to an election to accept a pig in a poke with this Bill. We are expected to pass provisions allowing for effective wholesale cutting, grubbing and so forth during the month of August, when many native birds are still nesting, without seeing any associated restricting regulations or any guarantee that such restrictions will be provided. We are expected to pass the Bill allowing for burning in March without knowing how the areas where it will happen will be selected or how extensive it will be. The Bill contains a sunset clause of two years but it has an entirely open-ended reactivation clause, so that clause is of no use whatever. We are told it is a pilot but there is no mechanism to assess it. Where is the mechanism? If it is supposed to be a pilot project, surely there should be some provision for assessing the impact.

We are expected to accept section 8(2) of the Bill which provides for wholesale cutting, grubbing and so forth without any clarity about the restrictions, the basis for any restrictions and no guarantee that the proposed regulations will ever be introduced. By passing this Bill, we will provide for no protection in August, contrary to expert evidence based on the submissions. I note that the Minister quoted no scientific evidence. However, the organisations that have briefed me have provided extensive scientific information. For example, the British Trust for Ornithology provides information on egg laying dates for breeding birds. This is the most reliable scientific evidence available, since we do not have similar recording of egg laying and nesting activities in Ireland. We are seeking such data from the Minister.

I return again to the issue of biodiversity. I have to laugh when a Minister, who is introducing provisions for massive hedge cutting and almost unrestricted burning, talks about biodiversity. She refers to grubbing. This grubby little Bill is grubbing out the possibility of biodiversity and is certainly not enhancing it. I know it will be passed. That is the mathematics of politics. However, it will not be passed without my strong objections to it. They are reasoned objections backed by scientific evidence, which the Minister has failed to produce. It is a sop to the farming vote for the forthcoming election.