Seanad debates

Wednesday, 9 November 2016

Heritage Bill 2016: Committee Stage

 

10:30 am

Photo of Alice-Mary HigginsAlice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Returning to section 6, I was disappointed with the Minister's response and there was considerable contradiction. The amendment does not require that the Minister sanction or delay the process of any road cutting. It requires that the Minister be notified. It means there would be a central repository for tracking what is happening in our hedgerows and when and where cutting is taking place, and that the Minister would not abdicate responsibility for the overview of the matter. I would first clarify the point given in response by the Minister which suggested her approval would be required for each instance of hedgerow cutting and, thereby, lead to a delay. This is not what is set out. It is a matter of a notification, bringing together the big picture and placing together the patterns in cutting and in our environment.

The Minister also spoke about having sufficient powers. If the Minister feels she has sufficient powers regarding the area of road safety and hedge cutting, why are we proceeding with the proposals that are being set out? Why, at the end of the Minister's speech, did she talk about driving along roads and the hedgerows? Is it, or is it not, a road safety consideration? If it is a road safety consideration, and the Minister is satisfied that they have sufficient powers, why are we proceeding? At times, we hear it is a land management issue. There is need for clarity. Is it a land management issue or a road safety issue? Later, I will speak on our amendment on data and the huge richness that is needed in research in the area. Regarding road safety, we are going on an anecdotal, ad hocbasis. The word "managed" is used regarding cutting. There is nothing managed in the proposals. It is deeply ad hocin terms of the responsibility placed on individuals.

The Minister said something which is of extreme concern to me. When we talk about our hedgerows, let it be clear that the hedgerows are not simply the preserve, responsibility and interest of those who live right beside a particular hedgerow. I am from the west of Ireland and I know hedgerows and gorse. We all live in Ireland together and, more to the point, we all live on a shared planet. The hedgerows of Ireland are not simply a matter of interest to one person's commute. They are a heritage for generations to come. They are part of who we are as a nation. They are the conduit of our wildlife and nature. When we go to Europe, we do not go as individual landowners but collectively. The Government goes to represent Ireland and to explain that what we will do for our environmental responsibility, given that we lost our woodlands in previous times, is to have hedgerows. We list hedgerows when we go to Europe and say we are doing our bit for the environment. We argue for hedgerows, an argument that will be much less credible in the future when we argue for our hedgerows to be included in the allowance we receive under the Common Agricultural Policy. It is a collective argument and responsibility.

The Minister's fellow Minister lodged his commitments on climate change and said Ireland would do its part regarding climate change obligations. Is this another conversation with another Minister that we cannot have? The Minister is part of a Cabinet, and can speak to her colleague regarding roads, put forward workable amendments on road safety and ask where a policy fits in terms of climate change. Has a conversation even happened regarding climate change concerns?

The idea is that we would gather data along the way, although where we would gather the data appears nowhere in the text. What will we do? Do we gather data on the next national bird song day and see if it sounds a little quieter? There are no proposals for gathering data. If the Minister has responsibility for heritage, is it not her first responsibility to know what she is doing regarding heritage and gather the information that is needed, not to slash and burn and ask questions later? At a time when our planet is possibly more fragile than it has ever been, when we all feel the dangers and threats that exist and there is great instability, is it the time for a slash and burn approach to measures whereby we throw in a quick fix and abdicate our responsibilities? It is a time for thoughtful, informed, careful and caring debate. Let us have caring, thoughtful and evidence-based proposals. We do not "shoot first and ask questions later", a phrase that was used in one e-mail I received.

The people of Ireland who wrote to us are monitoring and know what is happening in the hedgerows. They spoke about the detail and the change from one season to another, what they showed their children and what they cannot now show their grandchildren. Where is all this detail and nuance? Where is any of the evidence? We are addressing it in terms of road safety and will return to it regarding section 8. However, a 20-line throwaway is being justified by the Minister calling it a pilot. Why will the Minister not pilot innovative measures regarding road safety, such as the proposals enumerated in County Clare? Farmers there receive an incentive payment when they take measures during a difficult season and there are practical, real proposals that examine the issue hedge by hedge and identify the areas. Communities know where the road safety concerns are. Let us talk to them and come up with solutions that address the area. I ask the Minister to take responsibility, not abdicate responsibility. When the Minister returns with amendments regarding amendment No. 6, would the Minister give amendments in respect of amendments Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, and all the areas and speak to her fellow Minister about it?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.