Seanad debates

Wednesday, 9 November 2016

Heritage Bill 2016: Committee Stage

 

10:30 am

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

I support the amendment. The amendment proposed by Senator O'Sullivan is indeed a proposal to deal with road safety. It is fundamental and important. The Roads Act is the correct and appropriate place to deal with the question of road safety. It is altogether discomfiting to see that the wrongly-named Heritage Bill and the Wildlife Act should be the focus of proposals relating to road safety.

Previously, the Government undertook consultation on the question of hedgerow cutting. The report following the Government consultation relating to hedge cutting stated clearly:

...any changes must be in line with Ireland's obligations to protect and enhance our habitats, birds and other species and not to increase the threat to them. This will be an overriding consideration in any proposals for change.

Instead, we are seeing the opposite approach whereby we are over-riding, in every sense, our obligations to nature to apply a blunt and inappropriate instrument to the question of road safety.

I will come back to the concerns relating to section 8 presently, but first I will speak to the amendment put forward by my colleague, Senator O'Sullivan. Her proposals amount to actual concrete measures to deal with road safety. The amendments set out how an individual or group who are concerned about road safety in respect of any area of hedgerow or overhang would be in a position to go to a local authority and request the use of a section 70 order. We are seeking something that would strengthen the practical implementation of road safety. We seek measures whereby those who are concerned can take immediate action and have a route to action.Under the Minister's proposals set out in section 8, there is no resource for a concerned member of the public, a pedestrian or a family with children who wish to cycle to and from work to act to strengthen road safety. They are reliant on the old measures and on the potential random will of a landowner.

Amendment No. 6 is a precise, useful targeted proposal to deal with a measure. It provides for the taking of responsibility. It provides that the local authority has responsibility and there is a root of accountability for how hedgerows are cut. The Minister also has responsibility. In the alternative that has been put forward we see an abrogation of responsibility for road safety. The Government and local authorities are saying that they will leave the matter entirely up to an individual landowner and that they will abrogate their responsibilities in terms of being fully accountable for issues of road safety. There is a washing of hands with respect to road safety. That alternative would disimprove road safety in Ireland. In contrast to that, I urge those who have genuine concerns to say that the inclusion of amendment No. 6 would be the instrument which would allow the Minister to address the concerns of those who may have contacted her on road safety issues. Amendment No. 6 provides for the insertion of the words "the removal or destruction of vegetation required by a notice served by a local authority under 70 of the Roads Act 1993" and the words "Such works shall be considered exempted for the purposes of section 40 of the Wildlife Act 1976". We have a precision instrument which allows, where it is necessary, any exemptions already under the Wildlife Act. That is provided; we have that capacity.

Before we discuss this amendment further and consider voting on it, I would like to hear from the Minister why the precise instrument that is already provided for under section 70, which allows for a suspension of section 40 of the Wildlife Act 1976 in clear cases where it is necessary where it serves a purpose of public safety, is not considered adequate. Moreover, why is the proposed extension of that to ensure that any concerned member of the public can take action not considered adequate for the purposes of road safety? I have not heard any concrete argument as to why this is not already an adequate solution, except that it abdicates responsibility and means that less responsibility is placed on local authorities to take action and to be responsible and accountable for the decisions. If something is dangerous in July, it is dangerous in August, and if it is dangerous in September, why precisely would we seek to change things simply in August and in March if there was such a fundamental problem with road safety? If there is an area where there is a dangerous overhang of an hedge, under the proposals set out in the Bill, no member of the public would have recourse to have it addressed. I have had extensive correspondence, as many other Members will have had, from many pedestrians and cyclists who speak about the protection offered to them by hedgerows and their importance to them. They are some of the most vulnerable road users yet they have been some of the most adamant in calling for a responsible targeted approach rather than the slash and burn approach we see being put forward.

I urge all Members to consider and support this amendment put forward by Senator Grace O'Sullivan and if there are aspects of it that are of concern, we will have an opportunity on Report Stage to further strengthen and amend our Road Safety Acts, to ensure that any concerns are addressed. I urge Members to support amendment No. 6 and change section 10 accordingly.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.