Fintan Warfield (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Sinn Féin will be supporting the amendments in this section to support the safeguarding of the canals. It is my understanding that previously section 3 and now section 4 are not what had been expected or committed to canals and waterways-based organisations. The absence of a canals Bill is noted. A canals Bill would give focus to all of this and would be an effective way to run our waterways. It also would give reasonable obligation to the communal value in terms of cultural activity and tourism. I appreciate that a canals Bill could not happen during the last Government term, but could it not happen now? This compromised position does not satisfy anybody as to what a canals Bill could have been.

In the last section we heard that Waterways Ireland was established as an all-island body, one of the six all-island North-South implementation bodies under the Belfast Agreement. Waterways Ireland maintains and develops the Barrow navigation, the Erne system, the Lower Bann, the Royal and Grand canals, the Shannon-Erne waterway and the Shannon navigation. It does so effectively and it is worth noting that the Bill only applies to those named waterways or canals monitored by Waterways Ireland. Other waterways do no fall within that remit. This could create a disparity in how the law is applied, where one canal may have different laws to another. The powers, however, with which Waterways Ireland can maintain canals and waterways, require clear and thorough analysis. While we can generally trust Waterways Ireland and the powers this Bill seeks to infer, that does not mean that those powers are not imprudent.

Senator Ruane has spoken about the numerous concerns that have been addressed to Members on section 4 on its lack of clarity and the inconsistency the legislation would pose if passed by these Houses. The lack of an appeals process will leave so many people trapped with fines that it may deter canal activity by those who use our canals or waterways for accommodation, livelihoods or leisure. They may have to make pressured decisions as to whether their activities could continue, based on heavy fines that they cannot question. A sufficient appeals process would give substantial clarity to this legislation and Sinn Féin will support amendments to that effect today.

The stop and search provision is very concerning. This is where authorised Waterways Ireland officers can search property if reasonable cause for offence is given. In no other instance in the State do any other public workers, apart from An Garda Síochána or agents of the court, have the right to search a person's home on the basis of offence caused. That is because An Garda Síochána and the other agents are trained to do such searches and are subject to stringent legislation on what is and is not acceptable. If Waterways Ireland officers are given this power, when we do not know the level of training they would receive, it would leave a huge uncertainty in real communities, as mentioned by Senator Ruane. Should the powers to stop and search be carried out with any level of flaw, it would leave Waterways Ireland subject to even greater scrutiny - and rightly so.

The five-day move-on rule that aims to clear stoppages on waterways gives a mass of uncertainty to those people who are living in houseboats or barges. People who live in these properties largely do so where they dock for a majority of the year and build a life in the surrounding area on land and off. The five-day move-on rule gives them no real level of certainty on where they call home or the confidence to settle within a local community.

In conclusion, it is the opinion of Sinn Féin that sections 3 and 4 in this Bill give confusion to those who use canals and waterways where it actually seeks to give clarity. Misapplication and misappropriation may be prevalent should this legislation pass and this is why we will support the amendments that improve the legislation as it stands.