Seanad debates

Thursday, 13 April 2017

Heritage Bill 2016: Report and Final Stages

 

10:30 am

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

On amendment No. 12, the Minister stated these matters will all be addressed in by-laws. I am glad the report of the proceedings will show that she made that statement because it will enable us to hold her to it later. However, I remind her of a principle in philosophical logic known as Occam's razor, which prohibits the hypothetical discussion of the non-existent. Given that the by-laws do not yet exist, any discussion of them is hypothetical. In this case, Occam's razor rules out the Minister's argument completely because, as I stated, one cannot discuss the hypothetical existence of the non-existent.

With regard to amendment No. 14, the Minister stated Waterways Ireland would take these matters into account. This is a highly generalised phrase which does not mean the matter should not be addressed in the legislation. It is very important that safety, security and access by emergency services are provided for in the main Bill, rather than being left to the goodwill of Waterways Ireland. I ask the Minister to reconsider her position on this very important amendment because I intend to press it. The issue of safety, access for the emergency services and so on should not be left to the goodwill of Waterways Ireland. While nobody questions the agency's goodwill, and I am glad compliments have been paid to it, I also strongly support Senator Ó Domhnaill's comments, particularly on the River Barrow pathway and the use of inappropriate materials. I do not believe planning permission was sought for this project, although retrospective planning permission may be sought. It is not good practice, particularly for a semi-State body, to rush in, wallop matters through and subsequently seek planning permission.

I hope the Minister will reconsider, even if she regards the amendment as somewhat redundant in the sense that it is already provided for. By saying that, she ceded the principle that access for the emergency services and so forth should be taken into account. It is no big deal for her to accept the amendment because, according to her, it will not affect practice. It means, however, that something that is so fundamental to the use of the canals as access by the fire services, ambulances, rescue services and so on should be guaranteed. That is crucial to the proper and safe use of the waterways. It should be provided for in the main Bill, rather than being left to the goodwill of Waterways Ireland, which I do not doubt. I hope the Minister will give way on the amendment because there is no contraindication and it is not causing a problem. She stated the amendment was redundant because Waterways Ireland already does that for which it provides but Waterways Ireland is not required to do so in legislation.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.