Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

There are positive elements in the Bill, some of which have been highlighted. There has been a 12-year consultation with many stakeholders on certain aspects of the Bill in respect of raised bogs. The designation of 25 new natural heritage areas is positive and needed. The Bill includes, as it must, the special areas of conservation. We need to be very clear that these are not being included out of virtue. Those special areas of conservation are already designated and we are obliged to preserve them under European law. It is very important that a situation does not arise in which the obligation on us to preserve these special areas of conservation is used to counterbalance or justify the removal of natural heritage area status from other areas. I refer to getting rid of resources. There is a major issue regarding the need to scale up resources and the restoration of peatlands. That is positive. Monitoring is also positive. The fact that we take positive steps forward, however, should not justify backward steps. If we do take steps to de-designate, then that is a serious issue. It is important that we be clear on how this has been framed and how it was framed in the newspapers in September and December. One headline referred to the coalition succeeding in de-designating NHA bogs. The big area of concern is de-designation. It would be different if this Bill simply stated that the Minister might consider making new regulations or orders. The fact is, however, that it involves revocation of orders not only in respect of raised bogs, which have been discussed, but also blanket bogs. The latter were added at a very late stage. My colleague, Senator Grace O'Sullivan, spoke about blanket bogs. They are recognised as a particularly important area of heritage and conservation but were added in at the 11th hour.

We are also at the 11th hour in the context of our climate change targets. The Minister of State did not refer to our climate targets and how they should be factored and nor does the Bill. The landscape has literally changed during this long period of consultation. We have a dual crisis. We are looking at biodiversity - and the conservation thereof - and climate change. Those two issues need to be addressed. A bog may have been degraded to a point where it may no longer be possible to restore biodiversity to its full environmental and conservation capacity, but that bog may still have significance in the context of Ireland achieving its climate change targets. I refer to carbon capture and the reduction of emissions. It will have significance in that regard.

I want to be very clear on this matter. I absolutely support the idea of social sustainability. Turbary rights are very important, as are seaweed rights. These are our traditional rights. The stories we have been hearing of people who like to cut their own turf are important. That is, however, already recognised. It could perhaps be strengthened. I am a member of the Joint Committee on Employment Affairs and Social Protection. Senator Ó Céidigh suggested that turbary rights should not be set against a fuel allowance in respect of those coping with fuel poverty. That is a sensible suggestion and I would be happy to bring it to the committee. Turbary rights, however, allow people to go to the bog and take turf for household use.

It is already acknowledged that this is allowed where there has already been cutting in NHAs. Let us be clear, however. De-designation is about commercial turf cutting; it is about opening up areas up for wide scale commercial use. This is happening at the same time that we are acknowledging we are hitting the end of the fossil fuel era. This is about commercial exploitation and a "last orders" mindset whereby we cut as much as we can. There is also an intergenerational issue here. I would like to see families passing on turbary rights for many generations to come. The use of sausage machines and the industrialisation of bog cutting, however, means we have seen generations of turbary rights being used up by one generation. We are also seeing generations who will have to deal with climate change being ill served by this measure.

My final point relates to the Minister of State declaring that he will advertise in local newspapers when he wishes to de-designate. He should also advertise those de-designations in national and, perhaps, European newspapers. I state that because when we agree to extract fossil fuels on a large commercial scale, that is an issue that affects everybody. There are positive aspects in this Bill but I really regret the inclusion of blanket bogs. That was a poor step. We need to include the pollinator plan and our climate targets to ensure it is fit for purpose.