Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 3, line 5, after “of” to insert "raised".

This amendment relates to one of the core issues in the Bill. There was a lengthy process under way and aspects of it have become outdated, for example, the previous process on consultation and review on developing the Bill was with regard to raised bogs. That process predated the strong focus we now have on climate change. On Monday, the Taoiseach was making statements on how he hopes Ireland will have a reputation for deep environmental concern. In this regard, it is unfortunate the debate on the Bill is taking place at the same time as the Joint Committee on Climate Action is meeting. More crucially, we are taking Report and Final Stages weeks before the committee is due to consider the future of our peatlands and to hear from Bord na Mona, experts on sustainable energy, the National Parks and Wildlife Service on the national peatlands strategy and experts from UCD and elsewhere. On the one hand, a process is under way in respect of climate change and consideration of our peatlands while, on the other, a Bill that will make quite radical changes to the usage of our peatlands is going through weeks before that discussion. As a result, the Bill will not be informed by the discussions that will take place at the Joint Committee on Climate Action.

This is directly relevant to the amendment because it relates to the question of process. There was a process - with gaps - which, in some senses, became outdated but there was a process for raised bogs. There was consultation and a review by the Peatlands Council. Action has been taken, documents have been published, opinions have been circulated and environmental assessment has been carried out. In the context of blanket bogs, no such process has taken place. However, at a late stage in proceedings in the Dáil, blanket bogs were added to the Bill. We have had a 12-year process for the raised bogs and, effectively, no process for blanket bogs but they will be opened for de-designation under the Bill in the same way as raised bogs.

It is important to take amendment No. 1 separately because it relates to the fundamental purpose of the Bill. I am simply saying that while I disagree with the Bill, at least let us insert the word "raised" and make it clear that it does not apply to all bogs. Let us be clear that, under the current formulation, it applies effectively to all bogs in Ireland, with raised and blanket bogs being the main concerns. It is wide open. Let us at least narrow the scope of the Bill to its original policy intent, which is based on some kind of process, and insert the word "raised" in the title.

There is particular concern about blanket bogs because we know they have a particular vulnerability when it comes to drainage. The environmental concerns relating to them are different. Such bogs perform different environmental work. The process of the original review was to ensure that new raised bogs would be designated. There was public consultation but in any of the engagement with the public, there was no mention of the potential de-designation of blanket bogs.

I will highlight one particular issue regarding blanket bogs. The diversity of habitats and the communities of plants and animals are quite different. The Minister of State has given some acknowledgement later in the Bill to the question of biodiversity and the idea of a review. Does the Minister of State at least not agree we should be looking at a full biodiversity review of blanket bogs before we proceed with including them in the legislation?

I will deal with my concerns on carbonation later when there will be opportunities to discuss them. The Minister of State added blanket bogs to the Bill at a very late stage and perhaps he might consider putting forward separate legislation appropriate to blanket bogs and narrowing the scope of this Bill. I also appeal to Fianna Fáil because it was a Fianna Fáil amendment that widened the scope. Given the environmental concerns that Fianna Fáil and its leader have expressed, will they support a narrowing of the Bill to limit its impact to the question of raised bogs? I put all of these issues with regard to consultation, transparency and environmental assessment to Fianna Fáil in this regard. This is why I want the amendments taken separately.

I am speaking about the wording in the Title. It is a symbolic point. Later, I will move amendments on very meaningful and impactful points on de-designation. I hope that even at this late stage Fianna Fáil may consider supporting amendments to remove blanket bogs from the Bill. This is one of the reasons I want the amendments to be discussed separately. This amendment is with regard to a symbolic point regarding the purpose of the Bill but later we will come to the question of what can and cannot be de-designated and that is an important point.

The Peatlands Council was established 12 years ago based on recommendations in the Quirke report, which outlined a plan for managing raised bogs.So all of that consultation I mentioned, including the foundation documents on which the consultation was based, came out of a report which was specifically based on a premise of dealing with raised bogs. Again, that is a huge expansion and I think it will be one that will stand as a great shame for Ireland internationally if we allow blanket bogs to be dedesignated without due process. I know there is a subsequent process that the Minister of State will suggest happens around designation. It is an inadequate process and certainly not comparable to the process that is under way for raised bogs.