Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

This amendment deals specifically with the issue of special areas of conservation, rather than natural heritage areas, given special areas of conservation are explicitly mentioned in the Bill. The Bill states: "...includes a candidate special area of conservation or a special area of conservation, within the ... European Communities (Birds and Natural Habitats) Regulations". I have a concern about including these bog habitats in the Government's consideration. The Minister of State will tell me he is not at liberty to de-designate or remove protections from these areas. However, I am extraordinarily grateful for the fact the European Union is not opening them up because I have no doubt all kinds of wonderful plans might be made for these internationally recognised, massively significant areas of natural heritage, and there are many great schemes and many things people would like to do with them. However, that is not open to the Government as it is prohibited by the EU.

The danger, and my concern, is that the Bill later uses the method of simple comparison as the means by which to justify a de-designation. For example, in regard to de-designation, the Minister of State said the Government is going to be looking at any bog that is on the list for potential de-designation and comparing it to another bog, for example, a raised bog could be compared to another bog, and it is basically considering or comparing whether the bog has a better or worse environmental value than the other bog. Perhaps the Minister of State can address this concern and I will not have to press the amendment. My concern is that, effectively, natural heritage area bogs would be compared with special area of conservation bogs, and it will be determined that the special area of conservation bogs are of better environmental, habitat or other value, and that will be used to justify the de-designating of the natural heritage area bog.

Does the Minister of State understand my concern? We already have something that has been determined by independent actors to be of an additional level of environmental value and given that additional protection of special area of conservation. These have already been shown to have an even higher level of environmental importance than natural heritage areas. However, the existence of there being something more precious, under the provisions of the Bill, is used as a justification for de-designating, so we would rate our bogs and say one is of supreme importance and another is just of importance.

I understand that, in terms of general policy, the Government wishes to look at special areas of conservation as well. However, I want assurances that special area of conservation bogs will never be used as comparators to justify removing protection from natural heritage area bogs.