Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 11:

In page 12, line 16, after "of" to insert "restoration, protection or conservation of marine biodiversity or for".

Again, this relates to the rights and jurisdiction of a state in a designated area. There are two intersecting pieces, including the rights and jurisdiction of the State in a designated area. That is jurisdiction in the very widest sense.That includes regulation and the power to determine what sovereign rights are and to exercise not solely whole but service rights and the right of jurisdictions in terms of regulation. Section 19 is on jurisdiction but from a civil and criminal jurisdiction point of view. That relates to offences.

I was trying to expand the powers in section 18, including those slightly wider framed rights around the jurisdiction of the State, which include regulations, to include reference to regulations in respect of the restoration, protection or conservation of marine biodiversity. Again, this comes in the context of this lacuna. We need to be very clear that there will be problems coming forward in terms of marine planning. We need to be clear that any problems that arise and any judicial reviews we see and so forth are going to have been necessitated by the fact that we have got the process wrong on this.

I mentioned the special areas of conservation, SACs, and it is important to do so because we do not have many marine protected areas. I mention the special areas of conservation that are Natura 2000 sites. I am looking at, for example, the Natura 2000 sites within Galway Bay. We had a check and balance in our legislation whereby if the Minister with responsibility for planning wished to allow for development in a way that would be damaging to a Natura 2000 site, which would include those marine sites, he or she would need to get agreement from the Minister with responsibility for heritage. Last week we made it be the case that the Minister with responsibility for planning no longer has a limit in requiring that the Minister with responsibility for heritage would agree.

I tried to insert such a check and balance within the Department. In that scenario, the Minister with responsibility for planning would need to get the agreement of the Minister with responsibility for heritage. That would have been true to the original spirit of different mandates and responsibilities. I am conscious of that check and balance having been removed and of the planning framework moving ahead of the marine protection agenda. In that context, it would be appropriate that we use any tool we can, including this maritime legislation, to strengthen the visibility of responsibilities in respect of restoration, protection and conservation of marine biodiversity. This is almost a protective measure that could be there in the absence of marine protected areas having been zoned.