Paul Daly (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I thank him and his officials, as well as the Minister, Deputy McEntee, in her absence, for the swiftness with which the Bill has been brought to the Houses. As a person who lobbied on this issue for some time and was notified well in advance of the potential cliff edge many people were facing on 30 November, I warmly welcome the move being made here this evening. Although it is just a short amending Bill, I take on board and welcome the fact that there is a commitment to a comprehensive review of this situation.

To be honest, this law is far too complex for a person such as me. When one researches the issue and reads into the intricacies of what is involved overall, one realises it becomes very complex. That goes back to our history, in that many of the smaller farms in rural Ireland initially came from the division of estates and larger holdings by the Land Commission. It is not always possible in such situations for all involved to have road frontage or road access. Agreements were made in respect of easements known as rights of way to allow people to access land. Back in the day, in my father's time and that of his father before him, these were often gentlemen's agreements. There is no formal documentation or registration of the rights of way and, as ownerships change and new generations come along, it is not always as easy to implement these gentlemen's agreements that have been in place for years as it was for the previous generations who were around when the arrangements were made.

A major issue that was beginning to raise its head in recent months with the 30 November deadline pending was a slowdown in conveyancing, as the Minister of State noted. Whether it was drawing down a loan, purchasing or selling land or working through probate or situations of intestacy, people realised that come 30 November rights of way would need to be registered and that was slowing down those processes. As such, it became vitally important that something was done before 30 November. The issue is addressed in this amending Bill, which I welcome.

I hope it will be taken into consideration in the comprehensive review that has been promised post the enactment of the Bill that, since 2017, 70% of applications to the PRA have been rejected. That is a fact that comes up when one researches this issue. I do not expect the Minister of State to have an answer this evening in terms of the reasons for those rejections but I hope that this issue will be considered in any review relating to further legislation and that the pitfalls that seem to have arisen there will be addressed in whatever manner possible.

I will not go on much longer. It is noteworthy that the Law Society, the Bar Council and the farm representative bodies all welcomed the Bill and that it had the blessing of the Attorney General, the Cabinet and the Government before it was even introduced. It is usually the case that legislation is introduced and at some stage during its passage through the Houses Members start getting phone calls or correspondence from stakeholders with an opinion on the matter. In this case, they all came forward to set out their opinions before the Bill was even introduced. For that reason, I do not see why I or any other Member present, certainly on the Government side, would have any issue with the Bill. As I stated, it has received the blessing in advance of the stakeholders whom it mostly affects.

I plead with the Minister of State to ensure that, whatever comes out of the review following the enactment of the Bill, an awareness campaign is put in place. The reason we got so close to the deadline with so little action was a lack of awareness. For many people who were aware that it was coming down the line, there is and was a big element of fear, particularly among the older generations who lived with the gentlemen's agreements. They did not want that to change and believed that the fact it was being legalised might diminish or dilute their ownership. They did not want to prevent their neighbour or whoever having a right of way, but were concerned their ownership could be diluted. Nothing could be further from the truth, but it is difficult to explain that to a person who has lived with the previous arrangement all his or her life. When we get to the final solution and this issue is moved forward, a serious awareness campaign will be needed. We need people to know the ins and outs of it and what might be coming down the line. I know of a person who was given a site on the family avenue and just assumed he or she could use the avenue for access, but when the next generation took over the farmhouse there was an issue in respect of whether the person was really allowed to use the avenue to access his or her house. Sometimes situations arise that were ill prepared for, or of which people were not aware. While this was a solution to such situations, in many cases it created more alarm bells than it offered the relief of a solution to a problem. It is vital that when we move forward with whatever extension is agreed, and whatever comes out of the review in terms of future legislation, there is a good awareness campaign through the farm organisations, Revenue or whatever body has access to all those affected.

I know other speakers will touch on the issue in the context of urban areas. This is not just a rural issue but, from my perspective, it is a major issue in rural Ireland. I have not mentioned access to bogs. It can be a nightmare when there are several bog banks on one land bank and there is only one access route and one person owns it. It is not just one neighbour allowing another across their land to gain access to other land or water for their animals or whatever; it can be 40 people using a lane owned by an individual. This is about how that can be teased out and how to get to the bottom of sorting it out, legalising it and moving forward to a system that is more structured than the gentlemen's agreements that were in place previously.