Martin Heydon (Kildare South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Members for being here today and for their level of engagement on this topic. It is my first time to address this issue in the Seanad. I am doing so in place of the Minister, Deputy McConalogue, and the Minister of State, Senator Hackett. I am aware of the concerns which have been articulated by Senators. I would like to acknowledge the points made by Senators Boyhan, Lombard, Boylan, Gavan, Daly and Burke. I read a previous debate in the House on this matter before I took this debate today. The Senators are absolutely right. The role of the Seanad is to be a check and balance and to highlight issues and concerns that Members have or which people have raised.

I have also heard colleagues in the House across the political divide make the point that this is not the House for detailed negotiation, yet some of what has been sought is detailed negotiation. That can be dressed up. It is all well and good to be reasonable in making points, but this is a Bill that is looking at a process. I take on board the points and concerns raised, but there are limits to what the Bill can do in terms of the finer level of detail it can go into.

The Minister has already made a decision. In response to Senator Lombard, I am happy to reaffirm the commitments that have been made. With regard to the workers, a decision was made to make extra payments to fur farming businesses for distribution to the workers as part of the compensation package. There is an extra fund to support retraining and reskilling requirements. This scheme will address the specific needs of employees in that regard. The detail of the scheme will be in the regulations.

Like all primary legislation, the Bill should not have a level of detail that is very prescriptive. There is a package for workers. The matter of five-year averaging was raised, and it was suggested that the relevant period could be ten years. In terms of seeking reassurances, the independent assessor will have a key role to play. If individual businesses or farmers feel very strongly about the ten-year period, as they do, an offer has been made to them to come back with more details that show the cyclical nature of the business. That will be considered as part of the process. To have a five-year averaging period is unusual; the normal period is three years. Again, we are getting into a level of detail that is a challenge. The cost of environmental assessments, including demolition costs, is a point that has been made previously.

The Bill is about two key commitments in the programme for Government. It is enabling legislation to get us to a point where schemes can be put in place, work can happen and certainty can be provided. I want to acknowledge how hard this has been for individual farmers and staff. As hard as the process has been, I imagine the length of time the uncertainty has continued is a contributory challenge to this. People want the best deal for themselves and their businesses, families and workers, but they also want to get to a point where we can move to the stage of getting through the finer detail as part of the regulation and independent process.

Senator Daly referred to the role of the Department in the specifications in the Bill. Due to the nature of the business activity concerned, it is absolutely right that there is a high level of specification. I acknowledge that the businesses and farmers involved carried out their business to that standard. Plenty of inspections were carried out, as one would expect. All requirements were met and that business was done very well. The decision has been made. It is fair to say that there is cross-party agreement on the cessation of fur farming in Ireland. We now need to work through having legislation that puts in place a process that allows us to bring out the regulations to make that happen.