Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Given that the State has paid significant fines, there is a sense, be it in the context of the location or perhaps more in the dismantling of the turbines, that it should get be able to take from this. Senator McDowell's proposals are certainly very interesting and imaginative. If there was the prospect of nationalisation and community ownership of badly planned developments, it would be an example of a disincentive to poorly planned developments. It would probably be far more effective than accompanying fast-tracking of development as set out in the Bill. The proposal would be an example of the kind of imaginative solution that would create the context, we would hope, where it is an absolute exception that environmental standards are not set, and where they are not set the risk would not be carried by the environment or the public. The risk would be carried by the developers in that context, rather than there being the risk of benefit and the risk of perverse incentive. It is a very interesting example, and it is certainly the kind of thing that would encourage many developers to get ecologists in and environmental impact assessments done as early as possible. It is a very interesting proposal in that regard.

One does not have to wait until the future, I am saying it now: the migratory patterns of whales do matter. However, this does not mean that we do not do these things. It is a matter of how they are done. A whale's migratory pattern, by its nature, is time bound. In that context, there are issues as to what time of year you are leading off on building activity, seismic activity and sonar activity.I say this as a member of the Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action. Advocates from Wind Energy Ireland recently appeared before the committee and spoke extremely passionately about their desire for there to be more ecologists and environmental impact officers, as well as collected State data regarding the marine environment, in particular, so we do not have every single company going out and having to do a new data set but that we actually have useful national data in terms of our marine habitats that is available and reliable and can be used.

They also very interestingly, and this was not prompted by anyone in the committee, this is what they brought to us, wanted environmental NGOs to be better resourced in order that there was feedback and things came in early, and so that they had projects they could be confident would work because they are making huge investments. Again, that was the message from them.

I think there are some signs that industry has learned from Derrybrien in that regard. It would be better for the State to start offering the industry what it is actually looking for, which is more resources around the environmental impact assessment and more access to appropriate data, rather than the kinds of fixes we have become too used to in Ireland. I am not speaking specifically to the Derrybrien project now. I am talking about the possibilities under this legislation whereby instead of having two chances to catch a problem at local authority and An Bord Pleanála level, we may have a risk now that new projects on adjoining sites attached to any previous projects may only get one chance really to be caught. This is at An Bord Pleanála level which, again, is a board that has one ecologist among its 60 inspectors. We should actually listen to what the big wind energy producers told us in the committee what they want to see, which is a better process into the future - not just a quicker process but a better process because that is quicker in the long run.