Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

It is great to see the Minister of State in the Chamber. I will not discuss this at great length. Suffice to say, I undertook, following engagement with the Irish Farmers Association, IFA, to bring nine amendments to the House. I made it very clear that none of them were mine. I supported the principle of stepping up to the plate and articulating on behalf of the IFA. All of the amendments were in order, discussed, pressed and rejected. That is the simple fact of the matter. I want to put that on record because it is important. I engaged with a number of people who contacted me before, during and after the process. It is important I make that point.

The IFA outlined its concerns regarding the aspects of the proposed legislation, which would give Irish Water the ability to infringe on the property rights of the Irish farmers. I responded to those concerns accordingly. As I said, I tabled amendments, which were from the IFA, not me. It was important that they were appropriate and I consider them to be so. I received other amendments from other groups and having reflected and obtained advice on them, they may have been ruled out of order or I could not quite make a case for them. I tried, in very simple language, to set out the rationale for each of those amendments.

Many politicians pride themselves on their connections with the IFA and their performance – or lack of it – in the Seanad. The lack of engagement in this House was an eye-opener. That is, after all, the prerogative of the Members and I respect that. I want to be clear about that. However, I was somewhat taken aback by the lack of engagement from Senators from rural communities, particularly those who had sought mandates to represent the nominating bodies on the agricultural panel. That came as a surprise. It is not a criticism but it surprised me.

Today, we have no amendments to this legislation. We have no Government amendments and none from Senators. No amendments were ruled out of order, which is an important point to make. I have always said that it is important that we represent groups that are officially constituted and properly run. IFA representatives are regular contributors at and attendees of the agriculture committee. I am also on the housing committee. I know the recommendations there are somewhat at odds with some of the arguments or rationale for the case I am making. However, policy is made in the Houses. We can have pre-legislative scrutiny and the committee did a good job with that and there was much engagement on it. I am on both committees. One could say I am somewhat conflicted, but I am not. I was making a case for a representative body. I have this opportunity to speak, of course, and that is why I will use it. I respect that is the decision of the House. That is what we need to say.

As I said, I remain deeply concerned about two aspects of this Bill, namely, the lack of a clear protocol for compensation and full guidance for fair mediation and legal remedy for farmers, landowners, and the issue of associated costs. That is one of my principal remaining concerns with this Bill. I refer to the ability of Irish Water to infringe and oppress the property rights of Irish farmers. Section 61 grants Irish Water the power to control, interfere or affect the levels of any water reservoir, be it a river, a pond or an aquifer, if it is relevant to the public extraction operation.

The Bill is now due to go to the Dáil and the Seanad will, no doubt, assent to it proceeding to Dáil Éireann. There will be another opportunity for consideration and debate in that House, which has a different set-up and dynamic. The Dáil has a greater cross-section of rural Deputies and they will have the opportunity to tease out the issues and do what they will through the parliamentary process. I hope they will take on some of my concerns and the rationale I set out on behalf of the IFA in the amendments. I will engage strongly with them. I have already indicated my concerns to some rural Deputies and I passed on much of the correspondence and advice I have received on this matter. It is critically important that the IFA concerns are further teased out. That is a matter for the other House and I wish Deputies well in their deliberations.

I appeal to the Government to work constructively, as I try to do, with all sides of the Houses to address some of the genuine concerns of Irish farmers in relation to this legislation. There is an opportunity to tease out some of the issues. I know the Minister of State will be open to considering each and every amendment as it comes. I cannot pre-empt what Deputies will decide to do, what amendments they decide to take in the House or what contributions they will make. However, I believe I did a reasonable and fair job articulating on the nine amendments drafted by the IFA. They were not accepted and I respect and accept that.

I thank the Minister of State and his officials for giving me assistance in teasing out some of the issues and Members on all sides for facilitating the debate.