Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State. I am glad she and the Government are not opposing the Bill. To have done so would have been a real pity, given that the Bill represents something that was committed to in the programme for Government and that has been called for across the board. The citizens of Ireland, whenever they have been consulted, have talked about wanting this different remit. The Citizens' Assembly on Biodiversity Loss was very clear. I acknowledge the NGOs that have been supportive of this Bill, including the Environmental Pillar, the Sustainable Water Network, SWAN, Friends of the Earth, Stop Climate Chaos, An Taisce and many others. More than 30 organisations have supported this Bill.

We cannot be complacent, and I have concerns. We have seen figures even this week to suggest Ireland is not moving in the right direction. The steps that have been taken so far have been too small and incremental. There is a suggestion that the largest landowners in the State will be engaged with simply as shareholders. We are the Legislature, and the Minister of State represents the Government. We in the Oireachtas are collectively the representatives of all the citizens of the State. It is not sufficient that we take a shareholder frame. It is not okay that a commercial limit is set. I acknowledge the need for sustainable business, sustainable woodland activities and so forth, but the Bill is hoping to avoid a situation whereby we limit climate action through commercial limit tests that do not have to be the be-all and end-all.

The Minister of State mentioned other legislation. There was scope to include these bodies in the climate legislation and require hard targets of them. That would have been a good decision. Why would we treat these bodies as private sector entities and encourage them and push them into convoluted partnerships with, for example, UK investment funds so that they can apply for a commercially beneficial scheme when we have the power to show leadership? When semi-State bodies show real leadership and are not simply concentrating on commercially viable interesting schemes or pilots, when those bodies show massive change leadership, it inspires the public and the private sector. We have the potential to move quickly.

I appreciate that the Government is not opposing this Bill but I am concerned that there might be delays in progressing it. I would like to see my Bill overtaken by Government legislation, for example, which changes the legal mandate and remit of these organisations. I would welcome Government legislation within the next few months. We are in danger of tying ourselves into a forestry strategy for 2050 where biodiversity and climate action are on the periphery and the commercial viability and wood harvesting pieces are centre stage. I will not go too far into the matter but we know that much of that timber is exported. There is guarantee that it goes into the construction industry in Ireland. The balance in the forestry strategy is still, in the majority, business as usual in terms of sitka spruce. If we want to make significant change, we need to push past shareholder expectations or requests.We need to do what we can do, which is to empower these bodies to be massive leaders, and make big changes so what they do over the next five to ten years reflects a vision for our land, forest, soils and water. If we were to get it right on 8% of the land in this country, that would be something transformative and significant. I appreciate that the Minister of State has spoken about the vision she has for Government. Where it gets concrete is if we put it into law. I hope the Minister of State not only accepts these points I am putting forward, but translates them into something significant to send a strong signal to the public. I will be looking with interest to see the Government's legislation to deliver on the mandates I hope will be coming through these Houses in the coming months.