Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Simon Coveney, to the House, and wish him every success in his new portfolio. As a fellow Corkman I hope he will do an excellent job for the fishermen and all those he represents, who are very dear to my heart.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you. This is my first opportunity to speak in this Chamber either as a Deputy or as a Minister. It is an honour to do that.

The Foreshore (Amendment) Bill 2011 now brought forward will transfer all foreshore functions under the Foreshore Acts 1933 to 2009 to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government with the exception of the following: designated fishery harbour centres; activities which are wholly or primarily for the use, development or support of aquaculture; and activities which are wholly or primarily for the use, development or support of sea-fishing, including the processing and sale of sea-fish and manufacture of products derived from sea-fish.

The Foreshore Acts 1933 to 2009 require that a lease or licence must be obtained from the relevant Minister prior to undertaking any works and placing any structures or materials in or on, or for the application of, or removal of material from, State-owned foreshore.

The foreshore consists of the land from the high water mark to the 12 nautical mile limit and is 39,000 sq. km. in size. In recent years, the size, scale and complexity of projects developed on the foreshore has changed considerably. At one time foreshore consents covered primarily small piers and jetties. Many members are from constituencies that are familiar with that. However, in recent years, applications received concern major State and private sector infrastructure projects, such as municipal waste water treatment plants, large commercial harbour developments, gas pipelines and large-scale offshore wind, wave arid tidal energy projects.

In order to deal with this increasing scale and complexity, it is vital that the development of these large projects accord with the development plans for the functional areas of the local authorities to which they are contiguous. Both land-based and offshore developments in the coastal zone impact each other in very significant ways-----

Rónán Mullen (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On a point of order, the Minister's speech does not appear to be available.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If not, I apologise. If the House wishes I will wait until we can get copies, otherwise I will continue.

Rónán Mullen (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It would be helpful.

Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand the frustration of the Senator. However, there is no obligation on the Minister to provide copies of speeches but it is the custom.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would concede that even though there is no obligation on me, it is a custom that should be followed and the Senator should have a copy of the speech I am making.

Rónán Mullen (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister. This is not the first time this has happened. I ask the Minister to let it be known through his channels to the civil servants that this is a problem that need not happen. I totally understand the Minister's-----

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I know what it is like being in opposition and trying to follow a speech when one should have it in writing. I apologise for that. If my officials are listening perhaps we could arrange for a photocopy of my speech to be given to all Members as soon as possible.

Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Senator for raising the point. The Minister may proceed. We will ensure that is done.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you. Balancing the impact of a development in one zone on the other zone is a major component of the impact assessment of any such projects. At a higher level is it also essential to align and integrate the strategic development plans for both zones, whether at sea or on land.

While it is acknowledged that some elements of the Foreshore Acts, first enacted in 1933 and often amended, require modernisation, it is important to note that, in relation to large projects, the assessment of environmental impact statements and the public participation and consultation elements are fully up to date and in accordance with all environmental directives. Regulations in respect of the Foreshore Acts have been implemented under the European Communities Acts dealing with the environmental impact assessment directive, the public access to environmental information directive and the public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters directive. Therefore, the Foreshore Acts are at this time in compliance with the Aarhus Convention. I have just got a note saying a copy of the speech is en route, so I hope the Senators get it before I finish.

Rónán Mullen (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The administration of the foreshore under the Foreshore Acts generally involves two distinct components. First, the licensing of the activity or development on the foreshore is a regulatory role akin to the role of a planning department. Second, the vast majority of the foreshore is State-owned and managed on behalf of the Minister for Finance. Therefore, property management is a key role under the Foreshore Acts. This role of property manager on behalf of the State can in very rare circumstances give rise to competing applications for the same area of State foreshore. The Foreshore Acts have always provided for this situation. Sections 1 and 2 of the Foreshore Act 1933 stipulate that all decisions must be made solely in the public interest. For this reason the 2009 Act made specific provision for co-ordination between Departments before any decisions on consents are made. Both Departments are deeply committed to the establishment of an efficient and effective structure designed to ensure that information on applications is managed in a co-ordinated fashion.

The cumulative effect of developments, one on another in the coastal zone has been a major challenge for national governments throughout Europe leading the European Commission to issue recommendations in this regard.

In all countries this integration of the foreshore and offshore development process has proven quite difficult. The Foreshore and Dumping at Sea (Amendment) Act 2009 amended the Foreshore Acts 1933 to 2009 to the effect that foreshore responsibilities were split between the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and what was the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, now the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. It provided for a complex division of responsibilities for foreshore licensing between the relevant Ministers based on the nature of the application. As a result, a significant element of the foreshore licensing function was transferred to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, while others were retained in my Department. It is accepted that the wording of the Act is difficult for business to clearly understand and follow. That outcome is not good for people who wish to do business in Ireland and develop our green and other energy sectors.

The core functions transferred to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government in 2009 included all energy-related developments including oil, gas, wind, wave and tidal energy on the foreshore; aggregate and mineral extraction developments on the foreshore; foreshore projects in respect of port companies and Harbours Acts other than development in a fishery harbour centre, including expansion or relocation of such port, harbour or development intended for commercial trade; all other foreshore projects other than those related to aquaculture, designated fishery centres and sea fisheries. The transfer was effected to provide proper and effective co-ordination and consistency with a land-based planning process. Provision was made in the 2009 Act for both Ministers to consult in respect of all foreshore applications received.

This consultative approach has worked reasonably well and took effect on 15 January 2010. In excess of 60 foreshore consents have been granted by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government since the transfer of foreshore functions in 2010 and a further 96 cases have been progressed through the formal foreshore application process in the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. Certain sections of the Foreshore Act 1933 concern the overall management of the coastal zone rather than the licensing of developments on the foreshore. For example, section 6 of the Foreshore Act provides the means to prohibit the removal of beach material and section 11 of the Act provides for the removal of dilapidated structures on beaches. In order to provide for the coherent management of the coastal zone under one administration, these and other coastal management functions were transferred in full to the then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

As an island nation, the status of the sea fishing and aquaculture industry is hugely important from both an economic and social perspective. In view of this, the future of aquaculture and sea-fishing related projects needs to be secured, given the often isolated locations of the coastal communities which these industries support. The grant of a foreshore licence for an aquaculture project is currently an outcome of detailed consideration of the aquaculture licence application. In certain circumstances an environmental impact statement must accompany the aquaculture licence application. I assure the House that the licensing of aquaculture sites, including foreshore licensing for such sites, remains with my Department. This is particularly important given my Department's role in food production. I have an ambitious approach to expanding the aquaculture industry in Ireland.

I have decided to introduce this short item of legislation for various reasons. These include the increasing number of applications being made year on year for foreshore consents to each Department; the need to facilitate a streamlined and clearly defined decision making process to ensure the ongoing and sustainable development of foreshore for the benefit of the State and future generations; the ongoing challenge for Government to examine existing procedures and practices with a view to eliminating red tape and unnecessary bureaucracy; the provision, where possible, of clearer and more easily understandable legislation, for those who have to use it; and developing a faster consent system, which we all want to see, in order to maximise the employment potential of the foreshore hopefully in a sustainable and green manner. This also includes allowing the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to develop a streamlined process that will include linking the planning process to the foreshore process. At some stage in the not too distant future, I want people who are applying for development on the foreshore and who must also apply for planning permission, to be able to make one application. It is important that any perceived obstacles to achieving the above are removed and to achieve these objectives I am introducing this legislation before the summer recess to ensure that a clearer legislative framework is in place as soon as possible. This new Bill will bring greater clarity to the management of foreshore matters which is very much in line with the thrust of the programme for Government. Hopefully, it will help stimulate the sector and the economy and provide much needed employment in many rural areas of the country.

I will now deal in greater detail with the sections of the Bill. Section 1 provides for the transfer of all foreshore functions under the Foreshore Acts 1933 to 2009 from the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. The exceptions are functions relating to designated fishery harbour centres, functions in respect of activities which are wholly or primarily for the use, development or support of aquaculture, and functions in respect of activities which are wholly or primarily for the use, development or support of sea-fishing, including the processing and sale of sea-fish and manufacture of products derived from sea-fish, which remain with the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

Section 2 provides for the amendment of the 1933 Foreshore Act by substituting a new section 1B in place of the existing section 1B, which was inserted by the 2009 Act. The new section defines the functions to be carried out by the relevant Ministers. It improves on the last Act.

Section 3 provides for the preservation of certain continuing contracts and the adaptation of certain references to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in certain documents concerning the transfer of foreshore functions to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. Section 4 provides for the saving and amendment of certain statutory instruments made by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on functions to be taken over by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. Section 5 provides for the transfer of certain property and liabilities connected with the functions being transferred from the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government.

Section 6 deals with the effect of the transfer of foreshore functions of certain acts performed and documents which relate to the matters so transferred. Section 7 provides for the substitution or addition of the name of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to any pending legal proceedings to enable those proceedings to continue. Section 8 provides for the completion by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, in regard to functions transferred, of matters commenced by or under the authority of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

Section 9 provides that any foreshore function exercised in whole or in part by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government since 15 January 2010, including any consultation and other requirements under the Foreshore Acts 1933 to 2009, is deemed to have been exercised as if that Minister was the appropriate Minister for the purposes of the Acts. Additionally, anything commenced but not completed may be carried on or completed by that Minister after the enactment of the Bill. Section 10 provides for the Short Title of the Bill when enacted and a collective citation for the Acts as amended.

This is short but important amending legislation that will copperfasten the transfer of specific foreshore functions from my Department to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, where the resources and personnel exist to do a good job. I am introducing it now for the approval of the House in order to bring certainty and the utmost clarity to the administrative foreshore functions of the two Departments and to facilitate the ongoing work of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government in integrating the foreshore consent process for major infrastructure projects with the strategic consent process operated by An Bord Pleanála, as well as the wider planning consent process in the case of non-strategic projects.

I have referred to merging planning and foreshore processes to simplify the application process for developments involving foreshore development. A further reason is to assist in the further development of a strategic focus on aquaculture licensing by my Department in the months ahead. I attach great importance to this as we try to move some of the larger scale aquaculture projects that may emerge in Ireland further offshore. I also wish to complete this now in advance of the very busy autumn schedule for my Department and the Oireachtas.

Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I remind speakers that group leaders have eight minutes and all others have six. Senator Brian Ó Dómhnaill is the first speaker with eight minutes.

Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister to the House. It is his first time in the Chamber and we are delighted to see him. I understand he will return in a number of weeks to talk about fisheries and perhaps agriculture.

The legislation before the House makes much general sense. Its purpose is to simplify the administrative procedures associated with the whole process of foreshore licensing. The 2009 Dumping at Sea (Amendment) Act to which the Minister referred provided for the process of co-operation between the Ministers for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in regard to the administration of foreshore licences. That Act, which amended previous legislation, provided for, as the Minister noted, consultation between both Departments and both Ministers. Would it be right to assume that the co-ordination system established between both Departments at the time did not work as effectively as perhaps it should have? Is that the reason for the introduction of new legislation now? Perhaps the consultation between the Departments of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Agriculture, Fisheries and Food proved not to be as successful as had been anticipated, resulting in the introduction of this new streamlined legislation to try to fast-track the process. If that is the reason, it is welcome.

As I understand it, a foreshore co-ordination unit was established in the Minister's departmental office in Clonakilty, the purpose of which was to manage and co-ordinate the consultation process referred to under the 2009 legislation. The applications received for foreshore licences were referred to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the advice of the Minister's Department was requested when they related to marine or fisheries projects. The new legislation is probably a further step towards improving the entire process associated with foreshore licensing. Recently I was interested to learn, arising from a parliamentary question in the other House, that currently 24 foreshore applications in respect of aquaculture or fisheries related projects are being processed in the Minister's Department. Does that figure include all the other foreshore licences?

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No, it does not.

Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Perhaps the Minister might give us some insight into the level of applications being dealt with in regard to foreshore licences being processed at local government level, applications from councils for sewerage treatment-----

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are approximately 90 under way.

Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That 90, added to the 24, makes just over 110 applications. I note that of the 24 in his Department the oldest application dates back to 2004 and is currently being processed. One dates from 2006, four from 2007, two from 2008, three from 2009, nine from 2010 and four from 2011 - a total of 24 under the Minister's departmental remit. Under this legislation they will stay within his remit. Perhaps he might provide an overview as to how we might speed up the processing of those applications. If one considers projects that were under way in 2004, 2006, 2007 or 2008, up to eight years ago, finance was available to many of them at the time but now they may run into financial difficulties because of the delay in the processing of the applications. I agree with the Minister that we must speed up the process but I would like him to express a view on how this will be achieved, in light of the new legislation before the House today.

Equally, aquaculture is another massive area. Although this legislation does not deal directly with aquaculture licensing it impinges on it. As I understand it, within the Minister's Department the application figure for aquaculture licences is approaching 600, of which more than 300 are for first-time licences and approximately 270 are for renewal. I understand there is a processing difficulty under the European habitats directive in respect of the special areas of conservation, SACs, and under the EU birds directive, the Natura 2000 sites. I realise the Minister is new to the portfolio and has inherited many applications coming downstream but questions must be asked as to why almost 600 applications are not being processed more efficiently and effectively and within a quicker timeframe. Perhaps there is a difficulty at EU level but if that is the case I would like to know what steps are being taken to address that anomaly or deal with that difficulty so that the very many applications for aquaculture licences to which the Minister referred can be fast-tracked and dealt with in a much speedier timeframe.

I agree with the Minister they are vitally important in terms of employment creation potential. There are approximately 2,800 people working in the aquaculture sector in this country and we could add many more jobs to that number if these projects were dealt with in a more efficient timeframe. I know of a number of applications, from various parts of the country, that are still in the Minister's Department. Unfortunately, the feeling among the applicants' organisations is that they are not being dealt with promptly enough. Perhaps the Minister might deal with that issue.

Another issue referred to in the Bill is the function in respect of the fishery harbour centres. Perhaps the Minister might refer to this in his later address. There is the whole issue of development of fishery harbour centres and the plans his Department has in that regard within the context of a report published a number of years ago, prepared by the Department and presented within it. Unfortunately, however, as I understand it, very little of the report has been implemented in terms of the development potential within harbour centres. I know the Minister recently visited one of the prime harbour centres in the country, in Killybegs, but unfortunately I was unable to attend that day due to another commitment. That harbour centre is crying out for support, particularly from the Minister's Department. I will support the Minister in every way to try to bring that support to Killybegs. However, of the development plan initiated for Killybegs a number of years ago, not one aspect has been implemented even though there were very many excellent recommendations. That leaves cause for concern.

Regarding this legislation, I look forward to hearing further on points that were raised. I assure the Minister that if this Bill can bring about improved efficiencies within the system and improved timeframes in dealing with applications, we will have no difficulty in supporting it on this side of the House

Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Senator Comiskey has eight minutes. To clarify, group leaders have eight minutes and second speakers have five. I stated they had six minutes.

Michael Comiskey (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I join my colleagues in welcoming the Minister to the House. I am delighted to see he has an interest in this area. We discussed food safety in the Chamber yesterday and the possibility of creating more jobs and this must be our concern for the future. That is what we should be dealing with in the future. There is a great possibility for jobs in this area. We have heard stories over the years about a great number of boats tied up in areas and people not having work. I am aware the Minister was in Killybegs recently for an event I was unable to attend but I understand he had good news for those people. That is very positive.

This Bill follows on from the first Act in 1933, which was amended in 2009. It transfers the areas for which the Minister has responsibility to the area of the environment, which will be dealt with by the Minister's colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan.

The aquaculture sector must be examined. There is huge potential in that sector and it would be important that any applications received in that area are processed as quickly as possible to allow people start producing in the area of aquaculture.

Job creation is important also. We learned in recent days that boatloads of fish caught in Irish waters are being exported to France and other countries for processing. That is unacceptable. We must process here any fish we catch in our own waters.

An area that will be transferred to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government is the development of wind and wave energy which has huge potential for jobs. While I would have an interest in wind turbines on land, I am aware that wind and wave energy is vitally important. At a time when we import €6 billion worth of oil and fossil fuels from abroad, it is important that we begin to develop our own resources.

We have had problems in the past in terms of our rich reserves of oil and gas. We must make sure those reserves are harvested here and jobs created in that area because we will have problems into the future in terms of energy resources. It is vitally important that all of those aspects are examined. I will conclude to allow my colleagues deal further with the Bill. I thank the Minister.

Susan O'Keeffe (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for attending. I welcome this legislation for the clarity it provides. In recent years we have seen that we are at a point now where our seas are being industrialised. There is no other way of putting it. It is a resource that has been lapping gently on our shores for hundreds of years yet it is only now that we are beginning to realise the potential of the sea and the shore. In so doing, I urge that we not race to exploit it because we have seen in recent years the dangers of exploiting certain areas on the land, particularly in regard to development. We have over-developed many parts of our country and built in places that should not have been built upon, such was the rush and the enthusiasm to make money and to develop.

While I support Senator Ó Domhnaill's views on the need for urgency regarding licences I believe we should be calm about that. If there is a queue for licences we do not want to issue them to everybody willy-nilly just because we want the jobs. The jobs must be sustainable. The shores and the waters are easily damaged and easily polluted and if in our rush to do this we do not do it through joined up thinking, we will lose the very thing we see as holding much potential for the future.

I welcome the legislation, particularly because of the interest in the environment and wind and wave energy. Although there is evidence to suggest, and the ESRI is one of the organisations that has referred to this, that we should examine land wind energy first because it is more efficient and cheaper, it is nevertheless the case that over time we will look to develop wind and wave energy.

I would have some serious concerns about the way in which some of the leases or licences were granted prior to this legislation being published. I am sure the Minister is well aware of that. We now have potentially the biggest wind parks if not in Europe then possibly in the world in Irish waters and it could be argued that some of those licences were handed out without the necessary scrutiny.

I am delighted that this legislation may bring clarity and greater responsibility and accountability to that entire area because there is no doubt there will be a race to exploit it. It is the next great thing, and it will not be simply about making Ireland energy efficient, as my colleague, Senator Comiskey, stated. That is desirable but it will also be about making money. The two companies that first built wind parks and established turbines have already sold on to other international companies. We must believe and understand that we are operating in a global world. If I understand correctly, one of the companies, General Electric, does not have permission to build turbines in waters off the United States yet it has turbines operating here. That is something about which we must be cautious and any legislation that will bring us protection while also enabling us to move forward, build industries and create much needed jobs is welcome.

We must also bear in mind that European Union environmental law is very strict. Suggestions have been made that we are already behind in our response to certain aspects of the environmental impact assessment directives regarding what we have done. We must bear in mind that whatever we do in the future we should be more aware of EU law because otherwise it will come back to bite us.

I, too, would like to state the obvious regarding aquaculture and fishing. These are areas in which we inevitably must create jobs. That is particularly the case in more remote areas of the country where those jobs are very much needed. While I welcome the fact that we would wish to grant those licences in a speedy and more efficient manner, and if the Minister can bring that to bear it would be welcome, I would guard against the sustainability of that. The world's population is increasing. We need more food, and fisheries will inevitably be more popular and sought to be exploited. We must not lose the run of ourselves and give it all away or develop it in a way that does not sustain. We have not been very good at understanding sustainability in the past 20 years. This is the time when we need to do that.

I thank the Minister for coming to the House and for this legislation. He referred to the utmost clarity. I trust and believe this legislation is the start of that process of clarity and I am sure there will be more in the years to come.

David Cullinane (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister to the House. The Bill is being presented as a largely technical item of legislation intended to transfer responsibility from the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government.

We in Sinn Féin are aware of the obvious need for careful management of the seafront and the foreshore in numerous areas. I appreciate the need for licensing and leasing for the facilitation of marine energy, including tidal power and other forms of power. We appreciate in particular the need for careful conservation of the natural wildlife and delicate habitats which often exist on seafronts and for strong legislative provisions to provide for that and prevent undue malign interference with those delicate environments and pollution.

I note the crucial importance of facilitating our marine industries of aquaculture and farming and our fishing fleet. I welcome the fact that the Leader has arranged for a discussion on fishing which will take place in the coming weeks. The Minister might return to the House at that time to allow us discuss those important issues. In my own county of Waterford we have many fishing villages including Passage East, Dunmore, Ring and Helvick and I am aware of the impact the reduction in the fleet has had in those areas. I look forward to a full discussion with the Minister on these issues.

I will note some of the concerns I have about the Bill and perhaps the Minister will allay some of them. I note most items relating to fishing and aquaculture will remain with the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food but I must register my concern at the potential for confusion and difficulties. What is the motivation for bringing forward the Bill in the first place? I am aware the Government believes it will lead to clarification and I appreciate that clarity is necessary, but there is also a clear value in the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government being aware of seafront and foreshore issues.

There will be a demarcation between the lines of responsibility of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. Will these lines of responsibility be based on geography or activity? The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will have responsibility for some locations. Will the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government have responsibility for others? I would like clarity on what the lines of responsibility will be.

I am also concerned about the potential for buck-passing between the two Departments. Fishermen are concerned they could be sent from pillar to post and there may be confusion about which Department will deal with their concerns and which Department will have responsibility for their concerns. It is an issue I was asked to raise by fishermen. Will the Minister respond to this?

I apologise for the fact that I had to leave when the Minister made his speech. However, I have seen a copy of it. My primary concern is the motivation for the legislation. While the Government will argue for clarity there is a greater role for the Minister of the Environment, Community and Local Government to play in some of the issues I raised previously.

Some of the issues I raised are of particular interest to fishermen and I know some of them will be discussed in the fuller debate we will have. The Bill will divide responsibilities between the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and I want to be absolutely certain that the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will have responsibility for issues of concern to fishermen.

Colm Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister to the House. It is extremely important that clarity is provided. As someone who served on the board of the Port of Cork for ten years and who dealt with a number of issues regarding foreshore licences, we found at times there were delays because of the procedures that were in place. It is important that applications are dealt with in a speedy fashion. I am concerned about the lack of a specific timeframe in which to deal with applications. We need to examine this because if there is no timeframe in which a specific decision must be made a matter can drag on for a long period of time. A previous speaker referred to this. The issue of foreshore licences will continue to grow. Therefore, it is important that proper procedures are in place and the clear definition being introduced in the legislation is welcome.

One of the problems with aquaculture is the interpretation by Departments of EU regulations, and there is fault on all sides from the EU to local authorities to national government. I dealt with an issue in Cromane, County Kerry, where the mussel harvesting process was delayed because EU regulations were in place but the necessary preparatory work to allow it to continue was not done. The process was closed down because it was not compliant with EU regulations even though the EU regulations were in place. More than €5 million in EU funding had been provided for basic research to be carried out in Cromane and other places but the information was not made available and the work was not done. I understand some of the funding ended up being returned to Brussels. We need to ensure we respond to EU regulations on aquaculture and set targets. I know it is not possible for Departments to respond on the day they receive regulations but clear targets should be established on the timeline for those regulations to be implemented and complied with to ensure there is follow-through at local and national level.

As someone who sat on the board of the Port of Cork, I remember wondering which Department we were to deal with on certain issues. The Bill is welcome as it will provide clarity and people will know which Department has responsibility for a particular area. One will not wait for a reply from one Department to be told one should be dealing with another. I look forward to working with the Minister on aquaculture development. It has major job potential and many people are very enthusiastic about getting involved but they need the necessary support.

Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have already welcomed the Minister to the House. I would like to have two hours to debate aquaculture, fish farming and fishing and my five minutes will lapse too quickly. I wish the Minister well in his new brief and I am delighted to see a Corkman at the helm for a change.

To recount an anecdote, in 1986 we were trying to build a new pier in Ahakista. The Minister's former colleague and my old adversary, the very colourful now retired Deputy P.J. Sheehan, held a meeting on a Sunday morning after ten o'clock mass with the Minister's late father who was kind enough to invite me along as a local councillor. Lo and behold, the pier in Ahakista was eventually built and it was a very important success story. I use this anecdote to illustrate the point that Dunmanus Bay has a mixture of inshore fishermen fishing prawn, lobster, shrimp and a little mid-water trawling and there is much tension about the development of aquaculture in the bay, more so than in Kenmare Bay. This follows the point made by Senator O'Keeffe on trying to find a balance between the environment and fishing. I fully support the fishing industry in so far as possible. At present, there is an application for a large salmon farm in Dunmanus Bay and the inland fishermen from the Mizen and Sheep's Head peninsulas are unanimously opposed to further aquaculture licences in the harbour. I hope a happy medium can be found and I asked the Minister to examine it at some stage.

I fully support the concept of the Bill. Bantry Bay used to be the capital of the mussel industry. This came about in the aftermath of the Whiddy disaster when there was a huge loss of life. Between 100 and 200 people, including my brother and brother-in-law, lost their jobs as a result of the collapse of the industry in the area. I was involved in a mussel harvesting pilot scheme established in Bantry. We were a little green at the time and the original rafts for harvesting mussels were made of timber. We did not realise that the rich waters in the area mean mussels grow and are able to be harvested much quicker than in Scandinavia. Our rafts sank as a result, although progress was made later.

As I pointed out to Fianna Fáil Party Ministers when I was on the Government side, the aquaculture and mariculture sector is underdeveloped. One of the reasons has been major delays of up to seven years in issuing aquaculture licences. This issue needs to be addressed, as Senator Ó Domhnaill pointed out.

In some cases, it took three or four years to approve applications for foreshore licences in Bantry, Schull, Baltimore and Kinsale to facilitate the development of sewage treatment plants. The sewage treatment plant in Bantry was recently opened by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan, nine or ten years after I first made efforts to have the project progressed. Despite funding being allocated in 1999, a delay in issuing a foreshore licence resulted in a six or seven year delay in commencing the project.

I was interested to learn of the Minister's meeting with representatives of the French fishing industry regarding the possibility of processing in Ireland the substantial amount of fish French vessels take from Irish waters. While this may not be directly related to the legislation, it is an important issue on which I hope progress can be made. Leaving politics aside, if the Minister is able to create jobs in Killybegs, Dingle, Castletownbere, Baltimore or Cobh, it will be good for Ireland and the community in question. I wish him luck in his endeavours. I am glad to have squeezed in that final agusín.

Caít Keane (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Some may ask why a Senator from an urban area without a foreshore is speaking on this legislation. As the Fine Gael Party spokesperson on the environment, I am pleased to speak on an issue with which I am familiar having been brought up near the seashore in Clifden. When I was a child my father sold everything that moved and grew in the sea to France. I am familiar with everything that grows offshore and on the seashore and everything that is produced from the sea.

Given that Ireland has 1,448 km of foreshore, excluding inlets, overall management of our seas and foreshore is extremely important for sustainable economic development and the environment. The Bill brings clarity to the 2009 legislation which transferred some functions from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. This legislation will simplify what was a complex issue and avoid confusion. This is a welcome development for everyone involved in the maritime industry.

I welcome the proposal to link the planning and foreshore licensing processes. Something was amiss in this respect as applications for foreshore licences sometimes focused entirely on economic development and overlooked the planning, sustainable development and environmental aspects of such developments. This is a welcome provision. When will this linkage be established? Clarity is one thing but it is important that this provision on planning is enacted.

The Minister referred to the core functions that were transferred in 2009 to the then Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. These included all energy related developments on the foreshore - oil, gas, wind, wave and tidal energy - and aggregate and mineral extraction developments. The use of an energy development process known as fracking is a relatively recent development. While it is used in the United States and elsewhere, it has not yet been used here and little research is available on it. Senator Susan O'Keeffe noted that offshore licences for wind energy were not granted to some companies in the United States. While we must be proactive in ensuring we have alternative sources of energy, we must also ensure we have access to all the latest research on extracting processes, whether onshore or offshore, including their environmental impacts. I ask the Minister to brief the House on research on the process of fracking to extract energy sources.

I thank the Minister for coming before the House. Jobs are needed in our coastal communities. The economic benefits of aquaculture are not spoken about sufficiently. We should appreciate the work done on the coastline and its environmental aspects.

Rónán Mullen (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Ba bhreá liom fáilte a chur roimh an Aire; guím gach rath air agus é i mbun a chuid dualgas.

As the Minister stated, this is the first time he has addressed the House in any capacity. He is very welcome and I wish him the best with his brief. The legislation before us is both technical and uncomplicated. The Minister dealt with the various issues involved in the transfers of functions. I note, in particular, his remarks about the different roles involved in licensing, property management and the protection of the public interest. Environmental protection is also a key issue.

I have a technical question for the Minister. It is proposed to transfer functions under the Foreshore Acts to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, save certain functions in relation to harbours and aquaculture and the manufacture of products derived from seafish. Transfers of departmental functions are generally carried out by Government order under powers contained in section 6(1) of the Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Act 1939. In replying to parliamentary questions on 22 March 2011, the Minister for Health and Children confirmed that in some cases primary legislation would be needed to proceed with the transfer of functions. The Cabinet handbook sets out the circumstances under which primary legislation is required when functions are being transferred. Chapter 1.23 states:

The transfer of statutory powers from one Minister to another is usually effected by a Transfer of Functions Order.

If any change is to be made in the nature or manner of exercise of the power in question, amendment of the relevant legislation will be required and should be processed in the same way as any legislative proposal.

It would not be appropriate to transfer a power from one Minister to another if this would result in the same Minister exercising powers that the primary legislation intended to be exercised by different Ministers. This would require amendment of the primary legislation or some other arrangement which did not infringe on the intent of the existing primary legislation.

As an aside, the House will later debate a Bill whose explanatory memorandum refers to the Minister for Justice and Equality consulting the Minister for Defence on a particular matter. I look forward to hearing how this will work in practice.

I ask the Minister to clarify the reason the legislation is necessary in light of the provisions and powers under sections 5 and 6 of the Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Act 1939, principally the provisions of section 6(1)(c) and (d). Under section 6(1), it "shall be lawful for the Government, whenever they so think proper, to do by order all or any" of a number of things. These include, in paragraph (c), "to transfer the administration and business of any particular public service or of any branch or part of any such public service from any Department of State to any other Department of State and to make all such transfers of officers and property and do all such other things as shall be incidental to or consequential on such transfer of administration and business" and, in paragraph (d), "to transfer from any Minister having charge of a Department of State to the Minister having charge of any other Department of State any particular power, duty, or function vested by or under any statute or otherwise in the said first-mentioned Minister".

In this respect, I ask Senators to cast their minds back to the legislation passed in the House last week on the new Department of public expenditure and reform. The explanatory memorandum to the Bill in question, the Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Bill 2011, noted that "a large number of remaining statutory functions which are appropriate for transfer to the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform will be transferred by way of Transfer of Functions Order, which will be timed to commence immediately following the commencement of this Act". These functions were by and large of an administrative nature. The functions set out in this Bill appear to be of a similar nature. It is not our role under the Constitution to hold the Government to account but it is sometimes our role to ask technical questions and I would be grateful if the Minister would explain why a transfer of function order was not chosen as a more appropriate route in this instance.

Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister. This is important legislation. I served on Waterford Harbour Commissioners and the Port of Waterford Company for almost 20 years so I am fully aware of the difficulties that arose on many occasions with the granting of foreshore licences.

The Foreshore and Dumping at Sea (Amendment) Act 2009 amended the Foreshore Acts 1933 to 2009. It provided for a complex division of responsibilities for foreshore licences. It is accepted that the wording in that Act was difficult for business to understand clearly and to follow. It was not good for people who wished to do business in Ireland and wished to develop our green and other energy sectors. That is an accepted fact.

The word that has been used most in this debate is "clarity". This Bill brings clarity in response to all the questions that have been posed to the Minister. It outlines the functions of the different Ministers, which is a good thing. It is good for the legislation itself and for the people who will seek licences, irrespective of whether those licences are from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food or the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. Clarity is the order of the day and I welcome any legislation that generates greater clarity. I commend the Minister for bringing such legislation to the House.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will address the questions raised as accurately as possible. If I miss any, Senators should feel free to interrupt me to seek clarity.

I will first respond to Senator Ó Domhnaill, who comes from a constituency that has an enormous interest in fishing. In fact, the economic survival of many of the communities he represents is dependent on fishing and the development of the port infrastructure that is already in place. My Department intends to be ambitious in exploiting the opportunities that exist in Killybegs, in particular, in Greencastle in the other Donegal constituency and in all the small coastal ports in Donegal.

With regard to the Senator's question about developing the six fishery harbour centres that the Department both owns and controls, I look forward to coming to the Seanad on 20 July when we can talk in more detail about what we are doing with those harbours. The development plan for Killybegs is being developed by stakeholders in Killybegs working with BIM, my Department and Letterkenny Institute of Technology to ensure that we are sweating the assets there to the maximum possible effect in terms of getting stimulus into Killybegs and the wider economy by using the infrastructure in which previous Governments have invested significant amounts of money. Although this Government might not have huge resources to spend - it will have some - it can do a great deal in policy terms to exploit the potential that exists in fishing ports such as Killybegs, Dingle, Castletownbere, Rossaveal and so forth on the east and west coasts.

Many people ask questions about aquaculture licences. I will put the problem on the record. We have not issued an aquaculture licence to anybody for two years. Many existing aquaculture operators are essentially operating outside of licence. That situation is unsustainable. The European Commission brought a case to court, and won, in respect of the way Ireland has approached the issue of licensing aquaculture activity, be it shellfish or fin fish farming. We are in the process of correcting that position, and we are quite a long way down that road. As a result, the European Commission is not fining Ireland. However, at any point in time it could choose to ask the court to impose fines for our approach towards aquaculture in the past, which was not acceptable under EU law.

We are being required by the European Commission to put a gold plated system in place for aquaculture licensing. Practically every harbour on the island has been designated a special area of conservation. There are one or two exceptions, such as Bantry Bay, but the majority of the bays that are appropriate for the expansion of aquaculture are special areas of conservation. This means that in order to give a licence for existing activity, in some cases, and certainly for expansion for new activity, and there are 520 applications for aquaculture licences, we are required to go through a process that also involves the National Parks and Wildlife Service, which has a heritage element as well, environmental impact statements and environmental impact assessments of the harbours concerned. That is before we even go through the process of applying for a new activity.

There is a process to be followed, which is incredibly frustrating, arduous and expensive, in assessing all these bays and harbours before we can even entertain the application for an aquaculture licence. We are going through that process now. We are targeting each of the priority harbours and there will be decisions by the end of the year. Certainly there will be three bays by the end of the year which will have the facility to accommodate aquaculture licences. However, in the context of all the bays we need to assess, clearly it is not acceptable that we will be doing this for the next four or five years before we deal with all of them. I am working with my colleague, the Minister, Deputy Jimmy Deenihan, who is responsible for the National Parks and Wildlife Service, to ensure we are doing everything possible to get decisions and assessments made as quickly as possible and in a way that is consistent with satisfying the Commission in terms of the standards it is imposing on Ireland.

Unfortunately, while we are dealing with this frustration, we are seeing aquaculture industries developing and expanding in other European countries even though, in many ways, we have better natural resources to exploit that potential in a sustainable way. I take the point made by Senator O'Keeffe. This is not about just pressing ahead to make money and create jobs; it must be done in a way that is sympathetic to our environment and the other demands on our marine environment and harbours. Ireland has a very precious resource. We have responsibility for more than 2 million acres of water. A total of 17% of Europe's seas are Ireland's responsibility so we have to manage that, particularly our foreshore resource, in a careful way but also in a way that exploits potential.

Last year, we produced 12,000 tonnes of farmed salmon. This is a hugely valuable commodity. If we were producing three times that amount, we could sell it without difficulty because there is a demand for it. Last year, Scotland produced 150,000 tonnes of farmed salmon. Norway produces over 1 million tonnes of farmed salmon and within the next five years that figure will rise to 2 million tonnes. I do not recall which Senator made the point about our responsibility to feed the world but, at present, Europe imports 70% of the fish it consumes. We cannot resolve that problem by increasing our domestic catch of wild fish because stocks will not sustain that. The only way we can deal with it is by expanding aquaculture, and doing it in a way that is clever and suits Ireland's natural resources.

That is why we are looking, for example, at moving some aquaculture activity a little offshore, maybe into the lee of islands in certain places. I have asked the Marine Institute to look at appropriate sites where that type of development could be facilitated. Moving activity offshore would also get it out of bays and avoid the sort of objections we saw, for example, in Dunmanus Bay.

Much is happening in the aquaculture area. That is why I am protective of keeping the decision making capacity on aquaculture in my Department. We are developing a team with significant expertise in aquaculture, aquaculture licensing and the foreshore issues that go with that. There is extraordinary potential to exploit, in a responsible and sustainable way, the natural resource we have around our coastline for the expansion and development of aquaculture. We want the kind of synergies between licensing and foreshore that will be involved in doing that to stay in my Department. I want to push that agenda. I will talk to Senators further when I come to the House on 20 July.

This is why we are not simply transferring all foreshore functions to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. That would have been the easiest thing to do, in terms of legal certainty and clearly outlining who has responsibility for what. I have insisted, for good reason, on keeping the foreshore issues concerned with aquaculture, fish processing, the fishery harbours and the fishing industry, for which I have political responsibility, within my Department. The Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government supports this course of action.

I hope this gives Senators a flavour of our frustrations regarding aquaculture licences, renewing existing licences and putting a proper and credible system in place that will avoid EU prosecution and fines and can allow an industry to expand and grow in the not too distant future, as opposed to five or six years time.

I welcome what Senator Michael Comiskey said about the offshore potential for renewables. It is now very clear that the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, and not my Department, has responsibility for the foreshore in that area, and rightly so. Most of the big offshore energy projects that will develop and emerge in Ireland will involve a planning element as well as a foreshore element. It makes sense for the same team to deal with both. Senator Colm Burke is right in what he says about the time constraint for the planning process but not for the foreshore process. This obliges a project that needs planning permission and a foreshore licence to be treated in a totally disjointed manner, from a time point of view. It is very difficult to finance such a development when one is dealing with two entirely different systems. We need to create synergies between planning applications and foreshore applications so that we can streamline matters while maintaining a rigorous process that will ensure that the type of development being proposed is appropriate for the environment, the foreshore and the land based activity. It makes sense for one Department to deal with all areas outside the fishing sector.

Senator Susan O'Keeffe is right to advise caution in pressing ahead with the sole focus on job creation and economic stimulus. Environmental concern should not be lost in the frustration with aquaculture licensing and in the rush to build offshore energy apparatus that can provide, some time in the future, self-sufficient energy generation on this island.

Senator David Cullinane's primary concern seems to be about the motivation behind the legislation. I think I have answered that question. We are trying to bring clarity and certainty so that when someone from abroad, or from home, wants to spend money developing a wind or wave energy or offshore aquaculture project and employ people in Ireland, the process of investing in Ireland is easily understood and does not cost an absolute fortune or take years to get through. We have seen many examples that are driving investment out of the country. The Bill goes a small way towards addressing that. It provides clarity that has been absent in the past.

I have outlined the lines of demarcation. They are straightforward. Aquaculture and fisheries and the foreshore that relates to those activities stay with the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Everything else goes to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. This has nothing to do with geography. It is about the activity being proposed and the foreshore that applies to it. This determines which Department deals with which application.

Senator Colm Burke raised the issue of setting timeframes for foreshore licences. I take his point and we will look at it. It is quite a good suggestion but it is not dealt with in this Bill. We may be able to do what he suggests by ministerial order, without primary legislation. I will have to check that.

I can relate to Senator Denis O'Donovan's stories from west Cork. I know the pieces of infrastructure he refers to, and I am glad they have been built. I have tied up at some of the piers he mentioned. With regard to Dunmanus Bay, we are going to have to face down the arguments and balance traditional interests in and outside bays and harbours with new developments that may emerge in aquaculture and fish farming. We must consider both views and I will have to make a judgment call, whether in Dunmanus Bay, Bantry Bay or elsewhere. The Bill will provide a system that allows everyone to have their say and to put the facts and opinions on the table that can be the basis for a responsible and sustainable decision by me and my Department. That is what I hope the Bill will add to the process.

Senator Cáit Keane described herself as an urban Senator who comes originally from Clifden. Farmers often say to me they are surprised I became Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food because I come from a largely urban constituency. Many people living in urban Ireland have their roots in coastal or rural communities and understand very well how they work. I will come back to Senator Keane on the fracking issue rather than go into it in detail now. Any substantial offshore activity requires an appropriate licensing and supervision process. Fracking would be no exception.

Senator Rónán Mullen, rightly, asked for clarity as to why we are doing this the way we are doing it. There is much transferring of functions in Government at present. My Department is no exception. For example, I have taken responsibility for marine leisure because I am trying to bring all marine activities under one roof. I can do that without primary legislation. I can transfer functions and the Cabinet can agree to such transfers under existing legislation. Likewise, Departments are being set up from scratch and others are amalgamating and merging. Those transfers can happen without new primary legislation. This is a little different. Existing legislation defines who is responsible for what, and we cannot disregard that. Legislation dating back to 2009 specifically defines, or attempts to define, who is responsible for what with regard to foreshore applications. In order to bring further clarity to the matter primary legislation is required. Given that we are working from existing legislation rather than simply transferring ministerial responsibility that is not defined in law, primary legislation is required.

That is the legal advice we have and it makes sense.

In response to Senator Cummins, many people working on the boards of port companies over the past 20 years will understand the frustration surrounding foreshores, which have been a nightmare. I am interested in trying to fix this not in blaming anybody for that. We are trying to streamline the decision-making process relating to foreshore licences in order that it will be clear for the people who want to use that system to develop a project, whether that is in the ports of Cork or Waterford, an aquaculture site off the west cost or a wind energy farm on the Arklow Banks. We want clear guidelines and legislation regarding who is responsible for what in order that we can then put pressure on the appropriate people to get the job done as efficiently as possible. That is what this short, technical Bill is about.

Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Now.