Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time".

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I am very happy to able to move this amendment Bill today. I will be sharing time with my colleague, Senator Ruane.

The Bill before the House addresses very outdated and narrowly commercial mandates of Coillte and Bord na Móna, two extremely important semi-State bodies. Between them they are responsible for vast amounts of our national land. Coillte is responsible for 7% of the land in the State while Bord na Mona is responsible for 1%. It is important when we look to the mandates that we recognise what has been described in some media as the last century nature of the mandate. These organisations have very outdated mandates. In the case of Coillte, the Forestry Act 1946 refers to carrying on the business of forestry and related activities on a commercial basis. In the case of Bord na Móna, the Turf Development Act 1946 refers to the duties of the company to produce and market turf and turf products. These narrow remits are the key points that are identified in each Act. When the Turf Development Act 1946 was updated in the 1990s more or less the same objects carried forward from the 1940s, so there was, even at that time, a failure to update the vision, even though it was updated in company law.

As I said, Coillte owns and manages 7% of our land, which includes significant areas of animal and plant habitats that are of international importance for biodiversity. This includes 96,000 ha of designated sites and many vulnerable, high-status water bodies.

Bord na Móna has 1% of Ireland's land area. These include land holdings that have the potential to support a rich diversity of wildlife across wetlands, peatlands, grasslands and woodlands. Both bodies can play and should be playing a very significant role in biodiversity and climate action strategies. It is worth noting that public sector bodies are subject to the public sector climate action mandate which requires a 51% reduction in emissions by 2030 under Irish law. However, a decision was made, which I think was a poor one, not to include semi-State companies under that remit. For this reason, it is really important that we have tailored responses in respect of these semi-State bodies. We need to ensure they are properly mandated and empowered to deliver on climate and biodiversity.

The Bill reflects a programme for Government commitment to ensuring that Bord na Móna takes into account climate, biodiversity and water objectives. Another commitment was in relation to addressing Coillte's remit to make sure it delivers climate change commitments and the promotion and protection of biodiversity. What is being put forward in the Bill actually reflects commitments in the programme for Government and gives us an opportunity to move forward on them. It also reflects the recommendations from the Citizens' Assembly on Biodiversity which called for the remits of Bord na Móna and Coillte to be reviewed to include a focus on peatland restoration and rehabilitation projects and targeted outcomes on biodiversity.

Members of the public have also been consistently clear on what they want from forestry. When consulted on Coillte's most recent strategic review, they say time and again that they want to see native woodlands with a variety of trees, public amenities and access to our forests. They want to see the forests as habitats for wildlife and a far more comprehensive move away from clear-felling and monoculture. That is what the public has consistently told us. However, we know that the vision being put forward for forestry still falls short of those wishes. When Coillte spoke last year about its strategic vision for 100,000 ha of new forests, we heard that the company's vision is underpinned by its commercially successful business. Even where it has ambitions on climate action and biodiversity, those have to be tested against the fundamental legal and commercial mandate. This constrains what is possible on the crucial 7% of public land in the State.

It is worth noting with regard to the forestry programme overall that the European Commission has signalled its concern about the lack of ambition and the danger of a "business as usual, more of the same" approach to a large amount of the new forestry programme. It is estimated that of the 8,000 ha annual afforestation target, 4,600 ha would be mixed forests, primarily Sitka spruce, with just 20% broadleaf trees. With the schemes for agroforestry, native woodlands and amenities that people are excited about, we are seeing pilot projects of 50 ha compared to that larger figure of 4,600 ha. I hope the Bill will give a mandate on climate and biodiversity to Coillte and ensure that we move away from a literal fringe of broadleaf trees or pilot projects to placing biodiversity and climate action centre-stage on the lands and waters that are managed.It is my hope that by giving this mandate on climate and biodiversity to Coillte, it will ensure that we move away from a literal fringing of broad leaf or from pilot projects and that we place these issues centre stage. It will place biodiversity and climate action centre stage in all the lands, soils and waters that are managed.

In terms of Bord na Móna, the Turf Development Act 1998 and other Acts have very much an extractive and a commercial frame. This Bill would instead insert a mandate on climate and biodiversity. Crucially, in the case of Bord na Móna, it would insert a mandate for a just transition. This is a just transition for those who work for Bord na Móna and indeed for the communities in which Bord na Móna operates. This is empowering legislation. It empowers Bord na Móna to take a very different, radical, new approach and move away from a narrow frame, which is where the buck ultimately stops.

In this regard, Bord na Móna would not just be delivering on our commitments on biodiversity and not just looking at the management of the soils and waters in a responsible way but it would also be looking to deliver. This is why we have this language in both sections of the new mandates about the environmentally, socially and economically sustainable work we want to see in both organisations.

I emphasise that my Bill does not completely remove the business component. It allows it, but it speaks about sustainable business. It speaks about things that are economically, socially and environmentally sustainable. It ensures that when we speak about business, we are not speaking about business as usual. Something the European Commission has looked for from Ireland is evidence of a genuine commitment to moving away from business as usual into something more exciting and visionary.

I will go into the specific issues, such as climate and gigatonnes. The Climate Change Advisory Council has signalled that Ireland is not achieving its national ambition for afforestation. Bord na Móna has a huge role in sequestration. This is something we have highlighted in terms of peatlands. There is a lot of focus on forestry, but peatlands have a dual benefit, which is that when we restore our peatlands, they can act as an incredible carbon sink. We speak about carbon capture, but one of the greatest forms of carbon capture is in the form of peatlands that are suitably rewetted and restored. However, when peatland is degraded and damaged, it becomes an emitter of carbon emissions.

Despite the science on this having been out there for a very long time, Bord na Móna only ended peat harvesting in 2021 after a very long period of the degradation of peatlands. The language in that mandate still focuses on the extraction of value from our peatlands rather than the placing of value into what our peatlands can do for our environment and for biodiversity. Peatlands are one of the largest natural-based carbon stores. Worldwide, they sequester 0.37 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide, which is more carbon than any other vegetation type in the world combined.

This legislation comes at a crucial time. Negotiations are under way on the much-needed EU nature restoration law, which will oblige EU Governments to take better care of the EU's network of priority habitats, many of which in Ireland's case are managed by Bord na Móna and Coillte. It is an opportunity to mandate and empower two of the largest landowners in the State to act positively for climate action and biodiversity, to deliver new ecological models of community development, to deliver sustainable employment for workers, to support communities and to restore the incredible tapestry of biodiversity and ecosystems on this land. This could be a sustainable future for us all.

My last point is on Coillte. We speak about public access and the public interest in the Bill, which is a crucial element. That empowers Coillte to put the test of public interest alongside the test of commercial benefit when it is making decisions. This is alongside climate and biodiversity. That wide perspective will lead to better decision-making and better outcomes for us all.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am delighted to be in the Chamber this evening to second Senator Higgins’s Bill. I want to begin by commending Senator Higgins and her staff, Sárán Fogarty and Ciara Gaynor, on their work in developing this Bill. We are very fortunate to have Senator Higgins and her team in the Oireachtas, given the work they have undertaken in developing their own legislative solutions to the problems we face in society but also in respect of the diligence with which they scrutinise and offer suggested improvements to Government Bills.

The Bill very positively addresses the significantly outdated mandates of Bord na Móna and Coillte to ensure that their remits take into account the need to protect, preserve and promote biodiversity in Ireland. As was noted, Coillte manages the largest individual share of land in the State - 7% of the land share - while Bord na Móna manages a further 1%. Bord na Móna is semi-State owned and Coillte is State-owned.

We are presented with an opportunity today to transform the management of a significant swathe of our national land share. Publicly-owned land should be prioritised for protection, preservation, restoration and rewilding. We can and should be doing much more in terms of increasing land sharing and land sparing across the country and across sectors. This Bill provides an excellent starting point for the State. It would also demonstrate the Government's commitment to acting on and achieving its own climate targets, providing the necessary leadership on climate action.

While financial supports for the agriculture sector are of course important in securing a just transition, they will not on their own make the change we need to see in terms of land use in Ireland. Evidence suggests that people are more likely to take affirmative action when they understand that it is the right thing to do. That is why provisions such as those contained within this Bill are so important.

There is a phenomenon known as “shifting baseline syndrome” wherein we do not see the environmental and ecological destruction which has taken place around us due to the shortness of the human lifespan relative to the other life that surrounds us. This is spoken about by Eoghan Daltun in his book An Irish Atlantic Rainforest, which I recommend to my colleagues to read. We currently perceive a significantly altered and degraded landscape, extensively managed, barren and devoid of wild nature as our baseline. The way things are and always have been and as the environmental landscape continues to degrade generation over generation, the baseline plummets lower and lower. We have completely forgotten that an alternative exists because we have become accustomed to that baseline.

While it is not possible for us to go backwards, we can chart a different path forward, but as we do so we must ensure that we focus on the health and functionality of entire ecosystems, as opposed to individual species. That is why the provisions in this Bill that relate to the rehabilitation and restoration of bogland and the protection of existing native woodland are so important. We need to stop managing land as much as possible and instead let the land do its own work as it has done for millennia.

In respect of the adoption of policies and practices that would support a just transition, I would like to bring to the attention of the House the fact that 2023 is the European Year of Skills. This is a year in which the EU will focus on addressing skills shortages in the EU to promote green and digital transitions. The State needs to provide as much support as possible to industry to facilitate the reskilling and upskilling of those who are currently employed in carbon-intensive industries so they can play a role in the just transition. We need to leverage whatever support and resources we can from Europe in that respect. It is beyond time for us to take urgent action to halt the continued and rapid decline to our climate and biodiversity.

By supporting this Bill, the Government would acknowledge the extent of the challenges that face us in this respect, but more importantly, the role the State can itself play in halting and indeed reversing this decline.

Lynn Boylan (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I commend Senator Higgins, the Civil Engagement Group and Sárán Fogarty in Senator Higgins's office on bringing forward this Bill. It is really important the State leads by example when it comes to tackling climate change.We need that collective action and a strong, co-ordinated response. Through Government-led climate action we can mobilise the resources but also set out to communities and the general public that we are leading by example, leading from the front. One obvious action we could take is what this Bill intends to do, namely, to strengthen the mandate of Coillte and Bord na Móna in order that they can deliver for people and the planet. As Senator Higgins said, it is not about businesses not still being profitable, rather it is about sustainable business. I am happy to support the legislation.

I am especially delighted to see that biodiversity receives significant pride of place in the mandates. One area I wish to focus on is around the mid-Shannon wilderness park. I raised this at the climate action committee because it is so important that Bord na Móna delivers on the commitment it gave to the community in mid-Shannon. It agreed 20 years ago that when the turf-cutting stopped it would work with the community to deliver what the community wanted. The community wants that wilderness park. It got the support of the local government, local councillors and Deputies, yet Bord na Móna has reneged on that promise to the community. Instead it is proposing to put forward a windfarm on the site which will require the continuation of the pumping of that land. This means it is using electricity to create electricity, when all it has to do is turn off the pumps and create that wilderness park that the people of the area want so much.

A matter flagged to me by the Irish Wildlife Trust and other organisations that campaigned for this wilderness park for so long is that the mandate of Bord na Móna needs to change so that it has to put climate action and biodiversity front and centre as part its work programme. That is why I am so happy to see that biodiversity is front and centre in the legislation.

I would also like to spend what is left of my time talking about a bugbear of mine in the climate Act and section 15. I agree it is important to strengthen the mandates of Bord na Móna and Coillte. I have to ask why it has not been done already. We have been here before debating the role of State agencies in climate change. The climate Act was supposed to provide that economy-wide sea change in how we were tackling climate change. For the Green Party getting this binding climate action Act across the line was front and centre when going into government. Yet, what we have seen is that section 15 still excludes a number of bodies.

There are significant portions of the State that play a role in climate action. Coillte and Bord na Móna are just two of them. Other parts of the State also need to do more such as Dublin Bus, the ESB and the Dublin Airport Authority. The reason I doubt whether we will achieve anything under the climate Act is that the relevant State bodies under section 15 are only those bodies that are obligated under the Freedom of Information Act. They are the only bodies obligated to comply with section 15. That excludes all the commercial semi-State bodies. It is interesting that when drafting the climate legislation we actually asked the Department at the time for the list of the relevant bodies that were captured by section 15. We could not get a list from the Department. We followed it up with parliamentary questions about whether commercial semi-States, including Coillte and Bord na Móna, were bound by the climate act. The response from the Minister at the time was that he was seeking legal guidance on this matter. Finally, the Minister conceded in another parliamentary question that Ervia, the ESB, Bus Átha Cliath-Dublin Bus and Coillte Teoranta and other State bodies were not public bodies, and therefore were not relevant bodies under the climate Act.

When this was flagged to the Minister, why are we here today relying on members of the Opposition to bring forward legislation to try to change the mandates when this has been flagged repeatedly with the Minister? Not only that, the only time we have seen the climate action plan come into effect was in regard to the Galway ring road. An Bord Pleanála stated it was not aware of the latest climate action plan and that is why it did not defend the decision.

How many other State bodies are unaware of their obligations? We asked the Minister at committee whether he had the powers available to him under section 15(2) to give a direction to a relevant body requiring it to prepare and submit a report specifying the measures that the relevant body has adopted for the purposes of compliance. He was not aware of a single occasion when he did that.

In the climate Act, which we all sought and wanted to see cross the line because we wanted to see that complete, society-wide step change in how we approach our carbon emissions, we have excluded a large number of semi-State bodies from section 15. Those bodies that are obligated under the Act have not been informed by any Minister of their obligations under that Act. This does not bode well for our meeting our emissions reduction targets. I hope the Government will not oppose this legislation. We need to go much further in tightening up section 15 of the climate Act.

Pippa Hackett (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senators and welcome this evening’s discussion on Coillte and Bord na Móna and the vital role each company has to play in helping to address our climate change and biodiversity objectives. I welcome the direction of the Bill. The spirit of the Bill is very much consistent with the programme for Government commitments in regard to each of the two companies.

Let me advise on the current legislative framework governing Coillte’s role. Coillte, as Senators know, was established under the Forestry Act 1988 to become custodian and manager of the national forest estate. The focus at the time was to put the estate in the charge of a company that would realise its potential and support wood production. It is important not to dismiss the production of timber which will come from softwoods as an essential part of decarbonising our construction sector into the future. Provision was made in the legislation for the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to issue directions to the company. The Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform are shareholders of the company under the legislation. The shareholders provide guidance to the company through the shareholder letter of expectation. This provides the opportunity to require Coillte to deliver on Government policy objectives. The most recent letter issued on 2 June 2022. It comprehensively and clearly asked Coillte to contribute to our climate change objectives by re-entering afforestation in order that we can meet our ambitious targets. It also outlined Coillte’s critical role in helping to meet our biodiversity objectives. It further outlined its responsibility to create new woodlands and to supply wood products to supply the bio-economy. We have encouraged Coillte to continue to provide safe and sustainable public access to the nation’s forests for the purposes of health, well-being and recreation. We also asked Coillte to invest in the creation of further recreational areas in order to support tourism and local communities.

Also highlighted in the shareholder letter is the need for the company to be viable. In order to participate in the State’s response to the climate and biodiversity emergency the letter states that the company should be profitable and in a position to pay dividends to the shareholders; and it must manage the forest estate and related enterprises in a manner which ensures that it is not a burden to the State but rather a contributor to the Government’s economic, social and environmental objectives. Colleagues in government have highlighted the importance that the potential consequence of any proposed legislative change of Coillte’s commercial mandate would be carefully considered. This would equally apply to Bord na Móna.

Much has changed for Coillte and the rest of the world since its establishment in 1988. Coillte now has a division, Coillte Nature, which is solely devoted to managing the delivery of nature and biodiversity initiatives within Coillte forests. Today, 90,000 ha or the equivalent of one-fifth of its forest estate is managed primarily for biodiversity. These initiatives include planting native woodlands, restoring important biodiversity areas, regenerating urban forests for the benefit of people and nature and rehabilitating ecosystem services on sensitive lands such as peatlands. A good example of these conversion projects is the Dublin Mountain makeover where hundreds of acres of forests in the Dublin Mountains have been converted to native woodlands and mixed forests, through remove and replant operations and continuous cover forestry management systems. Coillte has also restored more than 3,000 ha of designated peatland habitat on our lands and has immediate plans to restore a further 3,000 ha as part of the western peatlands project.

It is important to note that Coillte has aligned its future vision with the shared national vision for trees, woods and forests in Ireland to 2050. In Coillte’s strategic vision published last year, Government objectives in regard to climate and biodiversity clearly underpin the actions outlined.The division has a strong focus on sustainability. For instance, Coillte has committed to: growing 100,000 ha of new forest by 2050, half of which will be native woodlands and which will provide a carbon sink of 18 million tonnes of CO₂; managing the existing forest estate to capture an additional 10 million tonnes of CO₂by 2050; producing 25 million cu. m of certified Irish timber, helpingIreland to achieve its housing ambition of 300,000 new homes by 2030; increasing the area of the forest estate being managed for nature from 20% to 50%; and investing €100 million to create world-class visitor destinations by 2030.

With regard to compliance with environmental requirements, Coillte is subject to the same vigorous assessment as all applicants for felling, afforestation and forest road licences. This robust process ensures that all EU directives are observed. Furthermore, the National Parks and Wildlife Service must be consulted on any forestry development in European special areas of conservation and special protected areas designated under the EU birds and habitats directives. No such afforestation may proceed within these areas without the agreement of the National Parks and Wildlife Service. Under SI 477/2011 - European Communities (Birds and Natural Habitats) Regulations 2011, Coillte, as a public authority, must comply with the birds and habitats directive.

I turn now to Bord na Móna, which comes under the remit of my colleague, the Minister for Environment, Climate and Communications, Deputy Eamon Ryan. Being a Minister from the midlands, I am acutely aware of the importance of our peatlands to our heritage and identity in Ireland. Tomás Ó Ceallaigh, in the first democratic programme of the First Dáil, on 21 January 1919 stated:

It shall be our duty to promote the development of the Nation's resources, to increase the productivity of its soil, to exploit its mineral deposits, peat bogs, and fisheries, its waterways and harbours, in the interests and for the benefit of the Irish people.

Through the Turf Development Act 1946, Bord na Móna was established to deliver on that duty. Through its employees, it set out to develop Ireland's peat resources for the economic benefit of Ireland. This peat, as Senators know, was used to generate electricity for Irish industry, towns and villages when there were few alternatives available to a growing nation. This work provided security and in doing so, provided much-needed employment across the midlands and in building communities there.

It is critical that we all recognise the contribution of Bord na Móna during the decades since 1946. However, we also recognise that as our needs and priorities have changed during that time, Bord na Móna has changed with them, pivoting from producing sod, milled peat and peat briquettes to generating power from wind and continuing its transition from brown to green. Bord na Móna is already making good progress in enhancing the biodiversity and water quality of its lands as it is obliged to comply with climate, biodiversity, water and other environmental objectives set out in the programme for Government and wider Government policy and legislation. There are a number of tools and mechanisms to ensure that Bord na Móna meets its statutory environmental obligations, such as through shareholder letters of expectations, rolling corporate plans and strategies, and through ministerial consent requests from the company.

This Bill seeks to remove the duty from Bord na Móna to produce and market turf and turf products, and to foster the production and use of turf and turf products, replacing them with duties to manage, protect, rehabilitate and restore bogs in the State to ensure consistency with the protection and enhancement of biodiversity and our various environmental objectives. The company already does all of this and more. As its new logo testifies, Bord na Móna is more than móna. Green power generation and resource recovery are central pillars of the company's ten-year strategy. We need to carefully consider how to frame the duties of the board in a way that recognises the company that exists today, almost 80 years since the Turf Development Act was written. Notwithstanding the very positive direction of this Bill and its consistency with Government policy and direction, any changes must give due consideration to Bord na Móna's ability for commercial growth and strategic transition. The same applies to Coillte.

Returning to an earlier point in recognition of the importance of Bord na Móna to the midlands and its communities, I wish to emphasis in the strongest possible terms my commitment to providing meaningful job opportunities in the midlands for local communities as part of a just transition. Coillte and Bord na Mónaare delivering their existing mandates in accordance with sustainability principles and it is fair to say that we have seen a sea change. Since the Government took office, both companies have stepped up in the context of the vital role they have to play in furthering Government policy with regard to climate and biodiversity objectives. I acknowledge that the primary legislation, as currently drafted, does not fully articulate those obligations that are covered elsewhere in Government policy, other legislative requirements and the shareholders' letters. In view of this, the Government will not be opposing the Bill on Second Stage.

Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | 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.

Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Next Tuesday.

Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When is it proposed to sit again?

Pippa Hackett (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Tomorrow at 10.30 a.m.