Liz McManus (Wicklow, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 15: To ask the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if his attention has been drawn to a recent High Court ruling against walkers on a route in Enniskerry County Wicklow; his views on the fact that a large number of other routes may be affected by this ruling; his further views on whether now that these routes will be closed to the general public, it will have an impact on local tourism; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26940/06]

Shane McEntee (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 23: To ask the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if he had discussions with the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs regarding the Wicklow High Court ruling on 19 June 2006, which could have implications for the leisure tourism industry here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26673/06]

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 15 and 23 together.

Responsibility for legislation relating to public rights of way does not rest with my Department. Certain legislation bearing on public rights of way, under the Road Act 1993, is under the aegis of the Minister for Transport and, as the House is aware, the issue of public access to the countryside for recreation purposes is being dealt with by a group established by the Minister for Community Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs.

Neither I nor my Department nor any Agencies under my aegis were involved in the case referred to by the Deputies and I am reluctant to get involved in commenting on its merits. I understand that the case at issue was about the alleged existence of a public right of way on a particular piece of land and that the High Court held that there was no such public right of way on two grounds:

—there was little or no evidence to support the contention that this route had been a public right of way and, in fact, the strong weight of evidence suggested that very few "outsiders" or hill-walkers ever used the route in question, and

—there is a long established principle in law that, for a public right of way to exist, the start and finish points of that way have to be on publicly accessible land. There are one or two exceptions to this rule in relation to the finishing point. In this case, however, I understand that the Court held that the route in question was, in fact, surrounded by private land and the start and finish points were not ones to which there was public access by right. It, therefore, failed a basic and long-established test for the existence of a public right of way.

I have not been advised that the judgment in question represents a departure from long-established and well-understood principles of law or has any particular implications for tourism. I have not, therefore, discussed the matter with my colleague the Minister for Community Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs although our two Departments continue to keep in contact on developments relating to rural tourism including access to the countryside.

For the information of the House, I understand that Fáilte Ireland will, in the very near future, launch a major new initiative in relation to the development and promotion of walking tourism, details of which will be made available on its websites.