Éamon Ó Cuív: Calls Bill a Necessary First Step on Access Rights
Éamon Ó Cuív spoke about new legislation on access and rights-of-way, welcoming the Bill as a necessary first step and urging further reform. He argued the courts remain the ultimate arbiter in disputes and urged simple, low-cost registration through the PRA.
Overview of the speech
- Éamon Ó Cuív welcomed the legislation, saying it was necessary to avoid an imminent cliff-edge and that it should mark the beginning of a broader process to clarify rights of way and recreational access.
Courts as the ultimate arbiter
- He stressed that while agreements can avoid litigation, when people disagree "ultimately the courts is the only place you can resolve it," and that any alternative dispute arrangements cannot remove the right to go to court.
Community disputes and examples
- The deputy described long-standing local conflicts over mass paths, beaches and informal routes, noting cases where newcomers or landowners tried to exclude traditional users. He said people often become possessive over property and those with the deepest pockets are best placed to litigate.
Registration and practical next steps
- He urged that where there is agreement the process should be as simple and cheap as possible and go straight to the PRA. He welcomed recording rights in writing to prevent repeated disputes in future generations.
Lessons from past laws and the way forward
- He reflected that the 2-9 law and the 2-11 law produced unforeseen issues and framed those outcomes as learning points. He called for comprehensive reform beyond this Bill, describing the current measure as "step number one" rather than the final solution.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
I welcome this legislation because if it wasn't introduced we were going to literally go over a cliff at the end of the month but this is and has to be the beginning of moving forward on this issue because as we move through the generations and life gets more complicated the issue of rights by long established usage becomes a vaguer and vaguer more difficult concept and the reality is of course as long as people agree we can all keep away from the courts but when people disagree ultimately the courts is the only place you can resolve it. Now somebody said when they were speaking here this afternoon that you could set up an arbitration board but my understanding is that no matter what kind of arrangement like that you put in place that ultimately everybody has got the right to go to court and that that is the ultimate arbitration board because that's what a court is, a civil court, it's the ultimate arbitration board in the state and that everybody has the right to go there and to defend to defend or vindicate whatever they believe is their right. Unfortunately people often are more than willing to go to court over property rights. People get very possessive over even very small pieces of property and they also get very possessive about, and we see this all the time, people trying to take possession where people have traditionally walked. Now my first, very significant, I was familiar with this issue living in, traditionally you could go anywhere and people were fairly easy going and there were lots of mass paths and so on. Although it is interesting to record that in a book written about the Kong area in the 19th century it was well recorded that the local people put up with every kind of hunger and privation and whatever until somebody happened to close down a mass path. I think it was the Guinness's and in other words the big house and it's very odd that under a previous owner a similar situation arose around Ashford in the present generation and it just shows you how deep these things run within communities and so on. And therefore the idea that the old arrangement was ideal is a rather innocent view of life and I have to say we have experienced in recent times people trying to take possession who come in, buy maybe a home, don't go with local habits we put it that way and try to exclude people from going to beaches or going to beers or going to different places. And this is a matter of serious dispute within communities. And in the end of the day those with the deepest pockets are in the best position to fight these things. So the idea of moving forward on this I think is very very important and Minister I hope that when we pass this bill and it's very necessary and the deadline will come and go and it won't be mandatory to register these to hold on to them. But I hope the matter isn't left at that and that we actually deal with this issue into the future and make it as easy as it is legally possible to do and make the law as easy as possible. But I do not foresee where people are of different views to their rights that cases won't rise and wind up in the courts. I would like to see the Solomon that will come up with a plan like that but I can't see how you can do that. But I do think the process where there is agreement should be as simple as possible, straight to the PRA, where there are disputes. Yes maybe if there is some dispute resolution but I think unfortunately ultimately the courts are the ultimate dispute resolution. I can remember when we started working on rural recreation of course this issue came to the fore where people were coming to us and lots of people were very positive about allowing recreational use across land. But other landholders and it took one for example just to object to block you opening up some maybe recreational paths and then there would be an argument where they always use that and that was used and so on. But again you are back to this whose right is going to be vindicated and it is an unsatisfactory situation. I think too that following the 2-9 law and the 2-11 law some issues actually arose as a consequence that maybe had not been foreseen. I see that as a learning exercise that we now address all of these issues because every problem actually should lead to a solution. I know that some issues have arisen because of the law and I am not talking about the ones that you are doing away with now but some other issues arose. I think that it is time now that we dealt comprehensively with this issue and that we tried to have a clear right established that is not expensive in future generations to vindicate time and again. That is what I think was the purpose of the 2-9 law. I fully agree that it did not in the end give enough time for people and that the whole process got very complicated. But the idea that it would not be useful for the vast majority of these to be written down and recorded and established is a rather innocent view in the way the modern world has developed. And therefore I do think encouraging people to establish these rights and have them recorded is something that we should definitely work towards and definitely seek to get implemented. So, Minister, I welcome the Bill in the House but I see it as step number one. I think we have to be very clear that this is the beginning of a journey not the end of a journey and that this whole very complex issue needs to be addressed comprehensively. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
