Éamon Ó Cuív demands action on stalled Wildlife Amendment Bill

First of all, I would like to thank the Minister for coming into the House at this late hour. I hadn't foreseen having asked about this question with Deputy Fitzmaurice a number of times on the adjournment that we would have to come in again. I have raised it on the questions of published legislation and so on. I have put down written questions and I keep getting the same answer. I have to say I was very disappointed today when the list of promised legislation was published and I looked at the list and I looked at the priority legislation to see that this piece of legislation is not on the priority legislation. And then I looked at the priority legislation and then I looked at the list of all other legislation for this session. That's a massive list and I looked at that list and I found it. So it's in the also-round and all it says beside it in the right-hand margin is work is underway. I find this extraordinary. My understanding, Count Corley, is that the logistical difficulties of bringing it back in have long been resolved. So all they have to do is bring forward the final state of the bill back in where it stopped before. Now there were a number of amendments made in the Shannon but 11 of them were a government amendment so presumably the government were happy with them so they just have to bring them back in and put them down on the table and say can we agree that they are all passed. And that means that we were left with four amendments that had been put forward by independent senators and accepted in the Shannon. Now it baffles me that two and three-quarter years later your office and the office of the Parliamentary Council have not been able to agree to either accept or amend. or reject these four amendments. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Before I read the script, it is with regret that we are here again this evening. I thank the Count Corley for his intervention in trying to get this forward. Like you, I want this matter resolved once and for all. And to give clarity to those landowners who you talk about, but also to get this important bill over the line. As deputies are aware, the bill was originally presented to the Eroclis in 2016. The debate on the bill in both houses was very engaging, with good discussion on extending the scope to provide for a review of blanket bog NHAs and later in the Shannon on placing a duty on public bodies to promote conservation of biodiversity. The core focus of the wildlife amendment bill as initiated was to provide for the making amendment and revocation of natural heritage area orders, a review of the raised bog habitats and for the purposes to amend the wildlife amendment act of 2000. The bill had completed all stages in the Dáil and Shannon and had been returned to the Dáil so that various amendments made by the Shannon could be considered. However, the bill unfortunately lapsed with the dissolution of the 32nd Dáil on 14 January 2020. As I previously set out, Dáil's standing order 227 provides that where a bill passed by the Dáil is subsequently amended and passed by the Shannon, those amendments are then returned to the Dáil for its consideration. DSO 228 provides that the Dáil may accept or reject Shannon amendments. Amendments in the Dáil to the Shannon amendments may only be moved whether it is consequential upon acceptance, amendment or rejection of a Shannon amendment. There is no mechanism under standing orders to move amendments to a bill returned to the Dáil under DSO 227 other than set out in DSO 228. Deputies will recall that when we met to discuss the matter late last year, and indeed the deputies have raised the matter through a topic with me in the House since then, and we have discussed that the restoration of this bill to the order paper is not straightforward. My officials are working to resolve the complexities that arose once completed and the amendments were made in the Shannon re-examined in consultation with the Office of the Parliamentary Council to ensure that they are legally sound, Minister O'Brien will bring a memorandum to the government to seek approval to have the bill restored to the order paper. I would hope that this will be done early in Q4 of this year, and I will put whatever pressure I have to do to try and get that brought forward. As previously advised, at the same time the Minister will also bring a memorandum to the government to obtain government approval to the amendments to the bill in the Shannon. This process is at an advanced stage and will be completed as soon as it possibly can. I have to say, I will nearly be able to put this to music if I had any musical skills now, because we keep getting the same answer. For example, as we discussed then, the restoration of the bill to the order paper is not straightforward. My understanding was that issue was resolved and it is straightforward. You bring back the amendments or make amendments within the relevant standing order to those amendments and you come back in. As I said, there are four amendments that could be contentious because the rest were government amendments. They are not that complex issues. Amendment 2 was tabled by Senator Alice Mary Higgins and Linda Wan and would allow the Minister to propose the site for designation by virtue of its role in carbon sequestration or pollination specifically. Now, you either accept that, reject it or amend it. I do not see the complication there. Amendment 13 requires the Minister to commission a report on the guidelines and thresholds for turbid rights, including a definition of household juice, not rocket science. Amendment 14 would effectively require the Minister, before making an order to de-designate an NHA, to lay a report before the Oireachtas on the site's condition, restoration and re-wetting potential and so on. And there is one more, if the councillor could give me a little indulgence, is Amendment 15. Now, let us be clear about it. What we are seeking to give you is the ultimate Aladdin's lamp. Because we are giving you new pristine lands to designate as NHAs in return for degraded NHA bog. And you will not take the Aladdin's lamp when you are getting the new lamp. You must think there is a genie in sight. Silence. And I think we also, all of us, acknowledge that Minister Noonan has been nothing but helpful on this matter from the start. Just on the question of process, can I make it abundantly clear that if the bill that we are going to deal with is the return of the bill that had made its way through the House and through the Senate, together with the amendments that were contemplated, that is completely simple and straightforward, no rocket science involved, no complexity. If the government, on the other hand, is going to radically change the bill with a pile of other previously unheard of amendments, that is where the complication would lie. Yes. Yes. That is not the intention. I think the intention is to try and make this as swift and clean as possible. Again, I appreciate the frustration of the House and both deputies in particular, and of the landowners that you speak about. I will give my assurance, and if it does require us to sit down and look at where the obstacles are, I will organise a meeting with both deputies within the next week or so. That is okay. And we will do that and try and find out once and for all where the obstacles lie within this. Because I want it resolved. We have a new National Biodiversity Action Plan in Trane, and we really need to move forward with resolving this for the common good. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you.