Mr. Mark Adamson:

For the development of the preliminary flood risk assessments, we developed indicative maps nationally. We issued them to the local authorities to help inform their decision making around planning. We clearly stated that they should not be used as a sole basis for planning decisions, given that they were very much indicative. The maps we are developing through the CFRAM process are a number of orders of magnitude better in terms of their level of detail and the technical approaches being used to develop them. In terms of the way the maps are being developed, we are up there with best practice. They remain in draft form for quite a period, given that we want to ensure we get them right.

When the first drafts are produced, they are submitted for technical review to ensure the consultants are applying the best approaches. The local authorities examine them. We then take them out to public consultation days. We held more than 200 public consultation days around the country. Our teams go out and are available to talk people through the maps and explain what they show, what they mean and how they are developed, and very much take comments on whether people consider that they correspond with their understanding of flood risk in the area. Having gone through this process, we had the formal consultation process under the statutory instrument that transposed the directive. At the end of 2015, we went through this process and we have received objections on approximately 25 to 30 individual maps out of thousands of maps. We have developed maps that are the best achievable. While there are data deficits in some locations, they are the best we can achieve at this time.

Regarding planning and the use of the maps, under the guidelines set out in 2009 by the OPW and the Department, it is specified that we should try to avoid development on flood plains. The maps can help inform those decisions. However, ultimately, planning decisions are a matter for the planning authorities.