Maurice Quinlivan (Limerick City, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

That is good.

I thank the Minister for his presentation and I thank him for his engagement on the Bill in the past number of months. That was much appreciated. I also wish to acknowledge the concerns that Deputy Clare Daly has raised both in the committee and also on Second Stage of the Dáil debate. I did take time out after she raised those concerns and as a consequence I reconsidered the Bill and spoke to party members in response to some of some of the concerns she raised on Second Stage. However, we concluded that the powers outlined for the IDA are proportional and the oversight by An Bord Pleanála is adequate, so unfortunately I will not be supporting the thrust of the Deputy's amendments that were ruled out of order.

A compulsory purchase order should only be used in strict circumstances and as rarely as possible. We need compulsory purchase orders, CPOs, for strategic investment such as roads and hospitals and in very limited cases they could be needed for expansion of companies that will create substantial employment. I note the IDA has only ever used these powers once, albeit unsuccessfully, in the Thomas Reid case, which is welcome, because it highlights that most acquisitions by the IDA are done by agreement. In the future, should these powers appear to be used in a way that is not envisaged, I would be happy to revisit the issue.

I have a number of question for the Minister, however, he has answered one of them already.

I raised a question on Second Stage where I instanced a scenario where the land had a compulsory purchase order for an undertaking but something happened so that the proposed project did not actually happen, for instance, if a company was proposing to expand but it might have collapsed and closed down. Could the original landholder buy back his land at the same price, if he so wishes, or if not, what will happen to the land?