Shane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent) | Oireachtas source

To reply to Deputy Clare Daly, I am confident that we will get the necessary expertise. I do not think that will be a problem. When the Deputy says that I have repeated answers I have produced before, if she asks the same questions she will get the same answers. I do not mind if the Deputy wants to go over the old coals of this long saga time and time again, that is up to her, but she will get the same responses. Those same responses are the same reasons there has been a delay and I will give those responses every time she asks the same question. That is fine. People should be reminded of the difficulties we have faced but the reasons for them will be consistent.

I was asked if the delay is time sensitive and of course it is. We want to resolve the uncertainty that exists. The Deputy is representing a large number of residents here today, some of whom are in the Public Gallery, and they are welcome, but we want to make sure that the difficulties and uncertainties which they face and are living through, and I apologise for the delays, are ended. It is time sensitive and those residents should know exactly what the consequences of what we are doing will be for them and we are determined to do that. There is a lot in this directive which is balanced and in which those residents should find reassurance. There is no noise regulator there at all at the moment.

I wish to address what Deputy Troy said. His amendment looks for a robust body and his concern for independence is one which we share. I do not envisage any great difficulty with having a chief executive in that situation because of the safeguards which exist. It would be extraordinary if the chief executive were to do anything to compromise the independence because of the transparency of the process. That would obviously emerge immediately and the safeguards which are there in the appeals mechanism which we have already mentioned, the commitment to public consultation through the appeals and noise regulation process and the judicial review to which we referred are adequate safeguards to make sure the transparency and independence is there.

I also wish to assure Deputy Troy that resources and expertise will be brought to bear and, if there are mistakes, the appeal process will catch them. This is a very thorough process.

It is a long and arduous process and people will be complaining for a long time to come. An Bord Pleanála has 18 weeks yet and there are four weeks for appeals, which is to protect residents and the consumer. The length of time to make sure the process is transparent and thorough is built into the legislation. That is why it is there. It is irritating. We have so many cases of An Bord Pleanála annoying people because of delays in its decisions but the flip side of that is that the public and all sorts of stakeholders are protected by this and everything is taken into account. I do not think anybody needs to fear that the process is not transparent and full. It will be very thorough and forensic.

It provides for a new regulatory regime to assess, monitor and enforce noise management at Dublin Airport. We have had various suggestions about the competent authority here today. People have suggested the EPA; the Commission for Aviation Regulation, CAR; and the Irish Aviation Authority, IAA, in a post-split situation. All of them have a bit to offer and all of them have merit but on balance, I am adamant that the best choice is Fingal County Council. I do not dispute that everything that has been said here today has merit but it is a bit more nuanced. Fingal County Council has a great deal of expertise. Overall, it has greater expertise and there is a better case for it than there is for the others.