Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank both Departments for their presentations. I will start with just a comment and then ask five specific questions. I might have some additional questions in the next round if we get to it.

This is once-in-a-generation legislation. It seeks to put in place a comprehensive planning regime for foreshore and deepshore. It is the single longest piece of legislation I have ever dealt with, which means we have a particularly onerous responsibility to make sure we scrutinise it fully and get it right. It is important to emphasise that this is not just about wind but about how we treat our entire marine area. Therefore, it is not just about windfarms but also about aquaculture, fisheries, biodiversity - all those activities. It is probably unfortunate - and it is no criticism of anyone here - that we are dealing with the planning Bill before we have considered the planning framework in terms of the process because the planning framework, if I understand it right, is the overarching context within which any planning legislation and planning decision would have to take place. It is important Members understand that we have a legal obligation to produce that planning framework by March of this year. Part of that includes having both a spatial and a temporal plan for the marine within which decisions such as decisions on planning applications can then be made. In that context, my questions are as follows.

There is some concern that the marine planning framework in its draft form is not fully compliant with the marine spatial planning directive, particularly Article 8.1 of the directive, to have a spatial and temporal plan for the marine.

How satisfied are both Departments that when the final marine plan is in place, it will fully comply with the directive, particularly Article 8.1?

I have raised a concern before with respect to the marine protected areas. We were meant to have 10% by this year but we have chronically failed to do that and we have a very ambitious target of 30% by 2030. Can the witnesses update us on progress?

In the absence of having properly designed marine planning areas, in parallel with the planning legislation, what is the potential for conflicts of interest between applications for wind farms, for example, and concern over marine biodiversity in what could be marine protected areas? Could these conflicts end up in judicial review thus delaying, for example, some of the seven transitional projects or other projects after that?

I am very concerned about the consent process and the absence of an environmental impact assessment, EIA, and public consultation. Have the witnesses been given advice by the Attorney General to say that the non-inclusion of environmental impact assessments and public consultations in the consent decision complies with both the Aarhus Convention and the EIA directive? Can they explain why fishing and aquaculture have not been covered in the general scheme? Is there an intention to include deep-sea mining and liquefied natural gas, LNG, terminals?

Finally, when will the report of Dr. Tasman Crowe will be published? The Department and the Minister have seen it but we, the public and other organisation with a vested interest have not. The report is materially relevant to a lot of these discussions.