Mary Fitzpatrick (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their presentations and for the information they provided us in previous briefings. There is quite a lot going on in this Bill at this point. Talk about project creep. It is racing away from us a little, but we have had the benefit in the Seanad of having had the Bill come through, so I appreciate the time and support that the Department officials have given us in the Seanad.

I am concluding that, at heart, these amendments are looking to assert a couple of values for the public, one being the value of public participation, public information, and protecting their rights and participation in the planning process, which is all very valuable. On the requirement around the county and city development plans, it is important that the legislation would assert at a very early stage in the statutory process, in fact at the pre-draft stage in the process, the requirement on every local authority to have a public meeting to consult the public. The Bill, in this instance, reflects our evolving environment and asserts the facility of an online meeting. It is important that we recognise that a development plan process lasts two years. There is a pre-draft consultation and a report on that, there is a draft plan and consultation on that, and there is a plan and there is consultation on that. It is very important that we do not ignore all of the other elements of consultation that take place and that are conducted, both formally and informally, by the elected members with the support of the executive functions of the local authorities. The extension of the Covid periods for the planning and building regulations process is practical and valid.

On the third element, the substitute consent, this has gone on since July. Is it purely down to the fact that a Government had not been formed that this matter has not been dealt with? It is coming up to €10 million of a cost for the State. Will the witnesses clarify whether there was no earlier opportunity for the State to deal with this matter?

I support the contention that anybody applying for retrospective permission for a project that required an environmental impact assessment has acted with a level of disregard and negligence that needs to be criticised and called out. It is welcome that it will have to be demonstrated that there is an exceptional need and qualification for the project to be considered. Will the witnesses also talk through how the public will engage in having their say? In those instances the public good will have been largely ignored if the project has gone ahead without an environmental impact assessment that should have been a requirement.

In terms of the residential tenancies amendments, the extension to 3 April of the ban on evictions and the ban on rent increases is very welcome. It was mentioned that there had been 340 tenant declarations under the previous legislation. Is that the latest number to date? Will the witnesses confirm that for the tenants who are unfortunate enough to find themselves in these circumstances and who want or need to make a declaration, they will be able to do that via email using plain English and will not need to engage the services of a legal professional, be it a solicitor, public notary or anybody like that?