Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I agree with Deputy Ó Broin that we need sufficient time to consider the legislation in detail. We all have a lot of responsibilities but even if we did not the timeframe is insufficient for us. I appreciate the huge work that has gone into the legislation and appreciate the need for it.

On section 3 and code provisions, section 3(3) allows the Government very individual statutory prescribed timeframes and limits in something like the Planning Act. What safeguards exist to ensure that when the Government does this that it will, as required by the Aarhus Convention, provide reasonable timeframes to ensure the provision of effective participation rights as well as wide access? Given the practical obstacles the public will face during the pandemic, how can the provisions in section 3(3)(b), which allows a further variation in timeframes based on an administrative area such as the board or local authority, be justified given that people limited by a lockdown in one area may be impacted and have an interest in applications in another area? In addition to the risk to participatory rights and hence the legality of decisions compromising clarity and certainty for all concerned, is there not a serious risk of confusion about what time limits pertain, where and when?

Second, what provisions are there to ensure really robust communications from the Government in order to make sure the public is properly apprised of what the timeframes are? There should be more than just a notice on the website of the Department or a planning authority.

Third, what further requirements are there to ensure people can make electronic payments and submissions for all types of consents, including strategic infrastructure planning appeals and ordinary local authority decisions, for example?

Fourth, when will the file of the board be electronically available? It is significant for anyone who is considering taking a judicial review.