Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

If there is a site that requires an EIA but does not have one and now it requires substitute consent, the EIA, had it been produced at the time of application, would have set a baseline for the environment, that is, what the environment was like, the receiving waters, the soil quality or whatever may be the case. It would have suggested mitigation measures to offset any harmful action that might arise from development. Where someone is looking for substitute consent retrospectively, irreparable damage may have been done to the site by that stage or the mitigation measures that would have originally been required prior to development may no longer be sufficient. How can it be ensured that a retrospective writing of these development applications and mitigation measures takes the environment as it would have been prior to development as opposed to how it stood during the substitute consent process? The damage is done. How is that rectified so that it returns to how it was prior to the development? Does Mr. Kelly understand?