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

The adoption of amendment No. 40 would make everybody's life in the Department much easier. There is nothing wrong with lobbying, which is carried out by lots of different organisations, commercial organisations, NGOs, Deputies and Cabinet colleagues, etc. I will show why amendment No. 40 would make everybody's life easier. As the Minister of State will remember, we had discussions on the floor of the Oireachtas with respect to the recent amendments to Part V and he rightly pointed out that all of the public consultation submissions to the Government's new housing plan were received after the decision to take out Part V. Now, to the great discomfort of the poor old folks in the freedom of information, FOI, section on housing, we are trying to find out who lobbied in the period between November-December 2020 and June 2021, when the decision was made. Some of the information is in the lobbying register but not all of it. It would be much easier if that information was volunteered and made public. Such a move would make things fully transparent and say who was talked to. There is no reason not to put that information in the public domain. The measure would mean that we would not have to waste our time lodging FOI requests, the FOI unit in the Department would no longer receive pestering calls from Deputies Boyd Barrett, Cian O'Callaghan and I on a regular basis, and it would improve transparency. Therefore, in the interests of transparency, I recommend amendment No. 40 as it stands or some revision of same.

Let me appeal to the better nature of the Minister of State. Obviously. there are very large commercial interests in the sphere of offshore wind and we are going to need an awful lot of investment to provide the volume of wind that is required. People will be concerned that some of that investment may not be in the public interest. I presume, given the position adopted by the Minister of State, that he believes it is in the public interest, with which I have no quarrel at this point. Therefore, assuaging public concern by publishing the information would be a valuable statement of intent.

On amendment No. 41, I welcome the fact that it has been said that the policy statement will be subjected to strategic environmental assessment and appropriate assessment. I always want to mention appropriate assessment, particularly in the absence of an adequate designation of Natura 2000 sites. My one concern is that I have not seen anywhere where that is compelled. The Minister of State may be promoted and elevated to a senior Ministry in another Department and somebody else may be in his position. Can I hold that person to the same commitment that he has given to this committee? There could also be a different government, different party, etc. Would it not be better to make that very explicit in the legislation?