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

I do not believe for a moment that the Minister of State was surprised by the intention of the first amendment, nor am I surprised by his response. I mean that in good humour.

In respect of amendment No. 238, I ask the Minister of State and his officials to read the recent High Court judgment on an ongoing dispute between the provisions of the county development plan and central government statutory policy with respect to a retail shopping centre in Cork. I will not discuss the issue because it has almost concluded its High Court proceedings. I mention that because there has been a growing tension between the local democratic legitimacy of the county development plans, for example, and various attempts, sometimes for good sometimes for bad, to try to streamline, centralise, or standardise planning rules at a central level.

The Minister of State is right: city and county development plans have very little to say about the overwhelming majority of the marine. Therefore, this does not become important with respect to those areas. My concern is precisely the example the Minister of State gave at the end where there might be a conflict with a specific local objective. At that point there is a question about which set of guidelines or which plan has primacy. Is it the marine planning framework and the marine spatial plan or the city and county development plans? The courts are beginning to take a view that it is not as straightforward as the Minister of State or his predecessors outlined. It would be a mistake to assume that that might not continue to be the trend. Part of the purpose of the amendment was to make the point that the Minister of State needs to consider that very carefully; I did not expect him to support it.

I also wish to speak about the second amendment. While I know I am sounding like a broken record, if we had the resources the Minister of State has, our amendments would be much more technically proficient and adept.