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

I return to the second transitionary mechanism, for those people who do not have pre-planning approval from the board to make their SHD application, because that is the one I think the Minister has got wrong. I say this in all sincerity. My main worry is that applications could come in at a late stage. They have only to enter the pre-planning application process for SHDs by 16 December. While preparatory work will have to have been done beforehand, they will still be able to enter at that point. The reason I think the Minister should seriously consider the proposition I am making, namely, that while that pre-planning application can be assessed by the board, it should be redirected into the LSRD process, relates to the fact that is a better process. The Minister and I agree the LSRD process is far superior to the SHD process.

Moreover, a significant number of SHDs end up being judicially reviewed and delayed. I would have thought, therefore, it would be much better to redirect those applicants that have yet to get pre-planning application approval into the LSRD process. The reason some may not want that relates to the fact they might fancy their chances with the board. The board - in my opinion, and I say this with the greatest respect to the individuals there - continues to make questionable planning decisions. I say they are questionable because when they are challenged in the courts, the courts tend to uphold the challenge. I see no reason anybody should be allowed to put in an SHD application as late as the latter end of June of next year, with a decision to be made in October of next year.

That is just far too generous. It was never the expectation. The Minister himself will know that there was a kerfuffle when a circular was mistakenly issued giving the impression that April would be the deadline for everybody, which would have been bad enough. That was then withdrawn. Then another circular was formally issued and it did not provide any clarity. It was only when we saw the text of the Bill that we realised that the transitional mechanisms for those people only entering into the pre-application process would go throughout the course of next year. I appeal to the Minister. He is getting this bit of the Bill wrong. Whatever about an argument over four weeks, I still think 16 weeks is too long for the first group of people in the transitionary mechanism. Eight weeks would have been fine and we could have been done and dusted with all new applications by the end of February, which was everybody's assumption. The Minister is getting this secondary bit absolutely wrong.

I wish to challenge the Minister on the pause because it is a very important point. When the planning process was paused during the first lockdown, everybody knew that anything that was in the process at that point in time and that was affected by the pause would get an extra two months. That was very clear. None of the SHD applications that will benefit from the additional months into 2022 were affected at that point in time. That was not the legal issue, as far as I understand; it was the timelines in the legislation Eoghan Murphy had passed to extend SHDs to the end of this year. That could have easily been fixed by primary legislation. We could have easily stuck to the original deadline. If legislation had been introduced earlier this year, we could have had transitional mechanisms that dealt with that. That is not my primary concern. The Minister is giving new entrants to the system an extra year. That is a mistake. He does not need to do it. I know he will not support the amendment, but I urge him to rethink some of this between now and Report Stage. The Minister cannot say to people that SHDs are ending in February 2022 but that applications will continue to come in in June 2022, with decisions made in October and potential battles in the court into 2023. That is not what people were promised and it is not what should be provided for in this section of the Bill.