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

I thank everyone for their presentations. There are seven areas of the general scheme on which I am interested in getting the responses of both the IEN and Wind Energy Ireland. They are not going to get to respond to all seven in the seven minutes I have, so maybe the delegates would take note of them and correspond with the committee on them. They would be of interest to all members. I will rattle through all seven and then maybe Ms Uí Bhroin and Mr. Goodwin will respond insofar as possible.

Head 6(4) contains the phrases "10% of the maritime area as Marine Protected Areas as soon as practicable" and "up to 30%". That language seems very weak. It is certainly not consistent with our current EU obligations and potential EU legal requirements. I am interested in the representatives' views on the language.

Head 7(4) concerns the response time for organisations in regard to the designations, namely, six weeks. As with the four weeks Mr. Goodwin mentioned, it is simply too short. I am interested in hearing the representatives' views on that.

On head 13, concerning emergency measures for climate adaptation, it is welcome that there is a climate element but I am interested in hearing the delegates' specific views on whether the provision is strong enough or too restrictive.

Head 14(5) is one of the most concerning elements of the general scheme. It relates to someone who has an existing authorisation or licence and whose activity may not comply with the conservation requirements in the public interest. That activity would be allowed to continue. I am not saying there should not be a provision like this but the big question concerns who decides and against what criteria. I am interested in hearing the views of both organisations on this.

There are three general areas. The enforcement section is exceptionally unclear, particularly regarding the overlay between the navy, the Marine Institute and other organisations. Related to that is the issue of the architecture. We asked the Department to map out all the various enforcement organisations and agencies in the first session, and I was dizzy at the end of the description given. I am interested in the representatives' views on the enforcement provisions and how they might work in real time, given the complexity of the architecture.

There are no timelines. I am interested in hearing a little more from both organisations, from their different perspectives, about what the timelines could or should be.