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

I have a couple of very brief observations which the witnesses are free to comment on in their concluding remarks. We have had lots of conversations about data and taking a data-led approach. The big question, of course, is what we do when there is no data. Do we apply the precautionary principle or do we make sure the absence of data does not get in the way of activity X, Y or Z? That is one of the big challenges in the legislation.

My other observation is that the more I look at heads 9 and 10, the more I realise it is a very strange procedure. Head 9 gives us a public consultation on the proposed draft marine protected area for a larger range of organisations. The Minister can then either just proceed with what is recommended or amend it and so on. Then we have a separate head 10 which covers consultation but with a much narrower set of actors. It seems to me that will just delay the process. It would seem logical that we just have one public consultation process and people can give their views on it, irrespective of what sector they come from. In our engagement with the Department, we should try to really understand why the process is split in that way. I have never seen anything operating like that in our mainstream or terrestrial planning system.