Mr. Kevin Kelly:

There are probably two issues at play. The first is in the context of the draft Bill. Our submission was based upon what we see as the key criteria for establishing the boundary of the MASPs. There were no roles or responsibilities for the regional assemblies in respect of the current regions-based economic strategy and the designation of the current MASPs. We were handed the implementation roadmap for the national planning framework. I understand where the Senator is coming from. We had the same discussions around the designation of the Waterford MASP when we looked across the piece. The draft Bill is trying to resolve those issues to ensure an element of consistency around how the boundaries of the MASPs are determined. It is primarily for that reason that we feel the commuting zone is too narrow a criterion on its own. Other key factors must be considered. Based on all the factors we have in mind, I think Tramore would be included in the MASP for Waterford, if we want to focus on that local issue. We need to ensure a level of consistency across the piece in respect of how MASPs are determined, not only in our region but also in the other two regions.