Mr. Tom Flynn:

It does seem that the Bill is proposing language which would seem to be restrictive to the status quo. There are two arguments against this, as I understand it. Some developers would argue there has been a phenomenon of objections or challenges being instigated by companies which have been established very quickly, and maybe they are not particularly representative of all of the residents within an area and it may be just a couple of individuals. To be blunt, some developers would have questions over the bona fides of those objectors or the bona fides of that challenge. That is heavily contested and people would say that if there are those cases, they are very minor and the vast majority of cases are taken by bona fide applicants. It is legitimate for residents to set up limited liability companies, which has been going on for a long period of time, to bring forward a challenge and also to confer them with a degree of cost protection. I suspect it is the concerns of developers that may be the motivation behind some of that wording in regard to the restrictions. It seems to me to be more restrictive than the status quo and it is something that needs to be analysed to see if it could operate unfairly.