Mr. Philip Jones:

Probably not. This is why in our submission we have said that it might be better to have it up to 50%. It is the threat rather than the action that might happen. The object of the exercise here is to get development happening, not for people to use the planning system just to enrich themselves with no real development happening. The real nasty piece is that people are getting planning permission on land having got it zoned or having bought it from a farmer who has had it zoned and just selling it on at a higher price. To me that is speculation. The less of that we can have in Ireland, the more we can actually get development going. This whole thing here, it is hoped, is going to try to stem that as much as it can. Certainly, I can see no logic in any of the documentation the Department has put forward as to why it is limiting that option in 171AQ and the new Part 2 insertion on UDZs since it is all about the land sharing contribution, which applies to all zoned land. That would be the big one in that regard from us to the committee.