Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 109 proposes to add "artistic, cultural, including intangible culture, historic, linguistic or traditional" to considerations the Minister would have. It proposes that the Minister, when deciding to apply or cease to apply an appropriate protection on the register, would take those elements into consideration. Archaeological, architectural and historic heritage are already mentioned in the section. The amendment seeks to expand the list of what needs to be taken into account and as outlined in the section "whether the monument is, in terms of such heritage, of special or particular interest". The amendment seeks to add to that.

I withdraw amendment No. 112 because the Minister of State has tabled amendment No. 111, which has the same effect.

Amendment No. 113 seeks to require the Minister to "have due regard to the advice of the Board, An Chomhairle Oidhreachtaand An Taisce”, in addition to Ard-Mhúsaem na hÉireann. These decisions on special protection under the proposed wording require no consultation or oversight at the moment. The experts should always be asked their opinion.

Amendment No. 125 states: "In page 51, to delete lines 25 to 39, and in page 52, to delete lines 1 to 3." This is to remove a loophole as a result of which proposed works on a monument can go ahead without a relevant licence. It is to ensure that a developer or landowner cannot circumvent the normal licensing process to carry out works, if they give valid notice of their intention, and that they abide by the conditions as set down. The Minister can waive the need to abide by such conditions. There was debate on this issue in the Seanad with Senator Higgins.

Amendment No. 126 proposes to ensure that only an environmental impact assessment, EIA, compliant appropriate assessment, AA, is considered acceptable grounds for an exemption, when applying for consent to conduct works in line with the habitats regulation. Subsection 27(2)(d) allows an exemption in the case of notices that have been subject to a screening for AA that complies with the habitats directive, or an AA under another enactment, from which it can be concluded that the carrying out of the relevant works would not be incompatible with the AA. The section option does not specify that the AA must comply with the habitats directive and, therefore, that creates the loophole. The amendment aims to plug a small but important loophole.