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

To come back to the other points, the Minister was talking about amendment No. 55, the previous amendment. Perhaps I did not make the point as well as I should have. The specific provision in the legislation proposed has to do with matters to which the planning authority and commission shall have regard. It is not about pre-empting the decision of the planning authority or the commission. It says that they must have regard to a number of listed matters, some of which are difficult to define because they are not included in the list of definitions in the Bill. Some are loosely or abstractly defined. It is difficult to define "the likely effects on the environment of the development ". The word "vicinity" is used in section 83(1)(a)(ix)(II). There is also reference to "issues of strategic economic or social importance to the State". These are concepts that the Minister and I might not agree on but the board has to have regard to what people point out as falling under these headings. That is the whole thing with planning; it is a judgment call for the planning authority to make. That is why it is important that the authority have a duty to have regard to the context and integrity of a structure, whether it agrees with my version or not. The Minister does not agree with my version of what is happening on Moore Street but he has to have regard to it if I put legislation in front of him. At the moment, I also have the luxury of making a submission to the planning authority. What we are trying to do here is to make sure the planning authority or the commission have regard to these issues in their pre-emptive actions in respect of planning strategies and so on. The amendment is not prescriptive as to what their findings would be. That is why I cannot figure out why the amendments have been rejected in such a way.