Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

My not understanding this could just be because I am not as familiar with this process. Is it that the current practice of the courts, whereby a section 5 declaration is treated as conclusive evidence, is a problem whose solution is to not allow it to be admissible at all? Is there not a better way of dealing with that, namely, to find a mechanism by which the declaration is not deemed conclusive? For example, in judicial review proceedings there is a decision by the planning authority and board but there are still mechanisms by which they can be challenged and evidence can be submitted. I am not arguing against the Minister's position but just trying to understand it. Does it not go too far in the other direction? While I agree with the Minister that it might not be correct to see evidence as definitive or as the last word on the matter, are there not some circumstances in which it might be materially relevant and therefore admissible – for example, when new information has come to light that was not available at the time and therefore was not withheld but that is materially relevant in the consideration of the matter?