Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I do not want to get into a lengthy discussion about committees and legislation. We have had long discussions around "may" and "shall". We all understand the implications of it. If the Government considers plans or documents to be relevant and appropriate, it is hard to understand why the legal obligation would just be "may". There is a huge amount of discretion anyway in that the Government effectively considers and decides whether they are appropriate. Why would we have a situation in which the Government could consider them appropriate but then merely "may have regard" to them? It seems like a strangely loose discretion. In the rest of the section, and in section 22(2), it is "shall have regard to". The Minister of State might explain to us why it is "shall" in section 22(2) and "may" in section 22(1), and why that difference is there.

With regard to what else this amendment is trying to do, I think it is important that there would be a role and input where relevant from different joint Oireachtas committees. As such committees have a democratic mandate and a huge amount of experience, they could make a relevant input here. It would be strengthened if our suggestion regarding the role of joint committees were accepted.