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

The amendment is worded to have flexibility because that is a key point we are making with the amendment. There are areas that are complex and technical and require longer, such as where a notice is being issued or there is public consultation. More complex and technical areas often require getting expertise, whereas in the case of a more straightforward notice without complexities and technicalities, the same length of time is not needed. Nothing makes people more cynical about consultation periods or, in this case, public inspection than if they run over August or Christmas periods. That makes people feel, even if it may not be the case, that it is a deliberate attempt to keep people in the dark or reduce the opportunity for public scrutiny or input.

The amendment applies to the Office of the Planning Regulator, regional assemblies and planning authorities, as in local authorities, and its aim is to ensure there will not be such a high level of discretion as is provided in the wording "considers reasonable". Under that wording, the body that makes a determination on what is reasonable for the Office of the Planning Regulator will be the Office of the Planning Regulator, and the same will be true in the case of a regional assembly or planning authority, which is very wide. There is a lack of consistency. The Office of the Planning Regulator could take a totally different view as to what it considers reasonable. It may take the view that having public consultations running over holiday periods is not appropriate or that more complex and technical matters take more time, whereas a regional assembly might have a different view and there could be huge variance among planning authorities. I am not seeking with the amendment to prevent that flexibility, but it is to give some definition as to what constitutes "reasonable".