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

Does the Minister of State accept these are significant changes to the way decisions are made? This goes back to a previous discussion. Because the national planning policy statements can deal not only with forward planning, but also development management, and because the scope of those statements is so great, the potential for what are termed material inconsistencies in this section and others is quite large. "Alignment" and "consistency" have a nice and benign sound and, particularly in forward planning, are important. However, if taken too far - and the problem is the mechanism set out in section 34 potentially takes them too far - they become a rigid straitjacket, undermining the democratic accountability of the plans. It is a much bigger issue and I will speak on it in greater detail when we get to the development plans.

This also affects the regional assemblies. It means the Minister issues national planning policy statement X and that has to be within a short period retrospectively worked into all aspects of the regional spatial and economic strategies. If there is any dispute between the assembly and the Minister or the Planning Regulator, the potential for conflict arises. I say this slightly flippantly but it is almost like the mechanism is inviting conflict.

We have seen what happened. Dublin City Council is a good case in point with respect to the docklands SDZ. Where the planning authority takes the view its plan is correct and does not agree with the Minister, regulator or, in the case of the docklands, An Bord Pleanála, that can create conflict and cause difficulties and delays. Has the Minister of State properly thought that through in his desire for alignment and consistency? If he goes too far on the other side, he could create conflict leading to litigation and delay.