Darragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 632 proposes to amend section 84 which relates to the conditions that may be attached to a grant of permission. I am opposing this amendment as it may be appropriate to attach conditions to a grant of permission similar to the operational lifespan of a new wind energy development and enable the planning authority or an coimisiún pleanála to reassess the operation of the development at a later stage, as stated previously, in light of, among other things, any planned or emerging land use or infrastructure requirements. While I understand the sentiment behind this amendment, this is a policy matter more appropriately dealt with through guidance which the relevant planning authority or an coimisiún pleanála would have regard to in determining on a case-by-case basis whether to attach such a condition to a grant of permission. For that reason, I cannot accept amendment No. 632.

Amendment No. 695 seeks to add a new subsection to section 114 to provide that a prospective applicant for port infrastructure to facilitate offshore renewable energy may enter consultations under section 114 notwithstanding that they do not hold a maritime area consent at the time. I cannot accept this amendment because, as just mentioned, this may potentially lead to a speculative pre-application consultation which would not be constructive use of the commission's resources. With the marine area consents, MACs, there is a pre-consent process in place particularly relating to port infrastructure. That is happening right now with the establishment of MARA.

Amendment No. 718 proposes to amend section 125 which relates to additional provisions relevant to electricity transmission infrastructure development. I am opposing this amendment as section 114 provides a process whereby a prospective applicant may actually request a pre-application consultation with the commission in respect of a proposed application for what is called a Chapter 4 development. Where the commission receives such a request and forms the opinion that the proposed development is not a Chapter 4 development, it must notify the prospective applicant that an application for permission for the proposed development may not be made to it under this Chapter.

While I cannot accept the amendment, I will consider bringing a similar amendment on Report Stage to provide a streamlined process for the commission to confirm if an application for permission for a proposed electricity transmission infrastructure development, which is not a Chapter 4 development but which forms an integral part of an overall project, is required to be submitted to it. I will look at amendment No. 718 to see if we can bring forward a similar amendment. However, I need a little bit more time to look at the wording to clarify the process. I fully accept the point that if something is deemed not to be a Chapter 4 development, what happens next. We might be able to incorporate that into a process or the process. I give a commitment to come back on Report Stage on amendment No. 718.