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

I can, yes. We dealt with the other amendments in that group that were substantive. I will get to the other amendments now. Amendments Nos, 635 to 639, inclusive; amendment No. 653, amendment Nos. 697 to 701, inclusive; and amendment No. 705 simply seek to improve the language of these provisions without changing the intent of the provision as already provided for in the Planning and Development Act 2000. Effectively, that is just an improvement of language. For example, amendments Nos. 635 and 697 change the language from the applicant submitting "at least 2 approaches" to "a description of not less than 2 approaches". Amendments Nos. 636, 653, 698 and 705 change references to the commencement of the "proposed development" to the commencement of "the part of the proposed development to which the aspect concerned relates". This is consistent with the wording currently in the Planning and Development Act 2000 and ensures a person must confirm the specifics of the development prior to commencing the part of the development that was unconfirmed. The intention here is to ensure that, for example, in the case of renewable energy technology, the applicant can carry out site preparation works, etc., before confirming the exact technology to be used so long as the site works are carried out in accordance with their permission. The applicant may then confirm the technology to be used before that part of the development commences thereby allowing the developer avail of the most efficient technology available. Therefore, if site preparation works were to take a number of years - not saying that they would but they could - you would be able to use the most up-to-date technology. The Rochdale Envelope was a case in point on that, which we have looked at.

Amendments Nos 637, 638, 699 and 700 amend references to the planning authority or the commission keeping a copy of "each request for an opinion" and "a record of each meeting relating to providing an opinion" with any subsequent application for permission for the proposed development to references to the planning authority or the commission keeping a copy of "a request for an opinion" and "a record of a meeting relating to providing an opinion" with any subsequent application for permission for the proposed development. That makes sure all the information is sequential and is kept in the right place. This again is consistent with the wording in the Planning and Development Act 2000 and clarifies that the process of seeking an opinion around flexibility should involve a single request and meeting in respect of a proposed development.

Concluding on this, amendments Nos. 639 and 701 correct an incorrect reference. I have already mentioned that I will withdraw amendments Nos. 656 and 706. These amendments propose to insert the requirement that we have already gone through. I do not need to go through that again. That is it.