Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 10 April 2024

Select Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government

Planning and Development Bill 2023: Committee Stage (Resumed)

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

I move amendment No. 674:

In page 222, to delete lines 37 to 40, and in page 223, to delete lines 1 to 11 and substitute the following: "(b) in the case of a decision of a planning authority that relates to a development in respect of which a screening determination for an appropriate assessment or an environmental impact assessment was required under Part 6, or an appropriate assessment or an environmental impact assessment was required to be submitted to the planning authority in accordance with Part 6, or a decision which relates to the environment, non-governmental organizations promoting environmental protection—
(i) whose constitution includes objects which relate to and prioritise environmental protection,

(ii) that can substantiate reasonably that it pursues such objects, and

(iii) that is not-for-profit.".

We have been flexible with votes, but there is a value, particularly in respect of amendments of some significance, to have recorded votes. We are endeavouring to have a full attendance to assist that, but the official voting record is important. We have demonstrated in the past two weeks a willingness to work with the Cathaoirleach so we get through this in a timely manner.

I will speak to the three amendments together. The Cathaoirleach is right that in the unlikely event of the Minister supporting amendment No. 674, amendments Nos. 675 to 677, inclusive, fall. Given that the Government side is down one voting member, the margins are a little tighter for the purposes of the votes until the new Minister of State, Deputy Higgins, is replaced. I congratulate her on what appears to be her official appointment. She is a constituency colleague from Dublin Mid-West and I have worked with her on issues for a very long time.

Section 99 relates to persons who are eligible to appeal the decision of a planning authority. This cluster of amendments relates to section 99(2)(b)(i) to (v). For clarity, this is where "a decision of a planning authority ... relates to a development in respect of which an appropriate assessment or an environmental impact assessment was required to be submitted to the planning authority in accordance with Part 6". It specifically relates to cases where there are serious environmental considerations, whether from very large, formalised environmental non-governmental organisations, more localised community-based groups, campaign groups that have environmental concerns or individuals. My strong view is that section 99(2), particularly section 99(2)(b)(i) to (v), is far too restrictive. Amendment No. 674 seeks to have a much fairer set of definitions that are more compliant with the environmental impact assessment, EIA, directive and the Aarhus Convention to ensure that organisations whose constitution includes objects which relate to and prioritise environmental protection would be deemed eligible. The amendment also refers to NGOs that can substantiate reasonably that they pursue such objects and are not for profit.

Amendments Nos. 675 and 677, in the event that amendment No. 674 is not accepted, seek to remove the most egregious or restrictive elements of the Government's wording, particularly that the organisation had to be formed not less than a year before the beginning of the appeal. This is obviously particularly relevant where there might be some very strong localised environmental concerns and groups might only have formed during the course of the planning application process. The addition of a reference to "10 members" also seems completely arbitrary. I see no reason why it should be ten, five, 20, etc. The issue is whether they can be established as having a bona fide concern and on that basis, they should be able to appeal. I am interested in hearing the Minister's reply to each of my three amendments in this grouping. He might be willing to explain why one year is the threshold under section 99(2)(b)(iii) and why there is a reference to ten members under section 99(2)(b)(iv).

Something I have not covered in my amendments-----

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.