Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

The amendment seeks to delete section 258(4)(d)(iv)(II), which requires members of an unincorporated body, such as a residents’ association, that votes to proceed with a judicial review case to provide their names and addresses to the court as part of the affidavit supplied to the court with the judicial review application. Transparency is a fundamental pillar of the planning system. As we have learned over the decades, sunlight is the best disinfectant for many matters. For these reasons, it has been a well-established practice that all parties submitting observations on planning applications must supply their names and contact details and similarly, all parties making observations on development plans must supply their names and contact details. It follows that if a group of individuals with a genuine case for judicial review wishes to proceed to court, all parties, including defendants and the court itself, should know who is taking the case in the interests of transparency. There is little benefit from enabling an anonymised route to take judicial review cases or in any aspect of participation in the planning system. The court furthermore requires that it knows which individuals are taking a case and therefore it is a normal requirement to supply the courts with such information. For that reason I have to oppose amendment No. 966.