Marc Ó Cathasaigh (Waterford, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Buckley; I am sorry to cut her short. I know other members will dig down into these costs. There is another aspect I wish to briefly explore, however.

She referred to the context for making these decisions changing all the time. I want to refer to some of the environmental context. Traditionally, the Irish planning system and, therefore, the board enjoyed quite a wide discretion when asked to judge against quite flexible standards. That could be seen as quite subjective. Subsequent EU legislation, in particular, and Irish legislation have introduced much more objective tests, for example, the obligations under the habitats and birds directives, the water framework directive and more recently, of course, obligations under the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Act 2021. These all have strong and clear tests, which are aimed respectively at biodiversity loss, water quality and around emissions. The board has repeatedly found itself losing cases under the birds and habitats directives, which are the oldest of these legal regimes. A high-profile decision made recently with respect to the Galway ring road referred to the new climate Act. This is only going one way. Ms Buckley in her opening statement acknowledged those extra responsibilities the board will have to shoulder under the likes of the Maritime Area Planning Act 2021 in particular. How is it proposed to address this? I assume she will say massive extra resources are needed. Does she have the plans in place to recruit not just the bodies but the expertise in terms of the resources we need?