Batt O'Keeffe (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)

All of these amendments relate to the board's screening decision on whether a proposed development is or is not strategic. We had a long discussion on the matter on Committee Stage and I am happy that the criterion on which the board will base its decisions on whether a Seventh Schedule project is strategic infrastructure are clearly set out in the new section 37A to the 2000 Act. Issues to be considered by the board in reaching its determination include the importance of the proposed development to the relevant region, the contribution the development makes to the fulfilment of the objectives of the national spatial strategy and the national development plan and the potential effects of the development on more than one local authority.

On foot of those discussions we have brought forward amendment No. 13. This amendment will amend the criteria to require that the project would contribute substantially to meeting an objective of the national spatial strategy. Deputy O'Dowd will remember that I agreed to consider doing this on Committee Stage. This makes amendment No. 17 unnecessary as it seeks to do the same.

The other Opposition amendments seek to tie the hands of the board in reaching its decision. Deputy Morgan's proposed amendment would require that a project be listed in the Seventh Schedule and that it meet all the criteria listed. This is too strong a test and would substantially reduce the efficiency gains the new proposals aim to achieve.

The amendments in the names of Deputy Cuffe — amendments Nos. 11, 12, 16, 19 and 20 — Deputy O'Dowd — amendments Nos. 15 and 18 — and Deputy Gilmore — amendment No. 14 — seek to amend the criteria. In particular, they propose that when the board is making its determination on a proposed development, specific objectives and locations should be indicated in the NSS or the new NDP before the development can be deemed of strategic importance. I outlined on Committee Stage the nature of and interrelation between the NSS and the forthcoming NDP because there appeared to be a misunderstanding of the nature of the two policy documents. Due to the nature of both, these amendments are not viable.

I outlined previously that the Government's national spatial strategy sets the national agenda for balanced regional development while regional planning guidelines, RPGs, spell out how the NSS agenda is applied at regional level. Neither is site specific. Instead, they set out a broad framework within which Ireland and its regions can develop to their full potential. The NDP is a funding framework which will be firmly based on the spatial priorities set out in the NSS. These amendments would not work because they propose a level of detail, in terms of precise locations and specific objectives in the NSS, RPGs and the NDP, that does not exist.

It is also appropriate that we should rely on the expertise of the board to make the correct decisions. Deputy Gilmore said the board is involved in make believe, but I know he does not really believe that. There is little point in empowering the board to make decisions of great significance if we insist on micromanaging every step of the decision-making process. This would hardly represent an ideal means of overcoming unnecessary delays in the planning process.

Amendment No. 21 in the name of Deputy Cuffe is a drafting amendment which I will not accept. I appreciate the intent behind amendment No. 22. An extensive range of potential effects of a proposed development is set out in the amendment, but I am satisfied that the term "proper planning and sustainable development" used in sections 37B(3)(a) and elsewhere in the Bill fully embraces these considerations. I will not accept any of these amendments.

See this speech in context