Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)

The Minister of State has significant back-up which will make it difficult for us to win any of these arguments. In amendment No. 10 I seek to unite the three conditions. Currently, one or more of the following applies: the development would be of a strategic, economic or social importance. Strategic or economic importance would obviously cover an incinerator. Would social importance mean that a superpub could be built under the terms of the Bill? Other "or" conditions applying are that the development would contribute significantly to the fulfilment of any of the objectives of the national spatial strategy — Deputy Gilmore outlined adequately paragraph (c) of section 37A — or the development would have a significant effect on the areas of more than one local authority.

These conditions leave the matter wide open as no development could fail to acquire permission under them. I seek to join the three conditions to put some rein on the hands of the board. The Minister of State accepted we are trying to tie the hands of the board. That is exactly what we are trying to do. It is a minor tie because the three conditions are very broad as they stand.

With regard to amendment No. 22, the Minister of State suggested there was a substantial lifting already, but it is not sufficiently substantial and does not deal with the issues I raise in this amendment, particularly the ecological effects of a development which are completely ignored. The aesthetic, historical and cultural effects are also omitted. I want these included to strengthen this area. Amendment No. 22 would strengthen the Bill significantly and it is unfortunate that it will not be accepted.

See this speech in context