Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)

Yes, we have. Legislation is being introduced but it needs to be expedited.

Deputy Higgins referred to sections 13 and 14. The compelling need that is now inserted in the legislation is supported by the powers of direction and guidelines in sections 13 and 14. The Deputy postulated this conflict between the economic and the social. NAMA clearly has to operate within a commercial mandate, but within that commercial mandate I maintain an amount of social good and gain can be secured. The most obvious example, which I have mentioned previously, is the question of giving public authorities first option on sites and not being held up to ransom demands by developers and owners of land in regard to the use of land for public purposes such as the location of health centres, schools, playgrounds and the like. That is one example of how within the commercial mandate, NAMA can secure a considerable amount of social advantage.

Deputy O'Donnell intervened to raise the question of the time allocation for the debate, but that has been debated already in the House this morning. There is urgency attaching to this legislation. The OECD said it yesterday and Commissioner Almunia said it a few weeks ago. I am anxious to get on with this. I want to be careful in pointing out that I am not blaming the Opposition for delaying the legislation to date in any respect. That is not the suggestion I am making, but there is an urgency about it.

Deputy Rabbitte raised the question of sustainable development, which was also raised by Deputy Morgan. I am examining an amendment in regard to the issue, which can be submitted before Seanad Éireann for its consideration and would then come back to this House. Social and economic development in that sequence is a correct compelling need for the authority. The introduction of the word "sustainable" to qualify that raises a whole host of other questions about the planning system, which has its own distinct statutory mandate. Deputy Higgins raised questions about sustainable planning as well. The planning authorities have their own integrity under their own legislation. Social and economic development is a valid, objective, legitimate, stand-alone and compelling need. Sustainability, and its precise formulation, has to be in the context of the planning code as well. I am working on a suitable amendment for insertion into the legislation, but I do not want to link sustainability with the other two ideas in the context of a compelling need. Sustainability, ultimately, is secured by the planning authorities. It is not a compelling need of NAMA, it is a statutory obligation in the whole system.

Deputy Rabbitte mentioned the issue of the part I deleted in what he chooses to call the "gagging sections". It is covered in amendments Nos. 71 and 73. We did not move in the House that the words stand deleted. There is an amendment tabled and that provision in this respect is secured in amendments Nos. 71 and 73, lest we do not reach them.

See this speech in context