Eoghan Murphy (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I would not have combined some of the amendments as they have been combined. If we consider a separate amendment that has been tabled, I believe, by Deputy Ryan, it appears to open up a possibility of a third extension, which we do not want to allow for in this Bill. We want people to go to their local authorities to seek a second extension, the local authority to make a judgment call on the time needed, and for that work to be completed as quickly as possible. I think the Deputy's amendment would have been combined with the other amendment about a possible third extension. If we were to do that, it would potentially open up an ability for some builders to try to game the system to go for the first two years and then go for a third extension but that is not the intention of the Bill. To be clear, I do not believe that was the intention in the way the Deputy drafted the amendment. Some of these developments, from what we understand, are of a significant nature such that it would require more than two years to complete them, as they involve a significant number of units. While they are already substantially under way in terms of being past the point of no return, they may not be able to be completed within two years and so a five-year extension was the maximum or 2021 and at that point it would fall out of law, so one could not build beyond that time, or seek a further extension. We are very much giving the power to the local authority, given their closer knowledge of these developments, to decide what is the adequate timeframe for the extension.

See this speech in context