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

This is a very specific amendment in and of itself. It fulfils the intention of the House in an Act that was previously passed but could not be commenced because of a technical drafting error. The risk in accepting these amendments is to open it up wider than was the original intention of the section when it was enacted and it risks turning an extension of a duration process into a whole new consent process and that is not what this is about. It is not about introducing another consent process but this amendment intends to do that. It is very difficult to bring in a new screening process, or even a new EIA, for a development that is already substantially under way and it could have a significant impact on and risk for the completion of the development. If we were to allow it there are potential knock-on effects for other types of development if we required a new EIA when they were substantially complete.

We are opposing amendments Nos. 10, 16 and 19 as they effectively create a second consent process which is not the intention of this Bill. They bring in a further layer of uncertainty, a financial risk, a completion risk which we do not want, and unforeseen consequences beyond the scope of what this Bill intended to address.

See this speech in context