Shane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 87:

In page 45, to delete lines 38 and 39, and in page 46, to delete lines 1 to 18.

Amendment No. 87 deletes section 20, which includes the noise insulation scheme inserted into the Bill on Committee Stage by means of an amendment tabled by Deputy Troy with the support of Deputy Darragh O'Brien. I fully understand and share the very good intentions behind it, which I accepted on Committee Stage but which, as we discussed at the time, needed to be reworked.

Amendment No. 99 inserts a new section, section 31, to replace section 20. This new section provides that the existing noise insulation schemes which are currently available to residents around Dublin Airport will be treated as if they were noise mitigation measures introduced by the noise regulator. This new section is a far more workable provision that better secures and safeguards the current insulation schemes available to residents. I am putting this forward as a more legally sound and workable proposal to address the concerns of Deputies Troy and Darragh O'Brien regarding the status of insulation schemes. These amendments achieve just that and have been cleared through the Office of the Attorney General. What I propose in amendment No. 99 is that the DAA's existing noise insulation schemes will be deemed to be noise mitigation measures introduced by the noise regulator in order that the rights embodied in this Bill shall apply in respect of them. This means that the insulation schemes will be monitored by the noise regulator and that it has powers of enforcement as if it had included these schemes in its own regulatory decision.

Furthermore, by virtue of amendment No. 91, once these schemes are deemed to be noise mitigation measures, any person will have the ability to write to the noise regulator and request it to review their effectiveness. This amendment achieves what Deputies Troy and Darragh O'Brien set out to do in this regard. It ensures that the existing insulation schemes are protected and that they are monitored and enforced by the new noise regulator. As I have explained on several occasions this Bill is technically complicated and its interaction with EU regulations, and directives, and with national planning and development law is finely balanced. That is why we have had to be very careful and deliberate in our drafting and it is why we have had to rely heavily on the drafting expertise in the Office of the Attorney General. I say this because the language contained in the Committee Stage amendment is much more straightforward and easier to read. However, it does not work and that will be to the disadvantage of local residents which is not what is intended. If we are to progress good, implementable legislation and if we are to include in it additional protections and entitlements relating to insulation, I ask the House to support my amendments.

See this speech in context