Darragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am happy to. I have listened to colleagues intently in quite a detailed debate. There has been some misinterpretation around public consultation. That relates to the pre-draft stage of a development plan only. The joint committee received detailed briefings. It is complex legislation but it is urgent and important.

The tenancy protections that we are bringing through are an extension of the protections that I put to the Dáil in July, which have worked and are very important to protect tenants and those most at risk from the pandemic. At that time many questioned whether those protections would work. Some said thousands upon thousands would lose their homes. Deputies Boyd Barrett and Barry said there would be tsunami of evictions, but that did not come to pass because the legislation is robust. It has worked and this Bill is an extension to it Its urgency is because the protections in that legislation expire on 11 January.

We have to bring in those protections now.

There was some talk about pre-legislative scrutiny and that we went into the Seanad having decided just to set aside the scrutiny process for this Bill. We did not do so and I have explained that in a very detailed letter to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage. Deputy Ó Broin knows that, as does the Chairman of the committee, Deputy Matthews. We secured a slot for the Bill in the Seanad in advance of the committee responding to the request we put to it. I gave a detailed response in writing to the committee, as I said, and I do not intend for the same thing to happen again. I said that in my response and I apologised for what happened. There was no slight meant on the committee and there was no attempt to get around the pre-legislative scrutiny process. I do not intend for that to happen again.

Deputy Boyd Barrett talked about the substitute consent process as a systematic abuse of the planning system. The facts do not bear that out, but that does not really matter when it comes to the Deputy. There are approximately 30 cases of applications for substitute consent before An Bord Pleanála out of 29,000 planning applications. That is hardly systematic abuse of substitute consent. The provisions in this Bill relate to the importance of addressing the issue of the Supreme Court decision. The State is being fined €15,000 a day. I must have regard to that, as must all colleagues. I have been in this job six months and I want to address that issue.

In the context of the planning aspects of the Bill with regard to Covid and some of the changes required, the advice from the Attorney General, which I absolutely accept, was that this legislation would be a good vehicle to bring in those changes. I explained that in detail here. Is it something I think we will be doing often? Absolutely not. I do not accept that it is an insidious, creeping type of process or set of proposals that I am bringing forward in any legislation. That is not the case. The two pieces of legislation relating to the rental market that I have brought to the House, which have worked and are protecting tenants, were opposed by some who are, fortunately, speaking for, and in support of, these additional measures I am bringing in. I am glad there has been a recognition that the stance taken by some people in July was the incorrect stance and that the Government's stance was absolutely the correct one. I assure Deputies that the provisions on substitute consent have nothing to do with whether a particular application will be granted. That will be a matter for An Bord Pleanála.

Regarding the provisions for online meetings, Deputy Mattie McGrath strayed into the area of vaccines in his contribution. I hope, in the minute he has tomorrow, that he might clarify his position in this regard. I say to him and Deputy O'Donoghue-----

See this speech in context