Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 28, line 30, to delete "coexistance" and substitute "coexistence".

Amendment No. 9 is required to address a typographical error. The purpose is to correct the misspelled "coexistance" by replacing "a" with "e". There was an amendment that arose from an Opposition proposal that we were happy to accept. While we thank Deputies for their significant and useful contributions in respect of their amendment, their proposed spelling, "coexistance", was incorrect. This amendment corrects the typographical error.

Amendment No. 13 is to provide that Chapter 4-designated maritime area plans, DMAPs, be approved by the relevant coastal planning authority and are not required to be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. This amendment was agreed on the Committee Stage discussion of section 19 on Tuesday, 2 November 2021. I thank the Deputies who brought this to the attention of officials during the debate. I would like to think this is an excellent example that reflects the truly collaborative nature of the discussions on Committee Stage. We entered Committee Stage in the spirit of collaboration and continued in that regard to the conclusion. All Members will agree that the Government sought to work in a collegiate manner whereby proper and respectable consideration was given to all proposals to achieve the best possible legislation for all maritime users.

Amendment No. 14 amends section 20, which provides for the designation of public bodies that may make DMAPs. It is accepted that we want high-quality DMAPs that can successfully achieve what is set out in sections 21 and 22. It is acknowledged that not every public body has the necessary capacity, competency or skill to prepare a DMAP. It is intended to be mindful of these matters when designating. On Committee Stage it became clear that we had inadvertently used too broad a definition of "public body" in respect of such a designation. As defined in the Bill, it includes the Minister, local authorities and bodies established under enactment. It also includes companies. While appropriate in other contexts, it would not be appropriate for a company, a commercial entity, to prepare a DMAP. It was therefore flagged on Committee Stage that I would be introducing an amendment such as this on Report Stage to modify the definition of "public body" for the purpose of this section. For clarity, this excludes public bodies as defined in paragraph (d) on page 19 of the amended Bill from being able to prepare a DMAP.

Amendment No. 15 is to amend section 22(2)(f) to add "or coexistence" after "colocation". This amendment arises from an expansive discussion of a Opposition amendment on Committee Stage. That amendment was to replace "colocation" with "coexistence" as this would be more consistent with the language used in the MSP directive. I raised concerns about this approach and committed to reverting to the House with a more appropriate formulation. The inclusion of both "colocation" and "coexistence" is designed to reflect the intended versatile nature of DMAPs. The formulation is necessary to allow for a specific DMAP to provide for the colocation of particular future maritime usages.

It does not dilute the requirement to comply with the maritime spatial planning directive in terms of coexistence of maritime usages and, seen in the amendment No. 13, this requirement exists for the national level plan, under which DMAPs must sit. It is simply a drafting tool to provide for the flexibility required for this innovative type of sub-national planning.

Amendment No. 19 arises from Committee Stage amendment No. 122, which was withdrawn in error as part of a grouping of amendments on Committee Stage. The purpose of this amendment was to correct a typographical error by replacing "Minster" with "Minister". It is introduced as a single amendment to correct the spelling error.

See this speech in context