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

I am sure he will come back in to speak about the regulator.

This grouping includes Government amendments Nos. 62 and 68. They are important and have come from a very good discussion on Committee Stage. It is a good example of how we have been able to move the Bill through and take on board many of the views of Government and Opposition Members if we felt they were worthwhile. One of these amendments provides for transitional arrangements in respect of development required by reason of an accident or emergency. In order to address the matter Deputy Matthews raised on Committee Stage, it provides that development shall not be exempted development for the purposes of this Act if it consists of any works to, or changing use of, an unauthorised development. It will ensure that where somebody flouts planning laws and carries out unauthorised developments they cannot continue to carry out further development to an unauthorised structure under the guise of exempted development. This is a very worthwhile and important clarification in the Bill. I certainly commend Deputy Matthews on it.

That is why I am moving that amendment here on Report Stage. Amendments Nos. 58, 59 and 61 in this grouping have been discussed. For the information of Members who are here, exempted development regulations are being drafted right now by the Department. They will go out for public consultation later this year, and it is important they do. It is also important to note at the outset that all exemptions are disapplied where environmental impact assessment or appropriate assessment are required, save in excepted cases under regulations or where protected structures are affected.

Also, exempted developments are not free of all curtailments, rather they are often subject to specific criteria that the development must meet, such as the size of the exempted structure, its location or particular use, which may be for a defined time. Therefore exemptions play a vital operational role in regulating, in the interests of the proper planning and sustainable development, otherwise relatively minor, ancillary, operational or maintenance developments. If they were required to go through the consenting process this would add considerably, I think most would agree, to the operational load on the system for relatively little effect and would have considerable negative implications for the making of effective decisions in a timely and robust fashion. They are not a form of workaround of proper planning, I can assure people of that. Deputies will all see examples in their own areas. It is through this important lens that the amendments proposed have been considered.

Amendments No. 58 and 59 proposed by Deputies Ó Broin, Gould and Ó Snodaigh seek to accord special status to the Irish language in the overall principles set out for the making of regulations. In the case of amendment No. 58, section 9(1)(a) already places an onus upon the Minister to provide exempted development regulations in a manner that would not offend principles of proper planning and sustainable development. Just as this section does not call out those factors individually, so it is also not necessary to identify Gaeltacht communities at this section in this manner. This should apply across the board.

Similarly, the purpose of section 9(3) referenced in amendment No. 59 is to ensure exemptions do not apply where the threshold of requiring an EIA or AA is reached, thus ensuring a high bar is in place to protect any potential environmental impact. By inserting a language impact assessment at this point, it could exclude any number of everyday activities that fall within the classes of exempted development and it is unclear how some of those classes could be assessed against language assessments. Exemptions will be set out in regulations and are in any case development specific, with clear restrictions that allow, for example, members of the public to be absolutely certain as to what they can do or not, as the case may be, to ensure they are legally compliant. Operational clarity is required to allow for the effective implementation of exemptions and this is reflected in the current system.

On Committee Stage I undertook to review this Bill’s interaction with the Irish language. I have discussed that already in the context of the previous amendment. To that end, important and practicable Report Stage amendments have been tabled which assist the promotion of the Irish language, not least the very important amendment I have mentioned already providing for priority area plans for Gaeltacht and island communities which I will address when we reach discussion of Part 3. Those amendments have been welcomed. In respect of consultation with Údarás na Gaeltachta, an Coimisinéir Teanga and others, bhí sé pléite roimhe seo. My amendment No. 284 is just one example which might be of assistance to Deputy Ó Snodaigh. I have taken on board the need for that consultation. That is just one example, Members will see it throughout the Bill. I have taken on board what we debated on Committee Stage. I think it is important.

Amendment No. 60 tabled by Deputies Cian O’Callaghan, Ó Broin, Gould and Ó Snodaigh seeks to amend section 9(3) which provides that development shall not be exempted where an EIA or AA is required. The proposed amendment seeks to create sub-tier below that of EIA or AA assessment from which exempted development is excluded. However, this is unnecessary as it is likely that any such subcategory would, by reason of having a likely negative impact on the environment, require an EIA in any case or, if it were not a type of development subject to EIA, would be captured by the fact the Minister, under section 9(1), may make regulations where he or she is of the opinion that, by reason of the size, nature or limited effect on its surroundings of the development, the carrying out of such development would not offend against principles of proper planning. These limitations are adequate and clear and therefore I cannot accept this amendment.

On amendment No. 61-----

See this speech in context