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

I move amendment No. 226:

In page 73, line 15, to delete "makes" and substitute "shall make".

This grouping includes a number of minor technical grammatical changes to the regional spatial and economic strategy provisions via amendments Nos. 226, 230, 236, 240, 242, 244 and 247.

As before, these do not change the legal meaning of the sentences in question but have been identified by my Department and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel to improve the syntax and usability of the sentences in question. Amendment No. 226 replaces "makes" with "shall make" in section 28(1) to bring further clarity to the provision. Amendment No. 230 removes the term "the preparation, the making of and the revision of" in section 28(6) and replaces it with "the preparation, making and revision of".

Deputies Boyd Barrett, Ó Broin, Ó Snodaigh, Gould and Cian O’Callaghan have proposed an amendment to amendment No. 236 to change "as appropriate" to "in all instances where it is regionally appropriate". I cannot accept this amendment as it is unnecessary; the text as written does the same thing. Amendment No. 236 adds the words "as appropriate" to section 29(1)(l) to acknowledge that Gaeltacht-related matters will not be relevant to every area.

Amendment No. 240 includes a hyphen in "land use" in section 29(1)(p). Amendment No. 242 replaces "was justified" with "is justified" in section 29(1)(r). Amendment No. 244 replaces "must" with "shall" in section 29(7). Finally, amendment No. 247 includes the phrase "without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (a)" to section 29(7)(b) to further clarify the provision.

I will now address amendment No. 232. Deputies Boyd Barrett, Ó Broin, Ó Snodaigh, Gould and O’Callaghan have proposed an amendment to amendment No. 232 which seeks to make minor modification to the provision surrounding climate obligations. I cannot accept this proposal as the wording of the amendment as drafted is appropriate. In particular, I do not see that it is necessary to include a reference to "international climate obligations" because the Climate Action and Low Carbon Act 2015, which is referenced in this section, already deals with international obligations. Therefore, there is no necessity to include it in this section. Amendment No. 232 updates the reference to the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 and strengthens the language from "reflects" to "is consistent with". This reflects the commitments made on Committee Stage to review such references throughout the Bill. As previously explained, similar amendments have been proposed in relation to the national planning framework and national planning statements and later in the Bill in relation to development plans and consenting procedures.

We are bringing forward a number of amendments across the Bill in relation to climate change. References to climate change have been strengthened at national planning framework and national planning statement levels, emphasising the requirement for integration of the relevant policies and measures of the Government relating to the national biodiversity action plan and the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 as well as the national adaptation framework, long-term climate action strategy and any sectoral adaptation plans prepared under that Act.

I will now address amendment No. 227 tabled by Deputy Matthews; amendments Nos. 228, 229, 235, 237 to 239, inclusive, 241, 243, 245 and 246 tabled by Deputies Ó Broin, Gould, and Ó Snodaigh; and amendment No. 231, tabled by Deputies Boyd Barrett, Paul Murphy, Gino Kenny and Bríd Smith. Amendment No. 232, which I have just discussed, achieves the same aim as amendment No. 227 tabled by Deputy Matthews, and I would ask the Deputy to withdraw that amendment.

As with other sections of the Bill, Deputies Ó Broin, Gould and Ó Snodaigh seek to insert multiple Gaeltacht-related amendments, namely amendments No. 228, 229, 237, 239, 241, 243, 245 and 246, in relation to regional spatial and economic strategies. As previously noted, Government amendments have already been tabled regarding the notification of the relevant Irish-language bodies throughout each tier of planning in this Bill, as well as, in the case of directions, the Minister for Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media. Section 29(1)(l) already provides for "(l) the protection of the linguistic and cultural heritage of the Gaeltacht" and as with the amendments relating to housing, it is not appropriate at regional level to become so granular as to replicate the work implemented at local level. I therefore cannot accept these amendments.

Amendment No. 231 seeks to insert a reference to "social, affordable and cost rental targets" within the RSES. However, this is not the function of the RSES nor the section in question, section 29(1)(d). Rather, this subsection compels the RSES to set out the location of housing within the region which then informs the development plans of local authorities who go on to specify targets in relation to the types of housing needed having regard to the RSES and utilising their own local knowledge and tools such as the housing needs demand assessment. It would not be appropriate for such targets to be specified at regional rather than local level and therefore I cannot accept this amendment.

Amendment No. 235 seeks to amend section 29(1)(k) to introduce the concept of "linguistic heritage". As with the concept of "historical landscapes", linguistic heritage is not a clearly defined term and the muddying of concepts between the Bill’s provision for language, architectural heritage and environment, in an effort to be all things to everyone, may have counterproductive effects by introducing unhelpful ambiguity. I therefore cannot accept amendment No. 235.

Amendment No. 238 seeks to amend section 29(1)(m), content of regional spatial and economic strategy, to expand the term landscape to also include "historical landscapes". Such landscapes may include cemeteries and battlefields for educational and interpretive purposes. However, the Bill does not provide for such sites separately and their identification and characterisation can be complex in nature.

Furthermore, such sites would, arguably, already be provided for in section 29(1)(k) which provides for "the preservation and protection of the environment and its amenities, including the archaeological, architectural and natural heritage of the region". I cannot, therefore, accept this amendment.

I have introduced a number of minor amendments in this group to clarify language in the Bill. I have also introduced an amendment that updates the reference to the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015. As mentioned, we are bringing forward a number of amendments across the Bill in relation to climate change. References to climate change have been strengthened at the national planning framework and national planning statement levels, emphasising the requirement for the integration of the relevant policies and measures of the Government relating to the national biodiversity action plan and Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015, as well as the national adaptation framework, long-term climate action strategy and any sectoral adaptation plans prepared under that Act.

See this speech in context