James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)

I thank the Minister for the reply. It seems to me that we have put the laws in place in the planning Act in relation to trying to reduce the number of judicial reviews. We have not yet commenced the relevant provision as it relates to fixed costs. The Minister has a statutory role in relation to that, although I acknowledge it is the Minister for housing who has to discuss it with him. I wonder when we are going to make an actual decision on this and send a very clear signal of what the State's approach is in getting critical infrastructure over the line. I am still not very clear as to whether the Minister's civil reform Bill will have any impact at all as it relates to planning. It seems to me that the civil reform Bill, how it has been briefed and what is in Mr. Justice Peter Kelly's report, talks about a more onerous leave stage when it comes to judicial review whereas in the planning Act - and those provisions have been commenced - we have abolished a leave stage. I want to ensure that the public are clear as to what the Government is going to do here. I was heartened by what the Taoiseach said on Wednesday in terms of looking at bespoke legislation on the drainage project. He is going to seek the advice of the Attorney General. However, will we be able to do that with long-standing precedent of these Houses legislating as it relates to cases that are before the courts? The public wants this to happen. They want us to do something. We just simply have to do something. The Minister's Bill is very important legislation that will take some time to go through these Houses but ultimately we need to see radical action here because we know what is going to happen. The Taoiseach asked people politely not to judicially review the drainage project but they have done it. We know what will happen with the Shannon to Dublin water project. That, and other critical infrastructure, is going to be judicially reviewed. People are going to suffer. Young people are not going to get access to houses because of these laws and we have to do something radical to respond.

See this speech in context