Michael Finneran (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Fianna Fail)

As regards amendments Nos. 19, 20, 25, 26 and 46, I acknowledge that differing views have been expressed. They may have arisen from a lack of clarity on the proposal of these amendments to increase the voting threshold in the case of material amendments to the draft development plan. First of all, I take the opportunity to clarify the intent of my Department in regard to these amendments. The proposed legislative amendment to introduce the two thirds majority was intended to ensure that any further changes proposed by members to those amendments to the draft plan, that had been the subject of public consultation - i.e. the second consultation period - were subject to a higher approval threshold because such changes would not be subject to any further scrutiny. It was always intended that a simple majority vote by members would be required, as is currently the case, in respect of approving a draft development plan; a draft variation for the initial public consultation; proposing and approving amendments to the draft plan, which would then be issued for a further public consultation phase, as the amended development plan - i.e. there would be no second consultation phase concerning a variation or a draft local area plan; and approving by resolution to make a development plan and variations.

The amendments were proposed in order that approval of any further changes would require the higher threshold of a two thirds majority. From the reaction I have received, it would seem the legislation is perhaps not sufficiently clear in this regard. Therefore I propose to revert to the parliamentary counsel for further legal advice with a view to bringing forward some technical amendments to address the matter. We will find another opportunity on which to do that. That is my position. I have asked the parliamentary counsel to clarify this particular area.