Ivor Callely (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the inclusion of this section in the Bill. However, the Minister of State and his departmental colleagues should put in place a mechanism, whereby one could adjudicate on the benefits accruing from the implementation of the section. Were one in private business, one could put in place a mechanism to enable one to make an assessment after an appropriate time, be it 12 months, 24 months or otherwise. One would have clear knowledge of the reason for the section's inclusion and would have a form of ready reckoner as to when one would expect to see benefits accruing from that mechanism. As section 24 is being included, can the Minister of State indicate what mechanism will be in place to evaluate its benefits? When can he revert to the House or me as an individual with an assessment of the merits or otherwise of section 24?

I make this point with reference to my local authority area in the capital city which has massive infrastructure. If one takes as an example the single area of drinking water infrastructure within the capital city, it is known that it is ancient, is leaking at all levels and will cost an arm and a leg to replace. However, to be practical, I met the city manager last week who informed me that the amount in development levies he expected to collect this year would be approximately 15% of the amount in development levies he had collected two years ago. Consequently, this provision does not match up. I do not suggest this is an issue on which the Minister of State should respond in the Chamber this evening because I am sure he did not draft this provision. However, while section 24 may be merited, it does not appear to stack up in respect of the practical realities of the section's implications.

I seek clarity from the Minister of State. While I welcome the redefinition and, as I stated previously, the newer infrastructural requirements, I note the line in the explanatory memorandum which states the definition "is re-defined to allow development contributions to be levied". I seek clarification in this regard. While development levies are already in place, this refers to allowing "development contributions to be levied and used to fund". I return to the point I made on the section previously and to which I believe Senator Burke also alluded, that is, the density models appropriate for sustainable development and to meet the required level of infrastructure that all Members have discussed. Is there progress in that regard?