Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

We may have already touched on this point when we discussed housing. I am concerned about amendment No. 40 on the variations. The answer seemed to be that if issues were identified under the SEA, there would be no extension. I understand there may be circumstances where it is a very specific issue and I do not want to create a dynamic in which one very specific issue will interfere with this period. It may be as localised as one particular site, for example. I was trying to tease out how the variation tools might be used. It may be a matter of sequencing. It may require a variation, following which an extension could be sought. I am trying to solve the problem of how to address issues that arise. We cannot work on the assumption that no issues will arise. They may well arise.

When we talk about the escalating responsibilities for climate change over the next year or two, I am keen that local authorities would not miss out on opportunities.We have the suspension of the fiscal rules for the next two-year period. We know a large part of the recovery and resilience funding coming from Europe is in respect of green projects and infrastructure. When I talk about climate obligations and obligations under the climate Bill, it is not as a brake to measures that might be able to be taken but to take account of, for example, an old development plan that is not equipped to take advantage of opportunities in funding, zoning and resources that could be accessed. It is important to give that context. Some local authorities have strong climate provisions. The Minister of State mentioned section 10(2)(n), which we will discuss later. Some local authorities have those provisions embedded quite strongly in their existing development plans whereas others would have moved on quite considerably in their engagement on those issues in the past two or three years.