Seanad debates

Monday, 28 June 2021

Planning and Development (Amendment) (No. 3) Bill 2021: Committee and Remaining Stages

 

10:30 am

Photo of Peter BurkePeter Burke (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Unfortunately, I must oppose these amendments, which propose that a planning authority must, before making a decision as to whether to extend the duration of the existing development plan, undertake various assessments.

Amendment No. 22 seeks an assessment of the potential impact of an extension on the local authority's achievement of obligations as a relevant body in respect of the public duty regarding equality and human rights and the UNCRPD. There is no obligation under the provisions relating to the preparation of a development plan or the variation of that plan as set out in the 2000 Act, which requires an assessment of the potential impact of a plan in respect of the public duty regarding equality, human rights and the UNCRPD, and it would not be reasonable to require such an assessment in respect of the extension of duration of a plan, as provided for in the Bill. General obligations on a local authority under relevant legislation and conventions will apply notwithstanding the provisions set out in the Bill. It would not be appropriate to require a specific reference to such matters within these provisions. Accordingly, the amendment is rejected.

Amendment No. 23 and part of amendment No. 24 relate to the requirements under section 10(2)(n) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 to include the following within the development plan:

the promotion of sustainable settlement and transportation strategies in urban and rural areas including the promotion of measures to — (i) reduce energy demand in response to the likelihood of increases in energy and other costs due to long-term decline in non-renewable resources,

(ii) reduce anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, and

(iii) address the necessity of adaptation to climate change;

Amendment No. 25 and part of amendment No. 24 relate to the requirements under section 10(2)(o) of the 2000 Act to include in the development plan an objective related to the preservation of certain public rights of way. Given that the provisions under this Bill relate to the temporal extension of the existing plan and do not involve the variation of that plan, it would not be reasonable or appropriate to require assessments of this nature before a decision is made about whether to extend the duration of the plan. Such matters will be addressed separately in the preparation of the new development plan for the area under the current provisions set out in the 2000 Act.Accordingly, amendments Nos. 23, 24 and 25 cannot be accepted. In light of Senator Higgins's issue with public rights of way, I will undertake to work with the Minister for Rural and Community Development about the valid concerns she raised in the debate. We can have a bilateral on it and come back to her with a response or course of action.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.