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

I will address amendments Nos. 32 to 34, inclusive, together, in the manner in which they have been grouped by the Bills Office. Amendments Nos. 32 and 34 are tabled jointly by a number of Senators while amendment No. 33 is a Government amendment.

With regard to amendments Nos. 32 and 34, the proposed new section 11D(7) relates to the carrying out of a screening for appropriate assessment and requires that this be carried out in accordance with section 177U of the Planning and Development Act 2000. In accordance with Article 6 of the habitats directive, section 177U of the 2000 Act already requires the competent authority to assess, in view of best scientific knowledge, whether a land use plan, or in this case the extension of duration of an existing development plan, an existing development plan or a proposed development, individually or in combination with another plan or project, is likely to have a significant effect on the European site. As such, it is unnecessary to include the term "individually or in combination with other plans or projects" within the provisions set out in the Bill. The two amendments appear to differ only with regard to the reordering of the wording describing the extension of duration of the existing development plan. They have the same effect. Accordingly, the amendments are unnecessary and are rejected.

Amendment No. 33, a Government amendment, is also to be moved. This is a technical drafting amendment which has been recommended by the Office of the Attorney General to ensure that, where a planning authority is considering the effects of the proposed extension of duration of an existing development plan on the environment and on the integrity of a European site, it must also consider the proposal in combination with any previous extension of that plan, as appropriate.