Darragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

It would make a significant difference if it were in respect of an application as opposed to an applicant. If an applicant had had seven different successful judicial reviews taken against them, that would suggest an issue with the planning system rather than the applicant, unless it was an applicant who wantonly cast aside the normal practices there. Changing the wording from "applicant" to "application" makes a fundamental difference to the amendment the Senator tabled.

As the Senator knows, judicial reviews are generally taken against a decision of a planning authority or the board in respect of a specific case - so it would be an application - or against the State potentially over something like transposition of EU law or the constitutionality of national legislation, and not against the particular applicant of a proposed development who may be just listed as a notice party in any case. On that basis, I could not accept the amendment. I know what the Senator is trying to achieve. Someone consistently lodging poor planning applications will be refused.

Going back to my original point, were someone lodging applications that are granted permission but then were continually losing judicial reviews, that would indicate a problem with the planning system. We are carrying out a review to reform judicial reviews. We are carrying out a full time-bound review of the planning system to report back next September.

I cannot accept amendment No. 23 for the reasons I have outlined.