Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I must say I am disappointed and will be calling a vote on this because I believe it is a very important principle.

The Minister of State spoke about the Aarhus Convention, under which we know the public has a right to participate effectively - "effectively" is the key word - and in a reasonable and timely manner in the decision-making processes with regard to all environmental, planning and sustainable development matters. Public authorities and State agencies should enable the public to comment in a reasonable time, for example, on proposals and projects affecting the environment or plans or programmes relating to the environment by the Government. The outcome of the public participation process should be taken into consideration in all decision-making. This is the backbone of the Aarhus Convention that is so much talked about.

When we come to actually putting in the votes and legislation to support that, however, we seem to back off. Everyone is talking about the Aarhus Convention and decision-making and engagement but somehow it does not go further in terms of the legislation. It is important, therefore, as the Minister of State rightly said, that a public participation process should take into consideration the decision-making process. We need to facilitate information to be made freely accessible and available to members of the public particularly but also the NGOs, environmental networks and all the other prescribed environmental bodies with which the Minister of State will be very familiar, and which have high hopes for Government and particularly for him and the Minister responsible for driving this legislation through. There is a great expectation that we here would stand in solidarity with people. It is important, therefore, that we have participation in the decision-making process. People need a reasonable amount of time, however, which is what we are talking about here. As the Minister of State knows, the four-week period is only part of this amendment. It is a very important amendment. I believe it will potentially be the subject of litigation and will possibly be referred further afield for some determination and argument. I think it right that we have on the record where people stand regarding this key amendment because it is an important one.

I take it from the Minister of State's summary that he is suggesting, and I am open to correction so correct me if I am wrong, that he would see a possible situation that there might be secondary legislation for NGOs and other organisations affected, and in the secondary legislation, the Department and his officials might be mindful of a possible six-week period. I am only saying six weeks because I suggested that. It may be longer; I do not know. I need some reassurances on that, however. Is it being suggested that it would be in secondary legislation? If that is the case, is the Minister of State committed? The Green Party is in government. As I keep saying, it is an important aspect of Government. That is one of the key issues. Green Party members are unashamedly environmentalists and are very proactive. The Minister of State personally and his party are very proactive with regard to the Aarhus Convention so we want to send a message clearly here. Am I right in saying the Minister of State is in favour of extending the four-week period possibly out to six weeks and perhaps even more? Is that the direction the Minister of State feels he would like to go? Would he be absolutely committed to driving that in terms of his own agenda within the Department?