Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 26 proposes that a review of the national marine planning framework be commenced within one year of enactment of this legislation.These proposed amendments contain deficiencies. These include providing for particular pillars of sustainable development and sectors to the exclusion of others, and thus upsetting the neutrality of the legislation, requiring compliance with very specific and selected provisions of directives other than the MSP directive - some of which are already covered elsewhere in the Bill, such as the birds and habitats directives, as referenced by the Senator - and other matters outside of the requirements of the MSP directive, which this Bill is giving effect to.

It appears that the intention is to up-end a plan that has only been adopted and is not properly embedded. This simply is not acceptable to the Government. I understand that the Senator is not happy with the NMPF but it is Ireland's national marine plan, the first of a series of interconnected and related spatial plans for the maritime area. We will simply not go back four years to the beginning of the process, holding off progress on all aspects of the NMPF. This Government takes marine management seriously and we take decarbonisation seriously. We need to move forward with this Bill.

The requirement in the Bill is that the review will be carried out within six years but it is our intention that we will carry out this review sooner, particularly for the first national maritime spatial plan. Now we must focus our resources on getting the new system up and running. I am happy that the existing NMPF underpins this system appropriately in its current form.

In terms of the detail of the proposed amendment, it has the effect that no maritime area consents or development consents can be granted pending the conclusion of the aforementioned review. This would simply have the effect of rendering significant parts of the Bill inoperable for a period of time.

This proposal, in itself, is extremely concerning as it would also mean that where one is currently permitted to obtain planning permission on the foreshore under Part 15 of the Planning Act, this right would effectively be removed. Just to be clear, under this amendment, no harbours could be expanded, no boathouses constructed, or no recreational jetties or pontoons erected pending a review of a national plan that would only be six months old.

As to the bodies that should be consulted during the proposed review, many of these bodies were already central to the production of the NMPF and sat on the marine advisory group for the four-year period in which the plan was being prepared. The NMPF has, I should note for the record, been broadly and widely welcomed by the members of the advisory group and further afield.

I appreciate the Senators' intention to ensure participation of certain organisations. This is why public participation, including the input of relevant organisations, is stitched into the very formulation of maritime spatial plans, ensuring that relevant views are taken into account throughout the entire process.

As regards specific points raised by Senator Warfield but particularly by Senator Higgins, they referenced the habitats and birds directives and the Wildlife (Amendment) Act. Some of those will be brought forward again early next year. There are also mechanisms by which certain species can be afforded protection under the Wildlife Act and those can be given consideration. We are certainly of the view that these processes are fully compliant with the NMPF directive. In that regard, I will not be accepting this amendment.