Michael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I do not think that all development is bad or that all developers are bad. I think people who find themselves in a position where they are looking for substitute consent, for whatever reason, are not in a situation which any rational person would like to be in to start with, bearing in mind what I consider to be the overblown decision of the Commission on Ireland. For example, people might be carrying out what appeared to be an exempt development, such as making a roadway on a farm. It could then appear it was too near to a pond used by the natterjack toad or such and somebody might point out that under the European directives, a natural habitats environmental impact assessment should be done but has not been done. If someone is contemplating applying for substitute consent from An Bord Pleanála before it is decided, or has already done so, it seems to be perfectly rational to ask, if the road is rerouted 100 yd away from the natterjack toad, if An Bord Pleanála will look at that instead of having the uphill battle of arguing about whether the natterjack toad would be affected by the track the person is building on the farm.I do not see Senator Higgins's dark scenario here. It seems to bring some degree of flexibility and proportionality to a tricky situation for many people. Some of these substitute consent applications will concern activities with significant economic effects on jobs. Businesses may have to close and so on and people lose their jobs. Imagine if the Derrybrien wind farm was a factory. If there is a proportional way around a situation, we should try to encourage that rather than use a battering ram approach to the planning Acts to satisfy people who take a purist approach on these things. I am with the Minister on this matter.