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

The Senators are suggesting that we either remove or qualify Dáil amendment 179, thereby limiting its application. This would leave in place on the Statute Book a legal anomaly requiring a double development consent under two separate provisions and tie up resources on the applicant’s and the State’s side in processing unnecessary applications.

In regard to Dáil amendment No. 180 which provides a new section 243, the effect of the amendments proposed by the Senators would be to not disapply the requirement for a MAC. This would cause significant delays to strategic infrastructure projects of benefit to the State which have already commenced the planning process and entered into pre-application consultations with An Bord Pleanála. Such applicants did so in good faith under the legislative regime in place at the time. It would be unfair and unnecessary to insist that such applicants now need to seek a MAC - a requirement that was not in place when they commenced the process - and then return to An Bord Pleanála to commence the planning consent process all over again. I cannot accept these amendments.

Amendment No. 181 made by the Dáil inserts a new section 244, amending section 285 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The effect of the amendment proposed by the Senators would be to remove the reference to leases. That would mean that any project that was the subject of a lease under the Foreshore Act 1933 made after 1 October 2017 would still require a MAC under the Maritime Area Planning Act, despite having completed the process in place at the time. A lease is a consent to occupy and a MAC is, in effect, an updated version of that. Insisting that an applicant reapplies for consent to occupy despite having already received that consent is not fair to the applicant and is not the best use of limited public resources. The reference to the fifth anniversary in amendment No. 181 was chosen because planning consent normally lasts for five years. Changing this to one year, as suggested by the Senators, is not realistic given how long construction of large-scale projects can take. Amendment No. 183 inserts a new section 246, amending section 285 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. This is a mirror provision to that in amendment No. 181. The result of the amendment proposed by the Senators would be to remove the reference to leases made on or after 1 October 2017. As in amendment No. 181, this would mean that any project which was the subject of a lease under the Foreshore Act 1933 made on or before that date would still require a MAC under the Maritime Area Planning Act, despite having completed the process in place at the time. As I have already noted, insisting that an applicant reapply for consent to occupy despite having already received that consent is not fair to the applicant and not the best use of limited public resources. I therefore cannot accept this amendment.

Amendment No. 185 made by the Dáil amends section 287 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. It provides that applications for offshore renewable energy-related port infrastructure can enter pre-application consultations with An Bord Pleanála in the absence of a MAC. The effect of this amendment proposed by the Senators to this provision would be to ensure that a person could not apply for a MAC without entering into pre-application consultation with An Bord Pleanála first. This is not necessary. The normal procedure is to apply for a MAC first, and a MAC must be held before applying for development consent. The amendment made by the Dáil allows, as an exception, that pre-application consultation may commence in certain circumstances without a MAC. The applicants for these developments will, however, be required to have a MAC in order to proceed with submitting a full planning application in accordance with section 291.

Accepting the Senators' amendment, to insist that a pre-application consultation is required before a MAC, would reverse the entire application process approved by the Oireachtas and laid out in the Maritime Area Planning Act 2021. I therefore cannot accept this amendment.