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

I cannot accept the Senators' suggestion to amend or delete the provisions at amendment No. 209, as it would result in an unfair situation where an applicant who entered preplanning consultations under the pathway to consent applicable in law at that time would then find, through no fault of their own, that he or she has to obtain a MAC and recommence the entire process, delaying the project considerably. The Dáil amendment as proposed does not eliminate the need for a MAC but allows that an application for a MAC must be made within two years of the grant of planning consent.

The Senators are also proposing that amendment 209 delete section 272 and restate it with some changes. They are suggesting that the disapplication of the requirement for a MAC shall not apply to a maritime usage consisting of, or for the purposes of, working with petroleum. The provision that usages listed at Schedule 3 of the Maritime Area Planning Act are exempt from the MAC requirement is already in place at section 75(4) of that Act and is merely being restated here. It is not a new provision that I am bringing forward now, and I do not intend to interfere with the list of activities at Schedule 3 which do not require a MAC, as this has already had ample consideration given to it in the preparation of that Schedule.

The Senators further propose that the subsequent application for a MAC must be made within 12 months rather than 24. I do not propose to accept this amendment, as the time period of two years inserted by the Dáil gives the applicant more time to regularise his or her position, while also allowing the newly established MARA to manage its MAC caseload more effectively. The Senators’ amendment to amendment No. 210 would have the effect that a person who holds a licence would still require a MAC under the Maritime Area Planning Act, despite having completed the process in place at the time. A licence 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. I cannot accept this amendment.

Finally, Dáil amendment No. 212 provides for a new section 76A to the Maritime Area Planning Act 2021, disapplying the provisions of sections 75 and 76 (requiring a MAC prior to development permission and where development permission is not required) in circumstances where a lease is made or a licence granted before the establishment of MARA, that is, before it was possible to obtain a MAC. As I have already stated, removing the reference to licences here, as the Senators’ amendment proposes, would have the effect of requiring a person to reapply for consent to occupy, a consent which he or she already has in the form of a licence. I do not consider this fair and I cannot accept the Senators' amendment in this regard.

Acting Chairperson (Senator Gerry Horkan):We have now concluded all of our groupings discussion and will move on to the amendments tabled by Senators. I remind Senators that on Report Stage each non-Government amendment must be seconded.

We will now proceed to amendment No. 1 in the names of Senators Ruane, Black and Flynn which has already been discussed with group 2.