Critical Infrastructure Bill 2026: Committee and Remaining Stages
Seanad Éireann — 2026-06-16
============================================================

Jack Chambers (FF), Dublin West

I thank Senator Murphy for the amendment. I am not accepting it. While I agree in principle that authorisation processes should be subject to clear timelines, I do not believe it would be appropriate for me as Minister to prescribe the specific timeline required in the context of this legislation for every individual authorisation process. I will set out why. If such a requirement were imposed by my Department, we would run the risk of conflicting with existing sectoral-specific legislation which already exists in terms of timelines and setting out statutory timelines across multiple areas. It could also create difficulties in relation to EU law and more importantly could risk undermining the independence of certain public bodies. In certain instances statutory timelines are set out which are different from what are prescribed in the amendment. That potentially conflicts with other EU legislation or its transposition.
As I outlined in the Dáil, Senators can be assured that the broader reform of regulatory processes needed to introduce times across suitable authorisation procedures is already well under way. This was a central commitment in the accelerating infrastructure action plan that I published in December. Regulatory reform and simplification is one of the four pillars of that report. In order to drive this work, a dedicated simplification unit is being established in my Department. This work is already delivering results. On 26 March I issued a circular on the principles for better regulation for critical infrastructure. It sets out eight principles that public sector bodies are required to apply in their regulatory processes. One of these principles requires fixed timelines for all licensing, permitting and consenting processes along with the tracking and measurement of performance through appropriate key performance indicators. We are also seeing this approach reflected in legislation being advanced by individual Departments. For example, the environment Act 2026 includes provisions enabling a Minister responsible for the Environmental Protection Agency to make regulations specifying the period within which the agency should endeavour to reach decisions. Therefore, while I accept the intent behind the amendment, I do not believe it is appropriate to include in the Bill. I am satisfied that its objectives are better achieved through the wider programme of regulatory reform and simplification that is already under way and, indeed, the wider direction set out in the Bill in the context of the powers of the Minister to direct a particular body relating to projects that are designated critical infrastructure. I think we have sufficient legislative direction already contained within the Bill.

---

Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted.

Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-06-16/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:55:03+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-06-16