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

Jack Chambers (FF), Dublin West

I thank all Senators for their contributions. I am not accepting these amendments. The power to issue directions to relevant public bodies in relation to those programmes and projects that are designated as critical infrastructure is an important mechanism in the overall process. It will allow the Minister for public expenditure to intervene where the framework for accelerated decision making is not being implemented. Crucially, however, this intervention can only be for the purposes of ensuring that public bodies are carrying out their duties under section 5 of the Bill. Linking the power to give directions on the duties of public bodies set out in section 5 sets an important limit. Any direction issued will only relate to the measures needed to ensure that a public body prioritises its relevant functions under the Bill; acts promptly and avoids unnecessary delay; reduces the time taken to complete authorisation; works in parallel with other public bodies where practical; co-operates effectively across the system; identifies and manages the risks, constraints and interdependencies; and appropriately allocates the resources needed to do this work. Importantly, all of this must be done without prejudice to the bodies' other legislative responsibilities so I cannot use this power to override existing law or to determine specific decisions. Its sole purpose is to support the timely progression of the decision-making process. This is not unusual. Similar powers exist across a range of legislation, particularly in circumstances where Ministers work with public bodies but do not have day-to-day operational control.
There is a further safeguard in place in respect of using the power to direct. I am required to consult the Minister responsible for the public body before issuing any direction. I do not expect the power to be used frequently but it is important that it exists. The approval processes for critical infrastructure are often highly interdependent. A delay in a single authorisation can hold up an entire project, particularly where the authorisation sits on a critical path for that project. In simple terms, if we are serious about accelerating the delivery of critical infrastructure, we must have limited and proportionate powers to intervene where the system envisaged in the Bill is not working effectively. There is nothing in this legislation that allows me or any other Minister to dictate the decisions of public bodies. The Bill does not permit me to override, undermine or interfere in any way with the independent exercise of a public body's statutory functions. The purpose of the power of direction is to provide a mechanism to issue directions to public bodies solely in relation to how they are carrying out their functions under the Bill. In practice, this means directions can only relate to measures aimed at accelerating the authorisation process and can only be issued in consultation with the relevant Minister. Given these safeguards and limitations, I do not believe the proposed deletion or the proposed provision set out by the Senators in the amendment are required in this instance.

---

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