I move amendment No. 39: In page 8, line 27, to delete “expedient” and substitute “necessary”.

I move amendment No. 41: In page 9, to delete line 5. This amendment seeks to delete subsection 9(b), which proposes to delete subsections (1A) to (1D), inclusive, of section 108 of the 2000 Act. I give notice that I may withdraw this amendment in favour of my amendments Nos. 47 and 48, which are more tightly framed and address the same fundamental concern around local government autonomy. One welcome aspect of the Bill is its proposal to repeal of some of the very poor quorum provisions in section 108 of the 2000 …

I will withdraw amendment No. 41. I may withdraw amendment No. 42 depending on the reply.

To clarify, I am withdrawing amendment No. 41. I will press amendment No. 42, however, which does, in fact, agree with the removal of the possibility of a quorum of two. Amendment No. 42 removes subsections (1A), (1B), and (1D) but does not remove section (1C), which requires a higher quorum in respect of changes or proposals that materially contravene it. To be very clear, I am pressing amendment No. 42 and withdrawing amendments Nos. 41 and 43. Amendment No. 42 is important, however, in that it ensures there is a…

I asked the Minister of State for a response in respect of an issue.

I raised a number of other categories as well. I thank the Minister of State for that response, however. I will look at that and the other legislation.

I will withdraw amendment No. 41.

I move amendment No. 42: In page 9, line 5, to delete “subsections (1A) to (1D)” and substitute “subsections (1A), (1B) and (1D)”.

I move amendment No. 43: In page 9, to delete lines 6 to 17. This seeks the deletion of the proposed new subsection (4) of section 108, which currently provides that where, owing to the illness of the chairperson or of an ordinary member, or for any other reason, a sufficient number of members of the board is not available to enable the board effectively to perform its functions, the Minister may, as an interim measure, appoint from persons who are or were or are established civil or public servants or employees of…

I move amendment No. 46: In page 9, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following: "(d) in subsection (4) by the insertion of the following paragraph after paragraph (a): "(aa) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), an individual who is or within the preceding 1 year was employed by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage shall not be eligible for appointment under paragraph (a).".".

I move amendment No. 47: In page 9, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following: "(d) by the insertion of the following subsection after subsection (4): "(4A) Notwithstanding any provision of this section, a quorum shall be 5 where the decision before the Board concerns any of the following: (a) large-scale residential developments; (b) development that would materially contravene the relevant development plan; (c) strategic infrastructure development; or (d) a development or class of development referred to i…

I move amendment No. 48: In page 9, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following: "(d) by the insertion of the following subsection after subsection (4): "(4A) Notwithstanding any provision of this section, a quorum shall be 5 where the decision before the Board concerns a development that would materially contravene the relevant development plan.".".

I want to indicate my very strong support for these amendments. In a Bill that gives such an incredible amount of discretion to the Minister, it is regrettable that it also gives absolute discretion to the chair in regard to addressing issues of concern. Again, this comes in the context where we have to acknowledge there is a crisis of public confidence in An Bord Pleanála, a crisis for good reason because there have been very significant concerns and there are investigations under way. At an absolute minimum, the …

While it is a one-stage process and that is appreciated, it is a one-stage process that may or may not apply, and may or may not be acted upon. I do not think there is a contradiction between the Minister of State's intent in terms of it being a one-stage process and the intent of these amendments, which would ensure it is a one-stage process which shall be applied.

Yes. It will make matters worse. Things have been pretty bad. Let us be clear on that.

It is very interesting. We have had this again and again and we have raised concerns about An Bord Pleanála. One would not think there had been any problem with An Bord Pleanála for the past few years because everybody in the Government has talked constantly about how wonderful it is, how nobody should ever challenge a decision it makes and how terrible it is that people would take judicial reviews against poor An Bord Pleanála. This is despite what were then found to be huge problems with how the board was operati…

I move amendment No. 52: In page 10, between lines 3 and 4, to insert the following: “Amendment of section 150 of Act of 2000 11. The Act of 2000 is amended in section 150 by the insertion of the following subsection after subsection (2): “(2A) Such codes of conduct described in subsection (2) shall require any member of an authority or the Board to disclose— (a) interests and relationships where the interests and relationships are of relevance to the work of the authority or the Board, as appropriate, (b) membersh…

I would ask the Minister of State to return to and examine the issue because at the moment there is a requirement that there is a code of conduct, and there is a list of issues that the code may address, but this does not necessarily include these requirements. We saw how the internal regulation and self-monitoring systems of the board failed to address the issues that arise and got into the public domain. I therefore think it is reasonable to ask that such internal mechanisms would be made more robust.

I move amendment No. 53: "In page 10, line 16, after “subsoil” to insert “to a depth of 30 feet”." This amendment relates to another part of the Bill on the foreshore. It seeks to amend the definition of "foreshore" in section 13 of the Bill to clarify that, as was the case in the 1933 Act, the foreshore is considered to include subsoil but to a depth of 30 f. Under the current legislation, even on the first page of the 1933 Act, there are specifications that make the depth. It specifically mentions subjects such a…

I am quite alarmed. In the briefing, I had asked if the 30 ft. issue would be affected, and I was told that it would not be. I was looking for reassurance in the House that it would not be affected, but the Minister of State has now told us that will be affected. Effectively, this has begun to look like another land grab by persons who may be given licences of particular kinds. It is extremely concerning to include: “and always to have included, the subsoil below”. If we are talking about an indefinite depth that i…