I move amendment No. 38: In page 35, line 10, to delete "colocation or". This amendment relates to language introduced on Report Stage in the Dáil that is a little concerning. It relates to the phrase "colocation or" in subsection 2(f). The paragraph currently states "any proposed colocation or coexistence of the maritime usages referred to in paragraph (c) ". I am a little lost in my thinking on this. I had it clearly in my head earlier. The concern relates to the word "or" between the word "colocation" and the wo…

My concern relates to the word "colocation". There are cumulative impacts that can happen. I am a little concerned when I hear the word "revolutionary" used in the context of the new system. If it is revolutionary we should definitely get the reviews in place first, if new major pieces are going into it. In the interests of saving time because I understand the constraints we are under, I will not press the matter further. I will wait to address further issues I have with DMAPs. I am concerned about that matter and …

I will withdraw it and reserve the right to reintroduce it on Report Stage.

I move amendment No. 41: "In page 37, to delete lines 33 to 39, and in page 38, to delete line 1 and substitute the following: “(3) Where the Minister ascertains an inconsistency referred to in subsection (2) , he or she shall— (a) make a recommendation in writing to the competent authority (D) to amend the draft DMAP to address the inconsistency, or (b) in relation only to an inconsistency in respect of paragraphs (b) to (e) of subsection (2) give notice in writing to the competent authority (D) of the inconsisten…

It straightforwardly states that the Minister will be writing to say that there is an inconsistency and then it states that it does not need to be amended to avoid or mitigate an inconsistency. It does not say alternatives for avoidance or mitigation would be put in place. It is strictly a disregard clause. I have no trouble telling the Minister of State that it should not be able to bypass all of these factors. We should not have ministerial direction telling a competent authority that an inconsistency does not ma…

I move amendment No. 44: In page 49, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following: "(e) relevant EU law and policy including the Habitats Directive, the Birds Directive and the Aarhus Convention.". Again, this is relevant to EU law. In the interests of time, and as the issues have been addressed elsewhere, I propose to withdraw it for now.

I support the amendments. It is particularly egregious if an inequality is created through city and county managers being unable to engage on the one hand, while board members who are, in effect, employees of a Minister, represent a local area where representatives might not. It is part of a general concern with the Bill and the movement on planning, unfortunately, where local authority members, and those structures people have created to represent concerns and democratic expression, are precluded. Many people ran …

I move recommendation No. 1: “ “Report on Help to Buy scheme 6 . The Minister shall, within three months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas on— (a) the impact of the Help to Buy scheme on prices and affordability in the housing market, and (b) potential alternative policy options which would increase housing affordability by reducing prices, rather than increasing available credit.”. The Minister will be aware of the shocking figures in the increases in the cost of housing…

The Minister mentioned 12.6% of purchases, but if we pick another 12% figure, house prices went up by 12.4% and that is an extremely high level of inflation. He will be aware that inflation in housing is a massive outlier compared with other levels of inflation. Inflation in wages does not match this factor. While I respect that housing policy is the responsibility of the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, the fact is that the financial and fiscal policies that have applied to housing have been ve…

It is important to be very clear. I am not objecting to the concept of profits existing. Nobody objects to that part of business. The question is whether the State should be factoring in profit levels, dividend levels, reasonable levels of return and profit, and unnecessarily adding profit levels into our expenditure. I have no problem with private developers that wish to build houses and sell them for profit. So be it. I hope they will be appropriately taxed, but I have no problem with them doing that. My question…

I move recommendation No. 2: In page 14, between lines 8 and 9, to insert the following: “Report on lowering of High Wealth Individual threshold 7. The Minister shall, within three months of the passing of this Act, prepare and lay before both Houses of the Oireachtas a report on the introduction of a new threshold for High Wealth Individuals defined as persons in possession of net assets of the value of €20 million and above.”. I am seeking information here rather than change. I am aware that a recommendation was …

I am seeking a report on the introduction of the new threshold, but the new threshold has been accepted in principle. I want to know about how it has been introduced.

I thank the Minister for indicating that he might provide me with information on that. It would be useful to see how it has panned out.

I note that if we wish to encourage the retention of hospital consultants or indeed anyone in the public service, it is in the Minister's remit to pay them more. We do not have to include a protection from tax for all those on higher incomes. If the concern is consultants, the mechanisms exist in the State's contracts with them. Among many of the concerns with regard to retention, tax has not featured highly. The terms and conditions, including those related to the silencing of consultants who engage in public deba…

Of course, when we talk about a rate of tax of 46%, we are talking about that as the rate on that portion of the income above the marginal rate. That factor can sometimes be blurred. It is also worth noting that Ireland has one of the highest levels of income inequality in the European Union. There is a redistributive function through our taxation system but it is redressing extremely high income disparity and income inequality. If we are committed to the idea of progressive taxation, a third level is something tha…

I move recommendation No. 7: In page 23, between lines 21 and 22, to insert the following: “Report on the application of Capital Gains Tax to REITs 19. The Minister shall, within three months of the passing of this Act, prepare and lay before both Houses of the Oireachtas a report on— (a) the introduction of Capital Gains Tax at a rate of 33 per cent where a REIT, IREF, or group of REITs or IREFs, disposes of a property of its property rental business, (b) the introduction of a stamp duty surcharge on REITs buying …

I move recommendation No. 8: In page 25, between lines 35 and 36, to insert the following: “Report on Diesel and Kerosene Subsidies 23. The Minister shall within 6 months of the passing of this Act publishing a report outlining the amount of fossil fuel subsidies provided by the State, including subsidies through tax relief or revenue forgone, in respect of (a) Diesel for Agricultural vehicles (b) Diesel for HGVs and other Haulage Vehicles (c) Jet Kerosene.”. This recommendation asks the Minister to produce a repor…

The phrase "just transition" is used quite a lot. I believe in just transition. I await the just transition territorial plan, which we are due to submit to the EU, with great interest. The Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action has requested to see this plan but has not yet seen it. We all want to see just transition but we must be clear that it relates to supports for those who are impacted when the necessary changes are made. It is not about delaying changes. It is about ensuring we address and support…

To be clear, it is not so much that I support these changes; it is just that I regard the cost of carbon as being high. I regard also that it is closer to an accurate reflection of those costs. It will be extremely hard to sustain. I am aware that climate change will have an extraordinarily negative and inequitable impact. On climate action, we should be taking every measure we can to ensure it does not have an inequitable impact. It is not so much that I support this, although, in a way, I have supported the fact …

Can I please make a small but an important point? There is nothing more real than our planetary boundaries. While any business sector may change, finances might change, and our entire fiscal and monetary structures may change, there is one thing that is not negotiable. When we talk about being real, the thing we need to be real about is our planetary boundaries and the impact of emissions. It is more real and less negotiable than anything else. Effectively, going into the future, our economic planning, our models, …