I move amendment No. 86: In page 73, to delete lines 5 to 9 and substitute the following: “(p) integration of the pursuit and achievement of the national climate objective and relevant climate action related policies and measures of the Government, including those prepared pursuant to the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015, into regional spatial and economic strategies, development plans, urban area plans, priority area plans and coordinated area plans;”.

I move amendment No. 87: In page 73, between lines 13 and 14 to insert the following: “(2) Before issuing a National Planning Statement the Minister shall ensure that such Statement is consistent with the National Planning Framework and the National Marine Planning Framework.”.

I move amendment No. 88: In page 73, between lines 15 and 16 to insert the following: “(b) both Houses of the Oireachtas,”.

I second the amendment.

The Minister has already replied on the amendments but I will formally put them. The Minister said that amendment No. 114 relates to a situation where the Minister is entitled to form an opinion. To be clear, our amendment relates to a situation where the Minister is not entitled to form an opinion. It relates to where a court has said that the Minister was not entitled to form an opinion. Extraordinarily, the Bill states that, even where a court has found that the Minister is not entitled to form an opinion, the d…

I second the amendment.

I second the amendment.

I second the amendment.

I second the amendment.

I second the amendment.

I move amendment No. 111: In page 97, after line 42, to insert the following: “(15) Where a regional assembly demonstrates that the regional spatial and economic strategy is consistent with the National Planning Framework and the National Maritime Planning Framework and to be brought into alignment with a National Planning Statement would lead to inconsistency with either the National Planning Framework or the National Maritime Planning Framework, a draft direction shall not be issued on any provisions of the regio…

I move amendment No. 112: In page 98, between lines 21 and 22, to insert the following: “(4) Where a provision is subject to a draft direction in accordance with subsection (2) but that provision is considered a protective measure such provision shall continue to have effect pending the decision of the Minister under section 40(4) .”.

I move amendment No. 114: In page 103, line 36, to delete “shall not warrant the quashing of the direction where” and substitute with “shall warrant the quashing of the direction, including where”.

I move amendment No. 115: In page 104, to delete lines 33 to 38 and substitute the following: “(1) A planning authority shall make a development plan for its functional area every 6 years. (2) Not later than 4 years after the making of each development plan for the functional area of a planning authority, the planning authority shall commence a review of the development plan in accordance with sections 53 and 54, with a view to making a new development plan in accordance with section 55.”.

Amendments Nos. 115 and 116 speak to the serious concerns we have around the erosion of local democracy and the centralisation of power in the Bill. Amendment No. 115 seeks to ensure that development plans are made every six years, with the review beginning every four years. We spoke on Committee Stage about the move from a six-year local development plan to a ten-year plan. This will mean that many elected councillors whose powers are already excessively constrained may never have the opportunity to contribute to …

What the Minister of State is presenting as the solution has been clearly identified as the problem by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Key Issues Affecting the Traveller Community, the Traveller Oireachtas group and other organisations. To talk about funding and the levels of funding when the funding has been consistently unused or under used is entirely hypothetical. To suggest that the Travellers will be in this separate framework where we can think about how we can accommodate them denotes the lack of actual t…

That is the case with accessibility and all of these other issues. The fact is that we are sliding backwards on public rights of way. I spoke to the Minister of State two years and a half years ago about the vision for what public rights of way could be, even from a green perspective. Our amendments refer to access to spaces of natural beauty. It is not just about that; it is about access to schools, children being able to travel on their own down cow-roads or public rights of way and people being able to access wa…

These are essential things, heritage sites and all of the rest, but there is nothing in there around that. What we are seeing is a backward step whereby it might become harder. We know that under this Government's watch a very stupid mistake was nearly made whereby all of the rights of way by use would have expired. Now we are seeing a kind of chipping away whereby some of the public rights of way that do exist might disappear and it becomes harder to have them. These are small but significant issues. We do not hav…

I know I cannot come in again but I would just say that I was clear in supporting the national planning framework but not the national planning statement.

I move amendment No. 116: In page 105, to delete lines 10 to 16 and substitute the following: “(5) (a) Subject to paragraph (b), a development plan shall have effect for a period of 6 years beginning on the date on which it comes into effect under subsection (17) of section 55. (b) Where the Minister, at the request of the elected council of a planning authority, certifies in writing that exceptional circumstances exist warranting the extension of the period referred to in paragraph (a), the Minister may extend tha…