There is a relevant point to make to the Minister of State as well, which is that, basically, if the Government is treating legislation as emergency legislation, it should be willing to accept a sunset clause.

I wish to speak to the section and I will speak to the policy point that I was seeking to address, which effectively builds on the extremely relevant point that I was making. That point is that we are told this is legislation to respond to an emergency and that it is urgent. In fact, the only aspect of this Bill which can constitute urgency is the appointment of an interim chair. I proposed that the section on the interim chair proceed. It is relevant because the amendment was tabled to this section. The other mass…

With this, I would say that we would have a more productive discussion-----

-----if we were solely discussing section 5.

With absolute respect, section 30 has been substantially chipped away. The Minister of State will recall the debate we had when sitting in the other House's Chamber a few years ago about the previously sacrosanct section 30, which stated that the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage would not interfere when the functions of heritage were blended into the Department. Therefore, some specific powers about specific applications, which were meant to act as a counterpoint from the Minister responsible for…

I am a co-signer of amendment No. 4. I will speak on the group now. This is an attempt to ensure that the right balance is properly maintained in the board. It comes out of a concern, which we will come to later, about appointments to the board. There is currently a requirement to have two persons with environmental expertise. That is no longer guaranteed in the new way that the balance of the board is set out, where environmental skills are listed as one part among others, whereas there was previously a provision …

The new section 6 does not provide a guarantee of a member who will have environmental expertise, which we had under the previous legislation. In that regard, it is a backwards step. The Minister of State is right there are very important laws in place, such as Fit for 55. There are more than 200 pieces of legislation coming through, including a lot of new legislation in respect of building regulations, which will be extremely relevant, even leaving aside the nature restoration law. These are laws that will have di…

I move amendment No. 5: In page 6, to delete lines 9 to 16. Amendment No. 5 seeks the deletion of section 3(b), which amends section 104 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 to allow the Minister to appoint additional ordinary members without placing a limitation on how many he may appoint, removing any existing limits on the proportion of the board that can be appointed by the Minister. Under the current legislation, there is a constraint. It was a constraint designed in the spirit of section 30 of the Act, re…

I have not objected to the appointment of additional members. I have talked about the process by which additional members are appointed and I have objected to the imbalance in that the Minister appoints all of them, which is contrary to the spirit of section 30. I have asked for a very simple check and balance such that the Public Appointments Service be involved in identifying new members when they are needed. I have also asked for an appropriate check and balance whereby when the Minister seeks to appoint new mem…

The debate is on Committee and Remaining Stages. There is no separate Report Stage. There is no spirit of proper engagement on Committee Stage, with the Minister of State listening to what we say and undertaking to come back with proposals on Report Stage. That is not happening and it means there is not a proper scrutiny process. It does not matter if we have a 900-hour debate; the fact is Stages have been skipped. I have been very clear that all I am looking for is accountability to the Oireachtas. Why remove a pr…

The point is that the Minister is removing a requirement to check with the Oireachtas before increasing the board numbers. That is a poor decision and it decreases accountability to the Oireachtas. That is just factual. I have not suggested the panel system is perfect. I suggested it was designed in a very good way but the issue with it is that bodies that should not have been eligible within the system were allowed, even though they were no longer incorporated, to continue to nominate two members to the current bo…

I move amendment No. 6: In page 6, between lines 16 and 17, to insert the following: "(c) by the insertion of the following subsection after subsection (2): "(2A) Such orders made by the Minister under subsection (2) shall require approval by motion of both Houses of the Oireachtas.".".

I move amendment No. 9: In page 6, to delete lines 18 to 30. This amendment deletes section 3(d) of the Bill, which states that: ... where the Minister is of the opinion that one, or more than one, additional ordinary member should be appointed as a matter of urgency due to the number of applications, appeals, referrals or other matters ... the Minister may, ... appoint, from persons who are, or were formerly, established civil servants for the purposes of the Civil Service Regulation Acts 1956 to 2005, established…

I will point out the word "vetting" because it is being used often. We should really think about the word and not use it. The term is undefined and vague and is being used problematically recently. The idea that because somebody has applied for a public service job, he or she is already suitable for absolutely any job gives the lie to the section we were just discussing a minute ago, which said there were all these specific skills and competences needed. The fact a person is a generalist who qualified through a pub…

I move amendment No. 11: In page 6, lines 27 and 28, to delete “or employees of the Board”.

I move amendment No. 17: In page 7, lines 7 and 8, to delete “or employees of the Board”

I move amendment No. 18: In page 7, between lines 10 and 11, to insert the following: “(1A) Notwithstanding subsection (1), 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 subsection (1).”. Amendment No. 18 seeks to add a caveat to the proposed section 105(a) that while a temporary Chair may be sought from within the Civil Service, an individual who is or was within the preceding one year employe…

I move amendment No. 19: In page 7, to delete lines 16 to 19. The purpose of this amendment is to delete section 105A(4), which states that a person appointed to be the chairperson under this section who ceases to hold office, either due to an expiration of his or her one-year temporary term or because the chair is permanently appointed, may be reappointed by the Government for a second term. This is the only section in the Bill in respect of which there is any urgency. A great deal has been inappropriately attache…

I will not press it. There may be an argument for one extension and it may then just be a case of ensuring that this is limited. Perhaps that matter can be addressed in the Dáil.

This amendment is not grouped with any others, but I believe that one of the later amendments proposes something similar. Amendment No. 20 relates to the panel system. The reason the panel system exists is because it was recognised, as a point of principle, that the planning system is meant to be independent and separate from the Department. The function of the Department is in respect of putting forward legislation, regulations and so forth. The making of planning decisions and the discussion and examination of pl…