I move amendment No. 2: In page 52, lines 27 and 28, to delete “or a local authority”.

I welcome the Minister of State. We have had a meaningful and good debate on this Bill, which touches on a number of areas. To recap, I wish to set the context because this is an important engagement in the Seanad and, while the Cathaoirleach and I know what that context is, people outside looking in or who will be doing so in future might not. The Bill seeks to regulate the maritime area: ... by means of a National Marine Planning Framework, maritime area consents for the occupation of the maritime area for the pu…

This sets the context for my amendment. I thank Senators Craughwell and Keogan for supporting it. The Minister of State will be well aware of the important role of local government and our councillors. We recently had a debate that was guillotined. I do not intend to go through all of it because it is on the record but the Minister of State, whom I am glad is in attendance, is fully committed to the importance of councillors, as am I. I never apologise for advocating strongly in the House for local authority member…

First, I do not doubt the Minister of State's commitment to local government. He has done significant work on councillors' remuneration and supports. I acknowledge that. I will not go into all of the detail. As the Minister of State accepts, there is a lot more work to do. It was suggested that my amendments are, by coincidence, similar to other amendments. I would not like it to be suggested that the Seanad Office, the Bills Office or anyone else would divulge or let anyone know the contents of other amendments. T…

I second the amendment.

I am conscious of time and the Order of Business for today as agreed, so I will be brief. It is important that we try to get these amendments dealt with. I will not add to the remarks of Senator Higgins. She has articulated it very well, which is important. I refer to locus standi and judicial reviews. The planning and development Bill 2019 will be coming back to the Oireachtas joint committee in January for pre-legislative scrutiny and review and we will be dealing with a whole range of judicial reviews. I do not …

I also second this amendment. I will not speak at much length to it, but I thank the Minister of State and his officials for their responses. This has been a very important discussion. I have had a lot of engagement on the text of this amendment as have our colleagues across the House. I support this important amendment. As Senator Higgins said, it will not be pressed but I would be interested to hear the Minister of State's response.

Votáil

Let us be careful and remind ourselves of why we are here to today. First, however, I welcome the Minister to the House and wish her and her team a good and happy Christmas. I thank the Minister for her ongoing engagement with me and with every Member of this House, which, I know, we value. We are discussing the Social Welfare Bill 2021, the purpose of which is to amend and extend the Social Welfare Acts, amend the Credit Guarantee Act 2012 and provide for related matters. That is what we are here to deal with toda…

I seek a debate early in the new year on sport. We sometimes take it for granted and I cannot recall much debate in all my time in this House on sport. I say that against the background of a week when the Government announced an €80 million financial boost to sport and that has to be welcomed. I would like to see a more even distribution and certainly some of the lesser-practised sports getting more funding. However, that is another day's work. We have moved a long way from the politicisation of the funding for the…

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. This Bill is a yearly event and I fully support it. The Minister of State will be glad to know that no amendments to this Bill have been tabled in this House, as I am sure she knows already. The fact that there are no amendments says much about the Bill. Senator Clifford-Lee made a point on the stamp duty levy reduction. It might be handy to have a note on that because while it is a news line, I do not know the exact impact of it. I ask the Minister of State to circulat…

I move amendment No. 7: In page 24, between lines 15 and 16, to insert the following: “(c) the National Heritage Plan;”. I welcome the Minister of State and his officials who have done a lot of work on this area. Amendment No. 7 aims to include the national heritage plan. I am conscious that there is a national heritage plan 2030. The Minister of State waved a copy of it at us at the committee the other day. It is done and dusted. There may be a little bit of tweaking. I think it is an important document. We do not…

The Minister of State said, "would likely include", if he goes back to the comments that he put on the record. These are European Union instruments. We are signed up to these. I see no difficulty. We are talking about protecting marine diversity, mitigating climate change for the protection of coastal areas, issues of carbon sequestration by marine organisms, the need for healthy ecosystems, best international practice, EU instruments, unified structures, shared language, and a consistent approach, using evidence-b…

On amendment No. 8, which relates to the European Union instruments, I mentioned in some detail integrated coastal zone management and the marine strategy framework directive, more commonly known as the marine directive. Is the Minister of State saying this Bill will have full regard to those? I am simply proposing that they be included but for some reason there seems to be a difficulty with including them. We have signed up to them. I do not want to draw this matter out. I am somewhat taken aback that the Governme…

The "likely" is the bit that is causing the problem but I hear what the Minister of State is saying.

I move amendment No. 8: In page 24, between lines 20 and 21, to insert the following: “(f) European Union instruments: (i) EU Recommendation on Integrated Coastal Zone Management; (ii) Marine Strategy Framework Directive, which offer a comprehensive and integrated approach to the protection of all European coasts and marine waters;”.

I thank Senator Higgins for bringing these amendments to the House. I will touch on amendments Nos. 11 and 18 concerning the revocation of the ministerial guidelines and the revocation of the marine planning policy statement or proposal to revoke a marine planning policy statement. I would like greater clarity and would really like to hear the Minister of State's response.

I move amendment No. 12: In page 25, to delete lines 6 to 12 and substitute the following: “(b) stating that a copy of the proposed statement, amendment or revocation may be inspected on a website of the Government, and available for inspection at a local authority planning office, and (c) inviting members of the public and prescribed bodies as follows: a local, regional or planning authority, the Commissioners of Public Works (OPW) and a body referred to in Article 28 or 137 of the Planning and Development Regulat…

I hear what Senator Higgins is saying. Clearly, four weeks is not enough. I have to remind Senators and the Minister of State of something, and it is not because he is a member of the Green Party. I know many of his colleagues and his party's councillors and I am aware that they became politicised through their advocacy for planning, environmental and community issues. They were to the fore on that. There are six or seven of the Minister of State's party colleagues on my local county council. That is testimony to t…

I must say I am disappointed and will be calling a vote on this because I believe it is a very important principle. The Minister of State spoke about the Aarhus Convention, under which we know the public has a right to participate effectively - "effectively" is the key word - and in a reasonable and timely manner in the decision-making processes with regard to all environmental, planning and sustainable development matters. Public authorities and State agencies should enable the public to comment in a reasonable ti…