Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I will speak to amendment No. 113, 123 and amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 220. Amendment No. 113 is the definition based on work that my colleague Deputy Ó Cathasaigh had done in respect of community gardens and allotments. I welcome the Minister's introduction of that definition in amendment No. 357. Amendments Nos. 354 to 357, inclusive, cover the matter quite well. The purpose of our amendment was to insert something similar into the definition section in Part 3, but I think we can accept the Minister's amendment on that. I acknowledge that the Minister of State took on board our consideration on Committee Stage and I thank him for that. I shall leave that to Deputy Ó Cathasaigh to cover because he has done a great deal of work in that area.

On amendment No. 123, we are trying to define transport infrastructure. I hear what the Minister of State says, namely that a definition already exists in Schedule 1. However, the latter refers to strategic infrastructure development which tends to deal with large-scale ports, railways, etc. We see the words "transport infrastructure" used in one of strategies that are required under the preparation of a development plan, in section 46(3)(b) and section 47(3)(f). It was for the avoidance of doubt that we inserted this definition in order that transport infrastructure would not be just roads; it would be infrastructure for cyclists, pedestrians, public transport and motorised vehicles and road traffic. I would ask the Minister of State if he would consider whether the confusion there now might be that as transport infrastructure is defined in Schedule 1 but relates to strategic infrastructure development, that would impact on the use of the words "transport infrastructure" in those strategies.

We had this discussion on Committee Stage about the fact that when the Act of 2000 was put in place, ours was a society dominated by cars. We are making a strategic move now to give people choices to move away from the car. We are investing in public transport at a scale we have never seen in this country previously and to invest in active travel as well across local authorities. It is just to be sure that in those strategies, transport infrastructure is not confined to road-based motorised vehicle usage. I would ask the Minister of State to consider that.

In that context, the strategies that are set out in the context of the putting together of a development plan are a very welcome addition to the Bill. They read very clearly - strategies for sustainable development and regeneration, strategies relating to economic developments, housing development strategies and strategies for sustainable development and preservation of places and communities. It would leave no confusion on the part of local authorities crafting development plans as to what their obligations are to meet some of the challenges we have in terms of climate, transport and biodiversity crises, as well as creating better places where people want to live and visit.

Amendment No. 220 is very important. I will speak to the amendment before I speak to amendment No. 1 to it. Amendment No. 220 arises from very lengthy discussions we had on Committee Stage, when we felt that climate action and biodiversity action was not as prevalent throughout the Bill as we thought it should be. It should be borne in mind that the biodiversity action plan was not a statutory document at the stage when the first iteration of the Bill, as originally crafted, was published in October 2023. We now see that the national biodiversity action plan has been very clearly brought into the Bill. That is a win for nature and biodiversity. I do not think any of us would have any objection to that at all.

On the proposed paragraph (p) to be inserted into section 26, which amendment No. 220 relates to, my amendment seeks to add to the end of that amendment, without prejudice to the obligations imposed by section 15 of the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015, and notwithstanding section 86 of the Bill. Section 86 is problematic and may cause some confusion. Under section 86(1), there is an obligation on the planning authorities and the commission regarding matters to which they shall have regard. It states that such bodies shall, "where the performance of the function is in respect of land-based development or proposed land-based development, have regard to principles of proper planning and sustainable development, and in particular ...". Section 86(1)(a)(x) refers to "the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 and the duties and obligations imposed by that Act". My amendment seeks to insert a reference to a planning authority or commission. It is not acceptable and it does not go far enough to just include the words "have regard" in the obligations in the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015, but that is what it currently reads. Will the Minister consider, which is the purpose of the amendment, that section 86 not introduce any ambiguity with regard to our obligation, and that of the planning authorities, all the Departments, and the sectoral areas, to be consistent with the climate Act? That is the purpose of the amendment to the amendment. Will the Minister consider whether section 86(1)(a)(x) creates difficulties and ambiguity? I ask him to address that in the context of the further deliberations on the Bill.

See this speech in context