John Cummins
Waterford · Fine Gael · Ireland
“To ensure a structured and comprehensive examination of the issues, the task force was organised under four work themes: structures, funding, functions and governance and accountability within the local government sector.”
“At the outset, I thank Senator Fitzpatrick for raising this important issue this morning. I am acutely aware of the strong interest that exists within this House in matters relating to local government.”
“Engagement took place with a wide range of organisations and representative bodies, including employer and employee representatives, community and voluntary organisations, academic experts and other key stakeholders.”
“I move: That Dáil Éireann approves the following Regulations in draft: Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) Regulations 2026, Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) (No. 2) Regulations 2026, Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) (No.”
“In that context, I welcome the opportunity to address the House and to provide an update on the progress made today in advancing that recommendation and strengthening local democracy more generally.”
“The task force was charged with delivering its report within the challenging timeframe of six to nine months. However, considerable preparatory work already completed across the sector provided a strong foundation and enabled that timeline to be achieved. The task force, as the Senator rightly pointed out, was chaired by Mr.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,038 lines we hold for John Cummins, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 12 of 21.
“I thank Deputy O'Rourke for his question. Both the Minister, Deputy Browne, and I, and the Government as a whole, are fully committed to ensuring the delivery of housing at scale. Part of that is the continued acceleration of delivery of affordable housing. Over 14,500 affordable housing solutions have been delivered by our range of delivery partners since the launch of Housing for All, including 850 in County Meath. Meath County Council has received funding approval for nine schemes to deliver 131 affordable purchase homes with the support of the affordable housing fund, of which 83 have been delivered. Furthermore, six approved housing body projects have been approved to date under the cost-rental equity loan scheme. Sixty-four cost-rental homes have been delivered and a further 168 are to be delivered by the end of 2026.”
“I reiterate that it is a priority in my Department. My officials and I have been working on this for a considerable period of time. I want to ensure that we get these revised guidelines right. I take public consultation seriously. There was public consultation over the summer on exempted development and over 920 submissions were received. I have reviewed all of those so I take on board what has come in. It helps formulate policy. To get to a point of having a draft, we have to ensure that they are as accurate and complete as possible and this is what my officials have been working extensively on. I hope we will be in a position to publish those in the not-too-distant future but I want to get it right.”
“I will not publish anything for the sake of ticking a box. I have been in this role for six or seven months. I want to ensure that we get these guidelines right, so I have been working extensively with my officials, who have been engaging with their colleagues in the Department of Climate, Energy and the Environment. All of the matters raised by the Deputy are being taken into account in the review, which is ongoing. I am aware of the draft guidelines that were published in 2019 before my time in this House or this role. A considerable number of submissions concerned noise and the issue has taken up a significant amount of time in trying to ensure that we get that element right. I am committed to ensuring that the guidelines are finalised and there is a public consultation on the draft guidelines when they are ready.”
“In light of this commitment, my Department is working towards concluding the finalisation of a review of the guidance as a priority, having regard to the requirements for a public consultation and the finalisation of associated reforms and reviews included in the revision of the NPF.”
“In conjunction with the Department of Climate, Energy and the Environment, my Department has been working to advance guidance on a number of these key aspects, including the noise aspect of the guidance, to ensure they are robust and fit for purpose, having regard to a series of considerations, including but not limited to our commitments to increase the percentage of our electricity that comes from renewable sources. In the interim, at local level, the city and county development plans set out where development is acceptable, including wind energy development. I can assure the Deputy that I am acutely conscious of the commitment in the Programme for Government 2025 - Securing Ireland's Future to prioritise the publication of the wind energy development guidance, having regard to international best practice and standards.”
“As the Deputy will be aware, I have no ability as Minister of State with responsibility for planning to place a pause on any type of planning application, be that for housing, wind energy, infrastructural projects or any other type of development. The 2006 wind energy development guidelines will remain in force pending the finalisation of revised guidance, which is currently subject to a focused review by my Department considering matters such as noise, setback distance, shadow flicker, community obligation, community dividend and grid connections.”
“With all due respect, I did not interrupt the Deputy so I would appreciate the courtesy of allowing me to reply. We are introducing that tax as the stick that will come if the carrot of those schemes has not been used. CPOs have a role to play. The issuing of the notices and instructing the owners of those properties to bring them back into use and activate them is also a tool some local authorities are using to good effect and others are not. The Deputy invited me to take a stroll around Dublin, Cork or Waterford. I walk Waterford every day of the week when I am at home and tremendous work has been done through CPOs and the schemes I mentioned. I am sure in the Deputy's city of Cork good work is being done, but also that more needs to be done to tackle vacancy and dereliction.”
“To be honest, that is just a bluff of a response as well because the Deputy is well aware that the organisation and role of local authorities in this is important. He knows about the schemes, including the vacant property refurbishment grant, the repair and leasing scheme and the buy and renew scheme.”
“I sat on the Oireachtas joint committee and the Deputy knows about many of the positive schemes that are in place. However, if the carrot is not used, the stick that is the tax is coming and it is coming quickly.”
“It is certainly my expectation that the report will be published this month. That is what my officials advise me. Local authorities have a role in pursuing the owners of vacant and derelict properties. They can issue notices and where those notices are not acted upon, the properties are included on the register and levies are applied. The Deputy will be aware that in yesterday's budget announcement, a derelict property tax was announced by the Minister for Finance. I have engaged with the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, on this. Local authorities will have a role to play in identifying all those properties and ensuring we have an accurate register of the number of derelict properties so they can be levied and those levies can be collected by Revenue. As I said yesterday, we have had a whole suite of responses.”
“The data on the CPO activation programme the Deputy referenced in his question is currently being verified and finalised and will be published in the coming weeks.”
“It is true to say that local authorities vary in their willingness to use compulsory purchase powers and the Department is working to support them to strengthen their activation response to vacancy and dereliction. This is certainly something about which I am engaging with local authorities when I go around the country. I want local authorities to use their powers under the Housing Act and the Derelict Sites Act. The programme requires co-ordination across teams in local authorities to support a focused response and this is occurring with reorganisation and new structures being established in local authorities. From my experience in dealing with local authorities, I note that where it is done under a single directorate in the local authority it functions a lot better than where it is a cross-directorate approach.”
“I thank Deputy Gould for the question. Addressing vacancy and dereliction is a key priority of the Government. The vacant homes action plan published in January 2023 set out a range of actions to be taken to return vacant and derelict properties back to use as homes. The 2025 progress report shows significant progress has been made and it is available on the Department's website. The CPO activation programme encourages a proactive and systematic approach by local authorities to address vacancy and dereliction. Local authorities are identifying vacant and derelict properties and engaging with the owners to bring these back into use, using the wide variety of schemes now in place. This includes using their compulsory purchase powers where engagement with the owners of the properties has been unsuccessful.”
“I take on board the other points the Senator raised on the additional catchment that is captured, but obviously that is captured in Galway County Council's allocation as well in terms of LPT.”
“The review of the baselines looked at a number of factors and population was just one of them. Other factors included local income, deprivation and achieving national policy priorities. It is important to say that Galway City Council has benefited and will benefit into next year. It will receive an additional €1 million from an increase in the LPT baseline, while €1.1 million of the surplus the local authority generates will be retained by it. The authority will increase its variation as well, as it did for 2025. That enables it to have €1.6 million over and above its base. There is significant benefit derived from the changes this year and into 2026. I take the Senator's points on board but the tiering designation piece has no impact whatsoever on the baselines. It is not a factor for consideration.”
“The Government agreed that these adjustments be applied and, furthermore, that every local authority would receive a minimum increase of at least €1.5 million, which Galway City Council benefited from. There will be a review every five years in this respect. I will go into a few more figures in my follow-up response.”
“It is important to note that while the LPT is an important source of own-use funding it was just 6% of the overall current income of the sector in 2023. Annual funding allocations from the LPT are decided in accordance with Government-approved distribution policies and are based on estimates of the yield and the baselines in individual local authority areas. Under the LPT allocation model, every local authority has a minimum level of funding available to it known as the baseline. A review of these baselines was completed by a working group in 2023, and it identified that the baseline funding of some authorities needed adjustment according to the criteria of population, area, local income, deprivation and achievement of national policy priorities.”
“Across all schemes and funding sources, my Department provided €69.6 million in 2022 to Galway City Council, €79.8 million in 2023, and €93.3 million in 2024. As previously stated, there is no tiered funding system in place and the criteria for the distribution of this funding varies by scheme, depending on the scheme in question. Central government funding has traditionally provided non-programme funding to local authorities in the form of an annual contribution towards meeting the costs of providing a reasonable level of service in their area. Up until 2014, this was in the form of a general purpose grant, and from 2015 onwards, it was replaced by the local property tax, LPT, which were linked in the most part to the general purpose grant.”
“In other words, a simple reclassification of Galway City Council from a tier 5 to tier 4 local authority would not have any effect on the funding of the authority itself, which is actually determined by a range of other factors. It would be the incorrect classification based on its size. The funding system for local authorities is a complex one. Authorities derive their income from a variety of sources including commercial rates, charges for goods and services, local property tax, as well as funding from Government Departments and other bodies. Central Government funding of local authorities similarly presents a complex picture, with transfers, both current and capital, coming from a wide range of Departments and offices for a variety of purposes. In 2023, funding from central government to local authorities totalled around €6.7 billion.”
“They are more than welcome to the Chamber. I thank Senator Kyne for outlining the position as he sees it regarding funding for Galway City Council. I know the Senator is a strong advocate for his area and that he will continue to fight for increased funding. It is important for me to clarify at the outset that the characterisation of Galway City Council as a tier 5 local authority refers specifically to the size of the local authority. It does not actually reflect the funding mechanism for the local authority. Dublin City Council, for example, is categorised as a tier 1 local authority because of the scale of the authority itself. It is not in any way linked to the funding the authority may receive.”
“The former CEO of University Hospital Waterford, Grace Rothwell, has been appointed as the national director for acute hospitals and will assist the new executive in University Hospital Limerick to ensure patient flow and bed management in order that we get the benefit from the additional 140 beds that have been provided to University Hospital Limerick over the last number of years. There is further significant investment to go into the region to ensure that we no longer have patients on trolleys because that is unacceptable. However, there does have to be better management of the flow, notwithstanding the excellent work that is done by staff on the ground day in, day out. I will take the comments back to the Minister.”
“I thank both Senators for raising this important matter. I can assure them on the investment flow that has gone into University Hospital Limerick. There is a significant focus. I know the importance of the review informing future investment. I come from Waterford in the south-east region where a hospital serving a population catchment of over 600,000 has had zero trolleys for the last three years because of very clinical bed management and patient flow through that acute hospital.”
“They will have a positive impact, but it is true that patient flow within University Hospital Limerick is very important when it comes to managing ED admissions and ensuring people are not on trolleys. I will make a couple of further comments in my closing remarks.”
“It should be with the Minister very shortly and she has committed to publishing it thereafter. I know full well the pressures within the mid-west region and University Hospital Limerick, but it is important to say there has been significant funding and investment in the region and the hospital in recent years. From 2019 to 2024 there was an increase from €265 million to €507 million. There has been an increase in the staff ratio by 50%, with 57 more whole-time equivalent doctors, including consultants, 576 more nurses and midwives, as well as 155 more health and social care professionals. Senator Ryan mentioned the 96-bed block, which is due to open imminently, and the second 96-bed block, for which some enabling works are already under way.”
“A critical dependency for completion of the final report from HIQA is the input from the national and regional demand and capacity projections being undertaken by the ESRI for the Department of Health. The first of these three ESRI reports, on projections of national demand and bed capacity requirements for public acute hospitals, was published on 28 May. The second report, on future capacity requirements for GP services, was published on 18 June. The third report, on future capacity requirements for older persons' care, was published on 30 June. The ESRI is due to publish a further regional analysis very shortly. It is these analyses and projections that are obviously feeding into the report which is being compiled for the Minister and will feed into the question of whether a second ED in the mid-west region is warranted.”
“The terms of reference, which were published in August 2024, stated, "... a final report will be provided to the Minister in Summer 2025 ..." and a more specific timeframe of the end of May was agreed. HIQA submitted an interim briefing on 28 February, which was published on the Department of Health website in March. It provided a progress update on the various streams of the ongoing work programme. HIQA next wrote to the Minister for Health in May 2025 to update on the timeline for completion of its report. Overall, the HIQA work on the review of urgent and emergency healthcare services in the HSE mid-west region has progressed very well and the work streams undertaken by HIQA to inform the advice to the Minister had been completed.”
“I thank Senators Conway and Ryan for their question, which I am taking on behalf of the Minister for Health. I also thank Senator Conway for his kind words, which are much appreciated. On the topic at hand, the final report of the review of urgent and emergency care in the mid-west region is due to be submitted to the Minister for Health by HIQA very shortly and published soon thereafter. I will take a moment to explain the sequence of events since May 2024 when the Minister requested a review of urgent and emergency care within the mid-west region with the primary objective of ensuring safe, quality acute care. As part of this review, HIQA was requested to consider the case for a second emergency department in the context of the population changes in recent years and ongoing pressures at the ED at University Hospital Limerick.”
“I thank the Senator. If she has a suggestion on what needs to be done between now and summer of next year, I am all ears. She is more than welcome to feed that back to me. That investment is under way and will have a positive impact. We acknowledge the effect it has in the area in terms of those boil water notices. They are put there as a safety precaution by the HSE. Obviously Uisce Éireann has to adhere to them and can only lift boil water notices when approved to do so by the HSE. I am pleased to say there is a significant investment which will have a positive impact in terms of the ability to expand development in Macroom over the coming years, which is what we want to see in terms of increased housing capacity. If the Senator has any suggestions, I am more than happy to take them back to Uisce Éireann.”
“Very significant Government funding is going into Uisce Éireann to address many of the legacy issues that have been in place. I recognise that Macroom has a growing population. I had the pleasure of visiting there two or three weeks ago as Minister of State with responsibility for planning and local government to see significant housing development at an infill site there. Obviously, adequate water and wastewater supply is critical to ensuring that expansion can continue in Macroom. I am extremely pleased to say there is a significant €6.5 million investment under way right at this moment which will be completed in the summer of next year, which will have a very positive and significant impact for the people of the area.”
“It is a very significant investment that will address the risks to water quality and the frequent boil water notices which the Senator pointed out the people of Macroom have experienced over the past number of years. In recognition of this, significant investment is being put in by Government and Uisce Éireann. The works are expected to be completed in the summer of next year. This will have a significant impact in terms of improving water quality and reducing the number of outages that have been in the system. Uisce Éireann is being allocated €514 million in 2025 of the €1 billion capital investment announced by the Minister for Finance in budget 2025. The budget allocation in total will increase next year and in the funding of the strategic plan of €16.9 billion through to 2029, which was approved in November of last year.”
“I take this opportunity to reinforce the advice that all consumers affected by this notice must boil their water before drinking. Uisce Éireann has also indicated that the operational issues at the plant have now been resolved and turbidity levels have returned to normal. Uisce Éireann is working with the HSE to lift the boil water notice as quickly and as safely as possible. Lifting of a boil water notice will only occur when the issue is resolved and the HSE confirms that there is no further risk to the public. The Senator rightly asked what is going to be done about this. I would be surprised if the Senator was not aware that, in April of this year, a €6.5 million upgrade of the Macroom water treatment plant commenced.”
“I thank Senator Ryan for raising this important issue on the boil water notice for the Macroom public water supply in County Cork which has been in place since 12 September. I recognise the inconvenience placed on those who have a boil water notice on their water supply. As the Senator rightly pointed out, the inconvenience for householders and businesses is very significant. I have experienced it in my own constituency in Waterford as well. Uisce Éireann has informed me that this boil water notice was issued as a precautionary measure to protect the health of approximately 4,697 customers due to operational issues at Macroom water treatment plant which resulted in elevated turbidity levels in the treated water. This notice was issued by Uisce Éireann after consultation with the HSE.”
“I take very seriously the debate that happens in this House and in the Dáil. As someone who was a proud Member of this House for four and a half years, I have agreed with the Leader to extend the duration of the debate, which he will propose shortly.”
“56 seeks to provide by legislation that the Minister shall lay a report before the Oireachtas every six months on the operation of the extension of duration, detailing the number of developments that have availed of the extensions, the number of units granted extension that have commenced and the number of units that have been completed. Section 42(5) of the Act of 2000 already provides that the details of any extension of duration is entered on the planning register. As there are already provisions in place to deal with these matters, I cannot accept this amendment. Further to Senator Boyhan's comments, it is important in responding to amendments that full clarifications are given on the record of this House for anybody who may read the record of this debate. That is the case for any Minister who comes before the House.”
“38 seeks to provide that applications for extensions may not be sought on other developments if a person has sought an extension on a development already and not commenced it. I cannot accept this amendment as applications should be dealt with on an individual basis. There may be circumstances beyond a person’s control as to why a development did not commence. Amendment No. 42 provides that extensions should be granted for a minimal period only. This is unnecessary as the provision already provides that the planning authority is limited to extending the appropriate period by such additional period as the planning authority considers requisite to enable the development concerned to be completed. For this reason, I cannot accept this amendment. Amendment No.”
“It would not be appropriate to seek accounting information as part of a request to extend the duration of a planning permission. Amendments Nos. 37 and 40 seek to provide that development must begin construction within a specified timeframe after receiving planning permission, and penalties for non-compliance will include the withdrawal of permission for the development. Amendment No. 39 seeks to provide that substantial works must commence in two years or otherwise the permission will expire. These amendments are unnecessary as the provision already provides that works must commence within 18 months of the coming into operation of the provision or otherwise the extension will cease to have effect. For these reasons, I cannot accept these amendments. Amendment No.”
“I will now address amendments Nos. 34 and 56, as tabled by Senators McCormack, Murphy, Andrews, Collins, Ryan and Tully, and amendments Nos. 35 to 40, inclusive, and 42, as tabled by Senators Higgins and Stephenson. These amendments relate to the extension-of-duration provisions of the Bill. Amendment No. 34 seeks to provide that as part of an application for an extension of duration, the applicant shall submit a viability assessment and a detailed schedule of works. Amendment No. 36 seeks to amend the extension-of-duration provision to provide that a contractor who is in receipt of State subsidies must publish an annual profit-and-loss account, an auditor’s report and a balance sheet in order to qualify for funding. Section 16 of the Bill does not relate to funding and therefore I cannot accept this amendment.”
“48 and 49 concern the setting of fees for certification applications and propose to amend section 246 of the Act of 2000, whereby the Minister may prescribe in regulation a fee in respect of applications under section 44B , and section 144 of that Act to facilitate the commission to set a fee in respect of such applications where it is the relevant authority. I appreciate there was a lot of content in that response but it was important to respond to the amendments to the Government amendments and to give the background and detail behind the amendments Government is proposing.”
“32 amends section 7 of the Act of 2000 to provide that particulars of any permission modified in accordance with section 44B must be entered into a planning authority's register. Senators Stephenson and Higgins have proposed an amendment to amendment No. 49 that seeks to provide that any fees set should not be prohibitively expensive. I cannot accept this proposed amendment as it is unnecessary given section 246 of the Act of 2000 has appropriate safeguards in place and provides that, in setting fees, the amount shall be related to the estimated cost of the development or the unauthorised part thereof, as the case may be. It also provides that fees for making copies shall not exceed the reasonable cost of making such copies. Amendments Nos.”
“Where a certificate is issued, the planning permission will stand so modified and any development carried out in accordance with the modified permission will not be unauthorised development. Public notification requirements are set out requiring the relevant authority to issue a public notice in a newspaper and on its website as well as making the relevant documentation available for inspection, including on its website. Section 44B is a temporary provision and certificate applications for proposed modifications must be made within two years of the Bill coming into operation, that is, by July 2027. Amendments Nos. 32, 48 and 49 are consequential to the introduction of this new certification procedure for modifications to existing apartment permissions. Amendment No.”
“Applications for certificates will need to be accompanied by revised plans and drawings and other documentation and information related to the proposed modification for purposes including the carrying out of environmental screening. Certificates will not be issued for proposed modifications if the development has already commenced, if an appropriate assessment or environmental impact assessment in respect of the proposed modification is required or if the applicant for the certificate fails to comply with requests for any documentation or further information. In addition, if the development is located in a strategic development zone, a certificate cannot be issued if the proposed modification would cause the number of dwellings in that strategic development zone to exceed the number permitted by its planning scheme.”
“As the provision explicitly sets out, its purpose is to facilitate the construction of greater numbers of dwellings in apartment complexes than permitted under permissions already granted, taking account of the acute shortage of residential accommodation, the rise in homelessness, the rise in the cost of residential rental accommodation and house and apartment purchase prices. Section 44B enables the holder of a permission for residential development to apply to the relevant authority that granted the permission, either a planning authority or An Coimisiún Pleanála, to certify that a proposed modification of a permission is a permitted modification. The relevant authority must be satisfied that the proposed modification, if made, would be a permitted modification in order for a certificate to issue.”
“Viability presents an ongoing challenge to housing delivery and this is particularly relevant for the delivery of apartments, where a considerable gap has emerged between the cost of delivering apartment development and comparable general housing market prices. The new guidelines provide guidance, standards and policy requirements in relation to the design of apartment developments to take account of current Government policy and economic, social and environmental considerations. Given the urgent need to increase housing supply, the proposed section 44B will enable the holders of existing permissions for apartment developments that have not yet commenced to modify their permissions in line with the new guidelines.”
“I do not consider this to be an appropriate measure as it could reduce the likelihood of the holder of a permission applying for a certificate under the proposed section 44B and in some cases could reduce the duration of an existing permission by a significant period of time. For these reasons I am not in a position to accept this amendment. My amendment No. 47 will introduce a new section 44B to the Act of 2000, providing a certification procedure for modifications to planning permissions for residential development that are in line with certain specific planning policy requirements contained in the recently published Planning Design Standards for Apartments - Guidelines for Planning Authorities, 2025.”
“4 and 5 to amendment No. 47, as tabled by Senators Higgins and Stephenson. Amendments Nos. 4 and 5 propose the insertion of a new subsection (16) into the proposed new section 44B. Amendment No. 4 to amendment No. 47 seeks to provide that any permitted modification to the mixture of apartments of different classes shall be a varied mix of different classes of apartments. I cannot accept this amendment as it conflicts with specific planning policy requirement, SPPR, 1 in the recently published planning design standards for apartments. Under SPPR 1, with the exception of certain specified social housing developments, there are no minimum or maximum requirements for apartments with a certain number of bedrooms. Amendment No. 5 to amendment No. 47 seeks to reduce the duration of a modified permission to six months.”
“47 seeks to provide that any permitted modification shall be subject to fire safety certificates, health and safety certificates and any other appropriate certifications. I do not consider this provision necessary for two reasons. Subsection (5) of section 44B at paragraph (a) will preclude a relevant authority from issuing a certificate in respect of a development that has already commenced. Second, subsection (7) of section 44B provides that where a relevant authority issues a certificate, the permission stands modified in accordance with the terms of the proposed modification. The modified permission will be subject to building control requirements in the same manner as would have applied to the original permission, if commenced. For these reasons, I cannot accept this amendment. I will now address amendments Nos.”
“These relate to apartment mix, apartment floor areas, dual aspect ratios, floor-to-ceiling heights, lift and stair cores, and works, including to footpaths, boundaries, gardens and balconies, required for the purposes of the foregoing, or to ensure access to the development. The removal or reduction of communal spaces or cultural space is not of itself a permitted modification. The permitted modifications will be predominantly internal, with any additional works allowable only permitted if they are necessary for the purposes of internal modifications or to ensure access to the development. It is for these reasons that I am not in a position to accept this amendment. Amendment No. 3 to amendment No.”
“Given the urgent need to increase housing supply, section 44B enables a limited number of modifications to existing planning permissions to facilitate the building of much-needed apartment developments while ensuring environmental screening is carried out in respect of those modifications. Amendment No. 2 to amendment No. 47, tabled by Senators Higgins and Stephenson, seeks to provide that a relevant authority shall not grant a certificate if the modification relates to the removal or reduction of communal space or cultural space within the proposed development. It should be noted that subsection (15) of section 44B defines "permitted modifications" for the purpose of the section. A number of references are contained therein to specific planning policy requirements in the new guidelines.”
“Following discussions with the Office of the Attorney General, the Department remains satisfied that the Bill is in compliance with all international obligations, including the Aarhus Convention. It is important to note that subsection (5)(b) of section 44B provides that a relevant authority cannot issue a certificate under section 44B if an appropriate assessment or environmental impact assessment of the proposed modification of the permission is required. Where an EIA or AA is required, such proposed modifications may only be sought by way of a planning application, a process that provides for public participation and notification. In this context, regulations made under section 44B will provide the screening procedures for an EIA and an AA to facilitate this provision.”
“Where it is determined that a site notice is required, such a requirement will be introduced by regulations made under subsection (13), as is the case under the Planning and Development Regulations 2001. Amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 47 further proposes that the relevant authority must provide for public participation in the certification process by inviting written submissions from interested persons or organisations, and the relevant authority must also have regard to those submissions when issuing a certificate under the proposed section 44B. The Aarhus Convention relates to access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters.”