Cuirim fáilte i bprionsabal roimh an mBille seo. Mar a dúirt an tAire, tá moill ollmhór againn sa tír seo maidir le cúrsaí bonneagair. Ceann de na fadhbanna is mó atá againn maidir leis an ngéarchéim tithíochta ná an ghéarchéim nó an mhoill leis an mbonneagar. Sa tír seo, tá fadhb mhór againn i gceithre réimse thábhachtacha: cúrsaí tithíochta, sláinte, iompair agus leictreachas. I welcome this Bill in principle and I would like us to work constructively on it. I am disappointed, as a member of the infrastructure committee, that a decision was taken to waive pre-legislative scrutiny on this. I would like a commitment from Government that the legislative guillotine will not be used for amendments on this legislation because this is really important. We have to get this right. The slow pace of infrastructure delivery is a huge barrier to the provision of housing in particular. When it comes to legislating for critical infrastructure, I take a bit of a Victorian view on these things. I believe the Legislature should authorise major infrastructural development by statute, as was done in 1925 for Ardnacrusha. In relation to this Bill, I think there is an outsized reference to or emphasis on judicial review as the primary blockage or bottleneck, when the primary bottleneck for the delivery of infrastructure in this country is the planning system and the plethora of complicated planning and consenting processes that were not actually simplified by the 2024 Planning and Development Act. Sometimes it feels like the planning system in this country is a bit like a multi-stage obstacle course as opposed to a facilitator of national development. The Draghi report highlighted that we have some of the longest permitting processes in Europe for onshore wind projects for example. The thing identified as a key bottleneck for renewable energy was the long and complex permitting process. I see in the infrastructure Bill that public bodies will be required to do everything in their power to accelerate approval of projects designated as essential by the Government. I have no issue with that in principle. The issue I have is that we have not really had clarity in real terms as to what that will actually mean. We know that our economy places significant pressure on water. We have a lot of water-intensive industries like pharmaceuticals and data centres in particular. I do not want to see a situation where fossil fuel infrastructure or data centres could potentially be designated as critical infrastructure. While I welcome the intention of the Bill to deal with fragmented decision-making and the imposition of binding duties on public bodies to prioritise, co-ordinate and resource critical projects I have significant concerns about the disapplication of section 15 of the 2015 climate Act. Judicial reviews for climate have a high degree of success because of real procedural flaws by regulatory bodies in complying with their climate obligations. It brings me back to the 2020 Supreme Court judgment, which deemed that the 2017 national mitigation plan for climate was quashed for being too vague. The decision to bypass pre-legislative scrutiny for this really undermines our ability as legislators to ensure it is legally sound and robust. I would like the Minister to address how this Bill intersects with our obligations under Aarhus. It seems to me from a lot of the media commentary and utterances from Government that it is excessively focused on judicial review and limiting public participation and legal challenges, as if they are the main or only cause of the failure to deliver infrastructure in this country. The fact is that we have the slowest regulatory and planning processes in the European Union. That is not a new problem. That is the Government's problem. It is a direct consequence of this Government's more than ten years in power. Six years have passed since Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael effectively consummated their marriage. In that time, we have had budget overruns and delays. We have had a national development plan that was published without listing the projects, yet the Bill itself talks about listing critical infrastructure projects. As a member of the infrastructure committee, we have met with countless witnesses over the past 11 months, and they have all said the same thing. There is a need for multi-annual funding, the need to give way to the common good, the need to speed up decision-making and there is a shortage of properly trained construction workers.

Sentiment score: 0.11