I move that the Committee disagrees with the Seanad amendments as set out on the Paper. The effect of these amendments would be to give to the person holding an inquiry power to decide whether the acquisition of certain land would seriously interfere with the amenities of the owner of such land. If it is right and proper that the decision, on all other objections to compulsory acquisition, should rest with the Minister, it appears to me that no special case could be made in connection with the question of interference with amenities. The situation would be entirely anomalous if the Minister were placed in the position of having to accept, and act upon, the report of his inspector, entirely regardless of whether he agreed with it or not. It would be a complete reversal of administrative policy and, certainly, no case was made for this amendment in the Seanad, and I do not think any substantial case can be made for it here.