Amendments Nos. 15a and 15b are in the name of Deputy Molloy but as he is not present they cannot be moved. It is possible they might be reintroduced on Report Stage.
SECTION 10.
Amendments Nos. 15a and 15b not moved.
Amendment No. 16 is in the names of the Minister and Deputy Molloy.
I move amendment No. 16:
In page 10, subsection (3)(d), lines 23 to 26, to delete subparagraph (v).
While the existing regulatory requirements laid down by the EC's environmental impact assessment regulations of 1989 provide for exemptions from EIS requirements subject to circumstances so exceptional as to warrant such an exemption at the Minister's discretion, it is not envisaged that circumstances would arise to justify an exemption for aquaculture developments. Therefore, where the regulations stipulate that an EIS is required, as they do for specified salmonid breeding installations in sea water and freshwater, no exemptions will be possible.
I note that Deputy Molloy is present.
Will the Minister explain his reasons for the amendment?
The original provision was that the Minister would be permitted to exempt a person from a requirement under the regulations to submit an environmental impact statement in respect of an application. That is the current position. In other words, under the 1989 EIA regulations the Minister is empowered to provide for certain exemptions. A number of organisations made representations to the effect that it was not desirable that there should be a general provision for such an exemption. On reflection, I agree with that position and this amendment will delete that provision for an exemption. In other words, the EIA regulations will apply without the general exemption which was provided for in the 1989 regulations.
Is it in other legislation?
It is already there but we are taking it out in respect of the aquaculture legislation. This Bill will go beyond the requirements which now apply to all other activities in respect of environmental impact assessment.
By removing the provision is it the case that anybody applying for a licence will be required to submit an EIS?
Yes, where the level of activity is above the threshold provided for in the EIA regulations.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 17:
In page 10, subsection (3), between lines 30 and 31, to insert the following:
"(f) provide for consultation with such bodies, including statutory bodies, as may be prescribed for that purpose;".
I tabled this amendment in the light of representations made to me asking that the provision for the making of application regulations should include up front a commitment to consult with relevant statutory bodies such as the Central Fisheries Board, local authorities and others which can be prescribed for that purpose, as this would give statutory effect to current practice. It highlights the importance of the fullest possible consultation in the event of a decision being made on an aquaculture licence application.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 18 is in the name of Deputy Michael Smith and was discussed with amendment No. 15b. As Deputy Smith is not present the amendment falls.
Amendment No. 18 not moved.
Question proposed: "That section 10, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
Was amendment No. 15b dealt with?
Yes. Amendments Nos. 15a and 15b could not be moved as the Deputy was not present. Perhaps he might reintroduce them on Report Stage.
Question put and agreed to.