With Deputy Dukes, I welcome section 10(2)(k). It acknowledges the existence of the Gaeltacht and that Gaeltacht issues are of consideration in the framing of development plans. It is not sufficient, however, to address the problem we have described.
Development plans can contain many aspirational statements which have no real significance when it comes to making a decision on an individual planning application. On the first day of our consideration of the Bill, the distinction was drawn between sustainable development, the concept that applies to the framing of development plans, and development, the reality that applies to the determination of individual planning applications. All a planning authority must do is have regard to the development plan; it does not have to comply with the expressed conditions. Even under this Bill, An Bord Pleanála is free to make a decision on a planning application which stands a development plan on its head. A requirement that a development plan, where the authority concerned contains a Gaeltacht or part of a Gaeltacht, will have to contain an aspirational paragraph about the Gaeltacht does not mean a great deal when a planning application has to be decided by a planning authority or, ultimately, when that planning application has to be decided by An Bord Pleanála.
Prior to the coming into effect of environmental impact statements, there were many environmental aspirations contained in county development plans which did not carry on into the planning decisions. The Minister's response to the question of what constitutes a linguistic impact statement reminds me of my friend Chris Hudson appearing in an advertisement in a chef's hat asking what a crouton is. There were many questions about what constituted an environmental impact assessment when the concept was first floated. It would be much easier to write a linguistic impact assessment in relation to a development in a Gaeltacht than it would be to put together an environmental impact assessment.
The coimisiún which is to be established to look at the Gaeltacht in its totality will take some time to address the many issues related to the existence, survival and revival of Gaeltacht areas. It will take time to report and the Government will then take time to consider its report and to frame any legislation arising as a result. In the meantime, development in this State is moving at a fast pace. Each week that passes without pinning this down exposes the Gaeltacht to development which will undermine its existence. There is, therefore, a need to legislate for linguistic impact assessments and a requirement for the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands to make regulations governing physical development in the Gaeltacht.
Gaeltacht areas are physical entities. The physical development which takes place in them is highly relevant to their continued existence. If we have a view of Gaeltachtaí as something other than areas of the country where the language is spoken, there could be a different approach. If our understanding of Gaeltachtaí is that they are physical areas of the country in which the Irish language is spoken and it is our objective to retain those areas, the only way to do so is by protecting physical development within them.
I agree with Deputy Dukes about the appropriateness of some of the developments which have taken place in the Gaeltacht areas. I also agree that a positive approach must be taken to the development of employment opportunities in the interests of the people who live there. Unfortunately, some of the development which has taken place in Gaeltacht areas is completely inappropriate. Under the previous Government, I had responsibility for fish farming, a controversial issue in Gaeltacht areas. I remember going along a coastal road in Connemara in February to see the site of a proposed fish farm. I was shown a road with 36 houses, ten of which were occupied while the remainder were holiday homes. Of that ten households, five were working in the company which was proposing the development of the fish farm. Sometimes there can be conflict over development in Gaeltacht areas where one development is inappropriate and another is appropriate. The development of the area's own natural resources is appropriate.
These amendments are essential if we are serious about protecting the Gaeltacht. The matter cannot be postponed for a commission to examine - it should be addressed now. As Deputy Kelleher said, Gaeltacht areas survived until now because they were remote, but they are at risk now for the same reason. They have become attractive places for holidays for people who do not come from such areas. As a society, if we value the Irish language we have an obligation to put into our laws whatever is necessary to protect the areas in which that language is spoken.