Amendments Nos. 135a and 135c are related and may be discussed together.
SECTION 46.
I move amendment No. 135a:
In page 38, paragraph (a), line 10, to delete "one" and substitute "two".
I would like to hear the Minister's response to this amendment.
The present requirement to place an advertisement relating to a motorway scheme in one or more newspapers is a statutory minimum requirement. Local authorities have to use their judgment as to the necessary level of publicity to ensure that the public are made aware of the motorway proposals. Anybody who has seen these advertisements will readily realise that they take up literally page after page of the newspaper at substantial cost and preparation time to the local authority. In addition to the advertisement the local authority must notify all landowners whose land is to be acquired and whose access to land is to be affected. The holders of planning permission to be revoked or modified must also be notified.
All motorway schemes are subject to an environmental impact assessment, and this means that there must also be public notice of this in the newspapers. A copy of the environmental impact statement must be sent to An Taisce, the Office of Public Works, Bord Fáilte and any other body prescribed by the Minister. Therefore, these bodies will be aware of the motorway proposal and, if they wish, obtain a copy of the scheme.
In practice, however, the environmental impact statement will contain all the relevant information about the proposed motorway, including its location, size and alternatives considered. The scheme involves largely a technical document essentially dealing with the referencing of all of the lands affected by the proposed motorway and would add little to the information contained in the EIS. In view of what I have said I do not think it would be reasonable to add to the already extensive, quite exhaustive publicity obligations placed on local authorities.
My amendment No. 135a seeks publication of a notice in two rather than one newspaper. I was afraid they might insert such a notice in a low-circulation newspaper that would not be read. Is that not a valid point?
It may well have been to date. I indicated during the course of the debate on the planning and development Bill that I was updating the regulations with regard to requirements for public notice so that — if you like — we would have greater transparency. I will be doing that within the next couple of months.
On the basis of that assurance I propose withdrawing my amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments Nos. 135b and 135c not moved.
Section 46 agreed to.