Darragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy. I want to say that his amendment here would affect all planning applications. It would reduce the period set at five years to two. There are certainly issues with extensions of permissions, and the Deputy will see in this grouping that I intend to bring forward amendment No. 729, which is about limitations on the extension of duration of permissions. That would mean that you could only seek an extension of duration once for that period, and it must be in line with the length of the original planning permission. It would allow it to go once more but that would be on the basis of amendment No. 726 - which is a Government amendment as well - where we are clarifying that the development must have commenced. That is very important. Where you have people seeking an extension on permissions where they have not commenced the original permission, we are only going to allow one extension. The example the Deputy has used of, let us say, multiple extensions to it would be no more on the passing of this legislation.

I understand where the Deputy is coming from because there are a number of measures we can take on this but I genuinely believe that to reduce a planning permission period to two years would be far too restrictive, particularly with regard to larger developments. I understand that in the Deputy's amendment he is allowing an option to seek an extension for a further two. We have talked and debated here, and rightly so, about the quality of design and what we need to do with regard to the planning process itself. Even the pre-planning and planning stage can take quite a substantial period of time. The Deputy will have seen that this year and last year, with the very substantial increase in commencements, that some of it is cost-related. That is why I have moved forward with the waiver of the development levies and the Uisce Éireann connection charge. We have seen a surge in commencements, which I absolutely welcome.

This amendment proposes to reduce it to two years, and there is another amendment here to reduce the duration from five to three years, but I cannot accept them. The specified planning period of five years is, I think, appropriate.

However, I agree with the Deputy about looking at the issue of the multiple extensions to existing permissions and bringing in the provision that a permission must have commenced before someone would seek an extension to that permission. I also recognise that we are looking at a longer term strategic planning view where development plans will be for ten years with a review after five years. A planning permission duration of five years is appropriate in that instance. We are bringing forward measures, as the Deputy will be aware, such as the residential zoned land tax and separately, uplift in values and zoning and land value sharing, which is also a significant change we are making. While I understand his motivation, a reduction from five to two years would lead to many more applications and many more requests for extensions to permission, even if it was for two years. My provision, which I do not see this in the Deputy's amendment, only allows one extension to the permission and only on the basis that the original permission has commenced. I will not accept the amendment.