Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)

Ministers and political leaders have a certain attraction to grands projects. From Charles Haughey here to Mitterrand in France the large projects seem to concentrate minds. Ceaucescu, the late president of Romania, spent his later years erecting a large palace for himself in the centre of Bucharest. Closer to home the Tánaiste, Deputy McDowell, some five years ago accused the Taoiseach of pursuing Ceaucescu-like projects in the vicinity of the M50. However, I suspect the Tánaiste's political legacy may well be a rather large white elephant on a site ten miles from Dublin at Thornton Hall in Fingal. The people of Romania eventually revolted and threw out Ceaucescu. I suspect within the next few months the Irish people may well be revolted enough to remove the Tánaiste, Deputy McDowell, from office. It is much easier to contemplate the grands projects than deal with the very radical reform required in the heart of the Prison Service. While the Bill contains some commendable sections, it does not go far enough to address the reforms required.

I am very concerned about the Bill's reference to the planning process required for the erection of and works to prisons. The Tánaiste makes provision to circumvent completely the normal planning procedure for major infrastructural projects. While this part of the Bill proposes to establish a public consultation process for the construction of new prisons and places of detention with the idea of a rapporteur to take submissions, the rapporteur reports back to the Minister who may or may not amend the plans for the project on the basis of the report. How dare the Tánaiste completely circumvent the planning process in order to build these places of detention? Whether it is dealing with the protected structures on the Mountjoy site or the archaeology in Fingal at Thornton Hall, I am deeply alarmed that the Tánaiste is simply avoiding the normal planning process in order to deliver projects. That is not good enough and is a negation of the public's right to have an input. It is a retrograde step that was first taken with legislation in the early 1990s and is perpetuated in this Bill. It is not the right way to do it.

There is no role for An Bord Pleanála as is the norm in the planning process for large infrastructure projects. Does the Tánaiste feel his work is somehow above that of his Cabinet colleagues? Why does he feel it is appropriate to single himself out for different treatment from his colleagues in Cabinet? I ask that in a rhetorical sense.

See this speech in context