Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The first three contributions were interesting. What has come across is the importance of, on the one hand, balancing the independent role of a regulator but, on the other, ensuring accountability. Deputy Stanley, in particular, referred to the accountability of the Minister answering questions and similar accountability at local level and we must get that balance right. Transparency is an element of this. There must be transparency in the system in order that the public knows the basis on which decisions are being made. A number of the recommendations in the Mahon report relate to transparency, for example, giving reasons a Minister makes a decision, publishing advice he or she receives and ensuring where councillors engage with the planning process and comment on planning applications and so on, they do so in a transparent way. Other actions have been taken and more will be taken and they are aimed at ensuring that whatever decisions are made, the public knows the basis for them. If somebody is doing something that does not appear to be in accord with advice given, the public should know that and know what was the advice. Transparency, therefore, is hugely important in that regard.

The issue of evidence-based plans and making decisions on the basis of core strategies was raised. Whether that relates to, for example, flood plains or projected population growth when deciding on zoning for housing, everything should be done on the basis of the evidence available. We want that to be a core element of forward planning at every level.

Senator Ó Murchú raised the question of whether the regulator would have a quasi-judicial role. I do not see that as the way this office will operate. It is not about individual decisions; it is about ensuring the forward planning process is pursued in the way it should be on the basis of evidence. However, the Senator raised the issue of education and that will be part of the role. He asked whether the regulator was likely to come under the remit of An Bord Pleanála or an independent body. Deputy Murphy specifically stated it should not be An Bord Pleanála. If it is to be An Bord Pleanála, it will have to be done in a way that there would be a clear separation from its current role in individual planning applications, including those appealed or referred to it. There would have to be a clear differentiation between the roles. The downside of having a separate, new, independent body is that we could be setting up what might be described as another quango. We have to make a decision on that and I value the opinions of the committee members in this regard. The Ombudsman's office is another possibility but, again, there would have to be a clear division between the roles and there could not be confusion about straying into the role of the body we opt for, if we go down that route.

Deputy Stanley raised a number of accountability issues and he referred to the fact that the vast majority of public representatives at local and national level are not in any way corrupt and they want to do a good job. I agree with him but it is in their interests that we have a system that is clear in how it operates and that is based on a strategic system of forward planning, which takes into account the needs of the various areas. It must done at the right level and, therefore, the local area plan must be in accordance with the county development plan, which, in turn, must be in accordance with regional planning and the national spatial strategy in order that they are all in synch with each other. On that basis, public representatives will be able to do a good job. They will know what are the parameters and they will have clear information as to the basis of the decisions they make. They want to play their role using clear information and the core strategies are very much part of that. As the Deputy said, much of the basis for the Mahon report recommendations was a long time ago. Many changes have taken place and the planning process has been developed considerably since then.

With regard to communication with the public, there are clear requirements for consultation on the drafting of plans and prior to the final adoption of plan but I take the point that we should ensure that this is notified. Perhaps we should use social media, for example, and ensure information is clearly conveyed to the public. I will take that on board.

Deputy Catherine Murphy stated that Kildare County Council adopted the core strategy model at a much earlier stage whereby councillors examined what the planning needs were and what were the limitations of land and so on and organising its planning in that way. That is what we want all local authorities to do now and that is why the various measures have been put in place. The regional authorities have a significant role and under the reform of local and regional government planned by the Minister, it is intended that they will have an even broader role in spatial planning and economic planning for regions. They have the capacity to significantly engage in this area.

I agree with the Deputy that checks and balances are required. She referred to local area plans and pointed out that people understand these but we have to make sure they are required to be in accordance with the entire hierarchy of planning.

One of the roles of the regulator might be to have a watching brief to ensure the various plans at the different levels are in accordance with each other. I do not know whether annual reviews could be conducted or whether the regulator should address queries when somebody says a plan is not in accordance and brings that to this attention but these are some of the areas in which the regulator could operate.

We are trying to work out what would be a positive and proactive role for such a regulator and, in the case of the drafting of local area plans, whether somebody should be able to say his or her local area plan is not in accordance with the way it should have been drafted and could take it to the independent regulator. Those are the type of questions we want to settle in defining how the role would be performed and what we would ask the regulator to do. I note the Deputy's point that she would favour an independent body. However, a decision will have to be made given the various factors to be considered.

With regard to enforcement activity, I feel strongly about the issue. Anybody who has been a public representative for a long period would be frustrated at times given the difficulty having decisions enforced. That is the reason I bring the document before the committee. We are insisting that senior officials in the planning office have a role in regard to enforcement, that there are regular updates to the manager and the director of planning, that annual reports are made available to public representatives, and also that public awareness is raised. We are trying to enhance awareness of enforcement and to ensure it is taken seriously within the planning departments of local authorities.

Appropriate attention must be given to large-scale developments where an environmental impact assessment is required. I accept the Deputy's point that the smaller developments should be ignored. We want to ensure the large-scale developments are dealt with because they can have a significant impact in the area but also possibly where European Union fines are concerned. Therefore we have to ensure the large-scale developments receive appropriate attention.