Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Cowen for this imaginative, practical and focused Bill. Any measure which will rejuvenate and get buildings back into use is to be welcomed and is important. However, it has to be an appropriate use and about proper planning and sustainable development. It is not any use but appropriate use.

Being familiar with section 57, dealing with protected structures and declarations, and section 5, exempt or non-exempt developments, the Bill will amend section 57(3) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 and speed up the process. We know it is a cumbersome process. I know from dealing with local authorities on getting clarification on exempt or non-exempt developments that it can take months. Ultimately, I have initiated the process myself and then waited for the decision of the planning authority. In some cases, if I were still not happy, I would go to An Bord Pleanála. It is a terribly long process.

We need to look at the whole issue of conservation officers. There are varying degrees of conservation officer across all of the 31 local authorities. Some do not have them while others share them with neighbouring local authorities. Some local authorities do little with protected structures and then there are others with engaging and imaginative conservation officers. They are not architects or planners. I do not know quite what they are and they do not know themselves. There is a need for tighter guidance on what is their function. I have spoken to planners and architects who have said that the conservation officers override their decisions. There seems to be conflict between county architects, county planners and conservation officers. The only way one can deal with that is by having robust guideline documents which set out the terms.

We have architecture of our time. The Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland is keen to see architecture of our time which fits nicely with heritage buildings. It is different outlooks and different ways of planning. It needs to be streamlined, however, because people are telling me they are being frustrated by the process. The Bill is addressing this, which is welcome.

It is important to get over the complexities and the slowness of dealing with section 57 and section 59, planning and protected structures, and getting them to use. There was to be a national inventory of protected structures but some local authorities have not completed it. We need to look at that again and the power of local councils in designating buildings as protected structures. Several people in a local authority can decide to designate a whole lace of protected structures to frustrate development. There is no artistic, historic, scientific context as to why they should be protected structures. We need to tighten up how we define protected structures. What is the function of the councillors versus the function of the executive? There is always conflict between councillors wanting in some cases to designate buildings but they may not be motivated by what is of a historical or heritage value but more of a constituency value or to frustrate development. We have to be careful in this regard. We need stricter and tighter guidelines, along with a speedier and a more streamlined approach on these aspects of the Bill. I welcome the Bill and support it.