Barry Cowen (Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I never have too much time for much of what Deputy O'Dowd says.

The Government chose to disregard the Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill that is currently going through the Houses as a means of facilitating a more inclusive role for Members of the Houses in agreeing a spatial strategy. That is the prerogative and the right of the Government and we respect and acknowledge that. It chose to refer to previous legislation which gives it the right to place the framework on a statutory basis. If it practised as it preached, it would have honoured the initial commitment it gave but it is obvious that, by virtue of the numbers within the Houses, it thought it might not receive the support to progress the Bill with the inclusive potential it had.

As regards county development plans, I seek clarification as to whether the previous legislation that governs the publication and statutory basis that this framework now has gives and guarantees the hierarchy as running from the national planning framework plan to regional plans, county development plans and area plans. If that is so, must any future plans merely have regard to that or must they strictly abide by that hierarchy? Local councillors must have some autonomy in terms of their efforts to devise, prepare and agree county development plans. I wish to put on the record of the committee and make the point to the Department and the Minister who has or will have responsibility in this area that the help and assistance afforded to members of local authorities in preparing a development plan leaves much to be desired. I say that having had 19 years' experience as local authority member. Many other committee members have similar experience. There must be provision for local authorities to have relevant professional expertise at their disposal and to act on their behalf rather than being led and directed by the executive. Local authority members come from a certain viewpoint and should have the relevant professional expertise available to them in providing a draft plan which is then the subject of discussion and amendment by local authority members and the public thereafter. Local authority members do not have the time or expertise they desire to adequately deal with development plans. That will have been copper-fastened if greater pressure is now placed on them by virtue of this hierarchy.

As regards the issues raised by Deputy Casey regarding rural housing, the initial draft only provided for an economic need criteria to be considered in the event of a person wishing to provide a rural house. I am glad to see that there is now also consideration of social need. How that is interpreted may vary depending on the local authority area. In my county, our main water source is underground and one must be conscious of the proliferation of septic tanks, which is not the case in other counties. Aside from that, our interpretation and best practice, of which Ms Walsh will be well aware as she has been there, is that one must cater for local need. One must cater for landowners and their families and for people who have an attachment to an area and wish to ensure they have a prospect of living there. If we are serious about rural communities thriving or surviving into the future, people must be allowed to live in them.

There is a definite focus in the strategy on moving people towards urban areas. I recognise and acknowledge that and appreciate that cities must grow but, in terms of the regions, I fear that the statistics, information and data collated in regard to the midlands region have been considered alongside those for the east of the country. The midlands is an identifiable region in its own right, comprising counties Laois, Offaly, Longford and Westmeath. The statistics published by the ESRI earlier this year are vastly different from those published that fed into this plan.

I am thankful the Government chose the path it did in regard to the legislation it chose to put this on a statutory basis because Governments and government policy can change. If I had my way, I would seek electoral approval to amend elements of the plan, as is my right, and would thereafter accept the will of the people, whether that indicates support for me or others who campaign on those issues.

The Government must acknowledge that local authority members should have independent relevant professional expertise available to them in playing their part in seeking to provide for future county development plans. That has not previously been the case and there is a huge weight of expectation which councillors are not able to live up to, based on what they are paid and the time available to them to do it. Only when the Government recognises and acknowledges that will local and county development plans be representative and what they should be. It is the councillors who are accountable. With all due respect, the witnesses have been in their jobs for far longer than most local authority members but the councillors put themselves forward, are accountable to the people and seek to devise and prepare a plan that meets the expectations of those who give them the privilege of being public representatives. A process in terms of regional plans has now begun, a planning framework having been put in place that was missing for the past six years. I was surprised that that process commenced before the planning framework was agreed and that gave me the impression that the Government had the planning framework in its back pocket anyway. County development plans and area plans will follow but they will not be what they ought if the relevant expertise is not available to local authority members.