Francis Noel Duffy (Dublin South West, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I thank the representatives of the board and the Department for coming in today. Their attendance is much appreciated.

Before I ask my questions, I would like to note that the SHD scheme established in 2017 is a Government policy of that term, and intended an 80% build rate from successful decisions. However, as everyone knows, the rate is currently below 40%. This is in the context that the scheme was created to build housing quickly considering the housing crisis. I would like to acknowledge that the board is implementing this policy and, therefore, is not its creator but its implementer. I have three questions based on process and cost. Some of them have been slightly covered already but I will go through them anyway.

Has the board strategically evaluated its actions in materially contravening, in a systematic way, the core strategies of democratically mandated development plans prepared in accordance with national and regional policy and ministerial guidelines via our national planning framework, the regional spatial and economic strategies and sustainable residential development in urban areas. This should be considered against the 2019 planning regulator's report, which highlights housing units in commuter zones that are being granted at higher densities in locations that are not identified for growth in the regional spatial and economic strategies. Does the board have concerns about the SHD process given the limited public consultation and pre-application stages, despite the Aarhus Convention? Is the board perturbed by comparatively high rates of judicial reviews and overturning of decisions to grant compared with the conventional application processes through local planning authorities?

The cases lost have been noted, for which I am thankful. Does the board know what the cost is currently to the State? To summarise, why are planning decisions being granted against sustainable development plan core strategies? Is it just to have limited public consultation? Is judicial review appropriate as a route to appeal?