Darragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I will respond to all the amendments together as they are related. Again, the context of this is that planning is being brought back to local authorities. We know that. On the pre-planning stage, section 32B(4), which is in section 3 of the Bill, provides that: "The planning authority may, prior to the LRD meeting taking place, consult with any person who may, in the opinion of the planning authority, have information that is relevant for the purposes of the LRD meeting in relation to a proposed development".

In broad terms, that gives the planning authority the power to seek other inputs at pre-application stage. The important thing is that we want transparency. How will we make sure there is transparency in the pre-application? All pre-application notes, opinions and what is being sought, once an application is made, have to be published. I made that change in the Seanad. The information will be published, but only when the application is made. Why is that? Many people want to know what is happening in their areas, and I do too. I will give the example of the strategic housing development, SHD, because it is the best data that we have. There are 553 pre-application consultations under the SHD. Of those, only 374 applications came about so 179 did not proceed. By doing what I understand people are looking for, we would potentially publish much information about applications that will never happen. It is best that when an application is lodged, the pre-application information must be published online, because it is live and we want to make sure people do not mix up the pre-application stage up with the application stage.

What I do not want to happen - and I genuinely mean this - is that people see the pre-application as important for dealing with issues. At the pre-application, the council can seek stakeholders to come in if they so wish. This is to try to make sure that we have good applications or to act as a filter and say, “That is not appropriate, we do not agree, go away”. In those instances, subject to these types of amendments being as broad as they are, we would have to publish all of that information. There could be numerous pre-application meetings on the same application that will never go anywhere. It is most important to get the process right, so that when a development gets to application stage, people will know what will happen and what has been discussed at pre-application stage.

We should also remember, and this goes to the point about the involvement of the elected representatives, that every councillor in the area will automatically be told about every LRD application that is lodged by the local authority. They will not just be told by way of planning lists, which can be sporadic insofar as some local authorities are better at issuing them than others. Some do not issue them. This will be tied into the legislation and it must happen. We will publish it and I believe we should. There should be transparency. I also believe we should publish the right information when it is relevant. We should make sure that the general public does not mistake the pre-application stage for the application stage and say, “Well I've already had my say there and I'm not putting in my observations”.

I understand what the members are getting at. We have greatly improved the transparency piece. Based on the data that I have, and it is probably the most comparable, 553 pre-application consultations were made, there were 374 applications and 179 did not go anywhere. In some of the bigger local authorities, there would many people having pre-application meetings and publishing data that is not relevant to anyone. The data becomes relevant when it goes in for application. It is then that the information will have to be published.

Section 32B(4) allows for a consultation with stakeholders at a pre-application stage. We have to remember why we are trying to do this. We want a transparent, streamlined and efficient planning process. We need good homes for people and members all know that. Much of what is being looked for in that group of amendments is in this legislation already. I cannot accept any of these amendments.