Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I know this from my local area, where there are some large planning applications. I can think of one where there was much knowledge in the local community about landslides in the area and about watercourses. The developer and the planning authority did not pick up on these. They were not in the pre-planning process that took place. It all resulted in the developer not getting a successful planning application through. To date, homes have not been delivered on that site. However, if there had been good engagement with the local community at a pre-planning stage, it could have been a much better outcome for all involved, for the local community, for the developer and for the people who could be living in those homes now. There is a huge value to this.

There is also the element that pre-planning takes up public resources. Given that it takes up public resources, why then should there not be a wider benefit of those public resources? The information and the lessons from the pre-planning stage should be made available and published online, whether or not this goes to a formal planning process thereafter. Indeed, that information in terms of learning in a local community would be useful. It would also be useful for other potential applicants in that area in that they would be able to see some of the key infrastructure issues that came up at pre-planning stage. For somebody making an application themselves, it will be for a site that they own. Information specific to that site will not be much use to anyone else. However, having that information more widely available is a good that could come from this.

A mistake is being made in the approach. The Bill is effectively deciding what the public wants to know about and when. We have been getting clear feedback from the public and from community groups that they want to know about what is happening in the pre-planning stage. The Bill decides for them that this information is not relevant to them and they are not to know it. It is no one’s intention to imply this, but there is the kind of narrative that people might not understand the difference between pre-planning and actual planning. People will understand the different processes around it. Certainly, people are interested. Rather than making the decision for people that information will not be relevant to them or that they do not need to know, the Minister should let people have the access to information they want and are looking for. That would give them more confidence in the planning system. It would help capture the issues early on and have them ironed out. I would just ask that that is looked at.

On section 32B(4), my amendment No. 17 specifies any "person" or "relevant community organisations". It is not explicitly clear from the current wording that local authorities can go to community organisations. Why not at least specify that local authorities can go to any person or community organisation and write them into that wording, if a local authority wants to go to them for information?

That makes complete sense in many areas where the local authority will know that there is a community or heritage organisation which has expertise or knowledge that could be relevant. We should specify that in the Bill, rather than just using the term "any person", which is more limited.