Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank all the contributors. The discussion is genuinely very interesting. I have two quick comments to contribute to the discussion and then a round-the-houses question for each of the contributors. While not discounting the importance of advertising, particularly in respect of people's lifestyles, when it comes to people's decisions about where they live, price, size and comfort are absolutely key. One of the biggest difficulties with suburban sprawl or one-off rural houses is that it is often far cheaper to get a much larger quality home. Dr. D'Arcy is absolutely right that people do not necessarily think about other costs at the point of purchase, such as transport. This relates not just to Dublin and Cork cities. I talk to many people in mid-sized regional towns where the cost of purchasing a second-hand or new house in the urban core is now very expensive. There is a real challenge in that if we want to incentivise compact growth, we have to make it affordable for people. There were some interesting figures recently which show, notwithstanding the national planning framework, the vast majority of new homes that have been built are still being built on the wrong side of the M50 in the commuter belt and not in the inner core of Dublin. Affordability is, therefore, absolutely key.

In regard to Bus Connects, Mr. O'Connor highlighted a good point in that 70,000 submissions is a sign of success. What is most important about that consultation is that the NTA changed the nature of the consultation in response to the public engagement. It was meant to be single round, but it became two. There was meant to be one version; there were three. The NTA is in fact still engaging with people. It had a meeting recently with interested parties in Lucan to look at the initial reaction to the first phase of the C-spine and potential gaps. That is an example of where there is top-down infrastructural development of significant change there is real merit in that process.

That can be combined with what Dr. D'Arcy and Dr. Rock spoke of earlier, which is getting out early and adopting a grassroots, bottom-up approach to get some valuable things. We need to talk in more detail about how we improve that public participation and consultation, because there are far more examples of how this stuff does not work well, than does. I ask contributors, not only in response to my question but generally, to share with us the experience they have, because that would be useful. I was quite taken by Dr. FitzGerald's comments around the institutionalising of the participation. Again I go back to the fact that there are two Departments, 31 local authorities, and a range of other development models. Let us keep in mind we are producing a report, hopefully, with some recommendations to Government. If there were one or two priority changes that they would like to see at central or local government level that our contributors think should be considered in our report on foot of these three hearings, what would they like us to recommend? They are probably getting the sense that most of us sitting throughout the entire meeting are in a similar space to all of them. What are the key recommended changes they would like to see beyond their submissions?