Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I just have some wrap-up comments. I know we all want to get out of here. I bear in mind a few things. I am conscious that there are processes and separation of various powers and functions. Yesterday, I issued a call in the Seanad – we had some amazing feedback from it too – on the Rory Mulcahy report into Donegal planning. The issues sitting on the Minister’s table are serious. I am not going to go into it other than to reiterate that I have made that call. We have had some substantial engagement from people since that call. I had a letter in front of me yesterday from former Minister Eoghan Murphy suggesting it was sitting on his desk for consideration and is still not published. That does not instil confidence. I am not asking for comments on that because it would not be right, fair or proper for me to do so. However, I just want to put that out there.

This committee meeting, of course, is televised. It is amazing how many people look in and see it. The meetings are replayed and, indeed, I replay them. I send the webcams of these meetings to up to 900 councillors sometimes. It is simple. There is a company called VideoParliament that does this. It will be on our desks within an hour today. It is always important and it sets the tone and record and accounts for our work here. I just think that is an important aspect. I will not ask the Department officials any more on that. I think we are instilling this confidence. We have ongoing issues about An Bord Pleanála and they are going through due process. It is very important that they are seen through. I respect that and let that process run its course.

While looking at the advisory forum, I refer to the CCMA. I have always had a bit of suspicion and concern about CCMA, albeit not bad suspicion. It is just that there is so much secrecy around the CCMA. If you go on its website it is very hard to find out much about what it is doing. I know where it is getting its funding from, what it is about and what exercises it more than other things. In addition, I know many people on the CCMA. I would like to think many of them are friends and certainly they are work colleagues. It has three representatives on this group. The CCMA is many times an obstacle and resists many of our elected members’ engagement in planning. Many of the complaints that I have about planning come from the members of the CCMA in terms of their frustration. Many councillors around me rightly or wrongly feel absolutely frustrated in the planning process. They feel undermined and that they are not assisted as much as they could be. City managers, by their very nature, if you watch the trajectory of their career, are pretty robust characters. I say that in a nice way. It is a difficult job, but they are well paid, in fairness. I just want to make the point that I do not know why the CCMA had three representatives over two local representatives. There may be a good reason but they are a very dominant and determined bunch of people, and that is not to cast any aspersions about them. I just want that sort of balance. That is what I want to say.

I want to reiterate the point on the Aarhus Convention. I mean that genuinely. I have the Aarhus Convention up on my wall. I think that much of it that I had framed and I put it up on the wall. I also have a little section from the Constitution that talks about the empowerment of local government because that is a very important reminder of the role of local government. Dovetailing with all of what we are doing with the Department’s legislation, I refer to whisteblower legislation. We spoke about whistleblowers' legislation in the Seanad this week. There is legislating currently going on about it in the House this week. I see scope there for a lot of public engagement in whistleblowing. Indeed, the Donegal case came about on foot of a whisteblower. By enhancing and strengthening that legislation, it will help us as part of our work in terms of the planning.

I just want to go back to e-planning. Four or five years ago, e-planning was mentioned first in Rebuilding Ireland. Indeed, I remember when Deputy Coveney was in here as Minister, he promised the devil and all and mentioned e-planning as one promise, with the claim that no one was going to be in a hotel after six months being another. Any of us would be delighted to get a room in a hotel in Dublin tonight. However, this was one of the big things we were told by another of the great architects of Rebuilding Ireland, and we all know how that went. Much of it was a success. In there, we talk about e-planning. We talk about the board doing all of this. We had the board chairs in here. They said they were full of resources and did not need another bob. They were awash down there in Marlborough Street. They could do the devil and all. We still do not have Plean-IT, IT planning or e-Planning, despite all the promises. As the Chair knows, we have written things in this committee. I am in a regular correspondence with the board in relation to this and I do not get much traction. We can be doing things with this legislation as we are going on.

The witnesses are the senior officials in the Department and will know more about planning than anybody. Is there any way we can start? We will have to have pilot schemes. We were promised a pilot some years ago. Let us get this e-planning on. We do not need this legislation for e-planning at all. However, and many people have addressed the point, we need e-planning. If Covid taught us anything, it is how we all have embraced technology.

There are parts of this country where you cannot even see the coloured drawings or anything on planning application for a protected structure. Some local authorities tell me they do not have colour scanners. Some local authorities say they cannot archive their reports. One local authority told me that it has two conservation officers sitting in what it described as a cloakroom with no window, which is a bit odd. These are the problems that we have in planning.

I suggest that officials in a high place, like our witnesses, with much influence, might just see if they can progress this e-planning thing. We know it should be part of the reform. Can we hear from the board? I acknowledge the Department is separate from the board. What is going on? Big money is going to the board. The Department officials might be able to share with me where they think we starting in terms of the timelines? We will have to roll it out somewhere. We will have to take the pilot to the planning authorities. I understand that. It is a technical thing to get all of that. However, that is very important because it will further engagement and public participation with the citizens in planning. We also will have to upskill people because that will not be an easy thing to do. I personally like to have a map in my hand. I cannot see myself ever looking at one. However, I will learn like we did with MS Teams. We thought we could not do Teams two years ago but we are now using Teams. Those are some thoughts.

I want to finish on this point. I am passionate about planning. I genuinely believe that this is a real opportunity for all of us. I am conscious the Department has a job to do and it is a political organisation here. However, we have a three-party Government with a very strong Green Party hue, might I say, which I say respectfully to the Chair. There will be tensions. I am confident we will get a good Bill.

I think there is enough constructive traction and tension within the Government and its various constituents to bring about something positive. We have this opportunity to prove to everyone that we can work together and embrace and take on varying views, so it is not just from the top down but the bottom and top coming together and sharing ideas. I thank the witnesses for their time.