Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Apologies, I thought the Chair was seeking a response to his comments. I thank all the witnesses for coming. At the outset, I must say I am extremely disappointed that we only received the papers this morning. We have a protocol and procedure on how we do business in this committee and it is set down clearly. The Department needs to be reminded and while I do not want a row, it is a public meeting, I respectfully suggest that we take our business seriously in this House and I know that the witnesses take their business seriously in this House. I have requested this and every time an agency attends the committee and does not present their papers, I will say the same. I ask that it be taken back to the Department. We require time to consider our documents and our papers and I think that is reasonable and fair. I accept the witnesses are busy but we are also busy and I want to make that point.

I welcome that there will be a reform of the board; as it is clearly not fit for purpose. Many of the concerns that have surfaced in the board are issues we have raised time after time. We have had two chairpersons of the board before the committee during my time and we have always asked them if they had sufficient resources. I will not go back to the strategic infrastructure, we are moving on, but they always assured us that everything was happy in Marlborough Street and that they were able to do everything. It is simply not delivering and frankly is not fit for purpose. One has to ask how is has taken so long to arrive at some of the decisions we have heard in the past few days. I will not comment any further because we will have lots of opportunities in both Houses of the Oireachtas to discuss this legislation in great depth.

I am fully supportive of retaining the panel system. Clearly there is a serious weakness in corporate governance in the board and that is obvious for everyone to see so I would like to see a panel that would deal with corporate governance reflected in the appointment of a new board. I sit on an audit committee of the Oireachtas, so we are familiar with how corporate governance works and clearly the board had difficulty with its corporate governance. There is a weakness there that needs to be strengthened in how someone is appointed to the board.

I want to draw the witnesses' attention to section 105(2)(b) and section (106)(1)(d) of the Act. Both relate to local government and one refers to the president of the Association of Irish Local Government being part of a panel to select a new chair for An Bord Pleanála. As I do not know if witnesses intend to keep that or not, they might comment on that.

I also think it is important that there is a local government panel, as well as a panel representing agriculture and farming. There are serious challenges around farming and agriculture in terms of planning and we see how EU environmental law is being interpreted and the challenges in the courts. One of the big problems with the planning system is that it is clogged up, in many cases legitimately, with legal challenges. We see the board does not defend many of its own cases and we see why. So I want to make a strong case for agriculture, the food sector and farming being represented. They are represented on a panel in Seanad Éireann and on a committee in the Oireachtas so they are an important group, as are the environmental panel. There is the importance of the prescribed bodies who make a significant contribution despite being much maligned by certain people. They have a role and it is important that we instill confidence in this board and we need to have representative groups who have different interests, sometimes conflicting.At the end of the day it is important we have a robust, independent process. I will leave it at that, if Ms Graham could touch on the issue of local government, and the environmental and farming sectors being represented. I believe there is a case to re-strengthen the panel system, rather than abolish it.