Mr. Niall Cussen:

I will leave Ms Buckley to deal with the consideration of timelines, particularly in the context of the board. The planning service has proved itself in the past when the resources are available and the systems are clear. There has been much very helpful streamlining of the planning system, particularly with regard to judicial review. Timelines are laid out. Judicial review was an area where there were not very strict timelines. The planning authorities at local authority level and the board have to work within very tight timeframes. Then there may be a judicial review, which is subject to the courts and their mechanisms, which we respect. Now this will be much more clear. This is one big gain the public will get. We will know where the various stages will unfold if planning issues go that far.

If we can get clarity on the resources and how they are implemented at various authority and agency levels perhaps we can have clearer performance regimes. Ms Buckley has spoken a little bit about this and the options that might be there in the context of the board. Where we have clear plans and a clear legal process on making planning decisions, and we back up these systems with people and arrangements on the ground, then the public can expect good performance.

Every year 30,000 decisions are made by planning authorities. The vast majority of these are by local authorities within statutory timeframes. We highlighted this in the planning overview report we published recently. It is a story that very often is not told to the public. The vast majority of applications handled by planning authorities are approved. In some cases in local authorities this is to the tune of 80% to 90%. Insofar as there have been very well-flagged challenges and issues in the planning process, they are very small part of the wider day-to-day operation of the planning process that is discharged without a great degree of drama.