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

I thank both witnesses for their presentations. We will probably get two or three rounds of questions so I will come in when appropriate.

I will start with the IPI. I thank Mr. Lawlor for both his submission and the more detailed documents. I want to emphasise one line where he said: "It is disappointing that as planning practitioners we have had limited input." That is our sense of the Bill as we have been going through it, but that is disappointing because while professional planners should not have a veto on planning, they are the people both in the public and private sectors who deal with it daily. We must take note of them coming before this committee and putting that bold assertion on the record. I thank Mr. Lawlor for being so frank.

I want to get into the detail of both submissions. I will start with the Irish Planning Institute and in my second round I will come to the RTPI. First, on timelines both for county development plans and for consents, can Mr. Lawlor give more information on what he thinks needs to be in the Bill? The board made a similar case for statutory timelines, but to make sure they were appropriate for the kind of decision or plan that was being made. The local government sector made the same point yesterday. Can Mr. Lawlor share more of his thinking on that if he would not mind? He specifically mentioned development management in Part 2, Part 11 and the judicial review, JR, issue in Part 9. Can he go into more detail on his thinking on that?

One area he did not mention but that has preoccupied us a fair bit is the provisions in sections 22 and 23, which is the new version of the mandatory ministerial guidelines, as well as a series of sections, namely, sections 28, 62 and 120 and what we understand would be similar provisions for strategic development zones and the transitional arrangements. This is really about strengthening the ability of the Minister, with the approval of the Government, to set detailed planning guidelines and for them to be more quickly retrospectively inserted into existing plans. Has the IPI a view on those provisions and on whether they will improve or slow down and disimprove the planning process and decision-making? I am trying to give Mr. Lawlor as much time as possible in his responses.