Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I agree with Mr. McLaren. There has been a problem with the discourse around planning in recent years, in that it has been discussed as if it is a burden. However, good planning leads to successful, sustainable, cohesive and vibrant communities that people want to live in, feel happy in and so on. That needs to become part of the discussion again. I agree that higher-level aims should be reflected at the start of the Bill. That was a good point.

I will ask a few questions. I apologise, as I had to step out for another meeting. An area of concern is that while we are being told that the Bill's aim is to create more certainty, reduce conflict and so on, it is not clear how it will do that. For area plans to work successfully and to give certainty, they need details on, for example, heights and densities. If they do that, though, there is the potential of them running afoul of national policy, in that people could challenge and take cases. Do I take it from what has been said at this meeting that the way to avoid all of this is to ensure that the guidelines, national policy statements and so on give strong direction on just the forward plans, development plans and area plans and that it should only be the development and area plans against which a planning application is judged?

If there are potential questions about those area plans or development plans, they should be questioned at the time of them being formed in terms of whether they fit in with national policy or guidelines. Have I got that wrong? What is Mr. Lawlor's view on that? What is the way to square those potential conflict of interest?