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

The amendment is self-explanatory. We had a lengthy discussion in the previous session with the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, about adding other areas which should be included in the list of 15 areas of section 24 for consideration when issuing national planning statements. As I said to the Minister when he was here earlier, I appreciate that the section 24(1) does not preclude the adding of other items by a Minister if he or she so wishes. The point I made, and it is particularly relevant to this amendment, is that unless something is actually listed in the list, the likelihood of it ever being considered as part of a national policy statement is greatly diminished.

As the Minister of State will know, we have a persistent problem in terms of adequate provision of accommodation for Travellers. That is not just a matter of housing policy and funding but also a matter of planning policy. The Minister of State will remember that his predecessor, Deputy Damien English, did very good work. It is very rare that I commend a Fine Gael Minister or Minister of State but I must say the former Minister of State, Deputy English, played a very positive role in putting together the expert group on Traveller accommodation. He worked very closely with his committee on a cross-party basis and the expert group's report is important as it set out what needs to be done, including with respect to planning, to tackle the Dickensian conditions in which members of the Traveller community live. Obviously what we are discussing here is a separate proposition from the recommendations with respect to planning in that report. We dealt with those earlier.

Amendment No. 204 is very straightforward as it seeks to insert, on page 66, a new subsection "(o) promotion of patterns and layouts of development to better facilitate the Travelling community;”. Obviously we have Traveller-specific sites but we also have Travellers living in what is euphemistically called settled housing. The design of that settled housing, from a planning point of view, only catered for the needs of the settled community in terms of driveway space, house layout, house size, etc. As the Minister of State will know, because Travellers traditionally have families of a larger size, there is a lack of adequate provision of four-bedroom and, in some cases, five-bedroom homes, particularly in social housing programmes. This means that when Travellers become homeless they tend to spend a disproportionately long period in emergency accommodation as they cannot gain access to the private rental sector because of discrimination. They also cannot access the social housing sector because the existing and new-build social housing stock is not large enough. While I appreciate some of that is a housing policy matter, it is also a planning matter. Inserting either this or some other reference to the planning requirements to promote better "patterns and layouts of development to better facilitate the Travelling community" would send a very positive signal. It would indicate that the Government is finally serious about tackling the underprovision and poor quality, from both the planning and housing point of view, of accommodation that is culturally appropriate and specific to Travellers. On that basis, I look forward to the response from the Minister of State.

I will deal with amendment No. 331 separately and briefly after we deal with the amendments that concern Travellers.