Darragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I will deal with amendment No. 684 first and then deal with the overall position with amendments Nos. 685 and 686.

Under the Bill, the commission may grant permission in contravention of the development plan if the development is of strategic or national importance, having regard to the policy of the Government, that is, our national planning statements and Government policy. Amendment No. 684 proposes to amend that to the development being "of strategic or national importance to the State". Linking the provision to the policy of the Government gives the commission a clear basis for contravening a plan, whereas linking it to the development being of importance to the State, I think, brings quite a large degree of ambiguity there. We know what the State is in geographical terms. What is the State? I think the provision is much clearer if it states "the Government" because people know where Government policies come from. In particular, we have discussed the national planning policy statements.

As regards amendments Nos. 685 and 686, the Deputy proposes to delete the other provisions which would allow an coimisiún pleanála to contravene a development plan. These provisions provide that the commission can contravene the development plan if there are objectives that conflict with one another or are ambiguous in their application or in cases where the development is consistent with the provision of the NPF, national planning policies and measures that deal with the matter to which the material contravention applies. These are important provisions for dealing with any material inconsistencies that may exist between adopted plans and national or regional policy. The current programme of review of draft development plans being undertaken by local authorities with oversight from the OPR will ensure that statutory local plans will comply with national and regional plans in addition to relevant ministerial guidelines. This should in future reduce the need for material contraventions of development plans in the case of specific planning applications.

It is not considered appropriate to specifically remove these material contravention provisions from planning legislation because doing so would reduce the options for consideration of proposals which may be in the interests of proper planning and sustainable development of an area and which are subject to scrutiny and approval. Further restriction of the commission's ability to consider material contravention in a development plan could potentially be counterproductive for significant housing developments, in particular where such proposals may be in the overall interest of proper planning and sustainable development of an area.