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

Perfect, thank you. I will be concise. People in communities where this is an issue, far from judge, jury and executioner being applied, would love to see even just one of those when it comes to these issues. My amendment does not seek to ensure that the planning authority or commission would be judge, jury and execution because I specifically leave in section 160(6), which is the provision. Whether or not it should be left in is questionable, but it leaves it in. Section 160(6) is the whole point about the applicant being able to go to the High Court and challenge the decision. To say that my amendment is trying to remove the provision of the applicant going the High Court just is not correct; it is left in.

With respect to property rights, what about the rights of the family or individual who buys a home subject to a planning permission and has every proper expectation that the planning law would be followed and their home and community would be built out as per the planning permission granted under planning law? Their property rights are currently being disregarded. They invest their life work into paying off the mortgage for that home. They buy it sometimes off plans and often off promises from developers, even if the home is built, but on the works that would be completed in that planning permission. When the developer reneges on that, they do not get the community facilities, amenities or public spaces that were promised in the planning permission and promised to them under planning law. What about their property rights? Why are their property rights being disregarded? Why are the property rights of the developer trumping those of hardworking individuals and families who put their life’s work into buying a home? I do not understand why the Minister of State thinks the property rights of the developer are more important that the individual family’s.

Regarding enforcement, the one thing we all know is that enforcement is poorly resourced. To say enforcement is the answer, not this section of the Bill, when enforcement has always been poorly resourced, just does not stand up and is not credible.