Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to engage with the committee on this important issue of the Government's response to the final report of the Mahon planning tribunal, in particular its recommendation that the Government establish an independent planning regulator. While I propose to engage with Members in terms of their views on the role of that regulator I will first provide some background information.

We must never forget that the work of the tribunal opened a window to a time when the greed and profit motive of developers and land speculators, rather than the wishes of the community, were the drivers of our planning process. It must also be remembered that the reason we are faced with severe fiscal and economic challenges is past obsessions with property and property development rather than the type of economic and spatial planning that secures lasting and sustainable economic and social development.

While much has changed since those times, we owe it to the people of Ireland to ensure that those dark days cast under the spotlight of the tribunal are consigned fully and finally to the history books. Accordingly, the challenge facing us as elected representatives of the Oireachtas is to fashion a comprehensive and appropriate response that demonstrates that the political system has learned from the tribunal's work and is determined to apply that learning to the planning process.

I am confident that the members of this committee will agree with me that the overriding goal must be to restore trust by the public in their democratic institutions. The Government gave a commitment to embark on this path after the publication of the Mahon tribunal report, the recommendations of which were far-reaching. As regards the planning process, as Minister of State with responsibility for planning, I am determined to deliver meaningful reforms of our planning system that will act on the tribunal's recommendations, while continuing with further changes and other measures to ensure the absolute integrity of the system and that planning is in a position to contribute fully to economic recovery.

The establishment of an independent planning regulator is one of the most fundamental recommendations in the tribunal report. I am determined to see this recommendation comprehensively considered and appropriately acted on.

Not only is it important that we address this crucial issue, but that we do so in the right way. With this in mind, I am consulting committee members as elected Members of the Oireachtas before I introduce proposals to the Government.

In this recommendation, the Mahon tribunal is essentially telling the Legislature that, despite improvements made since the tribunal commenced its work, the exercise of the forward planning process needs independent oversight with a legal mandate and resources to determine whether plans are in compliance with legal requirements and, if not, to determine what intervention may be necessary where serious policy departures have taken place or where there is strong evidence of bad practice or systemic failure. Also required is the authority to overturn the decisions and will of locally and nationally democratically elected representatives. This is a key point to which we will return in our discussions. In other words, the tribunal's assessment is that Ireland needs to introduce an element of independent review of forward planning and planning administration practice in the manner that An Bord Pleanála delivers in overseeing our independent planning application appeals system.

I circulated an orientation paper to the joint committee - I hope everyone received it - that sets out the wider context of the consideration of options for a regulator. Before I set out some views on possible options, it would be helpful to remind ourselves of the workings of the existing planning system.

As currently structured, the system has three main components. First, I as the Minister of State for housing and planning, set the overall legislative and policy framework for planning. This includes powers to oversee the forward plan making process and, where necessary, to take such steps to ensure local authority forward plans are strategies for proper planning and sustainable development within the hierarchy of regional and national plans.

Second, a system of regional and local plan making is overseen by locally elected and democratically accountable members of the county councils, whose actions must be consistent with national planning policy and must address my views as the Minister of State as communicated through the statutory observations of my Department.

Third, there is a system of development management through planning applications to and decisions by local authorities, including independent assessment of appeals of such decisions, including by third parties, by An Bord Pleanála, which has an impeccable track record of fairness and impartiality over many years. Local enforcement of the decisions of local authorities or the board is a vital part of the system and must be implemented in full to demonstrate to the public that the planning laws are to be upheld and to be seen to be upheld. We will return to the issue of planning enforcement when considering the draft ministerial policy directive. The Chairman intends to discuss both elements together.

In a wider context and as with all other arms of the State, the planning process is also subject to various processes to ensure transparency, lawful action and administrative fairness through the criminal justice system as implemented through An Garda Síochána, the courts, the Ombudsman's office, the Freedom of Information Act, access to environmental information and parliamentary questions, not to mention representations and correspondence to Ministers.

Ireland's planning process is designed to achieve a balance between democratically accountable policy making and executive implementation of that policy by public officials. The introduction of the core strategy for each plan is aimed at decreasing the need for ministerial intervention in development plans and local area plans by providing clarity in the legal responsibilities of planning authorities to have reasonable and evidence-based plans instead of relying on the Minister's intervention in the plan process. The concept of the core strategy model took account of a previous report by this committee into the section 31 process.

On my watch, local authorities have all but completed a process of introducing evidence-based core strategies in local development plans outlining the location, quantum and phasing of future development in a way that is nationally and regionally consistent. I commend local authority members across the country who have demonstrated a real commitment to engage with this process, making difficult decisions, abandoning past fixations with zoning and enabling careful management of and prudent investment in infrastructure provision at a time of acute pressure on the public finances.

Despite the additional discipline imposed on local decision makers by the core strategy process, I closely monitor the plan making process at local level and I have made clear that I am prepared to act where the process is not working or is being abused. To that end, I used my powers under section 31 of the Act twice last year and will not fail to act as necessary in 2013 and beyond. It was a lack of willingness in the past to use the powers available under section 31 that provided a major impetus for the tribunal to recommend the establishment of an independent regulator. Had all deficient plans been tackled proactively in this way, we would not have ended up with the problematic overzonings and inappropriate zonings now being tackled through the core strategy process. The core strategy model is a highly effective tool, but it is one that needed to be devised to fix a problem of our own creation.

I will move ahead to set out some important considerations in framing the most appropriate response to the tribunal's recommendations concerning the need for a regulator. When one stands back from the tribunal's report and considers its key message on planning, one sees its call for further oversight of plan making to ensure that each plan is in accordance with other plans. One also sees its call for further independent input into the planning system in terms of investigation, education and research. In responding to these messages, there are two options for further consideration, those being, establish a new or modified planning regulation body as an independent planning regulator, fully relinquishing political ownership and accountability, or adapt existing arrangements to provide for additional oversight, perhaps including a new and specific role for the Oireachtas while maintaining political ownership and accountability.

We must remain focused on the fundamental implications, be they positive or negative, when giving these two broad options the necessary consideration. We must also understand the fundamental implications for our existing planning system. As members know, planning functions are either reserved to elected members, are executive or are independent. The balance between these is central to an open and transparent planning system because it ensures that democratic accountability resides appropriately across and within the responsible planning institutions of the State.

The Mahon recommendation proposes to alter this system fundamentally. However, it is important to recall that there have been important changes to the planning system since the tribunal began its work. We will also need to be mindful of the implications for planning under the reform of local government structures under the Action Programme for Effective Local Government and the twin objectives of operational efficiency and democratic leadership and accountability. Significantly, the establishment of a regulator brings with it serious issues of accountability and democratic control that must be fully analysed if we are to get this important reform right.

To assist and provide a focus for the proceedings today, I have already outlined my view on two broad options that are available. Regardless of what the final response to the question of an independent planning regulator is, important questions must be addressed, including, for example, whether the Minister's powers should be fully transferred to an independent regulator or whether the final forward planning decisions should remain political in nature, that is, to be taken by the Minister, the Government or the Oireachtas, with a regulator providing an independent advisory or supervisory role. If power is to be fully transferred, how can we ensure accountability by an independent regulator? What would be the limits of the regulator's powers vis-à-visthe planning process and elected members? Is the regulator's decision final? Should the role of a regulator be confined only to situations where a dispute arises over a plan? What is the most suitable institutional arrangement for delivery on the recommendation? For example, should it be a new authority or some type of recast of an existing framework? If a new authority is to be established, how would it interface with the existing institutional framework, those being planning authorities, regional authorities and An Bord Pleanála? If existing structures are to be used, what entity can take on the function and how can the new function be taken on without eroding capacity to discharge existing roles or without being detrimental to well established and publically accepted independent roles? For example, if the plan making regulatory function is to reside in an existing body such as An Bord Pleanála, might that affect the other functions of the board, creating an inherent tension between the board's decisions on forward planning, development plans and local area plans as well as individual planning cases? Is there a case for the regulator to be the person who conducts the fundamental assessment of the performance of the planning system, including an assessment of the effectiveness of the Minister, local authorities and so on, rather than becoming a super unaccountable national planning body?

We must ask ourselves these questions before making final decisions. They are important questions about efficiency, democracy and transparency for the committee, for myself as the Minister of State and for the Government. We will take this ultimate decision relatively soon, but I want to get a sense of members' views on the matter. This is an issue of balance and the system's democratic accountability. To what extent should an independent regulator make final decisions and how should a balance be achieved?

This is both at local level, where it is also a question for discussion, and a national level.

I am in no doubt that we can and must further enhance our country's planning system in light of the findings and recommendations of the Mahon tribunal report. I am determined that we will have a fairer, more open and transparent planning system in which people can be confident and depend on to deliver the sustainable communities and quality of life which we all strive for and deserve. We must remain keenly aware that an effective planning system can play an important part in overcoming our economic difficulties and preparing for our country's economic recovery. Planning is essential for coherent, sustainable and healthy communities and we are united in the view that what happened in the past can never occur again, although our vision for planning must go beyond that. By placing the values of community, sustainability and the common good at the heart of our planning system we can fashion a mechanism that delivers a thriving Ireland for the decades ahead. That is my vision for planning and it is one that I am committed to delivering.

I also circulated to the Oireachtas for consideration today by this committee a draft ministerial policy directive on planning enforcement. A fully effective planning system requires rigorous implementation of policy and legislation throughout the forward planning, development management and enforcement stages. Ireland's performance in planning enforcement has been patchy and we need to address that. Those responsible for breaching planning legislation need to know that they will face the consequences. We want to see the law upheld and we need to know the system has teeth. The policy directive I am proposing will not on its own change the world and it must be viewed as part of a wider range of actions being pursued to ensure full and effective implementation of the enforcement provisions set out under planning legislation. This second element before the committee today will ensure that enforcement is taken seriously. The directive is before the committee having been referred to it for decision on recommendation back to the Houses of the Oireachtas.

I thank the committee members. With the main issue being discussed today, there are a number of ways in which we can implement the recommendations of the Mahon tribunal report with regard to a planning regulator. I am very interested to hear the views of the committee in that regard.