Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all contributors for their presentations and efforts in making the joint committee aware of and bringing it up to speed on the issues in their local authorities and organisations in order that it can be more informed in its presentation to the Minister and the Department when it comes to finalising the Bill. I am conscious of the overlap between the Government's announcement last November on the provision of social housing and the amount of funding supposedly tied with it. Listening to the county manager in Cork talk about funding, infrastructural deficits and negative aspects such as its inability to meet the demands placed on it, I wonder what consultation has taken place between the Local Authority Members Association and the Department on the provisions to deliver that element of the social housing policy that is at the forefront of the Government's mind when one thinks it is to spend in the region of €2 billion or €3 billion. If it is the case that the association does not believe many local authorities will be in a position to meet the demands placed on them because of the deficits, how are the two combined to deliver where there has been a failure to do so in the past?

The other point I want to make to local authorities and representatives of management and the executive concerns how successful they believe the enforcement offices within the various local authorities have been in enforcing, reviewing and contributing to better planning legislation, given that it is my considered opinion that they were not adequately resourced or funded, in monetary and personnel terms, to enforce planning legislation the way it should have been enforced in the past. Many have looked at the failings in oversight and signing off, to which local authorities were central. They, including management, have an obligation to have an enforcement office in place to have the oversight needed and reflect the thrust of planning legislation. I do not believe that was the case in the past and I have not heard local authorities coming out loudly, clearly and forcefully enough in the meantime to ensure the issue will be addressed in the future. I am surprised that issue has not been mentioned.

My other point concerns the vacant site levy. If the example of the derelict site levy is anything to go by, huge improvements must be made. Again, there have been failings on the part of local authorities, particularly management, to advise members to deal with these issues appropriately. In my time on a local authority I saw no success in addressing the obvious dilapidation in many towns and villages, as Councillor Guckian said, despite the best intentions of members to achieve success.

The excuse, either stated or withheld, was that local authorities did not have the resources to deal with the legal issues and bring them to a successful conclusion. Again I have not heard the local authority management or executives coming out and identifying the deficiency and saying how it might be improved. I am disappointed that I have not heard it today either. I hope the witnesses will identify the deficiencies in a succinct and straightforward manner in which the members can achieve the wishes of the people who give them the privilege to sit in the chambers throughout the country. That issue was left behind and it is vital at this stage to deal with it in view of the way that towns and villages have deteriorated during the bad times. They will continue to be left behind if collective action is not taken to address those issues.

I take the point made by the Local Authority Members Association on the caps on populations. That is right and proper. It is a case of horses for courses. County Leitrim was described as a case in point and that is replicated throughout the country. There should not be a national figure of a population threshold of 3,000 that is applied across the board. That is leaving many small towns and villages behind. I hope the Department does not think the vacant site levy will be a revenue generating exercise, which is what has been made of the local development contributions in the past. There is an expectation, rightly or wrongly, on the part of management to believe that some funding can be generated from this source because we generated money in the past. Again it is horses for courses. We are in a new situation, whereby that stream of funding is not available to most local authorities, and most definitely not to rural local authorities. I know the situation has improved and is improving in the cities and large towns, but that is not the case in most local authorities. Again, the vacant site levy should not be viewed as a revenue generating exercise. I hope the Department will be conscious of that when bringing forward new planning laws.

The various exemptions to the planning laws needs to be teased out more. I understand that many landholders are in the position that they cannot commit to developing the land, as much as they may wish to, because of financial difficulties and liens on the property from other institutions.

Land that is zoned for agricultural use should not come into play. The local authority members, in conjunction with the local authority management, devise development plans every six years. I am sure the planners, management and local authority members are in tune with their area when they are devising the new development plan. We all know the procedures for making changes to the development plan. If land is zoned as agricultural land, one cannot expect to see it developed for residential or commercial use. We have all learned lessons from lands being developed on the edge of towns, when lands were rezoned for commercial use. This has added to the problem of dilapidation and a dearth of activity in town centres. I expect that in the time that remains we would hear some specific recommendations or opinions on how we revitalise our towns and villages throughout the country. I brought forward a paper to my party in recent times. This is an issue that must be tackled. If the Bill offers an opportunity to deal with the lack of life and vitality in towns, which is very debilitating, we should all take it on board. I know that local authorities have a role in the setting of rates. Provision must be made in legislation to give local authorities an opening to be more imaginative in addressing issues, as well as in the planning and development legislation.

We should be seeking ways and means in which we allow people to live and reside in these areas to bring back some vitality to them. Having done that, the opportunity will then arise for other ways to encourage civic activity in those areas. I thank the delegations for their presentations. We will digest and investigate them further over the coming weeks before we finalise our own recommendations to the Minister and the Department. I hope they will not take offence from anything that I said earlier as we are all working in the best interests of all those we represent. That is our duty and our role. This process is about teasing out issues to better the legislation and to make it more appropriate to the needs of the public.