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

I do not want to go on too long. Suffice it to say that there is much merit in what has been said by previous speakers. I wish to pick up on Senator Coffey's points, with which I agree wholeheartedly. We are at a critical juncture in the future distribution of funds to these plans. I think in particular of the flight from many rural areas, the change in retail habits, the traffic management challenges faced by some larger towns, the way people do their business, residential issues, problems we have in housing, how we seek to repopulate towns and villages and whatnot.

My major difficulty is with the hierarchy of plans, the primacy of the county development plan and the input that is made by local authority members, who are of the community and for the community, as other speakers have rightly said. That should be the bible and the blueprint for all other development, initiatives, help and assistance in conjunction with these organisations which do much good work. However, an awful lot of money has been distributed. Some members and councillors, who are the ones who are most accountable, feel neglected, left out and do not feel they have the input into this that they should have, despite the fact, as Deputy Coffey said, that they have various representational roles on some of these committees. Community enterprise and development is not necessarily the wholehearted remit of individual organisations which have evolved. These guys build their own power base and end up in competition with the very ones who put them in place. There are development plans, local area plans, regional plans, spatial strategies and Government policy. Trying to tie all of those together can become very difficult. The hierarchy of plans needs to be set out clearly and concisely.

If the county development plan is to get the role it deserves and is to be ensured that role and primacy, better help and assistance has to be given to the local authority members to ensure that they are reflecting the views, aspirations and will of those they represent. While well-meant and well-intentioned, the executive has at it disposal huge expertise in engineering, economic and financial assistance. That same expertise is not available to the local authority members, who feel conflicted. In the event of the local authority members not being able to provide alternatives without the professional expertise, they are exposed in the future to issues arising out of that development plan or some of the initiatives contained within it. I spoke about this before.

The county development plan is a very consultative process, some would say far too much so, especially in the context of the position we find ourselves in now in trying to deal with a housing crisis, for example. I believe it is incumbent on the Department and the Minister to ensure that when the county development plans are being devised, funding is made available to local authorities to ensure the members have the relevant expertise available to them that may offer an opinion contrary to that of the executive in order that there can be greater ownership of the development plan thereafter and, ultimately, that those who base their own plans thereafter on the primacy of that plan can ensure that accountability is paramount and the ownership is with the membership and, by association, with those they represent.

That is my tuppence worth. The primacy of the county development plan and its associated local development plans is very important. It must assume its rightful place at the top of the hierarchy with regard to any development that ensues. Any plans initiated by any of these other organisations or groups, such as Leader or local development companies, community groups and whatnot, must work to the aims and objectives that are contained within the development plan, which is more representative than any other that is brought to bear.