Rebecca Moynihan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. Like Deputy Ó Broin, I will provide some of my own views then I will ask some specific questions.

I am quite disappointed by both presentations, in that the tone of both the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage and An Bord Pleanála seems to be more concerned with the implementation of the SHDs and helping developers than with delivering proper and sustainable planning in both our towns and cities. First, I want to ask about cases in which An Bord Pleanála decisions go against the findings of inspectors' reports. I have a list of them before me, as well as a list of some that have been overturned by judicial review. On the advice of the Chair, I am not going to refer to particular cases. There was one very recent case in my own area in which An Bord Pleanála went directly against the advice of its inspectors. On what grounds does that happen? Mr. Justice O'Donnell of the Supreme Court, in the Balz v.An Bord Pleanála judgment of 2019, stated:

It is a basic element of any decision-making affecting the public that the relevant submission should be addressed and an explanation given as to why they are not accepted, if indeed that is the case. This is fundamental not just to the law, but also to the trust which members of the public are required to have in decision making institutions ...

As someone who has been involved in making submissions to An Bord Pleanála, particularly in respect of the number of student accommodation units within a small area in Dublin 8, and who has read decisions by An Bord Pleanála and by planners in this regard, I do not accept that the reasons and the rationale that are given by both members of the public and also sometimes by An Bord Pleanála's own planners are adequately considered in the reports that are given.

An Bord Pleanála also referenced opposition to housing. I do not necessarily accept that engagement in the planning process always concerns opposition to housing, rather, as An Bord Pleanála referenced, it is actually a case of seeking to get the balance of the right type of housing within the right areas. Anybody who has been involved in development plans knows the amount of work that goes into them and the stages of the process. When a considered development plan is produced, it is as a result of months of compromise and engagement with developers and within the planning framework as set down. I want to ask about cases in which development plans are contravened and the reasons and the rationale for this.

I also want to ask about the strategic housing process. Applications for 9,746 student accommodation units and 55% of commencements are granted, which is a lot more commencements granted than in the case of houses. Of these, 5,371 have commenced. From what I can see, this is always in a small area of the inner city, including Dublin 8, Dublin 7 and Dublin 1. The only large third level institution within those areas is DIT, which is moving to Grangegorman. I wonder how that tallies with the aim to deliver the right developments in the right locations, because I do not particularly think that it does. I wish to ask the Department's representatives about what they said on the issue of SHDs, namely, on continuing the benefits of the SHDs, which is to provide certainty and timelines for developers. As far as I can see, the Department is planning to go against the political will of the Government, as decided within the programme for Government. I do not necessarily consider a commencement rate of 27% to be of great benefit in terms of what it was set out to do.

Will the witnesses elaborate further on that in terms of the SHD beyond 2021? Is the Department planning on going against the programme for Government? Is it planning to continue strategic housing development, albeit with a use it or lose it approach?