Seán Ryan (Dublin North, Labour)

The Minister of State knows why not. The net effect of section 2 of this Bill enables the planning authority to remove permission subject to an applicant's right to appeal to the High Court. This reverses the current position and, by its nature, puts the onus on the developer to complete the estate rather than go to the courts. I do not accept that this could be construed as an attack on constitutionally protected private property and on the individual's right to earn a living, as outlined by the Minister last night. There is no logic to that argument.

Under the Planning and Development Act 2000, which was approved by the Attorney General, no constitutional issue is at stake should a planning authority refuse the permission in accordance with the Act, that is, in accordance with a decision of the High Court. If, as we propose in this Bill, an applicant rather than a planning authority is required to go to the High Court with the same result, how can one be called constitutional and the other unconstitutional? It does not make sense and, as far as I am concerned, it is a cop-out.

It is about time the rights of householders were given equal consideration to those of developers. This is where we differ with officials in the Minister's Department and we make no apologies for saying that. Unfinished estates are a major issue in Meath, Kildare and Fingal. The Minister had better take this on board because the people who have mortgaged themselves up to the hilt are not prepared to stand idly by and they can be assured of the full support of the Labour Party to ensure adequate legislation is enacted.

See this speech in context