Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)

I would like the Minister to be a man of his word. In a recent reply to a parliamentary question by Deputy Olivia Mitchell, he stated he would, in a very short period, introduce changes to the Planning and Development Regulations 2005. One of the commitments he made in the reply — I do not know whether he or his Department officials wrote it — was that he would address the need for a uniform planning application form throughout the country. The reply stated he would also address the fact that a very significant number of applications are actually turned down by local authorities, as brought to his attention by Deputy Olivia Mitchell. These two issues are very serious. I understand from Deputy Olivia Mitchell that approximately 50% of the applications in her area are turned down by the county council because of errors made in filling out application forms. Has the Minister honoured his word regarding these issues? Has he made the necessary changes to the regulations? Clearly, they have not been made. Neither is there clarity of thought or intent, which the Government ought to demonstrate in dealing with these issues.

In spite of all the changes the Minister is making, any existing premises that has a licence from the courts to sell alcohol can and will continue to do so. There is no change whatsoever, provided they continue to comply with the law in every respect. However, every new business, convenience store and shop around the country can sell wine from the fridge. It does not need to be the substantial business of the premises, but can represent a very large portion. It will not be the Minister's concept of a little corner fridge, and that is where he is making a mistake. He is requiring people who want to sell beer, which has a lower alcohol content than wine, and spirits to apply for planning permission. However, he is not requiring those who sell wine only to do so. His proposal is ambiguous and lacks clarity.

The interim report of the liquor licensing commission strongly disputes some of the issues. The Minister refers to councillors and the community having a say with regard to an off-licence. Due and proper space is given for that in the courts. It is very clear that an applicant for an off-licence must comply with the usual conditions regarding suitability of premises and the other grounds for objection as contained in section 18 of the 2000 Act. The applicant must go before the court and due notice should be given. This is to ensure general conformity with legislation and to give the public and authorities proper grounds for objection. When people object to an application, they are not objecting on grounds of planning or the physical premises but because they do not want it in their neighbourhood and perhaps it has been badly run in the past. All the issues and objections people raise can be dealt with properly and entirely through the courts system.

The commission recommends: "Should a full off-licence be required ... then the applicant shall be obliged to obtain planning permission and shall satisfy the Court at the hearing ... that any conditions have been complied with." This is in the interests of good planning practice and conformity with general practice to ensure that the lay-out of the premises is suitable. It does not make sense to introduce a planning application process for the sale of beer and whiskey but not for bottles of wine. Deputy Perry informed me that for every bottle of whiskey sold, ten bottles of wine go out the door. The Minister has swallowed this line——

See this speech in context