Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)

What is the situation? Will this treatment plant be covered by a regulatory section that the Minister will not bring into force until after the next general election? Will it be exempt completely? We would like to hear the story.

I have been in a constituency probably subject to more mega-development plans than any other in the country, barring north County Dublin and parts of County Kildare. I will give some more examples. Approximately four years ago the Government nominated a strategic development zone of 3,000 units at Hansfield, Clonsilla. That number of houses is not unusual in Dublin West and the planning process deals with it regularly and very often without many objections, since a system has developed of trying to work in blocks of what is good for an area. However, in the strategic development process at Hansfield, the Government decided to make absolutely no commitment regarding infrastructure such as schools, access to public transport or the road network. People naturally objected, although not to the principle, since everyone accepts that the area is a good one to locate more housing. However, it is located along the line of the Dunboyne railway line spur which has, unfortunately, been closed for more than 50 years. The Government has promised that one day it will be reopened. However, living in Dublin West, people know the Government's track record. It is a case of promises upon promises, with precious little delivery.

There was the land at Abbotstown where the Taoiseach proposed to build a large stadium. There was the development of the National Aquatic Centre which I welcomed as soon as I heard it announced. Some 15 years ago in the Fingal development plan I proposed that the entire site be reserved for amenity purposes and a park, something supported by all parties represented on the council. As a public representative in Dublin West, I am now on my fifth stadium proposal. I know very little about football but have learned a great deal about stadium plans such as which ones work and which ones do not.

The critical point concerns the relationship of the proposals to the people and developers in the area and how realistic they are if the key issues of road and rail access are not addressed. I want to know about the ancillary facilities to which such projects give rise.

Let us consider Blanchardstown which has probably the best town centre in the country. It is open to all and everybody uses it but the road network which serves it is dreadful. Some 20 years ago there was a line drawn in the development plan for a railway but we are still waiting. I presume the metro, the grandson of the original railway proposal, will serve Blanchardstown. How do we know, however, that a developer will not get on the inside track, to which the public does not have access? That is the critical issue.

If there is strategic infrastructure alongside a designated strategic railway development which almost everyone would welcome, what happens to the lands on either side of the development? Obviously, their value will increase by multiples as a consequence. If we do not ensure the bulk of the increase in the value of the land accrues to the public, developers will walk away with unreasonable profits. I am a realist. Like other business people, builders are in business to make money and good luck to them. However, I draw the line at them making unreasonable profits where they avail of the benefit of the increase in land values and decamp to Marbella or some other location to buy their millionaire homes and the people left behind are left without infrastructure.

The reference to community gain is not to a small playing pitch which a developer suggests to a residents association to try to get it to change its view and support a planning decision. It is a much broader concept which has been developed in places such as Milton Keynes in the United Kingdom where when land values rise and developers make money but it is a reasonable profit and the bulk of the gain goes to the community. If the Government could address this issue, we would not have as many innate objections to projects which may be essential in the public interest but in respect of which people believe there is corruption involved at base because there is a golden circle on the inside track and the citizen is not within the ring of stakeholders and left without primary schools.

People cannot believe that since January, up to 600 parents in five housing growth areas in Dublin West have been told that there will be no place in a primary school for their four year old. The people concerned work, pay their taxes, buy their houses and do everything the right way. They are model citizens. Some 30 years ago when the country had no money, each child could find a primary school place but one cannot do so today in Dublin West. The reason is that the developers own the land and the Government is afraid to take them on. It makes promises but does not comprehensively address the issue. We have reservations about the Bill because it is only by cutting to the chase and providing infrastructure for the good of the community, not just to satisfy developers' naked greed, that we will make progress.

See this speech in context