Dáil debates

Wednesday, 14 June 2006

Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Bill 2006 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed).

 

5:00 pm

Tony Dempsey (Wexford, Fianna Fail)

Déanaim comhghairdeas leis an Aire as an mBille seo a thabhairt os ár gcomhair inniu. Tá sé an-tábhachtach, agus tá pleanáil an-tábhachtach don ghnáthdhuine, do mhuintir na tuaithe agus mhuintir na cathrach mar aon.

I congratulate the Minister for bringing forward the Bill. Since I was elected to the House, planning has probably been the third most important issue I have come across, after crime and the health service. It affects practically everyone in rural and urban areas.

The Bill amends the Act of 2002. Many years ago I studied the 1963 Act when I was a student in UCD. The Act of 2002 must be amended in order that strategic infrastructure can be put in place. The Bill provides for this by allowing for a single stage process and a rigorous assessment of all projects, including their environmental impact, public consultation and, above all, certainty of timeframes. It takes so long to get full planning permission for an infrastructural project that the proposal is often rendered uneconomic. If a private investor has to withdraw, he or she is at a significant loss because the pre-planning process costs so much before plans are even drawn up. If the State or a local authority is involved, the taxpayer picks up the bill, often unfairly.

I hope the Minister will go further and also examine smaller projects that are less important on a national scale but of great importance to an individual or a locality. The time taken to acquire planning permission for these projects must also be examined, in addition to their socio-economic and environmental impact.

An Bord Pleanála already has responsibility for roads, motorways, waterways etc. and the Bill correctly extends its remit. The most difficult aspect of planning is the delay in the timeframe. No one knows how long the process will take. One cannot operate in that way in the 21st century. Currently, planning decisions can be appealed from the county council to An Bord Pleanála and then to judicial review. It is important that everybody should have his or her say. However, I would like to see the Bill addressing what I regard as malicious objectors, those who persistently and routinely object to proposals. Such people do exist. One can have a person from County Donegal or outside the country objecting to a project in County Wexford. I accept we are all part of a big European Community but there must be a balance between economic necessity and environmental desirability. Too often projects fall down in spite of their economic necessity. In many cases, those who have been to the forefront with their objections pack their bags and leave the country once a project has been refused permission. Every delay causes significant loss, not just to private developers but also to taxpayers.

It is important that the rights of the individual are protected and the proposed public consultation process takes this into account. In getting rid of the local authority planning stage it is important to ensure the specialist division of An Bord Pleanála will be properly financed to consider projects of strategic infrastructural importance. In future An Bord Pleanála will decide on what is strategically important.

The Bill proposes to give a specific role to elected representatives. I compliment Deputy Stanton on his contribution because on at least three occasions he referred to the reason we were here. Public representatives are elected to local authorities or the Dáil to represent and give effect to the aspirations of the majority of ordinary people. In many cases in the past the aspirations of ordinary people were not part of the planning process. Too often the views of the minority take precedence over the views of the majority who elect us, irrespective of which party we come from.

A balance must be struck between economic necessity, job creation in rural Ireland and the protection of, for example, badgers and foxes. I make no apology for stating people and their needs should always take precedence over the needs of the environment. I am not someone who would like to see the environment destroyed. As a teacher, I was involved for many years in environmental preservation. However, it is important that if a project will create jobs or get us from A to B more quickly than would otherwise be the case, that these should be overriding concerns of planners.

I am delighted to refer Deputy Stanton to a provision in the Bill that gives a new specific role to county managers who will be required to obtain and forward the views of the elected members of the council to the board. That is one of the most important aspects of the Bill and reflective of a Minister who is in touch. I am sure not a day goes by when Deputies from every party, including Ministers and Opposition spokespersons, receive people who give them first-hand accounts of the frustration they experience.

I hope the Minister, Deputy Roche, who has been most proactive and the Minister of State, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, will look not just at major projects but also at the ones which concern the lives of ordinary people. Very often this may relate to the desire of a farmer who has worked hard all his or her life to provide a site for his or her children. Given the state of farming, very often farmers have little else to give their children. The position of such a person must be reflected in what we, as elected representatives, do. In my short experience in the House, this does not always happen.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.