Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)

I do not support this dangerous Bill, which provides evidence that the State is becoming a dictatorship. The time has come for people to march in the streets in protest at the denial of their rights in a range of areas. I am reminded of a disagreement I had with the Mayo county manager in regard to the provision of halting sites. I told the manager I would welcome a halting site beside my home as soon as he did the same. It goes without saying that such a site has never been and never will be constructed beside a county manager's house. The same principle applies to this legislation. Everybody is eager to support infrastructural development so long as it does not happen close to their homes.

This is the most dangerous legislation that has ever come before the House because it seeks to deprive people of the power to make observations and objections in regard to planning matters. We are told its provisions relate only to critical infrastructure but we can be certain it will only be critical for developers. Evidence from successive tribunals indicates who this Bill will ultimately benefit. In time, another Minister will introduce additional legislation that will further expand the provisions of this Bill to ensure developers are making enough money and paying enough of it to politicians. Developers may eventually be given such extensive powers that they will no longer require planning permission for building projects. This is dangerous legislation and it should be opposed. I hope my party will join me in opposing it because the public does not support its provisions. The time has come for us to stand up and be counted.

With each Bill we pass in this House it seems we are taking power from the people, in the person of the Minister, and handing it to faceless people who have never stood for election. Members of An Bord Pleanála and departmental officials were not elected and are not accountable to the people in the same way as politicians. We will ask the public to re-elect us next year but we must ask ourselves what function we serve. This House is only a talking shop and its Members no longer have any power. The same applies to local authorities. The public, however, wants us to reclaim that power even though it has undoubtedly been abused by Ministers and others in the past. Instead of making heroes out of such people, we must deal with them effectively. I am sickened by what goes on every day.

I am pro-planning in that I am generally supportive of development. However, I will give an example from my constituency to illustrate the problems with the planning system. Last year, a major garage in Westport successfully applied to Mayo County Council for planning permission to construct a new premises on a national primary road. At the same time, a young couple was refused planning permission to build a house some 100 yd. away. I raised this issue repeatedly until the council eventually agreed that a second application by the couple would be successful. After securing the approval of the council for this second application, however, the young couple was then faced with an objection from the National Roads Authority, NRA, lodged at 4 p.m. on the last day. I telephoned the authority and asked how it could object to this application when it had no difficulty with the construction of a garage on the same road. I received no satisfactory response.

It seems certain that somebody was corrupt in this process. There is no consistency in regard to such decisions. It makes no sense that the NRA should find a house accessed regularly by one or two cars more objectionable than a garage accessed by perhaps 200 vehicles. I support the construction of that garage but I also insist on consistency in the planning process. Will the Minister contact the NRA and ask it to withdraw the objection to this young couple's planning application? This may be their only opportunity to acquire their own home because they cannot afford to buy a site in Westport. The Minister must challenge the NRA on its inconsistency in this matter.

It is important that we discover why this happened. Why were the interests of big business accommodated while those of a young couple were thwarted? There must have been corruption. If there is a genuine reason, I would like to know what it is.

See this speech in context