Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)

Níl an Cathaoirleach ciontach in aon chor. Tá gach canúint chomh maith leis an chéad chanúint eile, chomh fada agus a bhaineann sé le muintir Mumhan.

An undertaking that damages for the delay of a project, which is what is involved here, should be underwritten by an ordinary person or community organisation is a crippling blow to people's option of resorting to the courts. Litigation in this country is strictly for the rich. Two and a half years ago a county council brought me before the High Court. On the Wednesday morning the council had a senior counsel on his feet for far less than three hours in the course of rather ordinary injunction proceedings. The council paid the senior counsel €7,500. That was his fee for the morning. His junior, who studiously studied the back of his senior for the less than three hours, was paid €5,000.

Two days later, I was again before the High Court and the same senior and junior counsels represented the council. The senior counsel was on his feet for less than three hours and was paid another €7,500. His junior counsel, who by this stage must have known every contour of his senior's back from sitting and staring at it throughout this time, was paid another €5,000. A total of €25,000 was the barristers' fee for less than six hours work and one or two hours in the background preparing fairly routine papers. How can ordinary, working people give an undertaking to bear the costs of the opposition, let alone the damages that might be assessed? This provision must be removed from the Bill.

The Bill also narrows the appeal possibilities to the Supreme Court. That is another severe diminution of people's rights. Of course, nobody approaches the Supreme Court with anything less than trepidation about the costs. Nevertheless, individuals and organisations have found that, as a court of last resort, on occasion they have been able to find justice in some decisions that have been made. The case involving Merck, Sharpe and Dohme in Tipperary comes to mind in that regard.

There are severe problems with this Bill. Communities are dealing with enough problems in planning; there has been enough diminution of people's democratic rights. Mobile telephone companies can put masts virtually where they wish, even beside children in primary schools. This has happened in Huntstown, west Dublin, and is a source of great agony for the community because we do not know what will be the health effects of these. That is a huge diminution of the democratic rights of communities.

Management companies are being imposed on communities. The Taoiseach condemned them outright in the Dáil yesterday, saying they were unfair and unnecessary. However, they are being imposed and constituents of mine from Tyrellstown in Dublin West are being dragged into the courts next Wednesday, on foot of bills sent to them by management companies.

Dá bhrí sin, deirtear gur "Acht do dhéanamh socrú, ar mhaithe le leas an phobail, maidir le hiarratais ar chead pleanála a dhéanamh go díreach chuig an mBord Pleanála i leith forbairtí beartaithe áirithe a bhfuil tábhacht straitéiseach leo i dtaca leis an Stát" é an Bille um Pleanáil agus Forbairt (Bonneagar Straitéiseach) 2006. Ní chreidim go bhfuil an Bille seo "ar mhaithe le leas an phobail". Laghdaíonn sé an chumhacht dhaonlathach atá ag gnáthdhaoine a ladhar a chaitheamh isteach sa chóras pleanála. Aon rud a laghdaíonn an tionchar ar féidir le gnáthdhaoine, eagraíochtaí pobail agus a leithéid a bheith acu ar an chóras pleanála, níl sé "ar mhaithe le leas an phobail" ach ina choinne.

Dá bhrí sin, nílim ceadmhach an Bille seo a chur chun cinn. Táim chun cur ina aghaidh, agus tá súil agam go ndéanfaidh daoine eile an rud céanna agus go dtógfar amach as an Bhille na haltanna a laghdaíonn cumhacht na ngnáthdhaoine, a gcearta agus cearta an phobail an tionchar is mó a bheith acu ar an chóras pleanála agus ar cén saghas pleanála a chuirfear isteach ina gcontae, a réigiún, nó pé áit atá i gceist.

See this speech in context