Ulick Burke (Galway East, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on Second Stage of this Bill. I welcome some aspects of the legislation as it stands, although I would suggest a review is needed of certain provisions. There are a number of inconsistencies between what the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is advocating and what is contained in the Bill. The cutbacks and embargoes imposed by this Government on local authorities are responsible for the termination of contracts for a significant number of excellent planners. The Minister should have ensured those who deliver services can remain in their positions.

The Bill proposes to extend the time permitted for planning permission in certain instances. Will this include an extension to the length of time for permission on projects which will be taken over by NAMA? The Minister has been highly critical of the decisions that permitted many of these projects to proceed, yet he intends that the time allowed for them can be extended automatically. I ask him to review this issue as a matter of urgency.

I regret that he is interfering in the planning process at local level. It would be a retrograde step were he to continue that practice. I say that because when the first Local Government (Planning and Development) Act 1963 came into operation on 1 October 1964 it became a mandatory function of local government to deal with planning applications. Prior to that the process was discretionary for towns and urban areas. Much has changed since then.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins referred to many bad decisions being taken by local authority members in County Galway. I was a member of Galway County Council with Deputy Higgins for many years. He was not totally accurate in some of what he said, because as a Minister he had responsibility for European directives. I know for a fact that he opposed the granting of a road licence to relieve flooding in south Galway in the 1990s. The whole world saw the recent impact of flooding on people as well as the flora and fauna in that area. He referred to people giving out about the importance of snails, birds and bees, but at the same time he was responsible for maintaining and retaining a flood plain in south Galway which affected people as well. I do not know how he can reconcile that and be at peace with himself.

I accept that at that time there was an abuse of the provision known as "section 4". I am delighted that mechanism has ceased to operate in County Galway because councillors have now found a different way of dealing with the issue. I wish to put on record that we had a Minister of State with responsibility for local government who during the 1970s vehemently supported section 4s and put his name to them. Many other Members of the House would have done that subsequently. The system was abused but I accept there was a necessity for it in some cases.

Planning is an executive function of the local authority and the majority of planners were excellent and honest and they delivered the service in a good way. Others fell foul of the system whether it was through greed or otherwise. A serious situation had developed in the past ten years and I hope that is over and done with. In effect, we have 88 planning authorities in this country. We have 29 local authorities, 49 town councils and ten borough corporations, whether they be city or county. As a result, it is inevitable that we would have inconsistencies in the delivery of the service and contradictions on city and county boundaries.

If one were to look from east Galway into Tipperary one would see positive integrated planning of local development in County Tipperary but the east Galway area remains stagnant because we cannot develop due to the fact that more than two thirds of the county has a designation of one kind or another, for example, natural heritage area, special protection area or whatever else. In addition, we have another designation, usually following a decision by the local authority in conjunction with the Galway transportation study. That started and had an effect on an area within five or six miles of Galway city but it gradually extended and now there are restrictions half way up the Slieve Aughty mountains some 30 miles away. That area was already designated but now another layer of restriction has been added. The Minister must come to terms with the situation. It is difficult for professional planners who advise and decide on planning applications to manoeuvre between those restrictions and at the same time to be fair to the applicant.

I welcomed the initiative by local authorities, on foot of a ministerial decision, to have local area plans. Local area plans might provide an opportunity to allow people to enhance their incomes in areas that are currently restricted. Due to restrictions, European directives and Government interference of one kind or another, farmers must resort to some other way of making a living in order to remain in Connemara, Portumna, Slieve Aughty or wherever else in the county. Galway is a county of immense contrast between east and west and north and south. It is important that those local area plans would present an opportunity to allow people to enhance their income. I refer, for example, to tourism in east Galway. When one speaks of tourism in County Galway one thinks of Galway city and Connemara and the rest is forgotten. Local area plans, properly put in place and directed, can present opportunities that will work.

I am on record in this House as having said that Shannon Development was a shining example of where people could provide opportunities along the Shannon as far up as Lough Derg. Unfortunately, Shannon Development remained in Munster. It operated in counties Clare and Tipperary. In east Galway we looked with envious eyes across the Shannon at the type of developments that were taking place and that through good planning fitted hand in glove into the environment into which they were placed. We could not do that in Galway until now. Thank God, due to a more co-ordinated regional strategy, some positive development has been allowed to take place.

Bad decisions were taken that resulted in flooding in south Galway in particular, in east Galway along the Shannon banks and in Ballinasloe. I accept that some of the flooding was not due to bad planning. When people are flooded insurance companies do not allow them to insure their properties any longer. In such cases it is important for the Government to consider a relocation plan. I do not refer to urban areas but to rural areas such as south Galway. Following the 1964 and 1965 flooding, three families were successfully relocated. That did not cost much. Five families now require to be relocated. Will the Minister and his colleagues who have responsibility for water management investigate the possibility of relocating these few houses? Four families need relocation because of the likely recurrence of flooding.

The Minister of State with responsibility for the Office of Public Works visited County Galway on two occasions. He saw what happened and he discussed the issues with the people. He was readily available and for that we thank him but, despite €1.6 million being spent on studies on flooding in south Galway, no work has been done because of the demands of environmentalists and Government agencies such as the national parks and wildlife service, formerly Dúchas. Unless there is agreement between agencies before we start, the ideas of, and the resources made available, by the Government will come to nought again.

Reference was made to one-off housing, which has been described with catchphrases such as "bungalow blitz" and "a blight". However, many people had to return to their homes and acquire a site from a parent or a sibling to provide themselves with housing in rural areas because of the explosion in the cost of housing during the boom. They were criticised by a number of groups, including An Taisce. The Minister's intention is to increase the number of agencies that have to be consulted about a planning application. Standard agencies such as An Taisce will still be consulted. People say local authority members and public representatives at large are the enemies of An Taisce but its officials have made many fine recommendations in various places and it was necessary for them to intervene where cowboys were at work. The Minister stated, "Specifically, the programme for Government 2007-2012 states that the Government will ensure that the Citizens Information Board has the necessary resources to assist and inform the public on planning procedures". When he replies, will he indicate what resources he will provide to the board? Is he satisfied its staff have the capacity to make reasonable contributions and observations on individual planning applications or in a community context? I agree consultation before decisions are taken is always good but under this legislation another agency will be engaged in the planning process on top of An Taisce, the national parks and wildlife service and the National Roads Authority, NRA.

The provision of infrastructure is important and in the past NRA decisions were imposed on the local planning authorities who were told some of their planning applications were premature because of the possibility of alternative routes being used by the authority. We were plagued with these decisions in County Galway. The new M6 motorway between Galway and Dublin is welcome but another national road runs between Ennis and Tuam and passes through Gort and Oranmore. Serious restrictions have been placed on development along these routes. I do not refer to merchants and builders who are in for the quick kill but necessary development could take place near these routes. The NRA, therefore, has had a serious impact on planning. I do not know whether this was ever envisaged. When the authority was first involved in the planning process, it restricted the number of slip roads on national primary routes. This was a great decision in the interest of safety and many lives may have been saved as a result but, at the same time, is it necessary for this agency to be involved?

Ireland is unique in Europe, as it provides for a third appeal in its planning system but it is regrettable that, in many instances, the advice and decisions of planners who report on appeals to An Bord Pleanála are overturned and disregarded by the board. The Minister needs to investigate this issue because when local elected representatives ignored planning advice from local authorities under the old section 4 provision, they were criticised heavily. Nobody knew anything about it until somebody read the file and found a planner's report had been rejected and disregarded and a different decision taken. Something needs to be done to tighten that up.

I am delighted the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources is present. Many areas in County Galway have been designated for wind energy development but there are major difficulties. The first is physical because they are in designated areas. A group of farmers in a community effort to provide a windmill in the Slieve Aughty mountains had to bring in experts from Scotland to provide a report on the possibility of hen harriers migrating to the area. As a result, the mountains were designated as a restricted area for development because of the potential for hen harriers to migrate in the area, even though none has never been seen in the area. However, the terrain is similar to the habitat of these birds.

I refer to the cost of the projects and the number of people involved who have gone far down the line but who cannot access the national grid. Who will be taken in under the Gate 3 directive? Will the Minister intervene with EirGrid to ensure projects are connected? What would it mean to a Green Party Minister if the country could produce more renewable energy?

Last Monday night I attended a community meeting in Clonfert, outside Eyrecourt, County Galway, on the banks of the River Shannon. The Government gave out a contract for the provision of broadband internet access under the national broadband strategy. However, certain areas have been left without broadband provision, despite the fact that this was one of the black spots at national level. A total of 111 district electoral divisions in County Galway alone will be officially without broadband. I ask the Minister to ensure that the entire area covered by the contract with 3 to which I referred — from Portumna along the banks of the Shannon, through Ballinasloe and as far as Ballygar — is provided with broadband because there is no sign of it currently in certain areas. I was told today by the Minister's Department that it will certainly be 2011 before these areas will be provided with broadband. There are no broadband facilities available; one cannot, under the present system, obtain access to any at all.

I ask the Minister to review the situation as a matter of urgency and extend the marginal area by the River Shannon and in the east Galway area. All of the Galway East constituency is in the area covered by the contract. I remind the Minister that my colleague, Deputy Michael Kitt, was with me at that meeting and he said he would attempt to arrange a meeting between the Minister and the four Oireachtas Members from Galway East to discuss this matter. I would greatly appreciate it if the Minister could facilitate this.

See this speech in context