Joanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)

I have a similar problem to Deputy Hogan. In amendment No. 12, I propose that section 8 be deleted. I have a particular problem with the subsection which states that submissions to a council shall not refer to a submission relating to requests or proposals for the zoning of particular land for any purpose. The section also states that a manager is restricted to providing a report on submissions providing they do not relate to the issue of zoning and the development plan. The Minister has justified this provision by arguing that at this stage submissions should be of a strategic nature and should relate to overall strategy.

I have a problem with this because I do not see a straightforward separation between strategy and proposals on rezonings. A member of the public might want to make a submission that no land should be rezoned in a development plan. He or she might argue that enough land is zoned under a development plan to last a number of years. Such a submission might relate to zoning. Someone might propose that a particular area of land should be a green belt because there should be a particular number of green belts in a county. Another person might suggest an area should be classed as high amenity or residential in keeping with the consolidation of residential development.

From what I can see the Minister of State is ruling out such submissions. He is making a judgment on what type of submissions members of the public might make if they were to make submissions regarding zonings and he is wrong to do so. Either one believes in public participation and consultation or one does not. The Minister of State should open submissions to allow for whatever the public wants to say about a review of a development plan. I do not agree with the separation between the strategy and zoning.

The fundamental part of a development plan, in terms of democratic input, concerns whether one keeps, changes or subtlety adjusts zoning. By excluding submissions on zonings at this stage lobbying for zonings could be put into a less transparent and publicly accountable channel. We all know that developers speak to planners, council officials, councillors and so on. It is the nature of the process. If that type of thing goes on it should be open and transparent. These people should put their views on the table.

Similarly, members of the public have a view on zoning. They might have no ownership of or vested interest in the land throughout a county but they may have a view on whether land should be zoned for industrial use to provide jobs in an area and to attract employment. That is an issue which is strategic in nature and does not just concern zoning. LAMA has objected to this provision. It believes that no restrictions should be placed on members of the public in making submissions in the preparation of the draft development plan. It said it believes the proposals contained in the Bill are undemocratic in seeking to restrict the type of submissions which can be made regarding the development plan.

The most important thing for the public is zoning. That is what development plans are all about, not vague aspirations and what we would like the county to be. The fundamental element of the development plan is zoning decisions. The public should be allowed at all stages to say what they think. Managers should have to read it and provide a report on all the submissions they receive. A manager can, behind closed doors, make judgments on submissions and decide to exclude some and not others. There could be a thin line on why he or she made a particular decisions or he or she could be prejudiced. He or she will not even have to provide a report as to why he or she excluded particular submissions.

It is not open and transparent. It is an undermining of democracy because councillors will never get to see some the submissions people made. The public will not get to have their say in the way it normally does. I urge the Minister to reconsider the wording of this section and that it why I propose it be deleted.

See this speech in context