Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour)

I will address the issues raised by Deputy McConalogue at the conclusion of my contribution. I assure the House that those investigations are ongoing.

It is important and good that the House is finally debating the final report of the Mahon planning tribunal. This is a significant debate which will be the historical point of departure in responding to the analysis, findings and recommendations of the Mahon tribunal report. I want to make it clear that this report will be the basis for action. We will ensure that the climate which existed will never be tolerated again whereby corrupt manipulation of the political and planning systems occurred in this country. As Minister of State with responsibility for planning matters I wish to reassure the House that I regard the report as a historic opportunity for both myself and for the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, to mark a point of departure between what has gone before and what is to come.

I will repeat the core element of my initial public response statement to the Mahon tribunal report :

The evidence given during the hearings and the conclusions of the report have rightly apportioned blame to those who received corrupt payments, frustrated the work of the Tribunal and undermined our planning process. Planning corruption is not a faceless crime, it affects the welfare of families and communities for decades. I am determined to act on its conclusions to ensure that our planning system is designed and operated in the interests of the country and the community [and not of developers].

The Minister and I are keenly aware of the strong relationship between the need to have an effective planning system and to overcome our economic challenges and prepare for our country's economic recovery. I also wish to underscore the strong synergy between the planning recommendations of the Mahon tribunal report and recent and ongoing reforms to the legislative underpinning and operation of planning in this country.

There was consolidation of planning legislation in 2000 and the publication of the national spatial strategy in 2002, followed by the introduction of regional planning guidelines in 2004 which were substantially revised in 2010. Although more progress is needed extensive efforts have been made to ensure a more strategic approach to planning, one where the debate is less about whose field is to be zoned and more about how places are being used in the longer term. That progress must continue.

The 2006 Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act established statutory recognition of the national spatial strategy and the 2010 Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2010 provided further amplification. In this regard, the 2010 Act has strengthened regional co-ordination, delivered better alignment of planning nationally, regionally and locally, and introduced a new requirement for core strategies in the development plan process. This process is one that local authorities are strongly engaging with because they recognise the need for a stronger, plan-led, strategic, phased approach to development that will facilitate careful management of, and prudent investment in, infrastructure provision at a time of acute pressure on the public finances.

By taking account of both the tribunal's findings and recent experiences better planning will be achieved. First, where there is an evidence-based approach and future needs, whether for housing, office space, retailing or infrastructure, are agreed strategically and matched by strategic planning at Government level through the appropriate national strategies and sectoral investment plans. Second, when we refocus on revitalising our city and town centres and move against the tendency of the Celtic tiger era to envisage extensive and sprawling extensions of our cities and towns that draw the lifeblood out of older, established central urban areas. Third, where local authorities use the core strategy approach to tackle the legacy of historical and systemic over-zoning and ensure that all zoning is based on a quantifiable need that is community based rather than developer-led. Fourth, when we move instead towards a more co-ordinated and joined up approach to the delivery of essential public services such as schools, public transport and water services, using the local plan as the template.

I wish to take this opportunity to outline some initiatives I have been involved in during the short period since I took office, which are pointers for the way forward. I expect shortly to receive the regional planning guidelines implementation annual report 2011 which has been prepared by the eight regional authorities, having particular regard to the core strategy provisions of the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2010 and ensuring proper oversight of the alignment of plans at national, regional and local level. I believe the report of the regional authorities will indicate that serious progress is being made and must continue to be made in tackling our addiction to zoning.

The 2010 Act was aimed at decreasing the need for ministerial intervention in development plans and local area plans by bringing clarity to the legal responsibilities of planning authorities to have reasonable and evidence based plans rather than rely on the Minister's intervention in the plan process. I wish to make it clear that this does not automatically rule out the need for my future intervention, in particular in the context of ensuring local plans and development plans are consistent. I will closely monitor their consistency with the now adopted core strategies in development plans.

I will shortly launch an innovative planning information system that for the first time in this country will draw together all the zoning maps of every development plan and local area plan in the country. These will be published on the Internet and will be accessible to the public. The system will enable a much more open and transparent system for tracking the integration of plans across the country. It will be a game-changer in terms of how the public will view the operation of the forward planning system. I will announce this very shortly. It is important to recall - as the tribunal did - that there are fundamental differences between the current planning regime and that prevailing at the time the planning tribunal started its work 15 years ago. I agree with the tribunal that while recent progress is welcome, we can and must go further.

I turn now to look more closely at the ten planning recommendations of the Mahon tribunal report. Recommendation No. 2, on regional authorities, will be considered in the context of the forthcoming policy proposals of the Minister, Deputy Hogan, concerning further local government reform, to include the regional dimension. Recommendation No. 3 and, to an extent, No. 8, on regional and local authority procedures, have already been acted upon in recent legislative amendments. Recommendation No. 4 is a matter for the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport. Other recommendations propose sensible improvements to improve accountability, transparency and fairness in the planning process. I believe we would all largely agree on these but we must study them closely and consider them carefully as we prepare to respond to them in greater detail. I have already met officials and will meet them again next week in order to progress these recommendations, in particular in the planning department within the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government.

Without question, however, the most fundamental recommendation is for the establishment of an independent planning regulator. In this one recommendation, the Mahon tribunal essentially tells legislators such as us that notwithstanding the roles of local authorities and the Minister, and progress made in recent years in tightening up a previously lax system, planning, especially the forward planning process, needs independent oversight. This must have the appropriate legal mandate and resources to determine whether plans are in compliance with legal requirements and, if they are not, to determine what intervention may be necessary where serious policy departures have taken place, or where there is strong evidence of bad practice or systemic failure. In other words, the tribunal's assessment is that Ireland needs to introduce an element of independent review of forward planning and planning administration practice in the manner that An Bord Pleanála undoubtedly delivers in overseeing our independent planning application appeals system. I intend to look at that recommendation and consult on it. My main focus in all this is to improve accountability and transparency.

In the short term, Members will also be mindful of the legacy of planning complaints, referred to by the previous speaker. Concerning these the former Minister, John Gormley, had announced a planning review that was intended to assess the application of planning legislation, policy and guidance within the development plan and development management systems at local level, and to inform further policy development in these areas. A number of planning authorities, representing a broad geographical spread of urban and rural areas and large and small authorities, have been selected to assist in the review of policies and practices by reference to a number of cases raised with my Department. I assure Deputies that work on this is ongoing and I have urged my officials to complete it as urgently as possible. Once it is completed I will issue a public statement, including any appropriate actions to be pursued in regard to further policy development and guidance while also taking account of the need to develop wider proposals for improving the transparency and openness of the planning system as recommended in the report of the Mahon tribunal report.

I wish to make it clear that the former Minister, Mr. Gormley, did not establish any investigations. He set up a panel of consultants who were to be available to carry out investigations. He left office in January 2011 without establishing any such investigation process. He was succeeded as Minister by Deputy Ó Cuív until the fall of the last Government but he, too, did not initiate any investigations. My predecessor, in conjunction with the Minister, Deputy Hogan, asked for a review within the Department which is ongoing and the findings of which I will publish when they are available. If necessary, and if appropriate on the basis of what is in that information, I will instigate investigations. The Deputies have my assurance on that because I intend, as Minister of State with responsibility for planning, to ensure we have a fair, open and transparent system of planning in this country, one in which people can be confident and on which they can depend, that will deliver the sustainable communities and quality of life for which we all strive and which people deserve.

I thank the members of the tribunal for their work over the years. I see this as a historic debate that I hope will close a very ugly, distasteful and damaging chapter in the history of this country. I look forward to playing my part in ensuring we have an open and transparent system in the future, without corruption.

See this speech in context