Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. I compliment Deputy Murphy on the Bill and I thank the Government for taking on its contents. I hope that as much as possible of the legislation can be incorporated into the new planning and development Bill when it comes before the House next year. I acknowledge the presence of the Minster of State with responsibility for planning. Had many of the provisions been on the Statute Book during the 14 years prior to the Government's taking office, as referred to by Deputy Kenny, we could have been spared many of the problems that have emerged in towns, cities and rural communities throughout the country. It is a pity this was not the case.

We are where we are and we need to fix the problems we face. Some of the provisions in this Bill will go a long way towards mitigating the problems.

The Bill makes reference to Part 8 planning and developments, whereby councils grant permission to themselves. At present there is no watchdog for compliance with planning permission where a local authority grants itself planning permission. Where a private citizen is granted planning permission, the council acts as enforcement officer but under Part 8 there is nobody to police local authorities, other than the Ombudsman. We have seen the problems that have arisen in local authority housing estates and buildings across the country.

I entirely agree with the indexation of bonds. Some of the bonds currently in place are, for want of a better word, Mickey Mouse in comparison to the scale of the devastation that certain builders left behind. The current scale of development is unsustainably low in terms of its contribution to GDP and the building industry needs to grow. However, while we may never return to the level of construction that obtained between 2004 and 2008, it is important that indexation be considered so that the scale of bonds reflects the costs associated with carrying out work.

The Minister of State's predecessor investigated the provisions of the Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2009 on extensions of planning permission. I refer specifically to one-off rural houses. For economic reasons or because they are out of the country, people may seek to extend a perfectly good planning permission. If, for argument's sake, there is a policy change to the EPA's code of practice on propriety treatment systems for effluent or the flood risk management guidelines, the legislation does not provide for further information to be requested where an individual seeks to extend an existing permission. This is something the Minister of State might pursue. People who are in hard pressed economic circumstances find they cannot extend their planning permission if in the intervening period there was a change of policy in the local authority that made a material impact on the original permission. There should be an option for the authority to seek further information and put it up to the applicant to comply with the changes in the policy. If the applicant cannot comply, let him or her apply for new permission. The option should at least be made available for applicants to try to meet the new standard. Given that many of these people are in serious financial difficulties and may even have been required to leave the country, this would be a good thing.

I support the provision in the Bill for the registration of cowboys. A mechanism is needed to weed out those who constantly reinvent themselves under different trading names. The Construction Contracts Act 2013 goes some way towards dealing with cowboys but now that the economy is about to move in the right direction again we do not want those who landed us in the you know what to be able to apply for planning permission in a few months' time or to see another Galway tent opening for business. Local authorities should have access to a blacklist in order to prevent future misbehaviour.

Unfinished estates remain a major problem. The Government has made a start on this problem in recent weeks but an ongoing effort is required to address it. In the context of stimulus packages and capital investment, serious consideration should be given to providing a level of investment that will cover the work required. The really bad estates are those which are one quarter or one fifth completed. There is a sense of hopelessness among the people who live in these estates and they are appealing for the Government's assistance.

In my early days as a member of Limerick County Council, I made representations on behalf of people who were seeking planning permission for one-off rural housing. I do not make apologies for performing this role. If the planning system worked properly there would be no need for it. On one occasion I suggested to a planner that the design for a house was relatively nice. The planner told me that the difference between my opinion and hers was that her opinion was informed. Her opinion was not in fact informed because she was not an architect. There is a lack of knowledge of design in local authorities. The relative number of architects and planners in local authorities needs to be investigated. These people are passing judgment on one-off rural houses when they do not know from Adam whether they look good or conform to local aesthetics.

I welcome this Bill and wish Deputy Catherine Murphy well with it. I am glad the Government has accepted it in principle so that we can make further progress on this area. It is a pity such legislation was not in place five or six years ago because we would not have half of the you know what we are now facing.

See this speech in context