Anthony Lawlor (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Deputy Catherine Murphy's Bill. When the Deputy and I sat on Kildare County Council we dealt with a variety of development plans, material contraventions and planning issues as part of our work. One of the few times we differed was when I spoke passionately against Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000, which I thought was a ridiculous provision. I was the only one of the Deputy's colleagues to vote against it. She will be aware of my views on planning. This Bill contains a number of positive provisions on topics that we discussed at council level when we were making planning decisions.

I am particularly interested in the issue of compliance. I have strongly argued that developers who are not compliant should not be granted permission on future developments. The notion that an application should be considered on its merits means that the applicant is not considered. Many of the applicants with whom we currently have problems in County Kildare previously made multiple planning applications under different company names. This practice left behind a legacy of problems. On one occasion we dealt with a material contravention on the part of an applicant who never complied with planning conditions. When I went to examine the proposed development, I found that a huge road had been constructed without planning permission. When I highlighted the road to the officials, they asked me to show it to them on a map. We could have walked out of the venue where the meeting was held to observe the road. When I returned for another look at the road on the following morning, however, it had been covered by soil. This type of association between developers and officials at council level was happening in all areas of the country. I am delighted to say, however, this sort of behaviour has disappeared. We must ensure that planning is managed in a proper manner.

Deputy Catherine Murphy referred to development contributions. I would like councils to set out how they are going to spend development contributions, whether for one-off houses or housing developments.

It makes a big difference for someone living in a rural area who is asked to make a contribution for a park in the middle of a town that he or she will not access. If more of that funding was going to be spent on their road locally, he or she could see a benefit in giving it. I was told today by somebody that such funding all goes into a hole and is distributed later. To my mind, that is wrong. There needs to be more accountability as to where this funding is going so that it is clearly identified at an early stage.

Deputy Catherine Murphy mentioned bonds. One of the problems in my county is that bonds are insufficient to cover the cost of the repairs that need to be done and in some cases, there were no bonds put in place at all. That shows a lack of determination by the local authority to follow-up. When the planning permission is granted, another local authority section is involved and these sections seem to be working in silos rather than in conjunction with one another. As soon as the planning permission is granted, all the information should be transferred across to the next relevant official responsible, whether for bond collection or ensuring that the development goes ahead in the proper manner in accordance with the planning.

Lastly, I refer to Part V. The Minister will bring forward a planning Bill early in the new year and I hope he will give serious consideration in it to the removal of Part V of the planning Act. Part V was initially brought in to help sort out the social housing problems. It has been an unmitigated disaster. Between all the challenges that were taken initially and the number of houses that were built at the start, the number of houses the local authorities got was small. There are some local authorities in serious financial difficulties as a result of Part V of the planning Act. We should go back to looking at what we want. Part V should have provided for amenity grounds, school grounds and roads. Instead, we merely focused on housing. I hope the Minister will take that into consideration.

I welcome the Bill. I am delighted the Government is taking it on board and I look forward to further discussion when the planning Bill is brought forward later.

See this speech in context