Eugene Murphy (Roscommon-Galway, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

As my colleague and party spokesperson in this area, Deputy Cowen, said earlier in this Second Stage debate, Fianna Fáil strongly supports the passage of this Bill to Committee Stage, which is what we are discussing here today. The main purpose of the Bill is to give a legislative basis to the establishment of an independent planning regulator's office to oversee and assess decision-making processes in planning authorities. This was one of the core planning reforms recommended in the Mahon tribunal.

Fianna Fáil has put pressure on this Government and its predecessor to implement as many as possible of the recommendations in the Mahon report. We are committed to drawing from the lessons of the Mahon tribunal. We must improve transparency, consistency and good decision-making throughout the planning system. It is vital that we build on the strong action taken by Fianna Fáil in government by continuing to put in place the legal and institutional framework to prevent the corruption and planning abuses uncovered by the Mahon tribunal. There is no question about the seriousness of what was uncovered by the Mahon tribunal. Equally, there is no question that the public does not want to see such things happening again. People want to see transparency and consistency. They want things to be done correctly. There is an onus on everybody in this House to ensure the recommendations made in the Mahon report are put in place where possible.

We believe this Bill strikes an appropriate balance between giving the new planning regulator's office independence in evaluating local and regional development plans and maintaining some democratic control over the body by the Minister and the Oireachtas. It is very important for the Oireachtas and the Minister of the day to have some control. That is not to say we are fully happy with the Bill, however. We have a number of concerns about some of its key provisions. We believe they require further scrutiny and amendment. For example, some of the key recommendations made in the Mahon report in the interests of improving transparency in planning, including the disclosure of political donations by planning applicants and the noting of all submissions by political representatives on planning applications, have not been included in this Bill.

Some of the functions of the proposed planning regulator's office, as prescribed in this Bill, might not make it an effective overseer of the national planning strategy. For example, the new office will not be given any role in overseeing the executive transport planning agencies, such as the National Transport Authority and Transport Infrastructure Ireland. Such bodies have a major role in the development of roads and other transport infrastructure throughout the country. My constituency has had serious problems in this regard in the past. The bodies in question have seemed to act as a law unto themselves on some occasions in the past. I assume the Minister of State, Deputy English, knows they have often failed to take account of the views of people by meeting them, speaking with them and listening to their concerns. We need to ensure the National Transport Authority and Transport Infrastructure Ireland come under the remit of the proposed planning regulator's office.

The achievement of greater integration between land-use planning, such as local authority zoning decisions, and strategic transport planning was mentioned in the Mahon report as one of the reasons a planning regulator should be established. In that context, it is disappointing that the new office proposed under this Bill will not be given any role in overseeing the development or implementation of plans proposed by the National Transport Authority and Transport Infrastructure Ireland. I urge the Minister of State to take this concern on board and see what can be done.

We are concerned that the limitations on the powers of the planning regulator's office as prescribed in this Bill might cause the office to be toothless in some aspects of its work as an anti-corruption watchdog in the planning process. We also have some reservations about placing the successor to the national spatial strategy - the Government's national planning framework, which has yet to be drafted - on a statutory footing, given that it does not yet exist. It is clear that this needs to be sorted out and dealt with.

I believe that certain simple planning developments in local communities, such as the construction of a modest bungalow, the replacement of an old house or the establishment of a community centre, should go through the planning process without any major difficulty. The only vested interest in such developments is the good of the community. I am concerned that some of the regulations which are being proposed will end up making things more difficult for local communities. I would not like to see that happen because it would not be good. While I support the provisions of this Bill as they apply to more major developments, I reiterate that it is extremely important for us not to make things more difficult for ordinary individuals with simple planning issues. If this Bill frees up some land for the development of housing in areas where houses are badly needed, we will all welcome that in light of the major housing crisis that exists at the moment.

My party supports the progression of this Bill. I hope the Minister of State and his colleagues will take account of some of the issues I have raised. In particular, it is crucial that Transport Infrastructure Ireland and the National Transport Authority have some understanding of the needs and wants of communities. They should not be seen to ride roughshod over people by not listening to them. The least the public deserves is a proper listening ear from bodies like those I have mentioned. When this Bill is considered further, I hope provision can be made to ensure these bodies are accountable to people and communities.

See this speech in context