Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I will pick up on the last point on the Mahon tribunal. One of the central issues is a powerful, independent planning regulator. Many of the criticisms of tribunals were on the basis that they cost a fortune and there is never a consequence. Not only is there not a consequence for people who are found to be corrupt in many cases, but there is an inability to learn lessons. We will repeat exactly the mistakes that were made in the past. When I see a Bill called a planning and development Bill, the word "development" screams off the page to me because it is primarily about development. I was trying to get my head around the coherence of this legislation and the legislation that was passed just before Christmas when there was public attention on it. It was very inadequate because the planning aspects of it were very much tied in with the rent pressure zone aspects of the legislation. It redistributed power away from individual members of the public to An Bord Pleanála in the case of housing developments of more than 100 houses, which will prove to be a disaster.

In terms of planning legislation, the coherence of this comes from a particular philosophy, which is to make it as easy as possible to get houses up as quickly as possible anywhere. Right through the crazy years where tens of thousands of houses were built every year, the planning laws were not an impediment to building houses. Is that the problem? It is not the problem. We are introducing legislation - the legislation before Christmas and this Bill - that has positive things but is inadequate to address the core issue. We are introducing legislation based on a philosophy that is not about planning but about development. Why do we not just call it that?

There is incoherence in respect of a number of issues. If we take, for example, county or city development plans or local area plans, on foot of the legislation that was passed before Christmas, An Bord Pleanála is not required to issue decisions that are consistent with those plans. One starts wondering what is the point is going through that process. It was never required to be consistent. I have seen it in my area. The number of houses that are proposed in the context of the regional planning guidelines is out of sequence with the prediction of the need based on the CSO's prediction of population growth. It is predicted there will be about 70,000 extra people accommodated in Kildare by 2023. There are a whole lot of proposals for the phasing of development. That phasing of development is knitted into local area plans. If An Bord Pleanála does not have to be consistent in decision-making on local area plans, one starts to question what the point is.

One issue I want to highlight is the strategic nature of what is being talked about. We have had a consistent difficulty in this country with short-termism and not taking the long view.

That is why this is so important. That inconsistency is not just around planning legislation, however. It is seeking to be consistent with the transportation strategies of the National Transport Authority, NTA, but there is a political counterbalance to that in that it requires funding. In terms of the Dublin Transport Authority, very large projects were scenario tested but were not delivered and still have not been delivered. These projects were supposed to facilitate development and their non-delivery is part of the reason for the current traffic chaos and congestion. We cannot have that level of growth without the public transport infrastructure that makes it sustainable.

In terms of the consultation element, amendment No. 2 makes reference to a report which "summarises the views of any person who made submissions or observations to the planning authority". It strikes me, having looked at a number of reports written by the CEOs of local authorities in recent months, that they are very dismissive of public submissions but they pay a great deal of attention to bodies that are notified under the Act. That is something that will require the kind of planning regulator that would look at that and take a view beyond the local authority.

As others have said, there is so much in this grouping of amendments that it is absolutely impossible to give the individual amendments the attention they deserve.

See this speech in context