Duncan Smith (Dublin Fingal, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I will not take anywhere near 20 minutes, but I have a couple of points to make. Since I am not a member of the joint committee, I was not present for any of the discussions on the Bill. I offer my apologies for that.

Regarding what the Minister said about the extension of development plans, the intent is welcome. As a former member of Fingal County Council, where I was honoured to serve for five and a half years, he knows that reserved functions must be protected and valued. The work of a councillor is important and needs to be valued. Perhaps I am being naive or optimistic, but I believe that there is a shift among the political class in the House towards recognising the need to value our councillors and local government more. A heap of work needs to be done to ensure that more reserved functions and powers are devolved to our wonderful, hard-working councillors of all shades and of all parties and none up and down the country. They do incredible work.

The most strategic and important work they do - when the dots are joined up, it also has the largest impact on people's day-to-day lives - is on county and city development plans. It is a significant undertaking by council officials and councillors who, after doing a great deal of research, sit, engage and debate in long meetings over a number of stages and do their best to ensure that the development plans they produce work for their respective areas. It is through these meetings and other processes that one can see which councillors and council groups care about their counties and put in the time and effort. I am sitting close to a Deputy whom I sat with during the previous Fingal County Council development plan, namely, Deputy Cian O'Callaghan. As a councillor, he put his heart and soul into the development plan, as did I. I was not a member of Fingal County Council while the Minister was, but I am sure he worked as hard on its development plans as his colleagues did. We are on opposing sides where many planning issues are concerned, but this is about being committed to one's county and doing what one feels is best.

The Minister stated that 15 councils had asked him directly for an extension. An extension is good if they use it to ensure that their county development plan processes are robust and the public are engaged as much as possible. Our county council has started its development plan. That is welcome. Speaking as someone who has run 15 webinars trying to engage citizens in Fingal in the early strategic process though, I know that some council officials are disappointed with the level of engagement and the number of submissions compared with the previous county development plan. With the previous plan, they were able to go to hotels and community centres, set up tables for many hours, have working groups and breakout groups and talk in great detail. They have not been able to do so this time. In Fingal's case, people's distance from the process has posed a difficulty. We need to be cognisant of that and make every effort across the country to ensure that the communities, clubs and individuals who care about how their areas are developed are engaged in their county development plan processes as much as possible.

Engagement must be rewarded. People are aware that their submissions will almost never be taken on board wholeheartedly, but after putting effort into make a submission, they need to feel it has been acknowledged and, where possible, they need to get answers to the issues they have raised. Doing that is a significant amount of work, but almost everyone who makes a submission on behalf of himself or herself, a residents' group or a sports club is doing it voluntarily. The majority of people cannot afford planning consultants to help them make submissions on development plans. They do their own research and work on submissions after putting their kids to bed or by getting up early before going to their jobs to ensure that those submissions are as robust as possible. Some never hear from the council again, be it councillors or council officials. That is a problem because it erodes people's faith in local government and the process.

I am digressing a little, but I feel passionately about this issue. I hope the extension contained in the provisions of the Bill will be used in the right spirit, which I believe is the spirit in which it is being granted by the Minister.

I have a question on the second provision with regard to the extension of the planning permissions when substantial works have commenced. I would like a definition of substantial works. We have an issue. The previous Deputy mentioned rushed planning law can lead to bad planning and bad outcomes. I always have a concern about how planning law may be used or manipulated by those who will profit from the development of land, for whatever purpose that may be, but mainly housing. Does substantial works mean the clearing of ground, for example, or does it mean foundations? Do bricks have to be up? I note the Minister has indicated bricks have to be up. I have got some more detail on that.

However, we could have a scenario in which there is planning permission for 800 or 1,000 houses, of which 100 are built. Then there is a pause for the next 100 units and then a pause for the next 100 houses after which a change of planning permission may go in to the effect that the houses may become a little narrower, smaller or higher and the gardens may become a little smaller. We all know the story there. Can the Minister speak to that in his response, in terms of these provisions? Does he have any concerns they may be manipulated. He is shaking his head. I will be back in the room listening to his response.

My one concern is the definition of what constitutes substantial work and, in his eyes, how open to manipulation these provisions could be by those who seek to profit from the development of land and these planning permissions.

See this speech in context