Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I add my voice of concern to the fact that so many of these amendments are coming in at such a late stage and are very much outside the scope of the original Bill. At last week's Business Committee meeting, we allowed an extra hour for discussion and debate on the Bill but that was before these amendments came in. There is a case to be answered regarding why this is being done in such a ham-fisted way.

I agree with the amendments to the Valuation Acts and to short-term lettings. I also agree we need to do something about judicial reviews and having more inclusive and co-operative planning processes so we can do things quicker.

If we push through legislation in this manner, it will be like manna from heaven to the people who want to object and employ lawyers to bring this legislation through the courts. The fact that it has not been sufficiently scrutinised and is being put through the House in such a ham-fisted manner is a concern.

On planning and the examples of planning at a local level, Galway County Council has not had any pre-planning meetings for the last two years because the planning department does not have the resources to deal with pre-planning meetings. The reason is that the council has been starved of funding for a number of years. Council staff are now dealing with up to 90 applications per day. It is absolute mayhem. The planning department has a statutory process to go through and timelines to meet. The risk of making a wrong decision is there all the time when planners are working under pressure like that.

To be fair, we must start off by asking how we get our planning system right. We must ensure the local authorities have the resources required to deal with the planning applications. For example, Galway County Council does not employ an architect or ecologist. It is processing planning applications in a very seat-of-the-pants manner. Some applications are simple enough while others are highly complicated, with the result that there is a huge amount of confusion within Galway County Council as to how planning will be delivered. The very simple and basic pre-planning meeting is a must. We need to have such meetings. The only way to ensure we have them is for the Government to provide the funding for local authorities, such as Galway County Council, to enable them to employ the cohort of staff they need. That is very important.

We have to do something about objections and the issue of people appealing planning decisions to An Bord Pleanála. I will provide an example. The HSE was building a new community nursing unit in Tuam to replace the existing Áras Mhuire community nursing unit. The building was no longer deemed fit to house patients or long-term residents. Galway County Council granted planning permission for the development. An objection was subsequently submitted by an individual living in the midlands, whose ground for objection was the idea that the nursing unit should not be based in Tuam, but in Galway city. The objection was submitted to An Bord Pleanála, delaying the whole project for over seven months. Thankfully, An Bord Pleanála upheld the decision of Galway County Council and the project is now proceeding. Hopefully, it will be completed by the middle of next year. We must stamp out the practice of permitting vexatious objections.

There is also a problem with serial objectors who object to anything and everything. I do not know from where or how they are being funded, but they are creating mayhem in the planning system and An Bord Pleanála. I do not know what is behind it. I can see it in different aspects of projects that are being planned. Objections are being put in and we expect them to be put in. An appeal has to be based on merit or there must be something about the process or development, in particular, that the objector feels is not right. Objections cannot just be vexatious. It is too simple, currently, to put in an objection to a planning application on the basis that the objector does not like or is jealous of the developer or does not want to see a particular development in his or her neighbourhood. It it important we get this right.

On the flexibility of our planning system, one of the biggest areas affected by the lack of flexibility is housing. There are so many processes in our planning system that it is delaying the delivery of social housing. I am sure it is a frustration for the Department that houses cannot be built quicker. I spoke about the issue yesterday. It is important we build social housing as a matter of urgency. We should be able to fast-track the planning of social housing so that units can be delivered quicker. We cannot be looking for an opportunity to object to developments and shout about and ask for social housing to be built at the same time. We need to build social housing units. We must deliver them rather than just talking about doing so.

On flexibility within the planning system, I believe that if there is engagement within the planning system between the applicant and the planning authority, we will get better, more efficient planning and fewer objections because it will be done right. There has to be greater flexibility in that. There must be joined-up thinking regarding the objectives of a planning application when it is submitted. We must consider whether the planning, in principle, is good. If it is good, we must ensure that planning permission is granted in a way that meets the legal requirements.

There are many issues to consider here. As I said, I am concerned at the manner in which this legislation is being rammed through. I am concerned that Deputies have learned, through the media, that an amendment has been withdrawn, rather than being told about it by the Minister of State in his opening remarks in the Dáil. Perhaps the Minister of State was not aware that the amendment had been withdrawn. However, it is important that we are clear with one another as to what is going on.

See this speech in context