Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I wish the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Burke, the best after his incident yesterday. I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Butler, for coming in and substituting for the question. This is my third time speaking on this issue. I am passionate about it. I served as a county councillor for six years before I had the honour of being elected to this House. I have fundamental concerns about the direction of local democracy, particularly in regard to the issue of the powers of the Office of the Planning Regulator, OPR. One of the few remaining powers that local councillors have in city and county areas is their development plan. It is the one thing they can take ownership of. It is great that they have that say at local level in their own local electoral areas, counties and cities. I understand the role of the OPR. There has been correspondence between myself; the Minister, Deputy Darragh O’Brien; and the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Burke; in regard to this issue. I can nearly predict the answer that the Minister of State will read out shortly. I understand the role of the OPR but I believe there is over-reach. When the OPR was initially mapped out, I do not believe it was envisaged that it would to go into each and every local area plan in such minute detail.

I have spoken here before about the role of the OPR in recommending the dezoning of land that is serviceable. I could speak about instances in Fermoy and Bantry in County Cork. Deputies Stanton and O’Connor in east Cork regularly mention an outlet centre in Carrigtwohill, which is the best example of the OPR’s over-reach. I will give the House an idea of what that relates to. On two occasions, Cork County Council took legal action against the Minister in respect of the OPR’s recommendations and on both occasions the council was vindicated. Despite being vindicated on two separate occasions in two separate legal cases, the OPR continues to recommend to the Minister that he put a halt to this potential outlet centre in east Cork. If a court makes a judgment and that judgment is stood over not once but twice, I do not see how the OPR can put the Minister in a difficult position by continuing to recommend that the project be shelved. Thankfully in that situation the Minister, on foot of receiving his own advice, sided with the county council essentially and did not enforce the OPR’s recommendation. That said, how did the OPR get into a situation where not once but twice it went against two legal judgments? It is reprehensible that it would put the Minister in that position.

I understand why the OPR is there. I understand why we must be careful about land zoning in view of the history we have in the State with regard to the Moriarty and Mahon tribunals. For me, the OPR is not the police officer. If there are allegations of impropriety or illegal activity, the Standards in Public Office Commission or some other body that is legislated for should enforce any difficulties with regard to zoning. I do not believe this role was initially envisaged for the OPR. My rant is the same; it is about the OPR over-reaching, particularly in the case of Carrigtwohill when it ill-advised the Minister. I know that the Minister has not always agreed with the OPR. I have asked numerous parliamentary questions about it and obtained the statistics on that. For me, fundamentally it comes back to local democracy in action. If we do not leave these powers with councillors, what are councillors there for?

See this speech in context