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

Like most people, I will start by saying I have not read all 700-odd pages of the Bill. To be fair, most people have been truthful in that regard tonight. I have, however, cherry-picked bits and pieces in which I have a personal interest.

Going back to my days as a councillor, the one fundamental power or responsibility I felt I had as a councillor, as a local rep, was my input to the development plan. It is why I got involved in local politics back in 2014. I grew up in an area where we had no housing of any description - public, private, social or affordable - for about 20 years. I grew up in a very industrialised area, Little Island. Come my first opportunity to contribute to a development plan, in 2016, I was able to amend the plan. It was against the wishes of the management, but I was able to argue my case as a local councillor.

I have a real difficulty here. We come in here and talk about empowering local democracy. I am from a party that, before the last election, was going to try to restore town councils, for example, and look at where that is. The one fundamental power a local councillor has is the ability to contribute to the local development plan. I have a couple of concerns about the Bill, but my one fundamental issue with it is that, instead of allowing a councillor to go out to public consultations and engage in the process every five to six years, it will now kick that out to ten years. I have a fundamental problem with that. As I said, we should be empowering local councils, not stripping the few powers they have remaining.

I looked at Part 3, Chapter 5, subsection 40(2). I was under the belief that there would be a review built into this every five or six years. I gathered that from previous presentations, but the legislation actually reads, "Not later than 8 years". Anybody here who has dealt with local authorities knows that means eight years. I hope I am wrong in that respect, but if the Minister of State could clarify that for me in his closing comments, I would appreciate it.

The second point I wish to bring up relates to the board itself. I was listening to other Deputies make contributions earlier. We all know the problems with An Bord Pleanála over the past few years; we do not need to recite them again here. It is about resourcing. This Minister has given resources, well in excess of what An Bord Pleanála has ever had, and the installation of statutory timelines is pivotal and crucial. How many of us here have made representations for people who were waiting 18 months or 24 months for a one-off bloody house? I watched on the TV other Deputies - well, specifically one from People Before Profit - more or less say that the issue is not with planning per sebecause 85% of planning permissions are granted. I think that was his argument. That is not the point. This Bill seeks to streamline the decision-making process and put in statutory timelines that bind the board to decisions. Pedalling this rubbish that there is some bloody paranoid ulterior motive totally misses the point of what we are trying to do here.

Another area I have an interest in is variations to development plans. Maybe this is just something I experienced on my local authority - I would be interested to hear what other Deputies' experiences were - but, again, in my time as a councillor, any variations ordinarily came from management within the county council or the city council. Very seldom did they ever come from the floor. It seems from my cursory reading of this Bill that councillors will be able to table variations from the floor themselves. Obviously, there are provisions for management to do that as well, and it is to be welcomed that there is clarity on that whole area of variations.

There is one thing that genuinely concerns me, other than, as I said at the beginning, the erosion of the local councillor's power. The one fundamental problem I have with the Bill is as follows. Reading through its provisions with regard to economic and other strategies, I understand there is a new dearth of laws there as regards climate, habitats and so on that have to be complied with. I am concerned, however, that the amount of legislation we are providing for here conversely, or perversely, will actually slow things down even further. That is my only concern. We have saddled this with so many different strategies that have to be gone through, be it local authority, regional assembly or whatever else. There are just so many layers, so many boxes that need to be ticked and so many groups that need to be consulted. I hope I am wrong but, in a perverse way, I think this saddling with so many different strategies will actually be counterproductive in the long term. I genuinely hope I am wrong on that.

That is more or less my bit. Before I close, I will reiterate my concerns about the local democracy side of things. When councillors on the ground become familiar with this, I think we will all be hearing about it. As regards my initial foray into politics, I was motivated by the idea that I could contribute to my own area directly. It was a long, drawn-out process that took two years, but at least in my term I had a chance. Now one might need to be a councillor for two terms to get one's chance. We need to reflect on that.

See this speech in context