Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. Part of the problem with this section of the Bill and the rationale for this group of amendments is that it is not just the Opposition who are raising very real concerns with the way in which the planning policy statement architecture has been put in place; these concerns are also being raised by professional planners and the people who make planning applications and decide on planning applications. I am not at all against the idea of planning policy statements. I believe it is a very good idea and, if designed properly, would provide for the clarity and consistency the Minister of State says that he seeks. In fact, in the final days on Committee Stage the Irish Planning Institute had its annual conference, at which Gavin Lawlor, its president, gave a speech that was widely covered in the media. His comments on the Bill as it was concluding Committee Stage are directly pertinent to these amendments. He stated:

In its current form this Bill is not fit for purpose. It will have a detrimental impact on citizen engagement in the planning process, and it proposes unrealistic timelines, guidelines and compliance, making aspects of the Bill unworkable.

He went on to say that the IPI hoped to see further amendments on Report Stage. There are no amendments to deal with its concerns on Report Stage. In its submissions prior to Committee Stage, it suggested amendments. We tabled those amendments and we urged the Government to support them. Specifically with respect to the issue in front of us, it wanted to see a clarity provided in the policy statements between forward planning and development management. The Government refused to do that. While of course planners will have different opinions, and there are some very qualified expert planners in the Department providing the Minister and Ministers of State with advice on these matters, the Irish Planning Institute surveyed its members on this Bill and 80% of respondents raised a very real concern. The real difficulty here is not that it is unfortunate the Minister of State is not listening to us but that he is not listening to the people who will have to work this Bill, make decisions and make applications. For the Minister of State to say that he does not believe that this legislation and this section of the Bill will create more conflict rather than less, despite what the vast majority of planners are telling us, is unfortunate. On that basis I will be pressing the amendments.

See this speech in context