Dáil debates

Wednesday, 13 May 2015

Independent Planning Regulator: Motion (Resumed) [Private Members]

 

The following motion was moved by Deputy Brian Stanley on Tuesday, 12 May 2015:That Dáil Éireann:notes the continuing failure of the Government to legislate on the recommendations of the report of the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments, published in March 2012; further notes that:- despite a commitment to appoint an independent planning regulator, that their proposed scheme for a new planning Bill does not allow for the establishment of such an office; - significant conflicts of interest continue to arise regarding controversial projects that require such independent assessment; and - significant legacy issues regarding planning remain to be properly investigated;notes the failure of this Government to pursue, as promised, the reviews into planning in local authorities in Dublin city, Cork city, Cork county, Carlow, Meath and Galway as had been set in train under the previous Government by the then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government; acknowledges the need to address public concerns over planning procedures, and the need to establish the independent oversight procedures recommended by the report of the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments; and calls for the establishment of an office of the planning regulator, with the appointment of a planning regulator to be made following an open public competition by an independent appointments board, and that the recommendations of the planning regulator be made binding on the now Minister.”

Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following:"welcomes the progress made to date by the Government to support the implementation of the planning-related recommendations of the final report of the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments, particularly the publication of a general scheme of the Planning and Development (No. 2) Bill in January 2015; and notes that:- the proposed legislation, which is scheduled for publication in this Dáil session, will provide for the establishment of the office of the planning regulator, which will be independent and whose primary functions will include the assessment and evaluation of local area plans, local development plans and regional spatial and economic strategies, education and research on planning-related matters, as well as powers to review the organisation, systems and procedures applied by planning authorities and An Bord Pleanála in the performance of their planning functions; and - it is expected that the work of the consultants appointed to carry out an independent planning review on the performance of planning functions in six selected planning authorities, Carlow, Cork, Galway and Meath county councils and Cork and Dublin city councils, in accordance with section 255 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, will be concluded by the end of June 2015, and that subject to considering its content, it would be intended to publish the consultant’s report in due course thereafter."- (Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government)

2:00 pm

Photo of Catherine MurphyCatherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The public is sick to the back teeth with the endless sequence of tribunals and inquiries. The sums involved are huge, with the Mahon tribunal costing in the region of $300 million. We do not seem to learn lessons from them, however. The usual finding is of systems failure but it takes an age to put new systems and legislation in place. We tend to be reactive, and proactive legislation is long-fingered while we try to fix existing problems. It is a source of great frustration that the key players seldom pay a significant price. During the course of the last general election there was a strong desire for a democratic revolution which would usher in radical reform in politics and institutions. It is seven years since the Mahon tribunal concluded its hearings and the new planning legislation has yet to be introduced.

The financial costs goes beyond the cost of the tribunals. Large tracts of land in Dublin were held back from development to increase their value, and the resulting shortage of available building land drove up the cost of housing. Many of the people who purchased those houses are now struggling to pay off their loans. I need not speak about the knock-on effect on lending institutions. Significant costs are also incurred to provide services to a dispersed population, including public transport, water and wastewater, school and leisure facilities. We must also consider the social cost for people who live far removed from their extended families, as well as the time consumed in commuting.

This is not exclusively a Dublin issue. A series of complaints about planning irregularities led the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to conduct inquiries into planning in various local authorities. As a member of a county council since 1991, I am aware of the enormous pressure on the council to rezone land. Planning issues were only rarely viewed in a strategic context and those of us who fought for a more strategic approach throughout the 1990s were called all sorts of names. It was only when we managed to collaborate with the community that we were able to curb the worst excesses. The one lesson that we seem to be incapable of learning is that history repeats itself. We have to put robust legislation in place if we are to stop history repeating itself.

Photo of Mick WallaceMick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like an hour to speak about housing because it is hard to know where to start. Ireland is facing a massive housing crisis. The Government did nothing about it for four years and I do not think it is doing anything serious about it now. It is simply sticking a plaster on the issue while ignoring the underlying problems. We do not have a housing strategy. The Government must not be consulting the people who work in the industry because there are serious problems with housing provision in Ireland. The new building control regulations introduced last year are a complete cop-out because the Government does not want to pay for independent supervision. The cost has been passed to the architects, who will pass it on to the insurance company and it will in turn come back to the citizen. What has been done with technologists and self-builds? It is lunacy.

The Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government told us he planned to build 18,000 social housing units by the end of 2017. We are now learning that only a quarter of these will be council owned. The Minister was being deceptive. We need to build a considerable number of social housing units. The State has not engaged in providing social housing for a long time but it needs to start doing so because people will no longer be purchasing houses to the extent that they did in the past. They will not be able to get the financing and the properties will be too expensive. I do not understand the logic behind the Government's argument. It is more spin than anything else.

Kennedy Wilson, the North American company which purchased a number of distressed assets and formed a cartel in the rental market, is building 164 units in the Clancy Barracks site in Kilmainham. Last year it requested and received a social housing exemption. In other words, we are going to continue the process of ghettoisation. There is a way to avoid this. I am not saying we should shaft the developer-builder. The format was wrong in the past but it can be fixed as long as the builder gets the site value for the house he or she is providing. However, there should be a minimum provision of 10% social housing on every site.

Photo of Tom FlemingTom Fleming (Kerry South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The new planning and development (No. 2) Bill proposes that the planning regulator should not be given powers to force local authorities to comply with national policy. The Minister will instead have powers to decide whether a city or county council is flouting the guidelines and force it to change its policies. The proposal that the regulator should not be independent from the Minister is contrary to key recommendations of the Mahon tribunal in regard to ensuring autonomy from the political system. The report recommended that some of the planning and enforcement functions should be transferred to an independent regulator who would have power to ensure that development plans proposed by planning authorities comply with national policy. The power to direct a local authority to change its county or local development will rest with the Minister of the day, thereby demoting the regulator to an advisor. The Bill attempts to address the dilemma of how an independent regulatory body can operate without compromising the existing democratic qualities of the planning system. This has all the appearance of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government maintaining its stranglehold over these powers. Without powers of enforcement, it is impossible to see how the regulator can be effective.

An ongoing issue in County Limerick reveals an anomaly in the proposed Bill. Councillors in County Limerick passed a resolution to refer an issue pertaining to a development in Ardagh to the Minister. This issue has been ongoing for several months without adjudication by the Minister. This is an example of why a regulator is urgently needed, particularly given that the request was made by an elected body. The Minister should address the issue immediately because it highlights all that is wrong in the proposed Bill.

Photo of Finian McGrathFinian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on this important motion and on the Government's continuing failure to legislate on the recommendations of the Mahon tribunal report, which was published in 2012.

This is an absolute disgrace, as we were promised reform and a democratic revolution. Once again, the Government sits on its hands. What is going on? There was a promise of an independent regulator, but the Planning Bill does not allow for the establishment of such an office. This is totally unacceptable. The Government seems to have not yet learned its lessons on regard to this issue. Is this another broken promise? The issue of conflicts of interest arises again, yet we have no independent assessments.

Proper and clear planning should be a priority in any democratic state or society. I fully support the call for the establishment of an office of planning regulator, with the appointment of a planning regulator to be made following an open, public competition conducted by an independent appointments board. The recommendations of the new planning regulator should then be made binding on the Minister. This is a reasonable and sensible proposal. Above all, it sends out the right message in regard to future planning projects. The significant public concerns that exist must be dealt with. It is time for the Government to get off the pot and accept fair and reasonable proposals.

Planning, development and the construction of houses and homes are hugely important in the context of this debate. Recently, the CSO figures on housing and poverty in this country indicated that just over half of the country's net household wealth, 53.8%, rests in the hands of just 10% of the population. The last four budgets have helped the better off and have helped create a more unhealthy and unequal society. I mention these figures in the context of the need to act to create a more equal society, which should be a core principle on which we agree. I urge all Deputies to support this excellent motion. It is about quality planning, accountability and transparency and above all it is about the future of this country.

2:10 pm

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion and note the progress the Government has made as a result of the planning related recommendations which emanated from the Mahon report. I also note that the Planning and Development (No. 2) Bill 2015 will provide for the establishment of the office of planning regulator. It is no harm for us to be reminded of the sins of the fathers or those who went before us in regard to not just issues around zoning, but to issues regarding the quality and suitability of buildings in certain areas. We have been dealing with fall-out from such planning and standards issues since.

I take this opportunity to express the more serious concerns I have about the Planning and Development (No. 1) Bill 2014. In many ways, the No. 2 Bill looks back to this Bill, but we should look forward and try to implement lessons we have learned from what went on in the past and from the findings of the tribunal. I applaud two of the objectives of the Planning and Development (No. 1) Bill 2014, namely, the objective of securing additional housing units to address the current severe housing shortage, particularly in large urban centres and commuter belts, and to increase productivity and jobs in the construction sector.

However, I have a particular concern in regard to the vacant site levy, which it is proposed will apply to towns with a population of over 3,000. This would see local authorities having an entitlement to apply a charge on vacant or under utilised sites in towns of this size. This proposal is made in order to address the issues of land hoarding and supply. While detailed legislation is not available yet, the general scheme published by the Minister, Deputy Alan Kelly, suggests further consideration needs to be given to the issues. Otherwise, many owners of vacant sites will be unfairly penalised. Not all parts of the country are affected by a severe housing shortage. Many market towns around the country, such as towns in my county like Ballina, Castlebar and Westport, have empty houses in private housing estates and even if one is on the council waiting list in these areas, private rented accommodation is available. Therefore, the urgency or requirement for emergency measures does not exist in these areas.

Of course, we must plan for the future, particularly for social housing. I welcome some of the projects announced by the Minister recently, but we need more, including in my county where we have approximately 1,500 on the council housing list. Often the owners of vacant sites in these areas are far from being property hoarders and find there is no real market for their property, whether as a would-be housing site or a commercial property. Often it is not commercially viable for them to develop the site or make it functional and they may not even be able to get finance from a bank. How fair is it on these property owners to be boxed in by a law that we might introduce when they have no option for development or sale of a site? They face having a vacant site levy placed on them by a local authority. These property owners are already subject to the Derelict Sites Act, which can force them to keep the site or building in a reasonable condition so as not to diminish unduly the amenity of surrounding property.

I have one other bone to pick in regard to this particular legislation. I find it highly ironic that the vacant site levy will not apply to State owned property or to property owned by councils. Some of the biggest offenders in regard to vacant sites are the local authorities, which have vacant sites and houses that need to be developed. Sometimes they do not have the money for this, but I am sure many property owners with vacant sites they can do nothing with would find it highly offensive if local authorities could levy them while not being compelled themselves to do up their properties. In my county, if local authorities did up their vacant properties, this would go a long way towards a solution to providing housing for people on the housing list.

My concern is that the vacant site levy is an attempt to address a problem, but it is not a problem that is experienced in the same way throughout the country. We must plan for the future. We are a growing economy and have a growing population. Our plans are to disperse growth throughout the country, not just in the urban centres. What is happening in Dublin and major urban centres is not happening where I am living. I ask that the vacant site levy be reconsidered and made more nuanced and not simply applied on the basis of what the local authority will decide for areas with a population in excess of 3,000.

Photo of Seán KennySeán Kenny (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion. Before I was re-elected to the Dáil in February 2011, I was a Dublin City councillor for more than 30 years. Much of what went on in the Dublin councils in the 1980s and 1990s, which was later reported on by the Mahon tribunal, was caused by greed, corruption and unregulated lobbying that lead to unsafe planning decisions.

I spoke in the first Dáil debate on the Mahon report when it was published. The report was of special interest to me, as the Baldoyle, Cloghran and Drumnigh Mahon report modules referred to the 1993 rezonings which took place in the Dublin North-East constituency where Judge Mahon found that corrupt payments were made to some councillors. In March 2012, I called on the Director of Public Prosecutions to consider these findings of the Mahon tribunal. In Chapter 9, the tribunal has found that Mr. Frank Dunlop paid six councillors, named in the Mahon Report, sums of the equivalent of £1,000 each for their support for the 1993 Baldoyle lands rezoning motions. Another councillor received a payment of £1,000 from Mr. Dunlop at that time, which the councillor told the Mahon tribunal was a donation to his January 1993 Senate election campaign after he lost his Dáil seat. This was the period when the dual mandate was allowed for Dáil Deputies.

All of this greed, corruption and unregulated lobbying led to unsafe planning decisions that triggered the property bubble a decade later. In my Dublin North-East constituency, the estates built on the rezoned Baldoyle racecourse lands were left unfinished and are only now being completed thanks to initiatives taken by the Government and Fingal County Council.

In nearby Donaghmede, the death trap apartment complex of Priory Hall built by cowboy builder Tom McFeely was the worst planning disaster of the Celtic tiger property boom. The property boom unfortunately attracted cowboys like McFeely. I do not think any of the Sinn Féin speakers in this debate have referred to the Tom McFeely and Priory Hall saga so far but I stand to be corrected on that. I always held the view that Priory Hall should be demolished and I welcome the fact that Dublin City Council has now commenced rebuilding Priory Hall with Government funding provided to Dublin City Council. I thought of the comparison with Priory Hall when it was reported recently that six houses in the Millfield Manor estate in Newbridge, County Kildare, were completely gutted by a fire.

Many new homes in north Dublin built during the Celtic tiger era were infected with pyrite. Homeowners struggling with mortgage payments and negative equity did not need the pyrite problem on top of that. This Government, through the setting up of the pyrite resolution board, put a mechanism in place to deal with this planning failure and I am glad that homes in Clongriffin in Donaghmede and the Coast estate in Baldoyle had their pyrite issues dealt with to their satisfaction. There are still homes in Belmayne in Balgriffin where a solution to the pyrite problem has not been found. The difficulty in Belmayne arises because of a decision by the insurance company involved not to cover the cost incurred by the home owners, who have to engage qualified professionals to prove the presence of pyrite in their homes in the first place. The cost of this can mount up to €3,000. As I said already, the insurance company, very unfairly in my view, will not reimburse the homeowners for this additional cost for which they are painfully out of pocket.

Many of these planning, building control and compliance failures happened because of the laissez-faire, light-touch regulation regimes that were then in place. These have now have been reformed and strengthened by this Government and I am glad that I was part of that reform. In June 2012 I welcomed the legislation on lobbying that was introduced at that time and I said then that this Government was keen to create more transparency over Government decision making, and to that effect was enacting legislation dealing with the issue. For the first time the public would be able to view information on the contacts that are made between lobbyists and the Government. This is critically important and it needs to be highlighted that these are moves to legislate on the basis of the recommendations of the Mahon tribunal report for far greater transparency over the role of lobbyists.

In the planning and development (No. 2) Bill, which is currently being drafted for consideration by this House, the core function of the new regulator will relate to the evaluation and assessment of local plans and regional strategies, including land rezonings, and will involve making recommendations to the Minister on these matters. Where the Minister agrees with the recommendations of the regulator, the Minister will issue appropriate directions and instructions to the relevant local authority on the steps that should be taken in regard to the revision of the relevant plan or strategy.

The Mahon tribunal report focused on events in Dublin but we must not forget that there are concerns regarding planning decisions in the rest of the country. That is why independent consultants, MacCabe Durney Barnes have been appointed on a statutory basis to conduct a review of the application of planning practices and procedures in six of the seven local authorities, Carlow, Cork, Galway and Meath County Councils as well as the Dublin councils. The Minister intends that the review being undertaken by MacCabe Durney Barnes will take precedence over his Department's own review and he will carefully consider and implement any further recommendations that emerge from this independent review.

I regard the Mahon tribunal report as a fundamental point of departure from the inadequate standards of the past and a beginning of a new approach to planning in this country. The Government is determined to continue to act on the findings and planning recommendations of the Mahon tribunal report and to ensure that our planning system is never again allowed to be exploited as it was in the past. Instead, our planning system will be redesigned and operated properly to ensure that it is a properly functioning, effective, responsive, transparent and publicly accountable planning system.

2:20 pm

Photo of Mary Mitchell O'ConnorMary Mitchell O'Connor (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is the first Government to have taken any real steps towards reforming our planning system so that it is fair, fit for purpose and, most importantly, serves the common good of the people. Previous governments were happy to let their planning system be dominated by endless greed and, on occasion, the power of what lay within an alluring brown envelope. The Mahon tribunal lasted 15 years and resulted in a 3,270-page report. This Government is acting on its many findings and recommendations and I strongly welcome the transparent, fair and accountable approach we are taking.

Such change cannot happen overnight and if we want real and long lasting change in our approach to planning, we must ensure we do it right this time. As a former Dún Laoghaire county councillor, I am very aware of the many bureaucratic issues, grey areas and downright lack of fairness and transparency that can arise around planning. We are all too familiar with the sights of depressing ghost estates, empty retail and business parks and residential zones in areas that should never have been sanctioned. Unfortunately, many people have lost faith in the planning applications system. This cannot continue. Transparency and accountability are key to ensuring that no planning fiascos like ghost estates, the building of housing estates and apartment blocks on water plains or Priory Hall ever occur again. It simply cannot be the case that a young couple encounters one bureaucratic difficulty after another in their planning application.

Let us not forget the real steps this Government has taken in trying to fix previous government mess-ups such as the pyrite issue and Priory Hall. I strongly welcome the establishment of a new planning regulator. It will greatly help with the assessment and evaluation of development plans. Most importantly, it will act as a watchdog for us all. I have had endless distressed constituents contact me on difficult and complex matters of planning which often seem very unfair. I cannot help, I cannot intervene but a regulator can. The regulator can act independently.

I urge the constituents of Dún Laoghaire and all over the country to be vigilant and to draw the regulator’s attention to the failings of local authorities to implement their own planning decisions. We must restore confidence and ensure that we are building sustainable communities, not apartments with wafer-thin walls where a toilet cistern flush can be heard in the next apartment. People should not be put through the mill and caused undue worry, stress and expense. I am pleased to hear that the Minister will shortly be publishing arrangements for the preparation of a new national planning framework. I urge all relevant stakeholders, including the public, to engage in the consultation for this framework so that lessons can be learned and confidence restored in our planning system. I look forward to the legislation being published.

Photo of Áine CollinsÁine Collins (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This Government regards the Mahon tribunal report as a fundamental point of departure from the inadequate standards of the past and the beginning of a new approach to planning in this country. The Minister is determined to continue to act on the findings and planning recommendations of the Mahon tribunal and to ensure that our planning system is never again deflected from serving the common good by greed and shortsightedness but instead is designed and operated with the best interests of our country and people at its heart.

The Government believes that a properly functioning, effective, responsive, visionary, transparent and publicly accountable planning process is not only a fundamental requirement but a prerequisite for a modern successful economy like Ireland's is today. It is committed to learning from past mistakes as well as building on the strengths of Ireland's planning process in leading the way on its further development. The core function of the new regulator, which is being provided for in the planning and development (No. 2) Bill currently being prepared, will relate to the evaluation and assessment of local plans and regional strategies, including on land zonings, and to the making of recommendations to the Minister on these matters. Where the Minister agrees with the recommendations of the regulator the Minister will issue appropriate directions and instructions to the relevant local authority on the steps that should be taken over the revision of the relevant plan or strategy. Significantly, where the Minister does not agree with the recommendations of the regulator, which he envisages will be a rare occurrence, the Minister will be required to explain the reasons for such disagreement, lay such reasons before the Houses of the Oireachtas and place them on the Department's website, all in the interests of increased transparency.

The Minister and many Oireachtas Members, including me, do not believe in replacing the democratic oversight and accountability of the policy-making process, currently held by the Minister, with an unelected official, namely, the planning regulator. It would be a step too far. This is why the Minister must have the ultimate decision on powers of direction and local development plans adopted by locally elected members. The planning review report of June 2012 was assessed independently. The independent evaluation, published in March 2013, generally supported the Department's recommendations in its 2012 report and included some additional recommendations.

Independent consultants have been appointed on a statutory basis to conduct a review of the application of the planning practices and procedures in six of the seven local authorities included in the planning review prepared in June 2012. The consultants are at an advanced stage of finalising their independent planning review which involves consultation with each of the original complainants and all the planning authorities concerned in preparing their report. The Minister will carefully consider and implement any further recommendations that emerge from the independent review report, which he expects to receive from the consultants by the end of June. The Minister will issue a public statement, including any appropriate actions to be pursued regarding further policy development and guidance while also taking account of the need to develop wider proposals for improving the transparency and openness of the planning system as recommended in the report of the Mahon tribunal. Every citizen will welcome it, given that we all want to move away from the unfortunate historic events and inadequate housing standards that have had such an impact on the country and on the lives of many families.

The Minister is finalising arrangements for the imminent appointment of a senior counsel on a non-statutory basis, nominated by the Attorney General, to prepare a report on planning matters in respect of Donegal County Council. The arrangements involved will be announced shortly.

The Minister is advancing wider reform and other important planning initiatives, such as the planning and development (No. 1) Bill, aimed primarily at addressing the housing supply shortage that is particularly acute in the Dublin area and as a visible commitment on the part of the Government to the Construction 2020 strategy published in May 2014. The main provisions of this are the revision of the Part V arrangements on social and affordable housing, the retrospective application of reduced development contribution charges, the introduction of a vacant site levy, and "use it or lose it" provisions on planning permissions. Another example of this wider reform is the recent publication of the planning policy statement, which provides for a concise and clear statement on the purpose of planning, values and principles we want to underpin planning, and a vision for what the Government wants to deliver. The Minister will initiate an organisationally focused external review of An Bord Pleanála, which must be seen as a significant opportunity for this much respected State body. The Minister intends shortly to publish arrangements for the preparation of a new national planning framework to succeed the national spatial strategy, which will require considerable consultation with other Government Departments, State agencies and NGOs, as well as an appropriate level of public consultation before the submission of the final strategy to the Oireachtas. The newly shaped regional assemblies will prepare regional spatial and economic strategies in tandem with the preparation of the national planning framework. This is particularly necessary in our cities, where we are running out of commercially zoned land and need new areas in which to build businesses.

All these important initiatives demonstrate that the Government and the Minister are engaged across an unprecedented array of legislative, policy development and organisational reforms designed to return our planning system to its roots as a process fundamentally focused on the common good, in which people can be confident and on which people can depend.

2:30 pm

Photo of James BannonJames Bannon (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister. It is often forgotten that the first victims of bad planning are people. Planning and all of the regulations and laws involved with it is a very important issue. During my 19 years on Longford County Council, I have seen countless examples of bad planning in my native county and throughout the wider midlands region. During the past two decades, the planning system has fallen victim to systematic corruption, a lack of transparency and the vested interests of developers. The loopholes in Ireland's planning laws ensured a complete lack of proper regulation. The repercussions of bad planning have had an appalling impact on the lives of people in every corner of the country. The number of people affected by bad planning is almost too high to count. Bad planning has resulted in development on flood plains, unnecessary over-zoning of lands by county councils and a blatant failure to protect water resources properly.

The Gleann Riada development in Ballyminion, County Longford is an example of building on a flood plain. The granting of planning in early 2004 was a surprise. The Ballyminion area was well known to flood and was better known for duck shooting than housing. Despite this, planning permission was granted for several hundred homes, a hotel, petrol station and retail units. Only 70 units were completed, the majority of which have since been demolished. Another example of terrible planning was the Carrigglas development just outside Longford town. The development had been in receivership until it was recently sold, and I wish the very best of good luck to the new owner. It sits on 600 acres of land with a proposal at the time to build 330 new homes. Once again, only a small percentage of these homes were built and the local community is left with the remains of a half-built ghost estate which was never lived in and which will remain unsuitable for agricultural use without a substantial investment. In 2013, Athlone saw the demolition of the unfinished Glenatore estate following a fatal tragedy.

All these mistakes have had a major impact on families and local communities and have resulted in a total lack of trust between the public and the planning process. I spoke on the issue of planning in this House during my first few years as a Deputy. Back then, I said that a casual attitude to planning, on a build now and think later basis, would be a recipe for disaster. I was right. Thankfully, now that the Mahon report has been published, we have an opportunity to rectify the wrongs, restore public confidence in the planning process and ensure we have a fully accountable system.

The Mahon report highlights the need for a planning system that has zero room for corrupt practices that could undermine the checks and balances that are now in place. One of the most important recommendations in the report relates to the appointment of a planning regulator. The core function of the new regulator will relate to the evaluation and assessment of local plans and regional strategies. If the Minister of the day agrees with a recommendation put forward by the regulator, the regulator can issue instructions to the relevant local authority on the steps that should be taken regarding the revision of its planning strategy. Equally important, if the Minister disagrees with the regulator's recommendation, the Minister must lay the reasons before the Houses of the Oireachtas and place them on the Department's website, which will ensure greater transparency and trust.

I am very pleased to see that the Minister is advancing much wider reforms down the line on a range of planning initiatives. For example, the main provisions of the planning and development (No. 1) Bill will include the revision of the Part V arrangements on social and affordable housing, retrospective application of reduced development contribution charges and the introduction of a vacant site levy. These important strategies highlight the Government's commitment to policy development and organisational reforms regarding planning. It is hoped that these reforms and improvements will return our planning system to what it should have always been, namely, a system focused on the interests of sustainable communities under which people can, once again, have faith and trust in the planning process and the stakeholders involved. The Mahon report will do much for planning and out of much bad will come much good.

2:40 pm

Photo of Seán BarrettSeán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Deputy Adams who is sharing time with Deputies Ferris, Pearse Doherty, Ó Caoláin and Crowe. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Photo of Gerry AdamsGerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The abuse of planning has been a key feature of a long-running and toxic political culture in this State that also gave us the abuses of power that we have seen in the banks, in the health service, in charities and in church and State-run institutions. It is part and parcel of a culture of golden circles and insiders which has so tarnished the political system here and so badly served our citizens. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, which between them have wielded power in this State for the past 90 years, created, maintained and are completely mired in this corrupt political culture. In my view, it is a consequence of the counter-revolutionary period which followed the 1916 Rising. This is the same political culture which ultimately resulted in the total collapse of the economy seven years ago.

The physical and social impact of corrupt planning decisions is evident to this day, especially in parts of Dublin. Working class communities were scattered to far-flung and vast housing estates on the outskirts of Dublin and other cities, estates bereft of adequate infrastructure or amenities. It is to the credit of the people living in these areas that they have come through what can only be described as an exercise in corrupt and mindless social engineering.

Is tríd a bheith eagraithe le chéile agus a gcearta a bheith á éileamh acu a tháinig na pobail seo slán. With the help of some political activists and a few courageous journalists, they exposed the rotten heart of planning corruption in this State. The legacy, however, remains as a dreadful scar on this city and county. The lengthy Mahon tribunal unveiled the reality of a decade of planning corruption. The extent and scale of corruption which was exposed was immense. The Mahon tribunal report was clear. Endemic corruption was rife across the political spectrum.

Fine Gael and Labour cannot portray planning corruption as solely a Fianna Fáil problem. Indeed, Fine Gael councillors and Deputies were central to planning corruption in Dublin. Mahon highlighted an unhealthy relationship between Fine Gael Ministers and individuals involved in property development.

The Mahon tribunal looked at matters relating to planning permission and land rezoning issues in the 1990s in the Dublin County Council area. Nobody seriously suggests, however, that planning corruption was an issue confined to Dublin. In 2012, Mahon made ten recommendations relating to planning. However, 18 years after the Mahon tribunal commenced, three years after it made its final report and four years after Fine Gael and Labour assumed office, the Government has still not implemented the tribunal’s recommendations. Constantly pointing to Fianna Fáil on planning corruption, as this Government does, has no credibility when the Government itself does nothing to root it out.

Instead, the former Fine Gael Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Phil Hogan, infamously frustrated proper scrutiny of the planning process. In one of his first acts as Minister, Phil Hogan, since promoted by the Taoiseach to the prestigious position of European Commissioner, shut down an inquiry initiated by his ministerial predecessor John Gormley. This was an inquiry into alleged planning irregularities in several local authority areas, namely Dublin city, Cork city and counties Cork, Carlow, Meath, Galway and Donegal. Phil Hogan has never given a satisfactory explanation for doing this. There remain serious and unanswered questions around this decision. He actually said at one point that the allegations were spurious. How does he know they were spurious when they have not been investigated?

This action highlights the arrogance of this Government and its indifference to pursuing any genuine reform of the planning system. There is a deep suspicion that Phil Hogan was motivated by a desire not to rock the boat in local government because, at the time, Fine Gael and the Labour Party controlled many councils across the State, including some in which these irregularities allegedly occurred. His actions ran entirely contrary to the findings and recommendations of Mahon. Does anyone believe, after four years of not implementing Mahon’s recommendations, that this is the action of a Government serious about political reform?

An internal review by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, which was presented as an alternative to the Gormley review, claimed there was no evidence of wrongdoing in planning. However, Gerard Convie, a senior planner in Donegal County Council, provided evidence of planning irregularities and he went to the High Court. The court quashed the review's section on Donegal. The Department was forced to apologise to Gerard Convie. The internal review was discredited and had to be set aside.

Did the Government go back to the Mahon tribunal recommendations? No. Instead, it set up another review into six local authorities, this time to be carried out by a group of consultants. We have yet to see what that will come up with. Meanwhile, Gerard Convie has presented substantial grounds for a full independent inquiry to establish whether there were any improprieties that would be subject to legal investigation. Sinn Féin has previously called on the Government to establish such an inquiry. I repeat that call here this evening.

Phil Hogan was also made aware of very serious allegations regarding planning irregularities in County Wicklow. The current Minister is aware of these allegations but nothing has been done to act on them to date. The allegations include one in which the value of a property ear-marked for development was vastly increased in value through rezoning and compulsory purchase orders were used to facilitate the development. It is also claimed well-known property developers, Seán Dunne and Sean Mulryan, two of the richest men in this State prior to the financial, property and banking collapse, were to be the chief beneficiaries of all of this. This was at a time when both of these men were struggling with massive debts accumulated through their gambling with Anglo Irish Bank and other financial institutions. There was also an allegation that on 2 September 2014, a file relating to allegations of corruption in planning in Wicklow, which was handed into the offices of the Minister's predecessor by a former member of Wicklow County Council, was removed from the Minister's office. The seriousness of this last allegation surely underlines the need for a full inquiry into all matters related to the alleged Wicklow irregularities.

Central to the Mahon tribunal recommendations was the establishment of an independent planning regulator. When the report was published in March 2012, the then Minister for State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, promised the Government would make such an appointment. It still has not happened. Three years later, Fine Gael and Labour are still sitting on their hands. The Government has published an outline for proposals on planning which does not provide for an office of a regulator, independent of the Minister. The Government's proposed scheme falls far short of what is required and what was recommended in the Mahon tribunal report. Why? The Government's outline would make any such office subservient to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. I would like to think that we want to decouple politicians from responsibilities for these matters. This completely contradicts the Mahon tribunal's recommendation for a regulator with powers separate from the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government.

If the Government genuinely seeks to break with the corrupt political legacy of the past it must move to reform the planning process. The Government's amendment shows it has no intention of doing this. The Government’s proposal, as it stands, is highly unlikely to be presented as legislation before its term ends. Sinn Féin proposes real reform of the planning process with responsible, ethical and sustainable planning, underpinned by equality. This is the right of all who live in this State. An independent planning regulator would operate in the same manner as the Office of the Ombudsman. A stand-alone Bill to establish such an office could be published before the summer recess. larraim ar achan Teachta tacú le tairiscint Shinn Féin anocht.

2:50 pm

Photo of Martin FerrisMartin Ferris (Kerry North-West Limerick, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When one talks to real people, not the people who inhabit this institution but real people on the streets of the villages and towns of Ireland, they are well versed in the level of corruption, greed and cronyism that exists in this State.

Most of the cases which came to light during the Mahon tribunal were in and around Dublin, but we are all well aware of planning decisions in our own constituencies which did not make sense. Those decisions left some councillors scratching their heads, wondering why and on what basis decisions were reached. Some of the planning decisions taken in this State in questionable circumstances had terrible consequences for people who in good faith went out and got mortgages to buy houses, which ended up being built on flood plains or other unsuitable sites, and who have suffered for that ever since. Planning conditions were not met in cases where people ended up living in housing estates which did not have the infrastructure to provide decent lives for those inhabiting them. It was more of the self-regulation that the economic elite seem to be able to get away with in all sorts of ways.

Last night, Deputies Calleary and O'Donovan referred to the Minister's role in regard to local development plans. Apart from the fact that Deputy Calleary’s own party passed the relevant legislation, I do agree with him regarding the fact that democratically agreed development plans can be set aside by the Minister. We saw that recently where objections from Westmeath and Laois county councils to the plans for massive wind farms were basically overridden by the Government as part of its now abandoned plan to allow the building of vast industrial scale wind farms across the midlands to generate electricity for export.

Sinn Féin drafted a Wind Turbines Bill last year, which was not opposed by the Government, although there has been no attempt to bring it forward since. Our Bill proposed that county development plans could not be overruled by the provisions of the Strategic Infrastructure Act which allows the State to push through projects if it deems them to be of sufficient economic importance. As things stand, the Minister can simply ignore, as was done in Westmeath and Laois, the concerns of democratically elected local representatives who are voicing the concerns of the people who elected them.

Reference was also made to new building regulations that came into force last year. These have acted as a huge disincentive to people who wish to build houses on their own land. That, in turn, has had a negative impact on local construction companies and builders' suppliers.

There need to be proper procedures and scrutiny through the planning process, but that should be done through the local authority rather than a person having to engage the services of a third party who will charge them a large amount of money to sign off on their plans and reports. In some cases, I have heard that it can cost up to €25,000 before any start has been made on a house. That is not unusual.

It is also important that if the Government’s plans to boost the construction sector take off, rural communities are not again subjected to the type of abuse which took place at the height of the last property bubble. We do not want to end up with more ghost estates and more houses built on flood plains. All that can be prevented through proper planning procedures. I agree that most of that can be done through existing structures once they are open and transparent. I also believe, however, that an independent planning regulator would act as a guarantor that everything is above board and can be reviewed in the event of concerns being expressed about particular proposals.

When the former Green Party leader, John Gormley, was Minister for the Environment and Local Government, he set about investigating planning irregularities in Dublin, Cork, Meath, Galway and Carlow. This Government promised to implement an independent assessment but then along came Big Phil Hogan as Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. The next thing we knew was that there would be no independent assessment and the investigations were stopped in their tracks. The outcome of the Mahon tribunal was to recommend such an investigation. It acknowledged the need to address public concerns about planning procedures, as well as the need to establish independent oversight procedures recommended by the report of the tribunal. Even though Phil Hogan - "Mr. Don’t-Investigate-Planning-Irregularities", who was responsible for Irish Water, septic tank charges and the property tax – has gone on to an even more lucrative job, his legacy remains on the Government benches. That is why we have brought forward this motion so that conflicts of interest and other legacy issues regarding planning can be investigated independently.

Photo of Pearse DohertyPearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an rún atá curtha síos ag ár bpáirtí anocht le plé a dhéanamh ar an cheist seo agus, go háirithe, déanaim comhghairdeas leis an Teachta Stanley. Ba é a thabhairt é seo chun tosaigh. Níl dabht ar bith ann ach go bhfuil an díospóireacht seo de dhíth ach leis sin tá gá leis an Rialtas é seo a thabhairt i gcrích. Tá rialtóir neamhspéach de dhíth ó thaobh chúrsaí pleanála de, mar a moladh i dtuairisc an bhinse fiosrúcháin Mahon a foilsíodh in 2002.

Tá sé dochreidte go bhfuilimid an oiread sin blianta ar aghaidh i saol an Rialtais seo agus go bhfuil an tuairsic sin foilsithe leis na blianta ach nach bhfuil an reachtaíocht tar éis dul tríd Tithe an Oireachtais go fóill. Níos measa ná sin, má amharcaimid ar an Bhille atá an Rialtas ag smaoineamh tabhairt isteach, ní freagra é don mhéid moltaí a ndearna an binse fiosrúcháin Mahon. Iarradh rialtóir pleanála neamhspéach a chur i bhfeidhm sa Stát mar go raibh sé de dhíth. Mar atá fios againn uilig agus mar a pléadh inniu agus aréir sa Dáil, bhí an chaimiléireacht a bhí ar siúl ó thaobh chúrsaí pleanála de fite fuaite trí chóras polaitíochta an Stáit.

Tá fios againn gur chaith an binse fiosrúcháin Mahon solas ar an chaimiléireacht a bhí ar siúl anseo i bpríomhchathair Bhaile Átha Cliath agus go raibh sé fite fuaite trí pháirtí Fianna Fáil ag an am. Níl dabht ar bith ann ach go raibh Fine Gael páirteach ann fosta. Ar an drochuair, is é an rud atá an Rialtas seo ag iarraidh a dhéanamh ná rialtóir a thabairt isteach ach gan neamhpléachas a bheith ag an rialtóir sin. Beidh an freagracht nó an say nó an focal deireannach ag an Aire. Níl sé sin ceart ná cóir agus tagann sé salach ar na moltaí a ndearnadh i dtuairisc Mahon.

Last night, the Minister explained the background to standing down the inquiry into seven local authorities that was initiated by the former Minister, John Gormley. While Gormley's review was clearly prompted by serious concerns about planning irregularities, which was amply proven in the Mahon tribunal in the case of Dublin City Council, this was abandoned by the current Minister's immediate predecessor, Phil Hogan. At the time, Mr. Hogan said that such an inquiry would be inappropriate. He then established an internal departmental review which, when it reported in March 2013, was considered to have been so inadequate that consultants MacCabe Durney Barnes were subsequently engaged to conduct a statutory review of the planning procedures of six of the seven counties which the Gormley inquiry had targeted.

The Minister, Deputy Kelly, states that he hopes to receive this report next month. We all look forward to that report, but what happened to the seventh county of Donegal? Although originally targeted by the Gormley review, Donegal is not subject to the current one. Instead, the Minister said last night that he is finalising arrangements for the imminent appointment of a senior counsel, on a non-statutory basis, nominated by the Attorney General, to prepare a report on planning matters in respect of Donegal County Council.

The Minister knows, as I do, that there are serious allegations regarding Donegal. They have been made by the former county planner, Gerard Convie. His claims of irregularities were dismissed by the former Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, although he was subsequently vindicated in the courts. I hope therefore that the investigation he referred to will be in operation as soon as possible. I am aware that there are legal aspects to this, so I will not go into any further detail, other than to say that Mr. Convie and all those involved in the Donegal planning office must be able to have full disclosure of the issues involved. If, by any chance, there are irregularities present, they need to be disclosed to the public.

All of this highlights that it is insufficient to have internal reviews and consultancy reports. We need an independent planning regulator with teeth. It does not need to be a vast, costly operation but it does need teeth and to be genuinely at arm's length from the Minister. It should also be empowered to make recommendations, if necessary, to ensure that proven cases of corruption are brought to the attention of the legal authorities. Otherwise we are doomed to repeat the failures of the past.

This is all about political priorities. In 2013, the Cabinet approved the establishment of an independent regulator, but the Government has done nothing about it. Yet in that period, the Government had no problem introducing Irish Water and subsequent legislation to bill nearly 2 million customers.

It is about priorities and this Government must get its priorities right.

3:00 pm

Photo of Caoimhghín Ó CaoláinCaoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Let me first take us back to the Mahon tribunal, first established in 1994. For some current registered voters, that is more than a lifetime ago. This was among the most renowned and most drawn-out in our history of drawn-out tribunals. Looking at matters relating to planning and land rezoning issues in the 1990s in the Dublin County Council area, it examined conflicts of interest, political finance, lobbying, bribery, corruption, money laundering and misuse of confidential information. A veritable treasure trove of corruption was reported on in its publication in 2012. What came of the report? There were ten recommendations relating to planning, including the following as yet unimplemented points that appear to be gathering dust somewhere. These are notice in case of material contravention of development plans; documentation of interventions by elected members; the requirement to identify political donation when making a planning application; and a transferring of the Minister's enforcement powers to an independent planning regulator. None of these has been progressed, let alone implemented.

I add my voice to all in my party and across the State calling on the Government to appoint an independent regulator to oversee planning procedures. The Mahon tribunal report was published in March 2012. Why has Fine Gael failed to ensure an independent planning regulator over the period since? We should remember that this is despite Fine Gael's protestations that it represents a different kind of politics to the long-toxic Fianna Fáil. The party appears to be not so different now. While we saw the housing market and development slow down during the recession, there have been some predictions that the demand for houses will increase. We are all well aware of the pressure for housing of all shapes and sizes in Dublin and in our larger urban areas. The Housing Agency reported recently that a total of 79,660 housing units will be required across all urban areas up to 2018, 47% of which will be required across the city of Dublin. The Government must act at once to ensure that robust, fair and transparent planning laws are in place so we can provide housing for all citizens without having recourse to the nod and wink culture that so badly served us in our recent history.

The Government has previously committed to providing such a body. However, it had not shown in the proposed scheme for the planning and development (No. 2) Bill any way to do this. The Government has, in time-honoured fashion, tabled an amendment to this motion that welcomes the progress by the Government to date on this issue. It would do so, as that is what it does. I am happy to welcome the commitment to the establishment of the office of the planning regulator but this needs to happen urgently. We are also very concerned that the Government's proposals would have a so called independent planning regulator that would be subservient to the Minister. Unfortunately, Ireland of the wink and the nod remains and the true damage of this culture will remain with us for many years to come. As a small island nation, we know that many in various fields, like planning and politics, will have connections or they might even be related. This is exactly why we need an independent body. We need to ensure that conflicts of interest are no longer tolerated. We need to be assured of a fearless independent body to take on any vested interests and ensure that all legacy issues are fully investigated.

In 2011, the former Minister, Mr. Phil Hogan, and this Government decided not to press on with the promised reviews into planning in local authorities in Dublin city, Cork city, Cork county, Carlow, Meath and Galway as planned under the previous Government by the then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. How can we have confidence in such a government, in this Government? A planning regulator must be appointed following an open public competition by an independent appointments board. This is the best way to ensure full independence. The recommendations of the planning regulator must be made binding on the Minister of the day. I also ask the Government to address the serious allegations already referred to regarding planning irregularities in County Wicklow as a priority.

Bhí amhras mór ar go leor maidir le pleanáil in Éirinn le fada. Tuigtear sin go forleathan nuair a thráchtar ar Fhianna Fáil, páirtí a bhfuil amhras mór ann ina thaobh in áiteanna fud fad na tíre. Níl Fine Gael tar éis a léiriú gur tosaíocht acu próiseas pleanála na tíre a cheartú agus oifig le pleanálaí neamhspleách a bhunú. larraim orthu gníomhú go gasta agus sin a chur i gcrích láithreach.

Photo of Seán CroweSeán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sinn Féin has tabled this motion, as others note, because we believe the appointment of an independent planning regulator is a matter of urgency and one that can be dealt with within a short time. It is regrettable that despite a Government commitment to appoint an independent planning regulator, the Government's proposed scheme for a new planning Bill does not allow for the establishment of such an office. They question is why that is so. The planning Bill that the Government now proposes to introduce will establish an office that is subject to the overall rule and veto of a Minister. The Government's amendment to our motion states that it is in a process of creating an independent regulator's office but the problem is that the proposed new planning Bill does not allow for the appointment of an independent regulator. The Irish Planning Institute has stated that with the Government's Bill the final say in planning matters will still reside in the office of the Minister responsible for the environment, not with the new regulator's office. The new regulator instead will act as an adviser to the Minister. Our proposal for an independent regulator answerable to the Oireachtas and appointed by an independent appointments board is clearly necessary.

The Mahon tribunal that has been mentioned, which investigated planning regulation decisions in Dublin, detailed a large web of corruption throughout the 1980s and 1990s. According to some, it cost the taxpayer €250 million with a former Minister, Mr. Michael McDowell, saying it would cost €1 billion. The Revenue Commissioners recovered up to €100 million of that money in undeclared taxes and so on. Three people were imprisoned, including one for corrupt practices and bribing politicians. Another was imprisoned for contempt of court. As we know, one of the modules examined the behaviour of a former Taoiseach. As has been mentioned, one third of Dublin City Council members were implicated as corrupt in the tribunal with respect to land rezoning and development issues.

We also know the tribunal was obstructed at every turn - there were approximately 400 court applications by developers and other individuals - and we can see that its recommendations are not being enforced. The last Government fell because of the perception of the electorate that there was an unhealthy relationship between politicians, wealthy businessmen, speculators and developers. The Mahon tribunal was described tonight by some Government speakers as a new departure but the promised new approach has not happened. The golden circle link between bankers, developers and politicians is still alive and well. The view has been peddled that corruption happens all over the world but it did not happen in Ireland. We know that is nonsense.

By not supporting this motion, the Government is refusing to abide by a key recommendation of Mr. Justice Mahon on creating an office for an independent regulator. The structure that the Government wants to create is clearly not as Mr. Justice Mahon intended, which would have brought about an independent entity with the power to make binding recommendations. We have seen much corruption in land planning in this country, specifically centred on the acquisition of lands and rezonings. Corrupt dealings on land regulations between politicians and developers brought them tens of millions of euro in benefits at the expense of the taxpayer and public services. It is clear that we need to properly investigate the significant legacy issues regarding planning. Additionally, we need to establish an independent planning regulator, with similar powers to the Ombudsman. It is regrettable that the Government is not acting to support increased accountability and transparency in planning matters in supporting this motion.

It will also be interesting to see how the electorate responds to those politicians who were seen as corrupt and who took corrupt payments if they stand in the next election. Hopefully, they will get the response they deserve.

3:10 pm

Photo of Paudie CoffeyPaudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am happy to offer concluding remarks on behalf of the Government. The debate over last night and tonight on this Private Member's motion confirms the universal consensus emerging from all sides of this House to broadly acknowledge the mistakes of the past as exposed through the tribunal report and accept that such mistakes must never again be allowed to be witnessed in our planning process. This debate has provided both the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly, and me with the opportunity to dispel any doubts there may be in the minds of the Opposition on the Government's commitment to good planning and also to demonstrate the extensive array of legislative and policy development work we are advancing to ensure that the inadequate standards in the past are consigned to history. Current and future planning will be community centred rather than developer led; place-making rather than development centred, and wise about the use of scarce resources, whether economic, environmental or social.

The Minister has spoken about the establishment of the independent office of the planning regulator. The regulator will represent a significant new development in the already extensive institutional landscape that oversees public bodies including local authorities and An Bord Pleanála. The regulator will oversee the functioning of an effective, responsive, visionary, transparent and publicly accountable planning system that is not only a fundamental requirement but a prerequisite for a modern successful economy like Ireland's. A constant theme in the contributions last night related to the expressed view of Deputies of the need for an independent and accountable planning regulator. We heard that again here this evening. In this regard and in framing the Government's response, I have had to be very mindful of the need to carefully integrate the role of the regulator into the existing roles of other regulatory bodies including SIPO, the Office of the Ombudsman, An Garda Síochána and my role as Minister of State. Indeed, I would suspect that I would be even more sharply criticised by Opposition Deputies if I were to create overlap or confusion by randomly adding another public body to an already crowded institutional landscape or, more critically, if I were to hand effective overall control of the policy making aspects of the planning process to unelected officials with no democratic mandate or duty to defend difficult decisions at local and community levels.

I am at a loss to understand how Opposition Deputies are claiming that the regulator will not be independent. It is a fact that the office of the planning regulator will be fully independent of the Minister in carrying out its functions. The regulator will, subject to the passage of the legislation by the Oireachtas, be a fully-fledged regulator who can initiate organisational reviews and monitor the performance of planning authorities and do so independently. The regulator will not have to wait for the instruction of the Minister of the day. As Minister of State, I am determined to ensure that the office of the planning regulator will be the independent guardian of the overall capacity for beneficial change and operational effectiveness of our planning system. The regulator will take on a very specific role, independently of the Minister, through its oversight of the planning functions of planning authorities and An Bord Pleanála.

There has been recognition by some Opposition Deputies in this debate of the critical need for democratic accountability for the office of the planning regulator. This recognition is underpinned by the significantly important and well-established reserved function of our locally elected members who are empowered to guide the preparation and adoption of local development plans in the interest of their local communities while also ensuring consistency with proper planning and sustainable development locally, regionally and nationally. Thereafter, when these local level development plans are assessed by an independent planning regulator, it will be done entirely independent of the Minister taking proper account of the policy and legislative planning framework put in place by the Minister. As a prescribed body, the regulator will be engaging directly with the local planning authorities on the evolution of these plans from their initiation through publication at draft and amended draft stage without any intervention by the Minister. It is only where the regulator considers a planning authority is not complying with its assessment and relevant strategic or national level considerations that it will request the direct intervention of the Minister.

The Minister, Deputy Alan Kelly, and, I suspect, many Opposition Deputies are of the view that if the decision of democratically elected local councillors are to be overturned, the person responsible for that power should also be democratically accountable. Otherwise, we would be consigning effective control of all development plan policy matters in one sweep to an unelected official with no democratic mandate whatsoever. The Minister and I will also ensure that the office of the planning regulator can and will conduct independent reviews of planning authorities from time to time as it deems necessary or as may be requested by ourselves as Ministers for the purposes of review of the relevant organisation's systems and procedures in relation to the performance of its functions under the planning Acts.

In conclusion, I note that the Government is determined to face up to the errors of its predecessors by driving forward positive reform of the planning system because we believe in planning as a way to achieve prosperity, equality and sustainability for our citizens. The Minister and I look forward to working with the House in the coming months on delivering an efficient, more effective, fit for purpose, well-functioning and fair planning system that learns from the mistakes of the past and provides the foundation for the future progress and prosperity of our country.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Talk of Fine Gael-Fianna Fáil coalition is nonsense. There is no need for such a coalition when Fine Gael and Labour become day by day more Fianna Fáil than Fianna Fáil itself. Despite the lofty rhetoric of reform, the depressing truth is that it is business as usual. Gabhaim buíochas le mo chompánaigh as ucht an ábhar tábhachtach seo a chur os ár gcomhair.

It seems from the outset of taking up office that neither Fine Gael or the Labour Party had any real intention of changing the existing political culture in the State. In 2012, Labour and Fine Gael Ministers lined up to peddle the lie that the former Minister for the Environment, John Gormley, had not lifted a finger to progress independent inquiries into planning in a number of local authorities. The truth is that the former Green Party Minister had left Phil Hogan an extensive dossier which was prepared by planning officials in the Department following an internal review of complaints, a series of reports from the managers in each of the local authorities, terms of reference for a panel of planning consultants to carry out independent reviews of six local authorities, including my own in County Meath, and a completed tender process to select that panel of consultants. Letters of appointment were ready to be issued to members of the panel. A great deal of work was done on this issue right up to the drafting of letters of appointment of a panel to carry out the work. Fast forward three years and we have yet to see this important work carried out and are listening to the same nonsense.

Last night, the Minister claimed the Government had ensured substantial compliance with the recommendations of the Mahon report, but this is simply not true. The general scheme for the proposed planning legislation is just that, a scheme. In the unlikely event that the legislation is introduced before the election, it will only deal with one of the Mahon report's recommendations. Even the planning regulator proposal is a watered-down version of what it should have been. He or she will be appointed by the Minister who, in turn, will be under no obligation to pay a blind bit of notice to the office. The Mahon report recommended the establishment of an independent regulator but the Government has set its face against that for its own particular reasons. Of the ten recommendations in the report, the Government did not accept that members of the National Transport Authority be appointed by an independent appointments board. The Government claims other recommendations are being considered or, in the case of the regulator, being legislated for, but to most observers it does not appear that its proposal complies with the recommendation for an independent regulator. Indeed, the three recommendations that have been implemented - making statutory provision for the national spatial plan, increasing transparency and documenting regional planning guidelines - were implemented before the tribunal reported and cannot, therefore, be claimed by the Government as a response to the Mahon report. The fact that such a costly and lengthy tribunal has not been fully complied with regarding its recommendations flies in the face of the Government's promise to act swiftly and decisively to clean up the planning process.

I accept that improvements have been made with regard to the worst aspects of the rottenness and cancer at the heart of the process years ago as described by Mahon.

However, there still seems to me to be a relationship between big money and influence in this State. Some might claim that there is a continued influence of one of the star turns of Moriarty. The only certain way to ensure the necessary vigilance is in place and to ensure we do not return to the days of brown envelopes being passed in bars to local councillors and planners is to establish a fully independent planning regulator. If we do not have that type of enforcement, we cannot be guaranteed that these issues, which have disastrous effects on all of society, will be resolved.

The question is whether this Government will get involved in fully independent anything. We see, right across the process, that the Government seems to want investigations to be carried out by organisations that are not fully independent. I urge the Minister of State to make the necessary change and ensure we have full independence.

3:20 pm

Photo of Seán BarrettSeán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Deputy Stanley, who has nine minutes.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thought it was ten minutes.

Photo of Seán BarrettSeán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Some of that time would be extra but we will not fight over a minute.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ceann Comhairle. The debate over the past two evenings has been interesting. Yesterday evening, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government referred to the Mahon tribunal and said the situation regarding planning has radically changed. He also claimed that the scheme for the new planning Bill will implement the conclusions and recommendations of the Mahon report. There is a number of issues I wish to raise in reply to those statements.

We all recognise that the Mahon tribunal did excellent work in revealing corruption in planning, mainly in the Dublin area, over a certain period. The final cost was massive. It was reported to the Committee of Public Accounts that it cost €103 million. It is therefore only right that the ten recommendations of the Mahon tribunal, as set out at the end of its report, are implemented in full. It is important that we implement them. I am not satisfied that this will be the case, given what we have seen of the Government's proposal, as outlined in the general scheme for the planning (No. 2) Bill.

I do not want to go over the ground touched on last night but, suffice to say, neither our party, Sinn Féin, nor the Irish Planning Institute, which is of the same mind, are satisfied that the office of planning regulator as proposed in the scheme will be as recommended by the Mahon tribunal, especially when it comes to the regulator's independence of the Minister. I am also not satisfied that the planning process is transformed since the time of the Mahon report, as stated by the Minister. It is true that there is not the same level of corruption, but neither is there the same level of construction.

There have been improvements since the time of the rampant construction which occurred when there was an unhealthy relationship between politicians, officials and the developers we had in the past. However, controversy surrounds some recent planning decisions, which reflects badly on the overall process. In particular, I am thinking of the Corrib gas pipeline project and the midlands' wind farm proposals. In both cases, there was widespread opposition and objections on various grounds. There have been objections to wind farms from at least two local authorities but my local authority in Laois and the one in Westmeath were basically ignored.

We also have legacy issues in Wicklow and other counties, which were referred to yesterday evening. These need an inquiry, but I believe such an inquiry would only have credibility if conducted by an office of an independent planning regulator. We must never again have a situation in which developers and their financial backers have the huge influence that they once had over local development plans, rezoning and planning matters. Much of what was built throughout the noughties was an absolute scandal.

One example is the Riverside estate in Portarlington which was built during that period. It was built with little or no drainage. It had an awful design, a terrible layout, awful planning, terrible standards of building and the materials used were substandard. The walls are like sponges. They soak up rain. The rain soaks in through the rendering and there is sponge-like material in the middle. Having purchased at the height of the boom, paid premium prices and despite having mortgages over them, residents have had to abandon their homes. The big apartment blocks in that development are now deserted. The local authority that gave the planning permission, Offaly County Council, did not enforce fully the conditions of planning permission or the minimalist building regulations.

I also wish to refer to the issue of Tymon and the likely conclusion of the Minister's planning initiatives. It was said here yesterday that we would be lucky to see the Bill framed before the end of the year, which is what we were promised by the Minister last night. However, given the normal length of time associated with the drafting process, this is optimistic. Even if we accept the stated timeframe, does the Minister of State not agree that, given it is at its final furlong, the Government has left it very late to legislate for and implement the recommendations in the Mahon report. Further, only three of the ten recommendations in the Mahon report are being implemented, which is not at all good.

The Minister also referred to the other planning Bill, or scheme as it currently is, last night. This deals with construction, housing issues and Part V, and I imagine it will have and is being given priority over the planning regulator Bill.

If the Mahon recommendations, in particular the recommendation on an independent regulator, are not legislated for and expanded prior to a geared up phase of construction, the danger exists that we will run back into the same problems we had in the past. The Minister correctly stated that planning corruption is not a faceless or victimless crime but one that impacts on communities up and down the country. We agree with that statement. However, claiming that the planning process is radically improved since the time of the Mahon tribunal is all very well and good, but it must be ensured through action measures and we must have that action. The key recommendations must be implemented.

The Minister also referred to what he called the organisational review of An Bord Pleanála. What stage is that at and when will it be completed? I do not share the view held by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Kelly, that An Bord Pleanála has peerless standards of fairness, probity and transparency. I do not share that same level of faith in An Bord Pleanála. I have raised the issue of conflicts of interest of some members of An Bord Pleanála with the Minister and his predecessor. It is simply not good enough that people who have been involved in framing and backing controversial proposals such as the Dublin waste incinerator can cross over to the other side, as has happened, and approve, as members of An Bord Pleanála, the same measures and plans, even though they had been involved with RPS Consultants.

Similar issues have arisen in relation to wind farms. The Minister, as part of the review of the workings of the planning board, An Bord Pleanála, could make it a rule that former employees of consultants involved in projects, in particular controversial projects, would in the future not be in a position to decide on the planning applications of those same projects.

I want to note as well the Minister's reference to the issue in Wicklow, which was referred to last night. These are very serious issues. A file on the issue in Wicklow and, in particular, the Greystones case, has gone missing from the Minister of State's office. What I want to know and what I was not told by the Minister in his summing up is whether the Garda has been contacted about the matter. If it has, what was the outcome? We do not know but I would like to know. What we do know is that the acquisition of between six and seven acres of prime land zoned for housing was dealt with in an agreement by the two Seánies-----

Photo of Seán BarrettSeán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Stanley must be careful.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

----- and they acquired that land for a tenner. That is one of the most extraordinary land deals that has ever happened in the State. It is the most extraordinary one that I have ever seen and I have studied it very carefully.

The Minister said last night that he is considering the matter. This and other serious matters in Wicklow require more than the consideration of the Minister. They need to be investigated by an independent planning regulator and that is why we need the independent office. The Minister of State made reference to the fact that he does not want to create different agencies and offices. Neither do we, but if the Government is going to create an office, it might as well be independent. It is still just the one office. It does not need to have 100 people in it, but it does need to be independent.

If the Government is going to create the office, it should give it powers.

A Deputy referred to Priory Hall and its building standards. Sinn Féin has been 100% clear on this matter. Among the first elected representatives to take up the issue were local Sinn Féin representatives. What happened at Priory Hall was a scandal and should never be allowed to recur. Those who had any role in it, be it the developer or anyone else, should be held to account. They were described as cowboys, but I would go further and describe them as buachaillí bó. Such situations have no place in a republic.

3:30 pm

Photo of Paudie CoffeyPaudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Sinn Féin support the building regulations?

Photo of Colm KeaveneyColm Keaveney (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Buachaillí bó.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are many examples of Priory Hall up and down the country. We must move beyond them.

Photo of Paudie CoffeyPaudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Sinn Féin support the new building regulations?

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask that all Deputies who agree with the need for a genuinely independent planning process vote for our motion and enable the introduction of good legislation that allows for the appointment of an independent planning regulator in order to avoid a return to the past's culture of brown envelopes. Let us ensure that we have a good, proper and transparent planning system and let us restore the public's faith in local and national government and the planning process. We should all agree on this front and move forward.

Amendment put:

The Dáil divided: Tá, 62; Níl, 39.


Tellers: Tá, Deputies Paul Kehoe and John Lyons; Níl, Deputies Jonathan O'Brien and Brian Stanley.

Níl

Amendment declared carried.

Question put: "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to."

The Dáil divided: Tá, 62; Níl, 40.


Tellers: Tá, Deputies Paul Kehoe and John Lyons; Níl, Deputies Jonathan O'Brien and Brian Stanley.

Níl

Question declared carried.

The Dáil adjourned at at 9.25 p.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 14 May 2015.