Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I compliment the producers of last night's "RTÉ Investigates" programme, which really demonstrated the environmental damage that can be done when regulation is breached. Not only is it financially costly, it causes significant damage to our environment and to human health. The RTÉ programme focused on waste and non-compliance with a fragmented system of regulation, how those who flagrantly abuse any system of regulation are dealt with, the time it takes to deal with those who cause such damage and who ultimately picks up the bill.

The RTÉ programme looked at waste, but unauthorised development is another area that requires significant attention. A planning system is only as good as the enforcement. While local authorities have responsibility for planing enforcement, on occasions it also requires the involvement of the courts. I want to highlight in particular the issue of quarrying and I will focus on one particular example that is not in my constituency but it is in south Kildare, in Ballysax near the Curragh. The history of this quarry goes back to 1983 when it operated without permission. I shall refer, however, to 2012 when An Bord Pleanála wrote to the owners informing them that the quarry was unauthorised and did not have the benefit of planning permission because it did not avail of a section 261 regulation.

In August 2014 a new owner took over the quarry and it was clear from the outset that the intention was to scale up the quarrying operation. This drew many complaints to Kildare County Council and an enforcement notice was eventually issued in 2015 stating that they should close the quarry immediately with all equipment to be removed by mid June. That enforcement notice was ignored. Understandably there continued to be complaints from locals which culminated in locals protesting outside at the quarry on a regular basis. Gardaí were called on numerous occasions and, ironically, this resulted in some locals being arrested for breach of the peace. Kildare County Council gave an undertaking to some local Deputies they would take High Court action under section 160 of the regulations. A High Court appearance followed in late 2015 and a temporary closure was to follow, but that agreement was largely ignored.

Today in 2018 the quarry is still operating. Not only is the quarry operating to full capacity and breaking every planning law, it has in fact been extended to a massive 20 ha. In 2016 the council took the quarry owner to the Circuit Court. There were seven adjournments in the Circuit Court before a full hearing took place in June 2017, with the reserved judgment to follow. In November 2017 the judge gave his decision stating the quarry was an illegal development without planning permission since 1983. The judge ordered the quarry to be closed and the Kildare County Council legal team agreed a stay of five months, until February 2018. The quarry owner was granted additional time to lodge an appeal for a stay on the judge's decision.

Prior to the most recent High Court hearing I contacted the council, which was due to deal with the stay. I was told the expectation was that there would be a full hearing. I understand that the stay had elapsed, and while the judge appeared to favour the immediate closure, the quarry owner sought a recess to apply to another court for a stay. Kildare County Council's legal team did not object to this. The quarry owner came back to the court with a new stay and the judge suggested an October closure. The council agreed to a 2019 closure, as long as the council got its fees paid.

A small community settlement is in close proximity, details of which I can give to the Minister of State later. I emphasise the length of time it has taken to deal with this. Do we actually have planning enforcement at all?

Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Catherine Murphy for raising this important issue on unauthorised developments and how they are not being complied with. I do not have the details of this specific case and am I was not familiar with the story, but I am now aware of it.

At the outset, I will outline the Minister's role in relation to the planning system. It is mainly to provide and update the legislative and policy guidance framework. The legislative framework comprises the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, and the associated Planning and Development Regulations. Furthermore, my Department has issued a large number of planning guidelines under section 28 of the Planning Act to guide planning authorities in the implementation of the wider planning policy framework. Planning authorities and An Bord Pleanála are obliged to have regard to those guidelines in the exercise of their planning functions. The day-to-day operation of the planning system, however, is a matter for the individual planning authorities and under section 30 of the Act the Minister is specifically prohibited from exercising any power or control in relation to any particular case, including an enforcement issue, with which a planning authority or the board is, or may be, concerned with.

Under planning legislation, any development that requires permission and does not have that permission is an unauthorised development. This is also the case with a development that is proceeding in breach of conditions laid down in the planning permission, or any exempted development that is carried out that does not comply with the limitations of that exemption. The planning code also provides that enforcement of planning control is a matter for the individual planning authorities, which can take action if a development does not have the required permission or where the terms of a permission have not been met. In this regard, planning authorities have substantial enforcement powers under the Act. First, a planning authority may issue an enforcement notice in connection with an unauthorised development, requiring such steps as the authority considers necessary to be taken within a specified period. If an enforcement notice is not complied with, the planning authority is further empowered to enter on the land and take such steps including the removal, demolition or alteration of any structure as is deemed necessary, as well as to recover any costs incurred in undertaking such actions. Second, a planning authority may also seek a court order under section 160 of the Act, requiring any particular action to be done or not to be done.

Taking account of the above points responsibility for enforcement action on any breach of the planning code is a matter for individual planning authorities under the powers available to them under the Planning Act. Accordingly, individual cases of unauthorised developments or non-compliance with planning permissions should be brought to the attention of the relevant planning authority, which can then take the necessary and timely action as provided for in planning legislation.

I am aware that Deputy Murphy has raised a specific case but it is not something I can get into because it is down to the local planning authority. We constantly review the powers available to the local planning authority through the planning code and the Planning Act, and we issue guidance on that also. A planning Bill is coming through the House currently and a second one is coming in the autumn. If any issues are raised from these cases or other cases we can look at it to see if we can strengthen the law. The enforcement of the law is at a local level and that is being strengthened there as well.

In some cases it can be an issue of resources. The Department makes it very clear that we try to work with local authorities to ensure resources are put back into local authorities, and in the context of making up for the last couple of years. The authorities should be in the position to deal with these cases. From a planning perspective the planning code is there and if we need to enhance it further we can look at it through the future planning Bills. I thank the Deputy for raising the general issue in the Chamber.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This quarry is not a small development: it is 20 ha. A small local community of 11 families lives near to it. Four of the family members in those 11 houses now have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and others are using inhalers. There is a significant problem with dust and on their doctors' advice the families stay inside when the wind blows predominantly towards their homes.

Some 150 trucks per day - 40 ft articulated trucks - travel to and from the quarry on small rural roads. They start at 5.30 a.m. and there is a serious problem with sleep disturbance for the families. The road conditions are also dangerous. Because there is no planning permission for the development there is no bond and no possibility of money for the remediation. One could, at this point, predict that the public purse will end up picking up the cost of this. Last night's RTÉ programme showed us the kinds of damage that can be done in the waste sector.

If this development had planning permission there would be a regime around it. There are laws in theory but in practice it is going in and out of the courts. People who comply with the law are at a disadvantage against those who break the law because they stretch it out the whole time. This case offers a breathtaking level of non-compliance. Every court, An Bord Pleanála and the local authority are being ignored. While I use this case as a specific example there is a serious problem with planning enforcement. There is great variation in levels of enforcement, depending on where one is in the State. If this site had planning permission there would be a bond and a time allowed for operation. A time would be set outside of which it could not operate. Currently we cannot even insist on the enforcement of planning conditions because there is no planning permission with conditions.

I ask that the Minister of State look at the theory to see if it is working in practice. I was a councillor since 1991 so I have dealt with the planning system for a long time. I have never once seen the local authority going in to take action or physically remove things using the section referred to by the Minister of State. I do not believe it happens anywhere. The provision is there in theory but it has to be there in practice. The local authority should be there for the public good and I do not believe that what is happening here between the courts and the local authority in this regard is in the public interest.

Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The role of the Minister and me in the planning system is to provide and update the legislation and policy guidance framework. The Minister cannot get involved in, or exercise any power in respect of, any particular case, including an enforcement issue with which a planning authority is or may be concerned. Responsibility for enforcement action in respect of any breach of the planning code is a matter for individual planning authorities. Part VIII of the Planning and Development Act 2000 sets out the comprehensive enforcement powers that are available to planning authorities.

Alongside general issues, the Deputy has raised issues with this specific case, as have Deputy Heydon and others. I have committed to considering whether these powers need to be strengthened in forthcoming planning legislation. They are already strong, though, and I expect local authorities to be in control and, where necessary, to enforce. We feel strongly in that regard. We review local authorities' powers constantly and will do so again under various Acts to determine whether strengthening them is necessary.

I agree with Deputy Catherine Murphy that there can be delays in planning authorities taking enforcement actions against unauthorised developments. Situations can arise where, for instance, damage is caused to roads by construction activity and, if not acted upon, can become a source of annoyance and inconvenience for local residents and result in a cost to the taxpayer. We need to strengthen our position on enforcement. Local authorities have been strengthened in financial and staffing terms. If we need to strengthen the legislation, we can consider doing so, but existing powers provide authorities with a good opportunity to enforce regulations in the way they should be.

Regarding annoyance, inconvenience and taxpayers' money, the earlier that individual cases of unauthorised developments or non-compliance with planning permissions are brought to the attention of planning authorities, the earlier the relevant enforcement powers provided for in the legislation can be activated by those authorities. In the event that it is considered that there is undue delay or failure on the part of a planning authority to address an enforcement issue, a complaint can be made to the Ombudsman. I am unsure as to whether that has happened in this case as I do not know the specifics, but it is an option. We will also consider powers in that regard.

When an issue is causing people distress and inconvenience, the local authority should use its position and powers.