Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)

I am pleased to be in the Seanad again not as a Senator but as a visitor to the scene of old crimes.

I take this opportunity to address the Seanad on priorities in the planning area, an issue in which I know Senators take a particular interest given their relationship with councillors and county councils. Land use planning has a higher profile in Ireland than ever before given that we are building more houses than ever and our population is increasing. We will build 83,000 houses this year, approximately three times the European average and five times the per capita level being achieved in the UK. We are constructing more infrastructure and more roads without which our record economic development cannot continue into the future. At the same time, the people of Ireland are becoming increasingly aware of our environment and heritage, particularly our built heritage, and the need to protect both. These differing priorities and interests cause conflict and, occasionally, controversy.

Our planning system which must mediate between all these interests is probably one of the most open and democratic planning systems in Europe. It must take a strategic view to ensure that Ireland Inc. keeps developing into the future and that the quality of life in Ireland is preserved at the highest possible level. At the same time, it must take care of the small issues, the individuals in the system, to ensure that everybody gets the best possible results. When a councillor, I used to remind council officials that their role relates to development and planning issues.

We also have to acknowledge that the economic boom has placed planning authorities under greater pressures than ever before. They are now handling around 80,000 planning applications a year, double the level of the early 1990s with planning applications in 2004 set to increase yet again. Appeals to An Bord Pleanála increased by 13% over the same period. The rate of appeal has not kept pace with the rate of planning increase. At the same time, people's expectations of a quality service when they interact with planning authorities have gone up and rightly so. Citizens have a right to expect a quality service. They expect quick delivery, electronic access — an issue which I will address later — and ready accessibility. Above all, they expect to be treated with courtesy and consideration. The planning system is struggling to meet these pressures.

I want the planning service to deliver for the people of Ireland. At a strategic level it must support the delivery of balanced growth and a better quality of life for all the people of Ireland. At an individual level, it must be more responsive and more customer oriented. These are important challenges and I hope I will have the support of this House in addressing them in the future.

I would like to make a point on customer orientation, a point with which I know many, if not all, Senators will agree. It is important that the planning system deals with citizens in a courteous, open and transparent manner. Above all else, the planning system should be competently administered. Discourtesy, secrecy or incompetence are simply not acceptable. These challenges are not insurmountable.

We have certain advantages. The legislative framework for the new planning system at all levels, local, regional and national, is already in place. The Planning and Development Act 2000 and the consolidated 2001 regulations represent the most far-reaching reform of the planning system since the original 1963 Act. The focus of my Department must now be on helping planning authorities to deliver on that framework at a strategic national level and at customer level.

The key to delivering at strategic level is the national spatial strategy, the main objective of which is to achieve more balanced development of the country, a better quality of life for everyone, vibrant urban and rural areas and a better environment. We want continued economic and social development but with a better spatial distribution. The strategy aims to build on the strengths of all areas to achieve more balanced regional development and population growth. We began speaking about national spatial strategies in the early 1960s when the Buchanan and Myles Wright reports were drawn up. It is extraordinary that 40 years later we are still talking about them. It is time the talking stopped and the implementing started. We are now in a position in terms of resources to achieve things which could not be considered a number of years ago.

The spatial strategy recognises that a greater share of economic activity must take place outside the greater Dublin area while at the same time we must continue to support Dublin's role as a key driver of our economy at national and international level. To achieve a more even distribution of development, the strategy sets out a spatial framework within which gateways, hubs and other urban and rural areas will act to allow areas to grow. There is more coherence in this strategy than ever existed in the history of planning in this State.

Regional and local authorities are key players in implementing the NSS in partnership with the Government. Central government alone cannot deliver the strategy. Regional planning guidelines to further implementation of the national spatial strategy at regional level were adopted this year by all regional authorities. Local authorities must now take account of the national spatial strategy in the preparation and adoption of their development plans and in varying development plans, local area plans and other plans and strategies. That makes sense. Ireland is a small island in that no area is isolated from another and it makes sense to adopt an holistic approach in this regard.

For the first time Ireland now has national coverage in terms of regional planning guidelines, for which local authorities are to be complimented. These guidelines inform and strengthen the big picture context for the local planning system. The national spatial strategy together with regional planning guidelines and more strategic local planning will provide a much more plan-led system to better address strategic development opportunities and infrastructure priorities. I want to see an end to what happened in the past when houses were built without supporting infrastructure. When my wife and I first settled in Greystones the residents' association was run by a woman from Applewood Heights who had an extraordinary sense of humour. She named her house "High and Dry" because there was no water available to her until 3 a.m. Getting up at that time to do one's washing made for a very interesting life.

If we are to deliver the right plan we need to take account of the bigger picture, to look at the issue in an holistic way and to take into account all regional issues. The guidelines act as a new strategic big picture backdrop for local plans ensuring that the development plans of the different planning authorities in each region are more integrated. In this way, regional as well as county or city level aims and objectives can be progressed in tandem. Regional guidelines will also help to shape and inform the strategic infrastructure priorities for Departments and their agencies. Departments and agencies such as my own Department, the Department of Transport, IDA Ireland and so on, have been actively examining and re-focusing their own policies and activities in the context of the national spatial strategy, looking at ways to support balanced regional development in a more systematic manner. Departments, agencies and the private sector are actively looking towards the investment priorities which the implementation of strategic development frameworks for the gateways and hubs will require. This is a big task but it is not impossible; it can be done if the various actors for once operate in concert.

The other way in which my Department underpins the strategic dimension to the planning process is through guidelines on specific land use topics of national importance. The draft guidelines on wind farms which will help deliver on targets for reductions of greenhouse gases, were recently put out for public consultation. Senators do a great deal of travelling around the country and will therefore be aware of the existence of the good, the bad and the ugly in this regard. Issues such as siting and design are the focus of these guidelines. It is not intended to stymie what is a positive development but to ensure that it takes place in a way that does not have a downside.

My Department has also published far-reaching draft guidelines on sustainable rural housing. For the first time, they provide a policy framework setting out in detail how Government policy on rural housing, as set out in the national spatial strategy, is to be taken forward by local authorities in planning more effectively for rural areas. This is where the controversial issue of one-off housing arises. These guidelines deal with how development plans can support the development needed to sustain rural communities, how development can be guided and facilitated at the right locations and how planning policies should be tailored to respond to the different circumstances in different types of rural areas, be they near either a large urban area or in a remote area. My personal belief is that a countryside denuded of people is a desert. I do not subscribe to the ideology that the countryside cannot have sustainable development, particularly in the area of one-off housing. There is nothing so joyful as a countryside populated with people. With the best will in the world, I cannot understand the ideology that suggests we should force everybody into towns. I do not accept that is the Irish way nor do I accept that it is the best way.

The guidelines are explicit in a way that has never been the case before now. Reasonable proposals on suitable sites for persons who are part of and contribute to the rural community must be accommodated. I know Senators will agree with that sentiment. There must be balance in how this issue is dealt with. It is important to note that these guidelines are based on good planning principles such as ensuring that housing development in rural areas complements rather than dominates its natural surroundings and that water quality and other issues are properly protected. Although the guidelines are still in draft form, planning authorities and An Bord Pleanála have been urged to adopt them, given the importance of the rural housing issue. Senators will be aware of my own views in this regard expressed very frequently in public before I took office and they are not changing. I regard as rubbish the comments of some commentators who have said that an acceptance of the importance of affording people in rural areas the opportunity of building their own homes means that the Government is not fully committed to the principles of sustainable development. I do not accept the ideological approach and I reject that view.

Sustainability must be about people. The most sustainable rural area is one which affords its population the opportunity to build their own homes in the area. I strongly believe that it is reasonable that the housing requirements of persons with roots in or links to the rural community will be accommodated by our planning system. I am familiar with parts of this country which over the years, particularly in the 1950s and 1960s, lost their populations. People were driven out by economic circumstances. On the issue of the guidelines, I want the particular situation of emigrants returning to their home areas to be borne in mind. Senator Kitt has expressed his concerns to me about people returning to the Galway-Mayo area, an area with which I am very familiar. I want the guidelines to accommodate that type of return as much as it accommodates others. A common sense solution to this problem can be achieved. It will not be based on ideology but rather on practical considerations being brought to bear on each individual case.

On the subject of better quality services, the rural housing guidelines will also help to deliver the other fundamental for a good planning system which is a better quality of service. Achieving greater efficiencies in the planning system was one of the main reasons for the 2000 Act and 2001 regulations. They introduced many new measures to enhance the efficiency of the system, for example, by tightening the deadlines for making decisions. The role of third parties in the system was also clarified and their rights of involvement were stated more forcefully, subject to certain restrictions. This is again an issue of balance. We have a good planning system with many positive aspects but from time to time it can be the subject of abuse. There must be greater consistency in the way that planning authorities use our planning laws and there should be a more courteous and open way of dealing with the people who interact with the planning authorities. My Department keeps the procedural aspects of the planning system under continual review. The proposed 2004 draft regulations, which were recently put out for consultation, contain proposals to further streamline the planning application process. In particular, a standard planning application form is proposed for use by all planning authorities which it is hoped will bring greater clarity to the system and will facilitate the introduction of e-planning, electronic planning. I had better explain that concept later, lest we run into the same difficulties as happened elsewhere when the "e" word was mentioned.

The Department will also issue guidelines to planning authorities on how to handle the procedural aspects of the planning process. Some local authorities have good practice but others have appallingly bad practice. There is not consistency across the country. Its lack is quite extraordinary. Best practice should be the norm. The development management guidelines will replace the existing manual which dates back to the early 1980s. They will set out the ways in which we expect authorities to act when they are handling planning applications, complaints about breaches of the planning code and so on.

Changes to the regulations and to the issuing guidelines will not deliver a more customer-friendly service on their own. Everybody in the system must sign up to the provision of such a service. It is essential that local authorities continue the work they are currently undertaking on the delivery of quality customer service. We can measure this by building on the performance indicators which have already been expanded to all main service areas, including planning. I wish to send a message to councils up and down the country. I expect them to come up with performance indicators. Objective indicators which show how a local authority is performing will highlight that which is good and will also highlight where there are problems. By doing so, we will not be in a position of being "after" local authorities, but in a position to encourage local authorities to deliver the quality service to which the taxpayers of this country are entitled.

I intend to develop the existing planning indicators in consultation with key stakeholders and devise a more comprehensive set of planning performance indicators. It is appropriate that I mention this in this House. For the past week, I have been looking at performance indicators in the housing area and the performance from councils varies dramatically and frighteningly in some cases. It is Government policy that good practice is the focus across the country. I want performance indicators for planning to be based on the ordinary things by which people will judge the local authority's performance, for example, the length of time it takes for a pre-application consultation to occur. I am amazed that it would be easier to get an audience with the Pope than it is to get an audience with relatively lowly officials in planning authorities. That is utter nonsense. If a pre-planning application and discussions are in place, citizens will be saved the time, expense, trouble and trauma of making planning applications that simply do not stand a chance.

The Planning Act deals with planning and development. How counter staff deal with inquiries is an issue for citizens. I am not prepared to accept a standard of discourtesy which has been reported to me and of which I have first-hand experience. I expect public servants to treat the public with the respect it deserves and that is the desire of every public representative from the most junior town councillor up to Members of the Oireachtas. Standards must be maintained. On the issue of performance indicators, I question how people can check the progress of their planning decision. It is astonishing there is no system for notifying people. Some local authorities are good in this area while others are very bad. This is one area where technology could help. I said we were trying to change the standard forms so there is a standard process. With modern technology, one should be able to go onto the Internet, go to the website of the local authority and find out the progress of one's planning application. It is not rocket science. It is simply the application of a system that exists in the private sector. It must exist in the public sector.

We have achieved a breakthrough in motor taxation. One gets a pin number and pays one's tax on-line. It relieves the queues at counters for those who cannot use the electronic system. The same application of common sense technology can help greatly in the local authority area. We need to work on the indicators that show the quality of service. If Senators have ideas, and they have first hand experience in this area, they will be pushing an open door.

Responsibility for good planning and customer service does not rest solely with local planning authorities. An Bord Pleanála has also an obligation to meet the higher expectations for customer service from public bodies in modern Ireland. My Department is actively working with the board on systems to ensure quality decisions, consistency in reports and so on. It is not fair or reasonable that one can get inconsistency at either board level or local authority level, depending on the state of someone's files or who turns up on the day. There should be consistency through the planning system. It is reasonable that people have an expectation that their case will be treated in the same way as every other case.

In my contacts with An Bord Pleanála, I have been impressed by the courtesy of the staff. They have done work but there is more to be done. A recent innovation is the introduction of a complaints handling system within the board. I celebrate that progress. This will ensure complaints are responded to promptly and that mistakes are corrected. However, most importantly, it will ensure lessons from the past are implemented. To make a mistake is the mark of humanity, to learn from the mistake is the mark of a sensible human being. That applies at all levels of public administration.

I see significant advantages for planning authorities and individuals in the full roll-out of an electronically based planning system service. E-planning — I hate the jargon — will be critical in terms of opening up a really transparent planning system. It will reduce the time needed for individuals to interact with the planning authorities. Some progress has been made but I am impatient that enough progress is not being made. Some progress has been made in using modern information and communications technologies and some councils are well advanced while others are still back in the days of the quill pen. That is not tolerable. If we are to give good quality customer service we should be prepared to use every technique available. The State has invested fairly heavily in computing services for local authorities and they should be used.

There should be an increased use of websites to provide information about development plans and lists of current applications. Why is it that a list of current applications is not available in every local authority? Why can we not see what is happening? For example, why can we not have an in-house file tracking system to see the progress of a planning application? Senators are aware of this from their experience as public representatives. When somebody goes to the local authority to look at the file, the file cannot be found because it is out.