Michael McCarthy (Labour)

Sadly, in one case of which I am aware, the applicant passed away before the planning permission was granted. The situation reached a satisfactory conclusion in terms of what he set out to do, which was to provide for his wife and family after his death. That was a very sad case and it is dreadful to think that the system we all subscribe to and make our living from was responsible for causing distress to vulnerable people.

I wish to refer to An Taisce. I am aware of a case where the daughter of a landowner applied for planning permission. She made many telephone calls and trips to the offices of the planning department. Eventually the local authority granted planning permission. The planner's report was at variance with the managerial decision because the planner did not take the reasons advanced in support of the application into account. In other words, the goalposts of the planner's report were different from those of the manager's.

An Taisce is very well organised and noticed this discrepancy immediately. It was in a position to lodge an objection and did so just before the 30-day deadline for the submission of objections expired. The original decision in favour of the applicant was overturned by An Bord Pleanála. The result was that the applicant could not build a house on her father's land. She wanted to leave Dublin to be near her father, a widower, who was living alone in an area that was not a scenic one, but she could not do so.

Often people who apply for planning permission in rural areas do so because they obtain the site from family members. This means they do not have to attempt to enter the housing market, where exorbitant sums of money are demanded for houses. The acquisition of a site allows them to build directly on family-owned land, which is a much more economically viable option.

I thank the Leader for organising the various debates on this issue. I also thank the Minister for returning to the House with these guidelines, which I welcome. There will be some difficulties regarding people who attempt to exploit the guidelines to make money. That is not the purpose of the guidelines. They are designed to advance the cases of genuine planning applicants, people who want to live in rural areas and contribute to their vibrancy by using the schools, shops, post offices and so on.

Some people may denigrate these guidelines, but they are the very people who will also bemoan rural decline. It is very hard to reconcile the twin issues of sensible rural development and rural population decline. I welcome the guidelines and hope we can have a healthy debate on any issues that may arise on this area in the future. If there are problems we can find solutions. Often problem seekers ignore obvious solutions because they do not want issues resolved successfully.