Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. Cé nach bhfuil mé iomlán sásta mar gheall ar an ábhar seo, molaim an tAire as ucht an méad atá déanta aige.

I welcome the Minister to the House. Before getting into the substantive issues, there is a need for elements of uniformity throughout the country with regard to planning. Planning guidelines should be seen as guidelines, because there are local issues which obviously impact. If the Minister subscribes, which I am sure he does, to the autonomy and empowerment of local councils, it is obvious they must be allowed to make their own decisions as to what is best in their own localities for the communities they represent.

Some issues I have noticed in recent times are a cause of concern. In my constituency, in a traditional area of Wexford town, the Faythe, where there are many elderly residents, there has been a recent trend for businesses to buy houses which were formerly residential. These are affordable houses, perhaps for single people or couples, and convenient to shops and so on. The businesses buy them simply because it is a cheap opportunity to access office accommodation. As a consequence, traffic and various other problems arise which have seriously impacted on the quality of life of the people living in the area. Within the guidelines, we should have some preservation of old housing stock so it would remain as part of residential housing stock rather than having it acquired by people in business in an opportunistic manner. Businesses should be located in some of the newer office estates which surround our towns, where there are parking and other facilities, rather than imposing the difficulties associated with them on residential areas.

We have previously debated the taking over of housing estates by local authorities. There needs to be a much closer monitoring of developments by local authorities because when it comes to the taking over of estates it is often discovered that there are various impediments because the developers have not fully conformed with the planners' original outline. At that stage, it is too late for the situation to be corrected. Issues such as ramps, community facilities and so on should be part and parcel of the estates being built.

The Department does not always get it right. I commend Dublin City Council, of which the Minister was Lord Mayor some years ago, because in the past 12 months it brought out new guidelines for the development of apartments in the city. It is fair to say that the Department lacked the vision which the city council has shown. The size which is allowed in the guidelines from the Department is much smaller than that introduced in the Dublin City Council guidelines. Across the city and elsewhere, we have seen very poor quality apartments built. The former Dublin city manager, Mr. John Fitzgerald, speaking at an Oireachtas sub-committee some time ago, stated that the new social problems will be in the section 23 apartment blocks in the city and other parts of the country. That is because the design and quality was not of a sufficiently high standard. People bought them on the basis of tax breaks and no significant thought went into that.

I was a proponent of Part V because I thought it was a good republican philosophy to encourage a mix of people in residential areas. It was a very courageous move by the then Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey. As it is almost seven years since its inception, it is time to review Part V and look at the consequences of it. In some areas people found it difficult to maintain the houses or apartments allocated to them and the disparity in income among residents led to social difficulties also.

As part of a review we should examine whether it is preferable for the 20% of land which developers give to local authorities at its original cost base, be it agricultural or whatever, to be used for sports fields and community facilities. Many of us are of an age to remember big open spaces when we were growing up in which one could play hurling, football or soccer adjacent to where one lived. All that land has now been developed. A potential volcano of problems is being built up as a consequence. I urge that we examine this matter.

At the time we all felt Part V was imposing an obligation on developers but in practice it has imposed an obligation on purchasers, especially first-time buyers who picked up the additional cost due to developers not getting the value from that portion of the land. Developers should also be involved in the provision of community facilities.

I fully support some of the objectives outlined in the draft guidelines, such as setting out stronger planning requirements to facilitate the development of sustainable communities. That is really what it should be about. In setting out the guidelines the Minister has clearly identified the objective. Setting high standards in terms of space and facilities to meet our needs is something to which we should fully adhere. I am somewhat disappointed, however, because I fear the Minister has run with the mantra of the Department in terms of higher density. From being involved with one or two very small developments I am aware that the more units one can get on a plot of land, the more profit one will make. I also accept the arguments regarding transport and CO2 but I question why no reference was made to the huge social problems which will be created by aiming for high density and not giving people space.

I accept that urban sprawl is a challenge but in provincial and rural Ireland the last thing we need is high rise apartment blocks, 20 houses to the acre or 50 houses to the hectare. That is a major issue and it is one which I urge the Minister to re-examine. While we may be meeting some of the criteria on the transport side I have no doubt about the social consequences of having people congregate in built-up areas. This is not necessary in rural Ireland where there is plenty of land. We are a very low density population. A total of 4.2 million people live in this part of the island and 6 million people overall live on the island. If we continue looking for this type of very high density what took place in Finglas on St. Patrick's Day will be replicated in various areas around the country.

I have discussed this issue with planners and they concur that there is no necessity for high density. It is a developer's charter and will add to the profits of developers but it is not in the long-term benefit of the social fabric of the communities we wish to create. I urge that this be examined in terms of the direction in which we are going as the disadvantages outweigh the advantages from the point of view of transportation and CO2.