Paudie Coffey (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister and his officials to the Seanad for the initiation of an important Bill and debate. While the Bill has been recently publicised by the media, it was also publicised prior to this summer's local elections.

This comprehensive Bill addresses the important matters of planning and development which will have a significant impact on how the country and communities will develop in the coming years. It is our job as an Opposition party to analyse, comment on, contribute to and debate the many contents of the Bill.

I acknowledge at the outset the Minister's sentiment that it is important we have good and sustainable planning. The Bill proposes to reform various aspects of the Planning and Development Acts from 2000 to 2007 and while I acknowledge there are some positive aspects to the Bill, to which I will refer, we in the Fine Gael Party have some concerns with regard to other aspects. We believe some undemocratic centralised control elements are being introduced to the planning area by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Minister. We are also concerned, and the Minister alluded to it towards the end of his contribution, that the Bill is incomplete and that he intends to add many more sections and amendments. I suspect the Bill will be heavily amended by the time it reaches Committee Stage in this House and before it goes to the Lower House. We would have preferred a more complete Bill to debate here at the earliest possible stage. I understand there are many complexities to the Bill and that it is comprehensive but I want to record that view at the outset.

The Minister referred to lessons being learned and the legacy we have inherited from development plans in recent years. We all accept there are lessons to be learned but where elements of corruption exist, and there was and is elements of corruption in the planning process, the Fine Gael Party fully supports the idea that it should be exposed, rooted out and has no hand, act or part to play in the proper planning and development of our communities.

We must also learn from the recent property boom and the mistakes made in planning decisions and developments but I remind the Minister that was propagated by his partners in Government, Fianna Fáil, where we saw an explosion of property development due to ill thought out and unsustainable Government policies. The Government and local authorities were happy to propagate that development boom at an unsustainable rate due to the huge income from property related taxes such as capital gains tax, stamp duty, VAT and development levies.

The Minister will be aware that local authorities have become seriously dependent on the income generated from development levies and we can now see the huge deficits local authorities are running in their current budgets because of the economic and construction slowdown. In other words, we put all our eggs in one basket for the past ten or 15 years and local authorities have become over-dependent on that income. They have prepared budgets in recent years based on this income and now that it has dried up we can see the cupboard is bare and the way services and local authorities are suffering. That is obvious to all. The infrastructure that was being developed is now at a standstill. While I expect the Minister to absolve himself of all blame for that, and this Bill may be his attempt to correct the problems created, I suggest the Bill is probably too little too late.

I do not want to go into the National Asset Management Agency debate but I am sure this Bill will have serious implications for lands taken under control by NAMA. We talk about transparency but it is important the implications of NAMA on zoned lands that will be taken over by NAMA are transparent and put into the public domain as soon as possible for all to see, whether it is the communities, the banking sector or whoever but more importantly for taxpayers because zoned lands that have not been developed and which are better suited to feeding cattle will be affected by the NAMA legislation and indeed this Bill.

On the Bill, section 5 is important and provides that evidence based core strategies will be the fundamental basis of the way we inform our new development plans, but how perfect is the evidence we are expected to use? I am reliably informed by sources that the statistics used by the Department are up to 10% out of kilter with the statistics on population trends. I do not know whether that is right or wrong but if the statistics are incorrect, it could seriously distort any future development plans. Regardless of the plans that are developed under this legislation, and I urge the Minister to focus on this area, it is essential that the information used as the fundamental framework based on population trends is correct. The statistics must be treble checked because if we intend to invest in infrastructure and set out development plans based on that information, it is essential that it is correct at the outset and beyond any doubt if development plans are to have the full support of the entire society.

Regarding the evidence based core strategies, it appears that a hierarchy is being established not only nationally but now also within counties and cities with regard to the way they will develop. Will that hierarchy be fair? Will it limit existing towns from developing and attracting new businesses or industry? Will towns suffer because under this legislation future development plans will be lower down the food chain, so to speak, within their county? Will towns suffer because they will not have the support of the Department or council officials because they are not seen to be important enough? Many towns and villages have not seen the benefits of the Celtic tiger or major development and they feel they have been left behind. I am concerned that as a result of this legislation they will be left behind in law because they will not benefit from any future incentives to attract business or development. There is a concern around that area. Every individual and, by extension, every community and town can aspire to developing to their full potential without being limited by a hierarchal type of planning process. Fine Gael has concerns in regard to that particular area. This Bill will limit the development aspirations of towns and stymie some development in areas where development is needed to regenerate towns and villages.

I am interested to hear the view of the Fianna Fáil representatives on this because I am aware that they, like Fine Gael, have councillors elected in all communities throughout the country. I appreciate the Green Party does not have the same levels of representation in towns and villages. In fact, in the main the Green Party reflects the views of dwellers in large urban cities to a large degree, and I do not say that lightly. That is a fact of life from someone who comes from a small rural village. Much of the time I do not hear the views of the ordinary people I live among being reflected by the Green Party. I would be interested to hear what the major party in Government has to say.

I will give the Minister one example. I come from a small town with a population of less than 2,000. It is the fourth largest town in County Waterford. The town has always had a development plan every five years but under this legislation we are being told there will be no requirement on the local authority to have a local area plan because the population is under 2,000. That has been studied by planners throughout this country, the British Isles and the world because Portlaw, where I come from, is a planned industrial town built by the Quakers where an industry was set up and all the social fabric the Minister alludes to in the legislation such as educational institutions, societal institutions, industry and housing was built within a period of 20 years.

The industrial site in this town became a brownfield site because it degenerated through neglect, and it remains a brownfield site of over ten acres in the middle of the town, fully serviced and accessible. It is all very well to bring in legislation that is high in aspirations and ideas but to date legislation and planning has neglected towns and villages like Portlaw. The Department officials and the county councils have turned a blind eye to dereliction, neglect and contamination on that site for over 25 years. It is in the middle of a town in a zoned area with all the water services, roads, footpaths and lighting leading into it but it has lain derelict for 25 years with no interest whatever from Department and council officials. Only for the councillors in that area, it would have been forgotten altogether.

Let me outline another example, the seven-villages sewerage scheme in Waterford, a project in which the Minister's Department is directly involved. The seven villages, which are long established, have all the social services to which the Minister alludes. They are among the villages and towns in the two thirds of the country that are not in the commuter belt and they include Cappoquin, Stradbally, Kilmacthomas and Ardmore. They have been awaiting a foreshore licence for over seven years so their sewerage infrastructure can be installed. The reason for the delay is the unnecessary bureaucracy in the Departments and it is not because of councillors' decisions or bad planning. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, and the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources have all held responsibility for foreshore licences, yet none of them is dealing with them or issuing them. As a consequence, the infrastructural development of seven villages is held up. We are trying to develop them in an integrated, sustainable way but, for seven years, they have not even been able to put water services in place. This is a question of bureaucracy, not of bad planning by councillors or local authorities.

It is important that we highlight both sides of the planning debate. It is not just a case of bad planning decisions on the part of councillors but of bad management of local authority areas by Department officials, the Government and local authorities.

Let me outline an example from a local authority adjacent to my own. I and the Minister are aware of a town in respect of which recommendations were made by town council managers and officials to zone flood plains for commercial development. This is on public record. It was not the councillors who were promoting the zoning but the officials. Therefore, it is not only on the councillors that we should be homing in.

Let us consider sections 7, 8 and 19, under which two thirds of councillors will be required to vote in favour of motions to sanction or materially contravene development plans. While I honestly do not know how frequently these motions arise or how often they are voted on, I suspect they are not as frequent as the reasons for introducing this legislation would suggest.

The Minister states this Bill will strengthen local democracy. However, I argue it will weaken the power of local councillors, who are elected directly by the people in the communities in which they live. They are accountable to the people and must put themselves before the electorate every five years. This Bill provides for new arrangements for adopting county and city development plans whereby two thirds of the majority of the council will be required to pass a plan or make a material contravention or change. My concern in this regard is that a rump can develop within a council whereby a small number of councillors can band together to halt a genuinely good development plan. This gives more power to a minority grouping within a council. Surely this measure is not improving local democracy.

If the Minister is concerned about the formulation of development plans, he should consider the Fine Gael proposal that was in the party's local election manifesto. It stated a register of lobbyists should be set up and be publicly accessible in local authority areas. Thus, elected members and council officials would be required by law to register any lobbying by developers or landowners regarding zoning issues. That would bring considerable transparency and accountability to the planning process and the creation of development plans.

In the Minister's recent contributions in the Dáil on NAMA, he has apportioned unfairly much of the blame for the property boom to councillors on the basis of decisions they made. I do not like this impression because there are other reasons the property boom occurred in the manner it did. The very fact land is zoned does not necessarily mean it can be built upon. It must obviously be subjected to stringent technical criteria during the planning application process, and a recommendation must be made by professional planners before a final decision is made by the relevant county or city manager. A decision can be appealed through An Bord Pleanála, if necessary.

Where large-scale housing developments did take place, more cohesive social infrastructure should have been developed in parallel. I acknowledge that this Bill attempts to address the social deficit attaching to large-scale developments.

Rather than restricting the powers of the councillor, the Minister could have examined ways to increase transparency and accountability in the local authority planning process, which includes planning departments, planning officials and elected members.

Section 10 increases the threshold in respect of which local authorities are obliged to develop local area plans. The relevant population is being increased from 2,000 to 5,000. Local authorities are being directed to leave smaller towns and villages without local area plans and without local democratic consultation and drafting. It seems towns with a population of 5,000 or more are those that the Minister wants to micro-manage centrally from his Department. The national spatial strategy has never been approved by the Oireachtas and has had no legal status up to now. Targets were established under the strategy without any strategic environmental assessment, which type of assessment should be required in respect of any basic large-scale development or development plan.

There are genuine concerns regarding the statutory power this Bill will transfer to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Minister. Any new development plan or local area plan will be required by law to conform with the national spatial strategy and the regional development plans.

Every community, local authority area and city has unique strengths and weaknesses. Therefore, any development plan must identify these and address them, and it must exploit any strengths and potential. This Bill attempts to have a uniform type of development that conforms with national and regional plans. One size does not fit all and every town is not the same.

The national spatial strategy, when first introduced, was a document for guidance and co-ordination for State agencies and local authorities with regard to the priorities in the national development plan. When the strategy was drafted, there was no proper analysis or public consultation and there was no opportunity to comment on its content when introduced by the Government. In essence, it was a diktat from central government on how our country should develop. To date, the national spatial strategy has had no legal status and, as far as I know, it was not approved by the Oireachtas.

Under the Bill before us, the national spatial strategy, which was originally a guidance and co-ordination document, will be compulsory under law. Local authorities will be required by law to conform with its content and direction. The problem we have with this is that, whatever the merits of the national spatial strategy, there is nothing stopping the present Minister or any future Minister from redrafting a new one without proper local consultation or democratic accountability. The new strategy would remain, in law, the fundamental framework for any development plans adopted subsequently by local authorities. This is essentially an attack on local democracy. The strategy is simply a development plan handed down directly from central government, from the Department and Minister, and has the statutory status to require local authorities to conform with it.

The Minister referred to section 18, in respect of which the Minister had to get involved directly with county development plans in a number of local authority jurisdictions. He is fully entitled to do so as Minister. As a member of the Oireachtas joint committee, I listened to submissions from both sides expressing displeasure over the Minister's intervention. I am glad to say he has taken on board the need for further consultation at an early stage in the formulation of development plans where he feels they do not conform with the guidelines.

In Mayo, all parties represented in the local authority decided unanimously to adopt the county development plan. We must all accept local democracy and listen to what representatives are saying. The Minister intervened in this case but I felt the way he and his officials dealt with the matter was a bit heavy-handed. It could have been handled better. He is attempting to address this issue by way of the reference to a consultation process in this Bill.

Rural Ireland has always been inhabited. Our planning model is not the same as that in Great Britain where people tend to live in small hamlets, towns and villages. I would not like to see the day when we decide to emulate the British planning policy. Reference is often made to forced urbanisation. It seems this Bill will go a long way towards forcing urbanisation. It will require local authorities, when developing their plans, to establish population targets and trends and establish subsequently a hierarchy of settlement areas within individual counties. It is essential that these population trends and statistics are perfect before we develop plans based on that information.

There are some very good measures contained in the Bill, including enhanced e-planning and on-line planning applications. The legislation clarifies issues in that regard and ensures full information will be available to the public on-line, which is welcome. The position on the taking in charge of housing estates is also clarified. We have all seen the difficulties with unfinished estates for people around the country. I welcome the clarification to the effect that local authorities can take in charge housing estates and that they will have the power to refuse planning permission where an unauthorised development has taken place. That is very welcome.

I have outlined many of my concerns and those of my party but I do not want to sound too negative. There are good elements to the Bill and this is a good time to review the planning process because of the changes in our economic circumstances and the legacies to which the Minister referred. I do not disagree with cutting the number required for a quorum from three members to two in An Bord Pleanála, although it will not achieve a lot. As referrals to the board have slowed significantly, they should be dealt with properly.

Sections 24 and 25 deal with public infrastructure, schools and transport services integration. We agree with any measure to improve integration in all these areas. We also welcome the increased fines where people are in breach of planning laws.

At this early stage, the Bill is incomplete. From what I have heard from the Minister today, it will be heavily amended on Committee Stage. We agree with much of it but disagree with parts of it for the reasons I have outlined. In the main, we are concerned that it is a Bill to manage planning processes in local communities at a national level in a Department controlled by the Minister of the day.