Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)

Slight changes could be made to some of the proposals.

A few years ago, the Fine Gael Party tabled a motion on construction standards on the basis that properties were being built without insulation, particularly in Dublin. As a result of the Fianna Fáil Party's decision to vote against the motion, a large number of houses were built using cavity blocks and do not meet insulation standards. If planning permissions are to be extended for a further five years, I hope the Minister will table an amendment providing that properties built on the basis of such permissions must be insulated and stipulating what type of block must be used.

Another problem with the Bill is that it establishes a hierarchy among towns. The national spatial strategy designated gateways and hubs which will be allowed to grow at the expense of smaller towns. The Minister indicated that area plans will not be permitted for towns with a population of less than 2,000. This means they will not be prioritised for sewerage and water treatment facilities and will never be given priority if there is a hub town in the local area because its population is expected to increase to a specified number within a specified timeframe.

Figures from the Central Statistics Office show the population is not increasing. Population growth in many hubs and gateways has, therefore, ceased. What provision has been made for transport facilities in towns and villages with a population of fewer than 2,000? How will access points from these smaller centres to the larger gateways and hubs develop? If the population of these smaller towns does not increase, transport services will not be viable and eventually shops, pubs and other outlets will close.

In our county development plan we have area plans for villages, as well as towns with a population of up to 2,000. A population of 2,000 is quite a sizeable town. It may not be considered so in Dublin but in a rural areas it is a considerable size for a town which provides a lot of facilities such as schools, gaming facilities, shops and supermarkets. Some towns of that size are a hive of activity. Many towns have experienced difficulties in getting extensions to water and sewerage treatment units over the past number of years, but under the plan the Minister has put in place they will have that problem for many years to come until the hub in their area grows to the size of population required by the Minister.

I note the Irish Independent on 10 October 2002 stated councillors zoned enough land in the country for 3 million extra people. That is nearly double the size of the population. The article discusses each county in great detail. It states my county has done enough planning for more than 7,000 extra houses. There are plans for 92,000 additional houses in Donegal, 10,500 in Sligo and 20,000 in Waterford. If that type of zoning exists, surely it is not a great priority unless the Minister makes provision for putting some of the land back into agricultural use. I do not know if councillors, landowners or the county managers would instigate a situation whereby the land would revert to agricultural use.

I welcome some aspects of the Bill. There are some good aspects to it. The Minister must examine the proposed 80% windfall tax. An 80% tax would be an absolute disaster. There would be no commercial activity and nobody would do anything. If a person has a site or piece of land to zone but 80% of the value will go the taxpayer, he or she will sit on it and will not do anything. It beats me why the proposed tax is so high. I advise the Minister if that provision stays in the Bill there will be no activity in terms of rezoning land from agricultural use to commercial or housing use.

It is proposed to change the adoption of a county development plan from a simple majority to a two thirds majority. I have heard various Senators speak on the issue and have dealt with a considerable number of county development plans over the past 25 years while I was a member of town and county local authorities. Councillors put in a significant performance in the adoption of a county development plan. It takes an awful lot of their time and energy, as well as that of the staff of local authorities. It is never a simple thing to get a county development plan passed. In this Bill the Minister says in some cases eight people may well have more power than 16 people. Why would a smaller number have the right to hold up the adoption of a county development plan? As we are in a democracy, surely the majority should rule. It is not always easy to get a majority of a local authority to pass a development plan. It is an area which the Minister should re-examine and it should go back to a simple majority. I have a number of other things to say on the Bill but I will hold them until Committee Stage.