Marc MacSharry (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister. I have not had the pleasure of being here for most of the Second Stage debate. While I am familiar with some of the provisions of the Bill, I want to use this opportunity to make a few general points on planning.

I am from the north west, namely, the gateway city of Sligo. I am very focused on the issue of balanced regional development. The wish for those of us who live on the western seaboard is to be able to live and develop the provision of the services we would like there and not have to have travel an unreasonable distance to secure the kind of administrative and various other services one would have the benefit of in the larger cities.

In that context, the spatial strategy has been a document we have selectively dipped in and out of. When we were doing something as a Government over recent years which fitted in with the strategy we would say it was in line with the spatial strategy. More often than not, when it did not, we did not mention it.

Sligo has been a major beneficiary in terms of decentralisation programmes from 1989 to more recent years, which has been very successful. When we last visited the issue of decentralisation we should have focused exclusively on the nine gateway centres. Like in the United States where, for example, heavy industry is located in Detroit, medical services and devices are in Chicago and so on, we could have a critical mass of activity and develop our nation along these lines in a strategic way. The hubs would feed off the gateways and the smaller villages and towns, such as my colleague, Senator Burke, mentioned would, in turn, feed off them. In a more general sense, the national spatial strategy needs to be examined in a more strategic fashion and in a cross-departmental, joined-up way. All policy and not just planning should feed into that because heretofore we have been far too selective about it.

One of the main issues I have, to which I briefly alluded, is that we in the west live there and do not wish to preserve it solely as the weekend destination of the urban dweller. We want to live there, have our services there and have due cognisance taken of that. I am cognisant of the need to have not a free for all but I am equally cognisant of the fact it is possible to achieve the objectives the people of the north west want, while upholding rules and sustainability.

The right to object is something which has always bothered me. If somebody is based in Dublin and wants to take a view on a dwelling home to be built in Enniscrone in County Sligo, I have a problem with such a person having the right to object. It is problematic. Such a person is not doing a service per se, particularly if a family wants to build a home within reasonable design guidelines. I do not feel one should have the right to object in such circumstances. I would like the Minister to examine the issue.

I am also conscious of an issue which emerged last week, that is, the EU ruling that we were in breach of certain standards in septic tanks. It was mentioned that we would have to have a licensing system for them which I am not against in principle. It is a good idea and we will have to assess septic tanks which are already in place all over the country. Many will have to be replaced. Following the ruling last week there is a lot of fear that a significant cost will be involved. It costs between €4,000 and €8,000 to replace a septic tank. As we prepare this law for next year, will funds be put in place to help people who cannot afford that but who may be in breach of the ruling because they have an older septic tank? They want to be compliant with the law but do not have the means to do so. As with the other very worthwhile grant schemes, which the Minister has presided over in terms of insulation and so on, could funds be set aside to ensure families throughout the country in rural Ireland who are being served by substandard septic tanks or waste water systems are helped?

I want to mention briefly the role of An Taisce. While it does some very good work and I support many of its schemes, one of its senior officials said to me it was its intention to close Sligo Airport. I do not wish to come down on either side of a planning application by the airport to extend its runway. I take no view on it. It is a frightening statement from a senior official in An Taisce. This is a gateway town under the national spatial strategy and I am sure the Minister will reaffirm that issue. To say there is an intention to close Sligo Airport is extremely shocking. If that is the perspective of a senior official in what is a good organisation — An Taisce does good work — I would have concerns about it being a prescribed organisation. A senior official would be in a position to steer that particular organisation down certain routes and with certain agendas.

On Committee Stage there will be various opportunities to get into the meat of the Bill. I welcome the extension for planning permissions but the idea should not focus on the amount of work done. What do we define as work? I am aware of a planning application worth millions of euro, and it will not be subject to NAMA, which Senator Burke has mentioned. Is five years enough or is there a possibility to introduce common sense to some of these cases? Some of the applications might need seven or ten years.