Brendan Ryan (Labour)

A problem arises with the possibility of an enforcement officer being able to have the fall back position of resorting to the phrase "a trivial or a minor matter". This is one person in the planning system who can decide this is a trivial or minor matter. Nothing the Minister of State said gives me any comfort in terms of putting in place an appeals mechanism. We need an appeals mechanism for people. As the Minister, Deputy Gormley, said during the debate on an earlier Stage, planning is about people. If the person on the ground does not have the means to appeal a decision, it is not satisfactory.

I am not making a charge against any enforcement officer, but the existing provision in this area lends itself to one person deciding a development is trivial. Therefore, how can that be fair? We must have an appeals mechanism available in every matter of life and legislation. In his initial response the Minister of State said we cannot have this. To where else can a person appeal in the planning process if not to An Bord Pleanála? He seems to have already discounted the possibility of having an appeals process to An Bord Pleanála. If an appeal is not allowed to An Bord Pleanála, to where can it be allowed? If there is to be provision for an appeals mechanism, can one appeal up the ladder in the local authority structure? I tried that in a case in which I was involved. I went from an enforcement officer, to the director of services, to county manager and the answer I got was "sorry, that is a delegated power". Therefore, one does not get anywhere with that process.

It is essential we have an appeals process in planning legislation. This is probably the one element of planning legislation where we do not have an appeals process. This is an important aspect. I ask the Minister of State to reflect on it and not to discount, as he seems to have, the possibility of an appeals mechanism to An Board Pleanála. We have already decided on one aspect of this legislation, where the Minister of State has reduced the quorum from three to two. I would not have a problem with the quorum being reduced from three to one for the purpose of this specific aspect of appeal, but there must be an appeals mechanism.