Seanad debates

Wednesday, 14 July 2010

Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2009 [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil]: Report and Final Stages

 

4:00 pm

Photo of Joe O'ReillyJoe O'Reilly (Fine Gael)

I agree and appreciate that the Acting Chairman will be even-handed in this instance.

Fine Gael accepts that all was not well in the State of Denmark. We know there were unsatisfactory developments. We are painfully aware of it as we drive pass many of them on a daily basis. However, we are concerned that we may be, in providing a solution to the problem, throwing the baby out with the bath water or using a sledge-hammer to hit a nut. As I listened to Senators' contributions on this group of amendments a popular song, all the words of which I cannot recall, came to mind. It is a simple ditty which includes the words, "little boxes, little boxes" which caused me to think we are going to create bland villages.

With the greatest of respect to many of my colleagues who are members of regional authorities, regional authorities are not directly elected. While they have a function and are made up of fine people they are not a directly elected fora nor should they be. I believe in the local authority-county council model and that the county structure is satisfactory. I believe in the county structure for the delivery of all services and I believe in the principle of subsidiarity. I am not convinced of the imposition of regional plans. While we must have guidelines and broad rules I am confident of the genius and capacity of people at local level to plan their futures. People are sobered by their past experiences.

Senator Coffey eloquently articulated that people on regional authorities are not democratically elected and that the regional structures are not responsive to people at a local level as are county councils. Another serious issue arises, one about which we are concerned in terms of its implications in practise. I remind Senators who like me are elected by county councillors that our county councils are energised by and engaged with this issue. Councillors are concerned that it will take a two third majority to alter a development plan. If one removes the majority vote, which is a democratically functioning model used for generations, a small grouping of, say, one third plus one, with an agenda of its own could hold up progress and change the wishes of the people. We are concerned about this, as are councillors. We cannot be too patronising, elitist or doctrinaire in our approach to councillors who are elected representatives with enormous commitment to community and the good of the environment. There is no one more conversant with or patriotic about their areas. They love their communities, which is the reason they do what they do. They are of the community and as such, are very annoyed about this provision. I do not joke about it. The Minister of State can use whatever empirical method he wants to assess this or send a questionnaire to councillors, but I can tell him that they are enraged about the issue. We are concerned about the democratic deficit in planning that will now be apparent. We are concerned about imposition, blandness and the little boxes to be ticked principle.

I believe in the one-off rural house concept. That might not be the trendy view to have and it might not be the view in Dublin 4, but there is a world beyond it.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.