Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)

A lot of ground was covered in those contributions. To respond to Senator Coffey, if there is social engineering in the Bill, it is based on the theory that developers will no longer be able to call the shots; if that is social engineering, I support it. We are restoring the balance with the community having more of an input and greater control over the development plan.

I was really pleased with the way Senator Coffey used Portlaw as an example because it is a planned town. The Quakers did a fantastic job 150 or 200 years ago. They have made a great contribution to Irish society in the past two centuries, but in this instance they thought ahead. They were philanthropic and ensured that not only would the housing needs of their workers be met but that also that they would think beyond this, to consider schools, health care and other issues. We need to return to that fundamental philosophy, not just tick the boxes and let a developer build whatever he or she wants and wherever he or she wants. We want to let the community gain. To me, that is a crucial part of outlining the core strategy in the plan. It will allow the planners and officials to ensure the developer will give back something to the community, as opposed to lashing out houses like snuff at a wake, with scant regard to the needs of the community.

We could cite good examples during the years. We had the Bord na Mona planned towns during the middle part of the last century. Fantastic new communities, with open green areas, were built, with careful consideration being given to how the new houses would be connected with the town. The late Arthur Gibney's father planned them and did a really good job; they have stood the test of time, 50, 60 or 70 years on. It is about thinking about the way towns are planned. If there are limits in the Bill, they are to prevent urban sprawl and every last piece of land being rezoned. I understand that in Waterford the issue is being re-examining. It is being stated one has to think again about the misplaced optimism because if every last acre one, two or three miles out the road is rezoned, it will take away from the town centre where there will be dereliction but development on the outskirts rather than close to where schools, pubs and churches are located. Irrational exuberance and optimism are very dangerous qualities in elected representatives. What the Bill does is restore a sense of realism to how we plan.

I will not name the small town in question, but I had a delegation to see me to speak about how the council had rezoned every last acre around the town. The owners of the big shopping centre wanted to build on the rezoned land beside the motorway and bypass. That is where the battle is taking place. The town centre traders came to me to state the viability of the town was under threat from the major supermarket multiple. Rezoning the land had laid the seeds of decay in the town centre. Traders who had traded for generations - retailers who had bought turkeys and carrots from the local farmer - would be killed off because of the absence of planning based on hope value. That is why we need to ensure we have a core strategy.

To clarify matters for Senators Ellis and Coffey, we revisited the two thirds majority provision and they will be glad to know that we are removing the proposal that there be a higher approval threshold. They made very good points on a blocking minority.