Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I do not propose to accept amendment No. 30 as proposed by Senators Grace O'Sullivan and Victor Boyhan due to its wording. It is important that there is a clear and robust planning rationale for embarking on a variation procedure in respect of a development plan. The current requirements in the Act recognise the fundamental role of elected members as decision-makers in this regard, which would be undermined by this proposed amendment as it seeks to permit the amalgamation of policy formulation with the decision process on policy. However, I know what the Senators are trying to get at.

It is important that we recognise the different roles of both elected members and the executive. Planning and local government legislation distinguishes between legal functions reserved for the elected members, on the one hand, and the executive functions of the executive on the other hand, and both are part of the planning authority's procedures.

The development plan variation and amendment process is intended to operate as a well-informed and open dialogue between the elected members and the executive regarding the wishes of the elected members on planning policy, in their local authority areas, and the legal responsibilities of the executive to advise the elected members of the council of their duties and responsibilities from a legal and technical perspective. Furthermore, there is a need to ensure that the integrity of the development plan and local area plan, as adopted by the elected members, is maintained and is not subjected to an ongoing review and change without the required level of technical examination. There is a danger that the overall coherence of the adopted plan will be undermined by piecemeal and frequent changes that would create uncertainty in the development plan process. I am not saying that would happen. I am saying that the wording of the amendment poses a danger and I am prepared to talk to the Senators in order to come up with a different wording. Both elected members and officials must work together in harmony. They must recognise their respective roles for the purpose of shaping the proper planning and sustainable development of the functional area of the relevant planning authority.

The actions involved in initiating a variation of a development plan include a number of steps such as: preparing for and undertaking a public consultation; reporting on the public consultation; and the subsequent preparation of recommendations for the members to consider further to the public consultation. From a practical perspective, the function under section 13 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, which governs variations to the development plans and local area plans, requires that reasons be stated for the initiation of a variation. The reasons must stand up to scrutiny from the perspectives of proper planning and sustainable development, consistency with the overall national policy and the regulatory framework for planning, and fair procedure.

I, therefore, oppose the amendment tabled by Senators Grace O'Sullivan and Victor Boyhan. I do so on the grounds that their amendment could facilitate piecemeal and frequent changes to development plans and local area plans, which would give rise to and create uncertainty in the development plan process. I know what the Senators are trying to achieve with their amendment. I am prepared to discuss some other wording with them, which will also provide a clear definition. I am sure we all agree that we do not want a variation to become a regular occurrence as it would undermine the plans. It might also generate a legal doubt so it is best not to do so. I accept, however, that there might be a need to do so in certain circumstances.

In general, this process has worked quite well. It has been mentioned at a committee meeting that the process has not worked in a couple of cases. I am happy to meet the Senators to discuss the matter before Report Stage. We could review the cases that the Senators are aware of but that I am not aware of and try to agree on a new wording for the amendment. I cannot accept the current amendment because it does not achieve what they want. Perhaps we will not agree on a new wording and we will have to agree to disagree. Before the Senators decide to press their amendment I suggest that there may be time in the months ahead to discuss the matter and perhaps reach an agreement. I have sympathy with what they are trying to achieve with their amendment.