Billy Lawless (Independent) | Oireachtas source

This is my first opportunity to address the House since the very disappointing decision by Apple to scrap its plans for a data centre in Athenry in Galway. I can tell Senators that, even from my brief discussions with the business community in the US, this has generated a real negative feel factor about the investment environment in Ireland. I am deeply concerned that, having invested so much political capital in Europe to protect our corporation tax rate, we have lost sight of other key pillars of what investors are looking at when they are thinking about entering, or expanding in the Irish market.

Clearly, our planning process, and within that our court system, have proven a total and absolute barrier to economic development. This is not something that can be simply shrugged off or seen as an isolated case. When a major brand like Apple takes a decision like this, it resonates in boardrooms right across corporate America and, I am sure, further afield. We are constantly competing with other similar-sized and larger countries who seek to emulate our model, and the investment community needs to see this Government respond in a meaningful way.

There are many lessons which must be learned from the Apple case that, in my view, are not as complex as perhaps some seem to make out. The most important one is time. It took six months for Galway County Council to approve planning for the data centre, which in my mind does not seem an unreasonable length of time for a project of this magnitude. However, what happened after that is deeply disappointing. It took a full 12 months from the appeal of Galway County Council's decision to An Bord Pleanála to be determined, and that appeal upheld the council's planning approval. It then took 14 months from that decision, which was challenged before the High Court in the Commercial Court, which is supposed to be a fast-tracked court for Mr. Justice McDermott to deliver a judgment, which again upheld the original planning approval. It took a further seven months after that decision for the Supreme Court to decide only that it was willing to hear an appeal.

This means that, in total, from the formal planning application to the Supreme Court decision to admit the appeal a few days ago, a total of three years and three months have elapsed. Quite frankly, this is some kind of a sick joke of a system for an economic development of this nature, and I do not use that language lightly. There has been a lot of talk about the objectors and their vested interests or otherwise, but in my view that deflects from the central issue. One of the largest brands in the world, which employs 5,500 people here, chose Ireland for a further almost €1 billion investment and our planning and legal system, despite upholding that everything which Apple was intending to do was completely lawful, took three years and three months to deliver its decision, with a further one potentially pending if Apple had decided to stick around.

I do not blame Apple. Why would any business stick around when faced with another 12, if not 18, months after an almost three and half year debacle? I recognise that the Government has announced changes so that major infrastructure projects will go through An Bord Pleanála first, but that body took one year in the Apple case, whereas the council actually took six months. I equally recognise the announcement by the President of the High Court, in a practice direction issued in February this year, that Mr. Justice Barniville is specially assigned to exclusively deal with all applications for permission to challenge decisions concerning strategic infrastructure developments.This is welcome, but I question whether it goes far enough. If a person challenges what is thought to be a quicker decision made by this new specially assigned court, what will stop the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court causing further delays, only later to uphold the original decision when the investment might be gone?

In the United States it is common in certain state courts, including appeal courts, for specific deadlines to be imposed for a court to deliver a judgment. Why can a similar system not be introduced here for certain cases? Similarly, if all major infrastructure projects are to be brought directly before An Bord Pleanála why can we not mandate specific maximum timelines and then impose similar timelines for the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court? The global investment community needs to know that we want its big capital investment projects in this country and that the shambles with Apple will never be repeated. I am deeply concerned that this message has not been conveyed. We must have more innovative thinking that will offer investors absolute certainty that this country remains open for business.

I wish to congratulate our two new Members, Senators Marshall and Lawlor. I look forward to working with them.