Seanad debates

Wednesday, 25 November 2020

Planning and Development Bill 2020: Second Stage

 

10:30 am

Photo of Victor BoyhanVictor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House. This is the first time we have been in this House together so I take this opportunity to congratulate him on his appointment. We soldiered together on the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government. The Minister has been on all sides of this debate, brief and portfolio. I wish him well and every success in it.

On the Minister's apology and clarification in regard to the pre-legislative scrutiny, I fully accept his bona fides. On the Planning and Development Bill 2020, I have one major concern. In regard to Covid, I understand the significance and importance of people being safe, be they staff, members of the public or anybody else. That is really important. I see the necessity for emergency legislation. However, I have a difficulty with section 2 of the Bill. The Bill will be amended, as the Minister will know, but the briefing also says the amendment is in line with the modernisation agenda and that this change will be permanent. I have with me a letter I received from An Bord Pleanála which I will circulate to the Minister. The Minister will be aware of the ongoing engagement with An Bord Pleanála in regard to Rebuilding Ireland, modernisation and IP planning. The board has been telling us for four years that it is working on a pilot scheme. I made some inquiries today. It still has not got that up and running. The modernisation of IT and IP project is a wonderful one, but it does not exist.

I am aware of a local authority that cannot scan applications, drawings and montages in colour in regard to protected structures. That is the reality for most councils. Another local authority does not have a proper archive of protected structures. I have had to visit the Irish Architectural Archive in Merrion Square to look at drawings because they were not retained by local authorities. I intend to bring a proposal to this House and to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage in the next few weeks in regard to a national archive of protected structures because these applications are lodged but not centrally retained. There is a gap there that needs to be closed.

My issue is in regard to inclusivity and respect for the elected members - city and county councillors - who do an enormous job. I was a member of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council which had thousands of people engaging in county development plans. That is the reality. There is great interest in planning. It is about the future planning and sustainable development of people's areas. Citizens have those rights. We talk about the Aarhus Convention. If we attempt to curtail public consultation in statutory format it will end up in the courts. There are a number of environmental groups and prescribed bodies under the Planning and Development Act, of which the Minister will be aware, which are engaged in this area. I salute them. They are watchdogs for planning. I also thank the public, who are our greatest watchdogs in regard to proper planning and sustainable development, as are elected members.

The Bill seeks to amend section 11(3)(b) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 to replace the mandatory requirement to hold public meetings in regard to the proposed development plan, with an obligation for planning authorities to consult members. Who are the planning authorities? There is always a conflict between the executive, which holds the executive function, and the elected members who hold the reserve function. That is a constant battle. As a former councillor, the Minister will know that. Is this decision to be made by the executive? Will such decisions be made by resolution of the council? Who will decide how this happens?

The briefing also states that the amendment is in line with the modernisation agenda for the planning system to improve accessibility and inclusiveness through increased online activity and assured continued flexibility in communicating details of draft development plans and will, therefore, be a permanent amendment. The Minister referred to this modernisation in his speech. This change is to be a permanent arrangement. I will not be supporting it. I had hoped that the Minister would reconsider that amendment. I can understand it in the Covid context but not outside of it. I see the need for a sunset clause in regard to this aspect. I do not believe it is right and appropriate to make this a permanent change. This is a matter of concern for me and I ask the Minister to provide for a review of it in a few months' time.

In some local authority offices elected members do not have access to the Internet. Under this proposal we may be excluding a generation of people over 55 or 60 who have a difficulty in terms of accessing IT? That is the reality. In many local authority offices in rural Ireland, members have not been able to engage in Teams meetings of authorities because there is no connectivity. There are many city and county councillors across the country. I have spoken to a number of them in the last few days. I have also engaged with all of the other stakeholders. They, too, have a concern. I do not see in any of the correspondence I have on this matter any reference to engagement with the Local Authority Members Association or the Association of Irish Local Government. I do see reference to Fianna Fáil Senators having raised this issue with them in correspondence. I have communicated it to them myself and invited feedback. That is their concern. As I said, I have serious concerns in regard to this change.

Did the Minister give consideration to extending the lifetime of county development plans by 12 months? It is an option. This could be done through legislation. I mentioned the principles of the Aarhus Convention and the right of citizens to engage. Many people that are outside of the technology and skills area like to, and benefit from, visiting a public town hall to see the plans and montages and to meet planners. I know this is not possible in the context of Covid. I have no difficulty supporting any other aspect of this Bill. My concern is the permanent little arrangement which the Minister references in the context of reform and modernisation of the planning process. The Minister also has a responsibility in terms of An Bord Pleanála. It cannot manage its own IT systems. It has failed to deliver on commitments, albeit it has been set back by Covid for the last nine months like everybody else in terms of access to information. That is important.

The Aarhus Convention references citizens' rights in regard to environmental and planning issues. Most Senators here are former councillors of city and county councils. We often talk about the right to subsidiarity, to decision-making on the ground and engagement with people. The Green Party has a strong record on this issue and organises meetings and rallies in its constituencies and communities to highlight issues about planning. I know all parties do that but to an extent the Green Party has been at the edge of this in terms of its engagement with communities and electorate and the principles of the Aarhus Convention. I took some time to look at the Green Party website today. It has a very strong record on that.

I propose to bring an amendment to the House. I will lobby in advance of doing so. I will ask local authority councillors to engage on it with all Senators in this House. Will the Minister give consideration to a sunset clause to end this permanent arrangement? We do not need a permanent arrangement, we need an arrangement in place for Covid but not to extend beyond that.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.