Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I find myself going backwards and forwards and checking and rechecking because when I hear the contributions being made I wonder whether I am missing something. The text, as per the amendment made on Committee Stage by the Government, clearly states a planning authority "shall consult with members of the public". The element of consulting with members of the public is absolutely preserved in this legislation. There is no question of the public not being consulted.We are talking about how it is consulted. That either happens in person or it is online but it is still a public meeting. There is a theme running through the contributions, a suggestion that the public is being caught out. It is not. The word "shall" is instructive. It is mandatory to consult the public at this stage but this is not the last or the only point of consultation in a development plan. There are subsequent sections in the Act that oblige various levels of consultation and contribution so it is not the case that the executives sit in their lofty offices and put together a plan and will now exclude the public and then it will be a done deal. There are elaborate measures to ensure there is consultation thereafter. At this point, there is consultation.

In my contributions on this the last day, my concern was about how that discretion is to be exercised. I asked the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, if he could draw up guidelines and outline best practice in the expression of that discretion. My intentions were good but that has already been done. I presumed the absence of something when it was already there. There I was thinking I had taken a novel approach but this is already a requirement for public authorities. The best practice is already set out. It was in the Oireachtas Library and Research Service document. I referred to this before asking that it be the guideline but this is the guideline and this is the manner in which public consultation is to occur. The document states online consultations can complement face-to-face public meetings but should not fully replace them. There is no question but that there will be an exercise in discretion and the way in which that discretion is to be exercised is set out in a list from A to F. If at some point it is onerously exercised so as not to have in-person public meetings or there is a rogue local authority that consistently excludes the public, there is recourse to this and the matter can be raised as a motion or in the Chamber. There are lots of means of addressing this and ensuring that discretion is not exercised against in-person meetings.

When I was elected to South Dublin County Council I was struck, at the first in camerameeting we had, by the number of metrics put before members. I was also struck by the way in which members prided themselves on public consultation and they counted how many times such consultation had taken place. How effective some of those public consultations were is another matter but that is the ongoing robust exchange that takes place between the public and members of the council. Members ensured they went out to the public and prided themselves on doing so. In my area, there are bus shelter advertisements on various issues.

We are not dealing with a malevolent group that is opposed to the public, although some individuals may be. In general, we are dealing with local authorities and their executives which are committed to serving the public. We are creating a narrative that is untrue and disingenuous. Elected members of city and county councils throughout the country have the power to keep this in check. They have something to say. By presupposing this, we are denuding them of their ability to stand up for themselves and for the public they represent. Elected members also have many opportunities to contribute to, check, recheck and build into development plans.

We are discussing here the stage prior to publication. There are several other stages to the development plan, all of which invite consultation. We are talking about whether it happens in public, in person or online. We are not talking about eliminating public consultation. We need to bring this down a level and dial down the drama of the debate because this measure is not excluding the public. It is merely opening up the vista and the possibility of including far more people.

While I have reservations about and criticisms of BusConnects, public consultations on the programme did not stop. There were huge numbers of submissions, most of which were submitted online. While I agree that a certain proportion of the population is not good on digital literacy, I am also heartened that my party colleague, the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, Deputy Harris, has a programme in place to make sure we have digital literacy. We are moving to ensuring that people have access to online forums and are literate online. Why not open that out to remote areas and big counties where people have long distances to travel in order that they can access public consultations from their homes? I understand the spirit of what the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, was trying to convey to us during the first debate on Committee Stage. It was about inclusion. There is no malevolent intent here. This is about opening up the process and not closing it down.