Seán Kyne (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am delighted Senator O'Donovan is here to tell his tale and I concur with him on the importance of the condition of epilepsy.

I call for a debate on the issue of planning. Every element of our infrastructure is dependent on our planning process. In the main it is open and transparent and allows for objections and submissions to the supreme authority for appeals, An Bord Pleanála. The duration of some cases and in particular the open-ended nature of the legal challenges to decisions frustrate the process, making infrastructure expensive. NIMBYism is alive and well. All this adds to the cost of delivery of many projects, a cost borne by our local authorities and the State and, in the case of housing, a cost that is added to house prices by the eventual developer or a cost that causes a developer to give up and not try on that site again or indeed anywhere else. Housing, roads, greenways and wastewater schemes can all be subject to the lengthy legal challenges that delay projects which are much needed for development, sustainability, job creation and environmental protection.

Former Supreme Court judge, Susan Denham, proposes a separate jurisdiction of the High Court for planning and environmental law similar to family law. This is due to it being a technical issue in nature. I understand that the programme for Government proposes such a court. As we continue to grow our economy through capital expenditure, timely decisions and decision-making are necessary and in all our interests. A legal impasse lasting years benefits nobody except those earning money from it, the legal profession and environmental experts. Meanwhile, communities are frustrated by delays lasting in some cases years in the provision of key infrastructure for homes. The south Kerry greenway is a project in point and a test case for greenways across the country. The old Galway city bypass went through the Irish courts before ending up in the European Court of Justice, which is fine, but the process was inordinately long, with huge delays. The Apple case in Athenry is another example. The project did not proceed because Apple said it had had enough due to the delays. Objectors using the system to frustrate and delay, delay and delay a project is not right or proper. A yes-no decision in a timely manner is what is needed in this country for all types of projects.

I therefore call for a debate on the matter of planning delays at an early juncture in the context of the progress on the proposals in the programme for Government on the numerous examples we have around the country of projects being delayed, predominantly because of the open-ended nature of the appeals process through our courts and the European courts as well. Planning is hugely important. As I said, it allows all projects to proceed. Thankfully, we have a robust planning system but we need a timely and efficient one as well for the reasons I outlined earlier.