Pat Casey (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I was not going to say anything on this until Senator Martin made a few comments with which I cannot agree. My first issue is with his generalisation that local authority members and local authorities themselves basically did nothing only zone land that was in flood zones or that would potentially cause flooding on housing estates further down the road. That is an inaccurate perception of our local authority members. I served on a local authority for 12 years. I have seen two full county development plans go through the process and have seen the start of a third one and what the Senator said is not factually correct. It might have happened in specific cases but it is not right to generalise in the way he did and I cannot agree with him.

I served on the housing committee in the previous Dáil, as did Senator Boyhan, when the Office of the Planning Regulator was established. Indeed, we all agreed with the establishment of that office but, in fairness, all that office is doing is enforcing the national planning framework document. That document was put on a statutory footing for the first time ever but to say that there were no checks and balances prior to the establishment of the OPR is also incorrect. The Minister signed off on every county development plan throughout country. That was part of the checks and balances. Zoning of land proposed in county development plans went on public display. It went to the Minister's office but the Minister came back and said, "Do not proceed", and members of the local authority did not proceed in most cases. Now we have an additional layer of scrutiny for our county development plans but, at the end of the day, if a decision has to be made on something that is controversial, the OPR does not make the decision. It is still the Minister who makes the decision, on foot of a recommendation of the regulator and he or she can either agree or disagree with that recommendation. That has happened in the case of a number of our county development plans that have gone through the process under the new regime. That has factually happened. Senator Martin went a little too far in the way he presented our councillors and how they carry out their duties on our behalf. Councillors only make a proposal that they believe will fundamentally improve their community but if that is proven to be wrong, that is why the process is there. The proposal must go through the checks and balances and go on public display so people can have their say on it. The Minister or the OPR can comment on it. It can go back to the chamber and if the councillors still want to proceed with it, they can agree again to put it forward and the Office of the Planning Regulator and the Minister can intervene again. We had these checks and balances prior to the establishment of the OPR. That office has simply brought an additional layer of scrutiny.

The other issue is that the national planning framework is a statutory document for the first time ever and every local authority must comply with it. Up to that point, the words used were "shall" or "may have regard to" the national spatial strategy. My colleague Senator Martin went a little too far in the way he presented our councillors who are doing incredibly hard work out there. Equally, there were checks and balances there previously. The Minister provided that function and still provides it on foot of a recommendation from the Office of the Planning Regulator.