Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

It is really important in terms of commenting on Senator Martin's intervention. We have to be clear when we ask whether we have learned nothing. That is exactly the question we are asking when looking at this legislation. There is a suggestion that the issue is the local authorities and that the problems we have had are with local authorities. To be clear, An Bord Pleanála was put in place originally as a check and balance and it was one that functioned for a period of time, but it is also a body with largely political appointees. We talk about councillors as if they are the poor decision-makers and about this new national high-level decision-making body. Let us be clear that An Bord Pleanála is the body that has had scandals, arrests and prosecutions. That is again a body where the lesson has not been learned because in this Bill, besides a rebranding, lots of the same problems are there with An Bord Pleanála. The new coimisiún na pleanála will be directly appointed by the Minister, without any checks and balances.

We talk about the Office of the Planning Regulator and this idea that it will ride to the rescue on the environment and protect us against flood plain building and so on. Let us be clear about the powers the Office of the Planning Regulator has here in terms of that issue of transparency. This is not about any individual in that role but about good legislation. It is not listed as a relevant body or person for the register of lobbying. That is a real gap and s massive hostage to fortune. That begs the question as to whether we have learned anything.

In terms of the powers it has, leaving aside how large those powers are, it is also excessively subject to political direction. We talk about this idea that it would to make sure we stay on track for the environment and climate targets. Let us remember when South Dublin County Council democratically voted against data centres. It was told it was not a matter of environmental concern but it was a matter of Government policy. It is not just the national planning framework or marine planning framework that the Office of the Planning Regulator will issue directions on. It will also issue directions based on national planning policies and measures which are basically the Minister's policies. The Office of the Planning Regulator overrode South Dublin County Council and said it needed to put in data centres on the basis of Government policy. That was a capturing of policy to the centre politically, which does not make it immune to inappropriate lobbying. It does not make it immune to the kinds of issues we all want to make sure are not part of planning.

We need to be really clear on that and when we talk about checks and balances, failing to comply with the Arhaus Convention is the essence of removing a check and balance. To be honest, it is not just about local authority members. I am not elected by local authority members and I will still champion their voice in relation to this. It is also about the public - actual people who live in local authority areas. When you talk about completely railroading over local development plans and their processes, you are not actually saying we have to have a check and balance on local authority members because you know how they are. You are actually saying we are railroading over local people who have a process of engagement with their local development plan and who collectively engage with it. That is the issue.

We absolutely need to have things like the national planning framework and our national targets. We need to have issues that we think about at each level and that are reflected at each level. It is not a matter not wanting checks and balances. We want functional checks and balances that are accountable, transparent and regulated the whole way up. That is not what this Bill does and it is disingenuous to ask where are our solutions because about 500 or 600 amendments of people's solutions have been put forward and I hope we get to all of them.