Vincent P Martin (Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the Chamber. At this stage, I feel it is necessary to reply to some of the comments made about the public, independent Office of the Planning Regulator. I appreciate it is dealt with in a separate Part, namely, Part 18 and sections 496 onwards. The office is front and centre in the first amendment my colleagues are considering today. I believe the commentary so far in respect of the office was disproportionate and not balanced. With the utmost respect, it did not fully appreciate why the office was established. No mention was made of concerns for proper planning and sustainable development. No mention was made either of empowering an office to comply with national and regional policy guidelines at all stages in the planning process.Instead, one anecdotal example was given of a segment of zoned land on which the owner decided not to build when he could have due to the high density zoning of land and that stopping the whole development of an urban area. I am not aware that one owner of one piece of land can stymie development by holding an entire area to ransom. It was disproportionate to focus on that as an example.

However, we have examples to illustrate why this office came into existence in 2019 following recommendations by the High Court judge, Mr. Justice Alan Mahon, who was in charge of the tribunal of inquiry into planning. There was good reason for it; it was due to corruption in local government. There is a need for checks and balances. Have we forgotten how planning worked in this country before Mr. Justice Mahon made his excellent recommendation, which I am grateful has now come into being? I recall local authorities before the establishment of that office zoning land in a haphazard and sporadic way. I recall our elected local representatives zoning land for housing against the expert wishes of the engineer planning experts in the local authorities when the senior planning officer said not to zone land or build on land or else houses would be flooded that are already there. I recall photographs being brandished in the Chamber showing swans and people on canoes. I recall swamps on which people wanted to build against proper planning guidelines. There was no office at the time. Instead, we had to rely on then Minister, Deputy Dick Roche, to invoke his powers under section 31 of the Act and, subsequently, his successor as Minister for the environment, then Deputy John Gormley, to invoke his powers to direct that it was not wise for the common good of the people for fellow democratically elected public representatives to zone land when they have been told by their own local authority it will causes existing houses to flood. Do Members not remember the award-winning RTÉ "Prime Time Investigates" programme produced by Mike Milotte called "The Pressure Zone", which listed farcical examples in different counties where county councillors got it wrong? There was no evidence of corruption. The currency of corruption was replaced by getting it very wrong. Maybe councillors could not say "No" to people. Thankfully, we now have an independent public body. We do not have to wait for some nameless official in the Minister's Department to make recommendations. There is now an expert, independent office, transparency and checks and balances. Are Members saying they do not want any checks and balances? I hope not. What is their proposition? His office has received stinging criticism in this debate so far, though I commend that the contributions were not personalised against anyone in the office. That is noted. The dark days of that kind of planning are over and the people of Ireland are grateful for that office.What is wrong with an office having functions that have regard to the policies and objectives of the Government's national planning statements? I did not hear anyone praising the office for having the statutory power to consider and take into account the necessity of climate change adaptation and mitigation and to achieve the national climate objective. I did not hear Members commending the office's powers to act in the public interest. I have not heard any contribution to date stating that the office is our balance, check and safeguard to ensure that the national planning framework, the national marine planning framework, and any regional spatial and economic strategy for the time being, are taken into consideration by it as an oversight body. I did not hear anyone praise the office for having consideration of the environmental impact assessment directive, the strategic environmental assessment directive, the habitats directive, the boards directives, and the water framework directive, to name a few, which that office, in its statutory role and function, are obliged to consider on behalf of the people of Ireland.

The Office of the Planning Regulator considers it when local government fails the people of Ireland or when county councillors get it wrong for whatever reason. Many people in the Chamber are returned by the votes of county councillors. I am not making any blanket criticism of the hard-working people who are county councillors in this country, who are underpaid and under-resourced. However, they have got it shamefully wrong in parts of the country in the past, which caused Ministers to intervene. We now have a system that can consult, evaluate, assess and carry out, under obligation, much-needed education and training for our fellow public representatives who are at the coalface of the democratic process at local government level.

I thank the Acting Chair for her indulgence. We need to restore some balance to having a go at the Office of the Planning Regulator without looking at what it has achieved in a more holistic way. I hope we can have a more thorough discussion when the office, referenced as part 18 in the amendments, is considered in the House. If there is not, that is a shame on the part of the Government. I appeal to the leader of the Government to allow more time to discuss this office in more detail. It is to be hoped it will be possible we can reach this vital part of the Bill. In the meantime, I ask Members to do their utmost to consider the office more in the round, to be more balanced, and to consider the good of that office. Let us then discuss the balance and checks in due course.

There are checks, as one Senator said. It is not handy enough to get to them, but there is no usurpation of the Oireachtas. The Minister of the day is in charge at the end of the day. Let us come up with a better solution but not one that gives carte blancheto my fellow public representatives at local level. I saw what that was in the past. It is a recipe for disaster. It is the biggest power they have. By all means, they should have it. There are balances and checks on us, including the courts and the President. There should be balances and checks on local authority members, especially with their track record and how the signpost for the future-----