Seán Connick (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 388: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government his views on whether delays by An Bord Pleanála in issuing decisions are having an adverse effect on infrastructural development in many parts of Ireland; and his further views on limiting the amount of time An Bord Pleanála can take to issue a decision. [37324/08]

John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As an independent planning appeals body, An Bord Pleanála has a key role in ensuring that physical development, in particular major infrastructure projects, respect the principles of sustainable development and are planned in an efficient, fair and open manner. With effect from January 2007, the Strategic Infrastructure Act 2006 substantially extended the remit of the Board. The key policy objective of this Act is to provide for a streamlined, single stage consent process for certain classes of infrastructure of national importance, being developed by statutory bodies and private promoters.

In addition to motorways and local authority projects, which were already handled by An Bord Pleanála, this process now includes heavy and light rail and metro, other infrastructure requiring environmental impact assessments such as significant airport or port developments, waste infrastructure, and major energy infrastructure such as electricity transmission lines, strategic upstream and downstream gas pipelines, liquefied natural gas facilities, oil refineries and large onshore wind farms. It is the duty of the Board, having regard to the special importance of applications relating to strategic infrastructure development, to ensure that consultations are held and decisions are taken as expeditiously as is consistent with proper planning and sustainable development, and for that purpose to take all practicable steps to avoid delays in the decision making process.

Since January 2007, the Board received 98 requests for pre-application consultations with promoters, involving 150 meetings; 68 such consultations have been concluded. The Board has received 18 formal applications for approval of strategic infrastructure under the new legislative process and to date, six applications have been decided upon, four within the statutory objective period of 26 weeks. All of these cases were the subject of an oral hearing. During 2007, the Board received 57 appeals in respect of other major infrastructure projects and 55 were disposed of, 13% within the statutory objective period of 18 weeks applying to the determination of appeals.

The size and complexity of strategic and major infrastructure projects has implications for the timescale within which relevant consent applications can be determined. Account must also be taken of the overall record intake of new cases by the Board in the period since 2004. In 2007 6,664 new cases were received, up 12% on 2006 while 6,163 cases were determined, an increase of 10% on 2006. In the period to end-September 2008, the number of planning appeals received by the Board fell by over 5% compared to the same period in 2007, and this trend may be expected to continue.

Overall, I am hopeful that with a reduction in the number of new appeals coming before the Board, significantly increased staff resources to deal with strategic infrastructure cases, greater experience with the operation of the Strategic Infrastructure Act, the recent appointment of a temporary Board member, and other measures to improve throughput, good progress will be made over 2009 towards achievement of the statutory objective periods for dealing with appeals, applications and referrals, as the case may be. I do not consider it appropriate to introduce binding time limits for relevant decisions by the Board.