The Government’s Planning and Reform Bill has been criticised as a “massive supertanker coming in to dock in a very small port” with most of its 560 sections not being debated in the Seanad because of a guillotine.
On the second day of discussion in the in the Upper House Independent senator Michael McDowell said reforms in planning should have been made in separate legislation, “so we can see what is new, what is not new and what the philosophy is in the legislation”.
He described the 747-page Bill as a “telephone directory” and said somebody decided it was “hugely urgent” when it was not. A direct approach is needed to the housing crisis but it does not need all “this gobbledegook”.
The Bill consolidates existing planning law and aims to streamline the planning process and provide for national planning statements, which Government will approve. National development plans will be extended from six to 10 years with reform of An Bord Pleanála including a new name – An Coimisiún Pleanála (Planning Commission).
Podcast: Terry Prone on allowing son Anton Savage to be in her publicity as a child: ‘I think it was the wrong thing to do’
Man who drowned off Galway coast named as singer-songwriter Johnny Duhan
Woman who alleges she was raped by Conor McGregor had ‘severe’ post-traumatic stress disorder, psychiatrist tells court
Owen Doyle: Ireland must ensure Scott Barrett’s claim about Joe McCarthy is not swept under the carpet
But Mr McDowell said there would be no accountability in the national planning framework mechanism and said it was “absurd” to think one Minister could come up with the framework and get Government colleagues to agree.
“This has somehow descended from Mount Sinai like the tablets of the 10 commandments and is brought down to earth, and becomes the cornerstone of all development in this country. This is nonsense. This is not the real world. This is a recipe for sclerosis in a country.”
Sinn Féin senator Paul Gavan introduced an amendment calling for these the planning statements to be subject to scrutiny and agreement by the Oireachtas.
Independent senator Alice Mary Higgins agreed, describing the national planning statement proposal as “an extraordinary and weird power grab”.
The Bill is filled with “ministerial over-reach and the erosion of local democracy and public participation” and the planning statement effectively give a Minister “a carte blanche” on the planning system, she claimed.
Minister of State Malcolm Noonan said, however, that he “fundamentally disagreed” that the Bill was unnecessary, insisting it was “absolutely necessary”. “We all want to see a system that works for everyone, that is participative, is inclusive and that supports communities and balanced development,” he said.
Earlier, Fine Gael senator Emer Currie introduced an amendment calling for full “transparency and public scrutiny” of applications for telecommunications masts, which currently are exempt from planning permission.
The amendment on masts attracted more speakers than any other and Ms Currie said there had been a proliferation of masts in residential areas in recent years “without any public notification or consultation” with 30 alone in west Dublin since 2020.
There is a “legitimate questioning of the integrity of the planning system” when “15-metre and 18-metre or higher telecommunications structures have appeared metres from people’s homes, along public roads, sometimes without warning”.
Independent Victor Boyhan said “litigation has been taken against parish churches to have the stuff taken off, internally and externally, including on many protected structures”.
“We see it on protected structures that are State-owned buildings. There is no comprehensive national mapping exercise” for which there are constant calls, he said.
Fianna Fáil’s Mary Fitzpatrick said telecommunications infrastructure is essential but “it is planned by engineers in an abstract way based on the optimal performance of the technology”.
Minister of State Malcolm Noonan acknowledged the genuine concerns senators raised and while he was unable to accept the amendment he would ask officials to re-examine the issue and he may introduce an amendment later.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Join The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Listen to our Inside Politics podcast for the best political chat and analysis
