I thank my colleague, Deputy Niall Collins, for giving us the opportunity to have this debate. We had two days debate following publication of the Mahon report. Much of the focus of that debate and in other fora was on the personalities involved in the Mahon tribunal, the amount of money involved and the disciplinary action that followed. No one focused on the recommendations on planning. I say that in the context of 99% of public representatives who have served in a council chamber or in this House having done so in the best interests of their communities. It is unfortunate that the remaining 1% have sullied all of our names and reputations. Some 99% of officials in all local authorities are good. I say that in the context of my daily dealings with officials in Mayo County Council and the three town councils. We are lucky to have them. They are far-seeing, decent and work 24/7. However, we need to have a full discussion on planning and where it is going and to reflect on the many mistakes made in the past ten years.
I remind people of the noughties when the biggest issue facing us was getting people a house. While many of the planning decisions made at that time are now considered to have been mad, the biggest issue then facing public representatives and of public debate was the shortage of housing units. People could not get a house or were paying bizarre amounts of money for one. It must be remembered that that debate was going on at a time when many of the decisions, which are now being criticised in the context of where we are now, were being made. We must be conscious of this in the context of all future decisions.
One of the difficulties of the Mahon report, and of any other reports which are published on this issue, is the focus on personalities and councils involved. We need to bring the debate back, as was done to some extent by Deputies Tuffy and Dowds, to the consequences for those people living in the communities involved. For instance, we have a serious problem in terms of unfinished estates. The only good thing to come out of this debacle was the household charge, which because of the manner in which it was handled by the Department, means we now have a register of so-called unfinished estates. Now that we have it, the work commenced by former Minister of State, Deputy Penrose, which the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, is now continuing, to complete these unfinished estates can begin. That register, in conjunction with SOLAS and the local employment agencies, can be utilised to finish these estates.
Deputy Dowds mentioned development levies, which councils used as revenue during the so-called boom times. What was done with that revenue in some areas is questionable. This initiative - I acknowledge that councils are currently under enormous pressure - could be funded by a levy on councils which were paid development levies. Some councils spent that money on gleaming headquarters and others spent it on infrastructure projects. However, the original intention of the development levy was that it would be spent on facilities in an area rather than on homages to architects and so on. We need the councils, as well as Government, to take responsibility for this initiative.
I facilitated an initiative in an unfinished estate where luckily the bond was still in place. While the amount available was not enough to finish the work, many of the residents who were skilled carpenters, brick layers and so on, got together with council labourers and finished it. We are looking at doing this in other areas where the bond can still be spent. Unfortunately, for many estates the bond is gone. There are tens of thousands of unemployed crafts people in this country and hundreds of unfinished estates. If we knock together a few heads in the Departments of the Environment, Community and Local Government and Social Protection these two needs can be met in a relatively cost effective manner. Much of the commentary and ding dong of the past two evenings has been about officials, councils and what is a proper planning authority. Everybody is agreed we have too many planning authorities in the State but let us not throw out the baby with the bath water by centralising in into one superquango answerable to nobody, which, quite frankly, is a bit like what An Bord Pleanála is at present. Nobody can question its decisions. If one wants to appeal a decision of An Board Pleanála one must take a judicial review and who has the money to do this? While I respect it must be independent, it must also be accountable as a State agency.
Some people, and I include the previous Minister, would like us to live in a planning ivory tower where everything is perfect and laid out wonderfully and we all live close to where we are supposed to live. However, this is Ireland, which is a rurally-based country with a settlement pattern dating back hundreds of years which does not lend itself to ivory tower-style planning policies. We must be realistic about this and we must be fair to people who choose to live in rural areas and want to have facilities. They are willing to pay for these facilities and do so dearly through levies and charges. The notion that everybody should live in a town and travel to the country at weekends is wrong and should be knocked on the head. However, it is what some people would like us to do. In other debates we discuss the closure of schools, the withdrawal of services and rural school transport because in many counties people do not get the chance to live in rural areas because of policies made in ivory towers where everything is perfect. Fortunately, as politicians we live in the real world and we must try to represent people.
The notion of centralising into one planning authority which decides everything for the country is wrong. There needs to be local input. However, at present too many local authorities are involved in planning. Town councils are fighting with county councils and city councils are fighting with county councils about land, as the Minister of State knows better than anybody. This does not make for a good government and certainly does not make for good planning. I hope when Minister publishes his review of local government he will face up to this.
I have been listening to other speakers in the debate and it seems just because we proposed something on planning all hell and damnation was unleashed upon us from the other side of the House. We are the only party, along with Fine Gael, to take disciplinary action against everybody mentioned and cited in the Mahon report.
