COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Thursday, 27 Apr 2023

An Bord Pleanála - Financial Statements 2021

Mr. Paul Hogan (Acting Assistant Secretary General, Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage) and Ms Oonagh Buckley (Interim Chairperson, An Bord Pleanála) called and examined.

An Cathaoirleach

I welcome everyone to this morning's meeting. We have received apologies from Deputies Catherine Murphy and Imelda Munster.

On behalf of the committee, I welcome the two newly appointed members of the committee, Deputy John Brady and Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh. They are very welcome and I look forward to working with them both.

If attending the meeting from within the committee room, members and witnesses are asked to exercise personal responsibility to protect themselves and others from the risk of contracting Covid-19. Members of the committee attending remotely must do so from within the precincts of Leinster House. This is due to the constitutional requirement that, to participate in public meetings, members must be physically present within the confines of the place where Parliament has chosen to sit.

The Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, is a permanent witness to the committee. He is accompanied by Ms Mary Henry, deputy director of audit at the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General.

This morning, we will engage with officials from the An Bord Pleanála to examine its Financial Statements 2021 and we are joined by the following officials from An Bord Pleanála: Ms Oonagh Buckley, interim chairperson; Mr. Chris McGarry, deputy chairperson; Ms Bríd Hill, chief officer; Mr. Gerard Egan, director of corporate affairs; and Ms Anne Killian, senior administrative officer of the finance section. We are also joined by the following officials from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage: Mr. Paul Hogan, acting assistant Secretary General, planning division; and Ms Paula Donohue, assistant principal. They are all very welcome.

I remind all those in attendance to ensure their mobile phones are on silent mode or switched off. Before we start, I wish to explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege, and the practice of the Houses as regards reference witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected, pursuant to both the Constitution and statute, by absolute privilege. As they are within the precincts of Leinster House, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the presentation they make to the committee. This means that they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at this meeting. However, they are expected not to abuse this privilege and it is my duty, as Cathaoirleach, to ensure that this privilege is not abused. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the provisions within Standing Order 218 that the committee shall refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government, or a Minister of the Government, or the merits of the objectives of such policies. Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise, or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Before we move to opening statements, Members are aware that there are a number of ongoing inquiries, four in total, and examinations that focus on alleged conflict of interest and governance issues at An Bord Pleanála. To avoid the risk of prejudicing these investigations, as well as other potential proceedings, that may follow their conclusion, and to respect the fact that a review of decisions of the board is a matter for the courts, and because Members should not comment on, criticise, or make charges against a person outside the Houses either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable, I will not permit Members to question or comment on the matters that are the subject of the inquiries, so specific planning applications, for example. Discussion of matters related to the board’s decisions should focus on systems and processes, and avoid discussion of specific cases or individuals. I hope that Members will follow that because there have been a lot of contentious issues around An Bord Pleanála. Also, there is a new interim chairperson and deputy chairperson so there has been a significant amount of change. I ask Members to bear all that in mind.

I call the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, to make his opening statement.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

As Members are aware, under the Planning and Development Acts, An Bord Pleanála is responsible inter alia for the determination of appeals of local authority planning decisions, and for the determination of direct planning applications for strategic housing and infrastructure development. The board also has responsibility for dealing with proposals for the compulsory acquisition of land by public authorities, and with determining appeals under the Water Pollution and Building Control Acts.

The board’s income in 2021 totalled €27.4 million. Grants issued from the Vote for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, and other Exchequer-sourced income, amounted to €20.4 million in 2021. Fee income of various kinds accounted for just under €7 million or 26% of the total income for the year.

Expenditure in 2021 amounted to €31.4 million. Spending on salaries and related costs amounted to €18 million, representing 57% of the board's expenditure. Expenditure on legal fees amounted to €7.7 million. The balance of expenditure of €5.8 million related to establishment and other operating expenses.

Overall, there was a deficit for the year of €3.8 million. I certified the 2021 financial statements on 22 December 2022 and issued a clear audit opinion. Without qualifying the opinion on the financial statements, I drew attention to two matters dealt with in the statement on internal control. The reporting requirement on An Bord Pleanála is that the statement should deal with the operation of the system of control both in the period of account and subsequently, up to the date of signing of the financial statements. Accordingly, the statement on the system of internal control discloses that a number of matters of serious concern about the operation of An Bord Pleanála's business had arisen in 2022. These resulted in the commissioning of a number of reviews and reports, both internally and externally. The current status of those reviews is outlined as at the signing date. The chairperson may be able to provide the committee with a further update in relation to those matters.

The statement on internal control also discloses that An Board Pleanála had made a number of statutory penalty payments to applicants, because decisions on strategic housing development, SHD, applications were not made by the board within the applicable statutory time period. The penalties paid amounted to €10,000 in 2021, and to €1.34 million in 2022.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. McCarthy. Ms Buckley is very welcome. I invite her to make her opening statement. She has five minutes.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I thank the committee for having us in. My script is probably a little bit long, so what I will do is I will skip over the detail of the activity in 2021, if that is agreeable to the committee, but it is on record and outlined in the briefing documents. I was appointed interim chairperson of An Bord Pleanála in January this year, having been appointed to the board in December 2022. I am accompanied today by the deputy chairperson, Mr. Chris McGarry, Ms. Bríd Hill, chief officer, Mr Gerard Egan, director of corporate affairs, and Ms Anne Killian, head of finance.

I will skip over the detail of the activity in 2021, save to say that activity was up across all metrics relative to 2020, which reflected the rebound in planning and development activity post-Covid and the pandemic. However, I will mention one issue, namely, that the significant increase in the volume of legal challenges to board decisions during 2020 continued in 2021. There were 83 in 2020 and 95 in 2021. These applications for judicial review of the legality of decisions involve significant detailed legal scrutiny of complex matters of procedure and interpretation relating to national law and policy, European Union environmental directives, and other issues in particular arising from the SHD application process. Legal costs for representation before the courts are substantial. Expenditure on legal costs was €7.8 million in 2021. These legal costs are in respect of the board's costs for solicitor and barrister representation and payment for the other side's costs in cases lost or conceded. Many payments have yet to be settled, and the board is required to make substantial ongoing provision for those outstanding liabilities.

Members of the committee will be aware that 2022 was a particularly difficult year for An Bord Pleanála. The board attracted major regulatory and public attention in relation to its operations and procedures, in particular the potential conflicts of interest that may arise during the course of the decision-making process. A number of departures from the board occurred, including that of the deputy chairperson in July and the chairperson in November, and others as their term of office expired. I cannot in the circumstances discuss those issues in any detail given matters pending before the courts. Suffice it to say that those events have had a serious detrimental impact on the board's reputation. Its overall performance disimproved significantly over the second half of 2022. The departure of board members diminished the capacity of the board to take decisions. It is fair to say that the morale of staff was also badly affected.

In an effort to learn from what occurred and to ensure that it cannot reoccur, I appointed an external investigator, Ms Lorna Lynch SC, earlier this year to carry out a scoping investigation into a substantial number of files and to make recommendations to me as to any necessary next steps. Ms Lynch and a colleague have recently begun a process of interviewing colleagues in the board. I have asked that her final report should be capable of being published, although that event may need to be deferred if any disciplinary or other action is indicated as appropriate following the scoping investigation.

The departure of board members, including scheduled departures, sharply reduced the overall decision-making capacity at board level. From November 2022 only four serving board members were available to make decisions. In the absence of a chairperson and deputy chairperson, the board was not in a legal position to take certain decisions relating to SHDs and strategic infrastructure developments, SIDs. That legal capacity was only restored when I was appointed chairperson and Mr. McGarry was appointed deputy chairperson in January of this year. While the total number of cases received by the board in 2022 was down slightly at 3,058, 6% less than in 2021, the number of cases determined by the board in 2022 fell sharply. At 2,090 determinations, it was down 25% on 2021 and standard operating procedure, SOP, compliance, which is compliance with the timeframes for making decisions for normal planning appeals, fell to 45% and has since fallen further. It will be a very significant challenge to reverse the downward trend in SOP compliance and return to more acceptable levels of compliance in 2023. However, the rapid appointment of board members, with 15 appointed as of this week, will allow the board to resume a much higher level of weekly decision-making once the new board members are trained. I am confident that decision output from the board is increasing and will continue to do so.

I am also working with colleagues from across all areas in An Bord Pleanála to see how we can reduce the significant overhang of work from 2021 and 2022 over the remainder of this year. Additional staffing resources have been sanctioned by the Department and we are recruiting them as quickly as possible. These will be in part for the new functions recently assigned to the board under the 2021 legislation relating to marine developments and in part aimed at building capacity across the board's existing functions.

In 2022, 127 SHD cases were received, with 80 determined. An increase in the number of SHD cases received in 2022, particularly in April, in part due to the ending of the relevant legislation at the end of 2021, coincided with insufficient decision-makers in place to determine the cases received within the statutory time limit. A substantial number of penalty payments had to be made to applicants where decisions on strategic housing development applications were not made within the statutory time objective under the 2016 Act, of 16 weeks. As I have noted, only one such payment of the €10,000 penalty was made in 2021 but 134 payments totalling €1.34 million were made in 2022. There continues to be a significant volume of applications within the system that will be determined over the coming months, while the new large-scale residential development, LRD, applications are being made to local planning authorities, and in certain cases appealed to the board.

An Bord Pleanála faces an increasing caseload of judicial reviews relating to its decisions. Many concern complex matters of procedure and interpretation. Over recent years, a greater number of such cases have been conceded or lost, in part due to this legal complexity and novel issues relating to the strategic housing process. The board's average annual legal costs over the last three years have increased by about two and a half times over those of previous years. The board is now increasing its capacity to handle these cases. I am determined we will improve processing and decision-making of future cases, by employing a head of legal services and expanding the in-house legal unit. We are also in the process of re-tendering for external legal firms with a view to expanding the number of firms who will manage cases for the board. We are well served by external firms at the moment but we need more of them.

There are several priorities for the board for this year. They include reducing the backlog of work and restoring timely decision-making to appeals and applications made to the board and; managing the new functions now assigned to the board, namely applications relating to significant marine projects under the Maritime Area Planning Act 2021 and appeals relating to residentially zoned land tax under section 80 of the Finance Act 2021. Pre-application discussions on maritime projects will start in May. Appeals in relation to the zoned land tax are now arriving to the board. We will also work through the actions set out in the board's implementation plan, which we drew up in response to the recommendations in the Minister's action plan for An Bord Pleanála, and both reports by the Office of the Planning Regulator, OPR. Copies of the implementation plan are available to members if they wish. That comprises a significant body of work aimed at restoring public confidence in the work of the board. One of the most important initial actions we prioritised was to draw up and promulgate a strengthened code of conduct for board members and staff. I am happy to report that a new draft code is now out for consultation with the Minister and the OPR and with staff representatives. It will be formally adopted by the board once those consultations are completed.

We are working with the Department on the new planning legislation, in particular as it applies to the board, and starting the internal change process needed to move to the new commission model. The Bill will adapt the internal structure of the organisation to a modern governance and operational model, and bring greater clarity, both to the roles of those working across the organisation and to the procedures for making decisions on planning files.

We are recruiting the people the board needs to carry out its critical national mission, including the permanent board members who will replace the public servants like myself who have been appointed on an interim basis. I take this opportunity to thank my fellow public servants for volunteering to come to the board to help the organisation in this difficult period.

An Bord Pleanála is an organisation with a long history, having been established in the 1970s. It is an organisation with its own strong identity and culture. Dealing with its ongoing challenges, both from the events of last year and around new and existing workloads, requires huge effort from all those working in the board. It is a task we all are engaged in, and we are determined to see progress in the coming months. I thank members for their attention. We are happy to answer any questions they may have.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms Buckley. The next speaker is Deputy Ó Cathasaigh and he has 15 minutes.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I welcome the witnesses and thank Ms Buckley and Mr. McCarthy for their opening statements. I do not presume to speak for everybody here but we all share the same wish, which is to have a planning system that works and makes fair and robust decisions in a timely manner. We all share that goal but, clearly, it has not been the case in recent years, as set out in the documents before us.

I welcome Ms Buckley to her new role. I do not envy her the task that is before her. She has a major rebuilding job ahead. I am glad the new board members are now in place, at least on an interim basis, and will, starting from May, be making decisions on files. Ms Buckley will have a huge challenge in recruiting the necessary numbers of supporting staff, especially in light of the new functions that are now assigned to the board. I suspect the greatest challenge she will face is around rebuilding public trust in a planning system that, in many people's eyes, is broken. She said in her opening statement that certain events "have had a serious detrimental impact on the board's reputation". Some of her commentary recently at the Irish Planning Institute, IPI, conference was not helpful in this regard, but I do not intend to dwell on that here. Suffice to say that robust decision-making in the first place is likely to reduce the incidence of legal challenge.

On the need to remediate the public opinion of An Bord Pleanála, the first question I ask Ms Buckley is whether the organisation should consider making a corporate public apology. I am not suggesting a personal apology in any way, shape or form. Ms Buckley bears none of the responsibility for actions that were taken before she took up her role. Would a corporate public apology be appropriate for an organisation that has so damaged public trust in our planning system?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The Deputy has asked an extremely good question. One of the first things I did when I arrived at the board was to approve an apology, to be put on our website, to people whose appeals and applications were held up by the difficulties in An Bord Pleanála. I am very happy to repeat that apology to those persons who, through absolutely no fault of their own, have had their household developments held up because of the difficulties within An Bord Pleanála. I extend that apology to the staff of the board because they, through no fault of their own, have had to deal with a lot of very difficult discussions with members of the public about what was going on in An Bord Pleanála. That statement was also aimed at making sure the staff had something they could say that was fair to them.

I did consider making a corporate apology. As the Deputy says, I was not on the board at the time, so it would not be a personal apology. I am happy to do so. However, An Bord Pleanála, as an organisation, has already apologised to the people whose applications and appeals have been held up. I am happy to repeat that today. It is most unfortunate.

The Deputy mentioned the IPI conference. I am very sorry that I became the story there. That should not have been the case. I am very sorry I name-checked somebody who was not in the room to answer those questions. I should not have done that. I have to learn a lesson from this. The first part is not to name-check people and, second, I have to understand in future that, in this role, people are interested in everything I say and I should write a script and stick to that script. That is my learning from what happened at the conference and I am very happy to say I will not be doing that in future.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I welcome those specific apologies and I understand the case for them. Ms Buckley should give consideration to a corporate apology, to which she indicated she is open. It is not just about individual planning applications. The entire public trust in our planning system has been undermined. If she is open to considering a corporate public apology, it would be welcome.

Staying with the issue of rebuilding trust, a central component of that must be transparency. As the adage goes, the best disinfectant is sunlight. In her opening statement, Ms Buckley indicated that she has asked Lorna Lynch SC to carry out a scoping investigation and prepare a report. She further states that she has asked that the final report should be "capable of being published", but there are caveats attached to that. There is a bit of a ring of "Father Ted" to this, with the question "Is there anything to be said for another mass?" coming to mind. We have had numerous reports, at least two of which have never seen the light of day. The Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage commissioned an independent analysis around alleged conflicts of interest. That has been forward to the Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, for which I get the rationale. I understand there was also an internal report from senior management. In addition, a third report was carried out by Resolve Ireland, which apparently found that An Bord Pleanála's director of planning has no case to answer. I say "apparently" but, in fact, it is not apparent because the report was never published. I assume that report was paid for out of the public purse. If the money is followed back, it is the taxpayer who footed the bill for it. Why was it never published? Does Ms Buckley see how the burying of successive reports does nothing to rebuild public trust?

Regarding the report commissioned by the Minister, has the board had sight of it and, if so, has Ms Buckley implemented any of its recommendations in the interim?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Generally speaking, when dealing with matters of HR, particularly investigations that can lead to disciplinary or other outcomes, to be fair to the person who is involved in that case, one has to be extremely careful about how one conducts investigations and what one publishes about them. At least one of the reports the Deputy referred to was an HR investigation and it would be most unusual to have such a report published. I do not know that I am aware of it ever happening. Indeed, if an investigation happened into any conduct of mine, I would not want the report, even if it-----

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

Is Ms Buckley referring to the internal senior management report as opposed to the Resolve Ireland report?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

One of the internal reports to which the Deputy referred was into an individual in the organisation. The other report is one that was conducted on a paper-based exercise by colleagues in An Bord Pleanála. I received legal advice that neither the board nor I should publish it. That report was always intended as the first stage in a process. I have started the second stage of the process, which is to conduct an external investigation comprising the same role but involving interviews with people. If there are issues raised from the papers, those issues will be put to the individuals in question and they will be allowed an opportunity to respond.

On foot of that, I expect to get recommendations from Ms Lynch as to possible next steps that might be taken. There may be none. There may just be recommendations about how to improve the processes in An Bord Pleanála. If that is the outcome, I will be able to publish the report straight away. However, if, on foot of her investigation, Ms Lynch recommends that further steps be taken, whether disciplinary steps, referral to the Minister in the case of a serving board member or referral to another external authority, I will have to do that. In those circumstances, it could cause problems for the subsequent investigation and process if the report were to be published at that stage. I do not have any problem publishing any report as long as my legal advice is that I can publish, in which case I will do so.

The Deputy referred to a ministerial report. There was a ministerial action plan that has been published. Is he talking about the Remy Farrell investigation?

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

Yes.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That is not my document.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

Has the board had sight of it?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I personally have had sight of it. It was given to me in order that I would understand the circumstances I was going into.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

Has the board had sight of it?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

No. I have read it but no other person in An Bord Pleanála has seen it.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

If there are recommendations contained within that report, it is fair to say then that the board, as it has not had sight of the report, cannot have implemented any such recommendations contained therein.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That is correct.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

Can Ms Buckley see how the public might cast a jaundiced eye on yet another report, which will the fourth one to be commissioned, given they presumably have all been paid for out of the public purse? Even members of this committee have not had sight of those reports.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The circumstances were that I had legal advice that I could not publish the internal report. I was concerned that the point might be made that I had a report and did nothing with it.

I have taken this next step and that is a very important next step.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I have an eye on the clock and there are many questions I want to get to. The Office of the Planning Regulator report on phase 1 states how more recently, "An Bord Pleanála has faced high levels of successful legal challenges to its decisions and associated costs – approximately €8m, or 45% of its budget, in 2021." It is a very substantial proportion of any body's budget to be going out on legal fees. According to the 2022 figures, An Bord Pleanála won nine cases, lost nine and then conceded 35 of them. In that kind of context, I find it difficult to credit that a head of legal services is only being put in place now. We can talk about costs being awarded to third parties but the fact is that the State has outsourced much of its own costs in taking legal advice on board. Can Ms Buckley give us a breakdown of the €7.6 million spent on legal costs? My assumption is that most of them refer to strategic housing developments, SHDs, but she might correct me if I am wrong on that. How many of them refer to normal planning applications, strategic infrastructure developments, SIDs, large-scale residential developments, LRD, etc.? Can Ms Buckley give any insight into the breakdown?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I can. I share the Deputy's view. The litigation environment in which the board is operating now is fundamentally different to that of years ago, but the board itself did not adapt to this new external legal environment. It is only adapting now. As the Deputy knows, I put in place the recruitment of a head of legal services and we will recruit more internal legal resources. I find it very strange. That being said, one of the points I was trying to make last week is that SHD has driven only part of that very substantial layer of losing and conceding cases. Conceding cases is obviously the really big issue there. Why are decisions being taken that we cannot stand over when they are challenged? In fact, to take last year as an example, we conceded 35 cases but 16 of them were on normal planning appeals, three were on SIDs and five were labelled "Other" where we had compulsory purchase orders, CPOs, and what have you. Only 11, that is, approximately one third of them, were SHDs. The point I was very much trying to make last week is that there is kind of a belief in planning circles, in particular, that once SHD decisions have gone through the system, this will all be all right and judicial reviews will fall back to one per week as opposed to two or three or whatever. I do not believe that to be the case. The board has to adapt. It has to bring in additional legal resources internally. In my discussions with our external legal firms, which ably represent us, they are very relieved that the board is moving to strengthen its internal core around being able to take robust decisions.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I thank Ms Buckley; I am sorry to cut her short. I know other members will dig down into these costs. There is another aspect I wish to briefly explore, however.

She referred to the context for making these decisions changing all the time. I want to refer to some of the environmental context. Traditionally, the Irish planning system and, therefore, the board enjoyed quite a wide discretion when asked to judge against quite flexible standards. That could be seen as quite subjective. Subsequent EU legislation, in particular, and Irish legislation have introduced much more objective tests, for example, the obligations under the habitats and birds directives, the water framework directive and more recently, of course, obligations under the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Act 2021. These all have strong and clear tests, which are aimed respectively at biodiversity loss, water quality and around emissions. The board has repeatedly found itself losing cases under the birds and habitats directives, which are the oldest of these legal regimes. A high-profile decision made recently with respect to the Galway ring road referred to the new climate Act. This is only going one way. Ms Buckley in her opening statement acknowledged those extra responsibilities the board will have to shoulder under the likes of the Maritime Area Planning Act 2021 in particular. How is it proposed to address this? I assume she will say massive extra resources are needed. Does she have the plans in place to recruit not just the bodies but the expertise in terms of the resources we need?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The Deputy is quite correct. The level of complexity in the planning and environmental system is of an order that is different from what it was. I used to be involved in this area 15 or 16 years ago, which is probably why I was invited back to do this role temporarily. The level of complexity involved is streets ahead of where it was even 15 years ago. To a degree, we need resources, yes, and we need expertise. I have a substantial sanctioned rate of pulling people in but I will probably be going back to the Department in due course to say, in fact, we need extra ecologists and we need those skills. We do much recruitment of external expertise because quite often, say, on the marine side, those skill sets are not available in Ireland or where they are available, they have already been used and are involved in the private sector in preparing its applications and, therefore, we cannot use them because there are conflicts or other public bodies are desperately trying to recruit them. Those are some of the issues. We tend to have to pull in expertise from across Europe. That is what we are looking at there.

It will be a challenge to keep ahead of all those, particularly under the current Government given its focus on these matters. The focus I have, and one of the cultural shifts we need to make as we move into being An Coimisiún Pleanála, will be a focus on a learning environment and a constantly evolving learning body so that the people who we bring in keep pace with those developments and keep learning. That is going to have to be a big investment in the new staff we have and, indeed, in the board members because the board members need to be kept up to speed with these developments as well.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ó Cathasaigh. I call Deputy Colm Burke.

Deputy Colm Burke

I thank Ms Buckley very much indeed for her presentation and for the information she provided to the committee. I very much appreciate it. I wish her every success in her new role, as well as the people who are appointed to assist her in dealing with the very difficult tasks.

A newspaper report recently mentioned 27,000 residential housing units pending a decision. There is much speculation about whether some of these applications can proceed. Where does Ms Buckley see the board in dealing with all the challenges that exist? What percentage of those does she think will have been dealt with by this time next year?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That relates to the remaining SHD applications before the board. I hope we would have dealt with all the remaining ones, subject to judicial review, by the end of this year. As the Deputy may have seen from press reports, the board is, in fact, now the engine of An Bord Pleanála and taking decisions on these applications has commenced. In fact, we have taken decisions and determined applications relating to approximately just over 6,000 units even in the past three to four weeks. The board's decision-making process has started to move again. That is one of the things I want to say to members today. With the new board members that have been appointed, the engine is moving again, if you like, and hopefully it will accelerate.

Deputy Colm Burke

Outside of judicial review, Ms Buckley would hope that all these would be dealt with.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I would hope that all those would go through. The other thing is that there may have been misapprehension from some of the headlines over the weekend. I am not saying that all 27,000 of them are caught up in a legal problem. There are small proportion of them where perhaps there may be a legal difficulty about granting them because there are newly adopted development plans and those newly adopted plans have to be applied by the board in making its decisions.

Deputy Colm Burke

Are particular SID projects, for instance, being prioritised? There are two in particular involving the interconnector between the UK and Ireland. Where are those two applications at this stage on whether a decision will be made one way or the other?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I will have to check. I understood all of our interconnector applications were determined so far. There is not a live one before us. We are making a substantial change in the structure, in particular, of the inspectorate before the board with the introduction of the new marine and climate change functions. We have appointed a new director of planning to oversee a part of the inspectorate. We are splitting the inspectorate into an area that will deal with the direct applications, if I could put it that way, such as the local area plans, SIDs and so forth, and then we will have a director of planning overseeing applications to be normal planning pieces, including housing and major infrastructure and so forth and land applications as well. We will give that priority. That division of responsibility will help us manage those major applications, which tend to take quite a long time because they are of very great significance, and raise many of those complex issues of the environment and so forth raised by Deputy Ó Cathasaigh.

Deputy Colm Burke

My understanding is that there are some applications before the board involving infrastructure development where if the decision is not taken within a particular period, European funding will not be made available.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There may be. We can check. I obviously cannot talk about live cases-----

Deputy Colm Burke

I fully understand that.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

On interconnectors, I was not aware of one being currently before the board. If there are such cases, we can look to them. It is worth bearing in mind that when we prioritise one file, that takes priority over another. These are all major projects in their own right.

Deputy Colm Burke

The other issue I am referring to is where European funding is available and it is dependent on a decision from the board. If that decision is not taken within a particular period, funding will not be available. Again, this relates to important infrastructure.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Even in my time on the board we have given priority to certain things. For example, we took a decision on two emergency electricity generating facilities in 35 days. We met a very tight timeline on that. Where people advise us that there can be issues around that, we are in a position to accelerate things. The Minister could also direct us to give priority to certain types of cases. If that were the case, we would do that. In a confined resources scenario, however, we have to prioritise certain things above others. That can be the challenge there.

Deputy Colm Burke

I would like to go back to the issue of judicial reviews. We have seen the table for 2017 to 2022. There were 226 cases taken. The number of cases that An Bord Pleanála won is 52. I know the awarding of costs is dependent on the court but in any of those 52 cases, has An Bord Pleanála been awarded costs and have costs been collected? Even in the past year, An Bord Pleanála won nine cases.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We certainly try to collect costs where they are awarded to us. The particular cost environment the board works within is a very special one in legal terms. There is a very recent decision called the Heather Hill decision, which the Deputy may be aware of, which stated the cost-constrained environment applies in all cases where an argument is made on a European matter caught up in that cost environment.

I have just been fed some figures. Costs recovered are relatively limited. In 2018, we recovered a little over €500,000 in costs; in 2019, €241,000; in 2020 , €181,000; and in 2021, €51,000. The numbers are relatively low relative to what we pay in legal costs.

Deputy Colm Burke

Out of 52 cases, it is a very small amount.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It is a very small amount.

Deputy Colm Burke

The number of cases lost in that six-year period was 31. Quite a number of cases were conceded as well. The impression of the public is that a far higher number of cases is being lost by An Bord Pleanála. Is there a need for the board to get the message out there that the decisions that have been made, in fairness, have been robust and that it is quite prepared to fight these cases where it feels there was no incorrect decision? There is a perception that every time someone takes a case to court, An Bord Pleanála is automatically on the losing side.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Clearly I am going to have to be careful about everything I say in the context of judicial reviews going forward.

Deputy Colm Burke

Yes.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It is worth saying, and I am only getting to grips with this myself, that often when the board loses a case it is because 30 or 40 grounds are put up against the board and the board has to win on all grounds. If it loses on one, it loses the case. Then the case is more often than not remitted to the board and the board takes a decision, having regard to fixing the problem that it lost on the previous time, whether that was a procedural problem, a lack of explanation for its decisions or whatever else. The bigger issue is less about the board being able to say it wins quite a few cases. We do win and we should win; the real issue for me is the concessions. The board is conceding too many cases and it is conceding on obvious grounds. It needs to make its decisions and procedures more robust and it needs to learn from those errors so it will not make them in the future.

Deputy Colm Burke

Ms Buckley is obviously hoping that the legal person being appointed to the board will remove some of those issues.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The primary tasks of the person we are appointing, and anybody we appoint to the legal unit, will be twofold. First, they must develop a proper litigation strategy for An Bord Pleanála so it has oversight of that, which includes conceding cases at an earlier stage if they have to be conceded because that reduces our costs. The second thing would be to make sure the board learns, that it keeps learning, changes its processes, changes the way it makes decisions and makes decisions more robustly. We also have two very activist judges working on the planning lists and they are making very far-reaching decisions. Sometimes the board can be at a stage where it made a decision based on what it understood to be the correct law at an earlier stage and a decision is then taken a year or two years later that says it applied the rules of the policy or whatever incorrectly. At that point, there is now a chain of cases based on the same issue and so it has to concede all those subsequent cases because it was applying the same thought processes to all of them.

Deputy Colm Burke

We have not been given any figures on cases going from the High Court to the Court of Appeal and to the Supreme Court. Can we get details of those at some stage? I know Ms Buckley will probably not be able to give them to us today.

The other thing I wanted to touch on was the cases withdrawn. A total of 54 cases that were initiated and then subsequently withdrawn. Is there a problem where planning is being delayed because there is an application for judicial review, it is dragged on within the court system and, as a result, there is a delay in the final outcome of the planning application? If, for instance, An Bord Pleanála granted planning, the case goes for judicial review and then we find 12 months or two years later the judicial review application is withdrawn. There were 54 cases withdrawn. I am just wondering about the timeframe from when a case is lodged in the High Court to the time it is withdrawn. What is the timeline? If that occurs, it means the planning process has been delayed for a year, two years or maybe even three or four years.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Obviously, it would be the other side withdrawing the case.

Deputy Colm Burke

I accept that. That is what I am saying.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The Deputy asked whether we have any timelines on how long it was between initiation and withdrawal. I am advised that withdrawals are usually at a relatively early stage in the process but I can try to get some details on timelines. Slightly reverting back to my proper day job, as it were, in the Department of Justice, I was involved in helping establish the planning and environmental law court. The intention behind that is to try to make sure these cases are processed more quickly in the courts to reduce those delays.

Deputy Colm Burke

I understand there are a few cases where the board is waiting for judgment. The cases have been fully heard and there has been a delay in the issuing of the judgment. I understand there is one case, in fact, where the judgment has been awaited for more than four years.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I would not have any details on that myself. I will have to check that for the Deputy. That has not been brought to my attention..

Deputy Cormac Devlin

I welcome Ms Buckley and the other witnesses. Her approach to today and to her new role is very welcome. I appreciate her frankness and honesty, or being as much as she can be at this point. I think she realises the scale of the challenge ahead of her in terms of the reputational damage to the board that has unfortunately dogged it for the past 12 months, if not before that. I am going to get to the two-person board meetings that were taking place because that is something I honed in on the last time the board was before us. The number of reviews and reports seems quite mind-boggling from where we are sitting because there are quite a few under way, both internally and externally. Ms Buckley touched on some of it in her opening remarks. To recap and summarise, how many internal and external reports or reviews are currently being done with the board?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There is one external review that I am aware of, which is the one I have commissioned from Ms Lynch.

That is the only one that is being done currently. The regulator has completed its work, as I understand it. We are now reporting on that, and reporting on a monthly basis, to the Minister.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

That includes the 34 recommendations.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That is correct - and the implementation plan. I should also add, for the sake of completeness, that there is a protected disclosure but as the Deputy is aware, I cannot go into any detail on that.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

That is fine. Is there one protected disclosure?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There is one.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

How many internal reviews are being done? Ms Buckley mentioned a HR review. Are any other reviews being done in the organisation?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Not arising from the events of last year, no.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Are there any reviews being done internally, apart from the HR review, full stop?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

No. Ms Lynch's review is the one that is-----

Deputy Cormac Devlin

That is going to cover a lot.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

That is fair enough. Turning to the statutory penalty payments to which Deputy Burke referred a few moments ago, I note that in 2021 a €10,000 penalty was paid out, and in 2022, that figure rose to €1.34 million. What is the reason behind that?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

As I said in my statement, there was a big influx of SHD applications over the end of 2021 and into 2022, with a particular peak in April 2022. At the time those applications were coming in, the capacity of the board to take decisions on them was falling because board members were no longer in a position to take decisions.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Okay.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

All of those penalties have now been paid, including a further €80,000 this year. We have paid out all of the penalties on SHDs. We are giving priority to the LRDs, which are subject to the same penalty regime. So far, we have had to pay only one penalty on an LRD. A second one may be triggered shortly because we are just-----

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Of course, with the LRDs, the onus is really on the council first and foremost. It has to adhere to-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That is correct. We are dealing with appeals.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

How many penalties for SHDs are we talking about for 2021? In 2021, only €10,000 was paid out, and that figure rose to €1.3 million in 2022. How many cases are we talking about for each year?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There is a €10,000 fixed penalty.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

So there was one case in 2021?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There was one case in 2021, 134 cases in 2022 and eight cases in 2023.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

I think the case in 2021 was very late in the year. They are all part of one grouping, if you like.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Okay, that is fair enough. I thank the Comptroller and Auditor General. In terms of the backlog of 27,000 residential units that was referred to, and the board's hope to have it cleared by the end of the year, anybody within the State realises that we need to have those units as quickly as possible, but obviously, the system has to be robust and we do not want any shortcuts from the board's perspective. As Ms Buckley said about the apology issued on the board's own website to applicants, whether small or large individuals, people need decisions. Reputationally, for Ireland Inc., there is a problem if we do not have a functioning board and oversight body. I welcome the fact that as Ms Buckley said, the engine has restarted, which is good. However, in terms of the volume of units, we need to have them delivered as soon as possible, as I am sure Ms Buckley is aware.

In my previous engagement with the board through this committee, I alluded to the number of members dealing with cases. Ms Buckley's predecessor said that there were two-member boards. What is the current make-up, now that the engine has been restarted? What reform has been made to ensure that there is good oversight and that people are adhering to good practice within the board?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

First of all, the two-person board structure was ended by my predecessor in July of last year. By law, the Minister precludes there being fewer than three people on a board. That is the quorum now for board decision-making. There are three-person boards. Obviously, that made it quite difficult when we only had four functioning board members, but now that board membership is back up to 15 I will be able to run board meetings morning and evening. There are actually two boards operating now, simultaneously. The key way of ensuring effective decision-making - and in particular, given the risk that arises in any situation of groupthink - is to keep mixing up the boards. The selection of board members in any one time is quite random and the selection of files that members are being allocated is random, save that it is sometimes relative to their expertise. If we have experts in certain areas, we have to use that expertise. For example, one of the recently appointed board members is a marine biologist. We will be using him in appropriate cases. We may use him in a lot of the cases involving marine biology, but the other two members of the board will be changing, shifting and rotating. In that way, we will try to ensure that there are good internal challenges within the board. Having met all the new board members, I can say that they have a lot of challenge in them. That is going to be great. I am smiling at Mr. McGarry because he is already becoming quite challenging.

The other thing is-----

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Sorry, who ultimately makes the decision of what inspector or planner is allocated to each board? As Ms Buckley has said, when those files are being allocated, it is random.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It is a senior official in the organisation. We have a new written procedure that we brought in on foot of the OPR recommendations in particular. He is tasked with that. For example, he will say he has a list of 20 files to be allocated. He will talk to me, and mostly Mr. McGarry, who is helping with this work. Mr. McGarry will say, for example, that a particular member can take five files, but the files are not specified.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

I have to press on because I have only two minutes and I have four questions. One is on the oral hearings. I have always felt that there has been a bit of uneven application of how the board decides an oral hearing. The board's annual report states that oral hearings are sometimes held in relation to "CPO cases, strategic infrastructure applications and other cases which are complex and/or large in scale". That is fair enough. In 2021, 18 oral hearings were held, of which 16 related to CPOs and one related to strategic development, which I find a bit odd given the fact that there were SHDs and everything else. They were very large scale as well, but there were no oral hearings for those applications in 2021. I do not have the figures for oral hearings for 2022. Perhaps Ms Buckley might outline them for me. For the purposes of comparison with the small number of 18 in 2021, can Ms Buckley give us a rough estimation of how many oral hearings were granted by the board in 2018 and 2019?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I do not have those figures in front of me, but I can certainly provide them to the committee. I have just been advised that the reason that there were no hearings for SHDs is that obviously, there was quite a strict time limit of 16 weeks and there was no real provision for oral hearings in SHD cases under the legislation.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

None of the witnesses have information on the number of oral hearings granted by the board in 2018 or 2019. Does the board have to come back to us with those figures?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

If we can get those figures while the meeting is going on, we will certainly do so.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

That would be helpful.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

They are probably readily available. A piece of paper is being produced. Sorry, that is slightly different. We will try to get those figures for the committee.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

That would be helpful. In terms of the annual report, fee income doubled in 2016 to 2020, which shows the volume of cases that the board was dealing with. However, operating expenses also rose from €6 million in 2019 to €11 million in 2020. What was the reason for that?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That was largely driven by legal fees.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

So, are we saying now, with the new appointment of a legal adviser to the board - I am sure I am not the only one who is surprised there was not one in place before - that this might reduce the expenditure or exposure of the board in terms of legal cases? Is that the rationale for having someone in-house, as opposed to outsourcing it?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

As I said earlier, I do not believe the number of judicial reviews will decline significantly, because I think that is the current state of play in terms of the legal environment the board works in. However, the appointment of a head director of legal services is to make the board more effective. Ultimately, if the board is making more effective decisions, it should win more cases or concede fewer cases. That might mean that we fight more cases, of course, so it might increase our legal costs, but-----

Deputy Cormac Devlin

But make that decision prior to it.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That is correct.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Finally, in terms of the planning regulator's recommendations, the way I read it is that there are no low-, medium- and high-risk recommendations, but there are the short-, medium- and long-term ones. I am reading it that the short-term recommendations are the high-risk ones because they need to be implemented in a very short period of time.

I have two questions for Ms Buckley. One relates to the legal services she has just outlined. She says that she hopes the matter will be dealt with by the end of April. Is that process on track? I know recruitment was under way. With regard to reinforcing public confidence and the statement to be included in the template for inspector reports, time and time again we have seen inspector reports differing from the reports of the board. I am not saying that will change under this new regime but I wonder whether the declaration or oath that inspectors will give, and to which planners will probably also adhere, will change the outcome of decisions of the board or reports given by inspectors.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We have made an offer to a director of legal services candidate and we hope that person will accept it. We have a panel in place and I hope to recruit additional lawyers to work under that person as part of the sanctioned resources coming through.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

I hope they will not be deterred by today.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

In fairness, I was very pleased that we actually did get applicants for the director of legal services role, which was good. We have revised our arrangements so that inspectors now put a statement on the front of the file saying that nobody affected their opinion on the case. That is the important point about the Office of the Planning Regulator, OPR. However, An Bord Pleanála does tend to disagree with the inspectors' opinions. Boards disagree in an average of 10% to 12% of cases per year. That is expected because the job given to the board is to review what the inspector is saying and come to its own independent decision. That is the job. If you wanted to, you could make the inspector the final arbiter but that is the way the system has been designed. I think it is healthy because it means it is not just one person making the decision. I should not be critical because, in the UK, which has a very similar system to the Republic of Ireland's - a certain amount of copying is involved - it is the inspector who acts as the final arbiter.

Deputy John Brady

Ms Buckley and her fellow witnesses are very welcome to this morning's meeting on what is a really important issue. It is not just about accountability, but also about rebuilding the reputation of the board. As Ms Buckley has said, very serious reputational damage has been done and restoring that public confidence and the board's reputation will be a colossal task. I wish her all the best in that regard. I welcome Ms Buckley's comment that she would consider issuing a corporate public apology. I also welcome her apology to members of the public and to members of the board, past and present. I imagine a shadow has been cast over all current and previous members of the board. That is a cause for concern.

I come from County Wicklow, where there are a number of legacy issues relating to planning and some very serious concerns. A number of very serious allegations of planning irregularities have been made. I am not saying that they all relate to An Bord Pleanála nor am I going to get into them here but formal complaints have been made to successive Ministers. I believe a process is under way to look at those very serious planning irregularities. Needless to say, since the news regarding An Bord Pleanála broke last year, I have been contacted by many of the people who made those allegations and complaints to the Department.

Ms Buckley has commissioned Lorna Lynch to carry out an external review. With regard to the terms of reference for the work Ms Lynch has embarked upon in respect of potential conflicts of interest and so on, how far back is she going to look?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The terms of reference are available. I have copies of them for members of the committee. In essence, it not so much a question of how far she is going to go. We have asked her to cover the same ground as was the subject of the internal paper-based exercise. As to the order of magnitude, it involves more than 300 particular planning files along with other documentation, metafiles and so on so it is quite an expansive area. Rather optimistically, I asked Ms Lynch whether she could complete it in eight weeks. We are already well past that timeframe. However, with the interviews now starting, I hope the process will continue apace from now on.

Deputy John Brady

Ms Lynch is looking at approximately 300 files.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It is a little bit more and she is also looking at other documentation.

Deputy John Brady

Has she issued an interim report?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

As yet, she has not because the first interviews with staff only took place last week and there was not really much to report on until Ms Lynch got to the stage of holding interviews and working things through. However, I have had a couple of verbal interim discussions with her so I know what is happening. Obviously, I am not directing her investigation because I want her to do it independently but I expect to get some form of interim report fairly soon.

Deputy John Brady

At this stage, Ms Buckley is not privy to any potential conflicts of interest Ms Lynch has identified.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Not as such, no.

Deputy John Brady

Not as such. Okay. The annual report for 2021 was published yesterday. I am not sure whether that was coincidental but I welcome-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It was actually published last week.

Deputy John Brady

That report states that An Bord Pleanála conducted a risk review, which identified no weaknesses in the processes that were in place. I believe Ms Buckley would agree that is completely-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That was a formal governance requirement and was carried out by the previous board under the previous chair. We had a similar formal governance consideration at the most recent corporate meeting of An Bord Pleanála and the discussion was rather different, as the Deputy might imagine. That rather different view will be included in the 2022 annual report.

Deputy John Brady

So, it has been rubbished.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Well, look.

Deputy John Brady

Obviously, a lot of the focus is on the 2021 report and figures. Do we have any idea of the full cost of legal challenges for 2022 at this stage?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes, I do have those figures for 2022. It is just under €10 million. From memory, I believe it is approximately €9.7 million. It is just over €9 million.

Deputy John Brady

How many judicial reviews were taken last year?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The figure I have in my head is 96 but let me check. It was 95.

Deputy John Brady

How many did the board lose? Are some still in progress?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Many of them are still working their way through the system. Since I arrived, we have already had a number of losses and concessions. Under the rules of the board-----

Deputy John Brady

Is Ms. Buckley able to put a figure on that? Of the 95, how many have been dealt with? How many have been lost?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The figures I have are slightly different. I can tell the Deputy how many we lost and won in 2022 but, of course, these figures would relate mostly to judicial reviews taken earlier. If the Deputy would like, I can give him those numbers for 2022.

Deputy John Brady

Yes.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We won nine cases in 2022 and lost nine. We conceded 35 cases and 12 were withdrawn.

Deputy John Brady

It has to be said that is not a good record. May I get Ms Buckley's views on the draft of the new planning and development Bill? Does she believe it will see an increase in legal challenges? Will it address some of the issues that may be there?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Obviously, I cannot really comment on particular policy matters but I believe the legal environment in which the board is operating will involve the current high rate for some considerable time to come. The legal environment we are working in is extremely complex. When you replace heavily litigated legislation - and the 2000 Act has been very heavily litigated in the intervening 22 years - with a new Bill, it tends to raise novel areas of law which require determination by a judge in some cases.

Decision makers are taking decisions under a new law. They have to make judgment calls sometimes. Those judgment calls can be the subject of litigation. I am highly supportive, and I have said this on the record of another Oireachtas Committee, of the new legislation being brought in. It will help to clarify and reduce the complexity of the law under which we work at the moment. I do not believe there will be a reduction in judicial review cases going forward. The only way we can achieve that is if it becomes more difficult to win cases against An Bord Pleanála.

Deputy John Brady

In regard to the delays which are a major annoyance for many people who are trying to build homes, have we a figure? Is it about 60% of cases have delays? Would Ms Buckley be able to put a percentage on it?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

At this point in the cycle we are meeting the standard operating procedure, SOP, timeline on normal planning appeals, which is the one we really check because that is where the bulk of figures are, in a little over 30% of cases. We are determining those cases. However, determining includes decisions, those deemed to be invalid and those withdrawn. In fact, in terms of deciding cases, because of the delays and backlogs in the board, the numbers decided within SOP are very small, only a handful at the moment.

Deputy John Brady

Moving forward, Ms Buckley said that An Bord Pleanála hopes to deal with all the delays as quickly as possible. I welcome the fact that new board members are being appointed. More broadly however, there will be a need for additional staff. Ms Buckley touched on that. How many new staff have been taken on over the past 12 months? How many staff does Ms Buckley believe the board actually needs in order to meet the demand?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We received sanction in December for 33 additional staff. We are recruiting them as fast as we can. We received a further sanction for 59 additional staff just before Easter. We do our own recruitment in An Bord Pleanála. Because we commenced these competitions at the beginning of the year, we are putting in place panels. With that additional sanction coming through we should be able to draw down the additional people we need from existing panels, if I can put it that way.

We have been pleasantly surprised by the level of interest in taking up jobs at An Bord Pleanála. We were afraid that, with the reputational damage it has sustained, that people in the broader planning world would not want to work for us. However, we actually had more than 100 applications for one of our recent competitions. We are pleased with that.

Deputy John Brady

I have one final question, which was not answered there. I welcome the staff that have been sanctioned and have come on board. How many additional staff does Ms Buckley believe An Bord Pleanála actually needs, going forward?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I put in the request for the staff I thought I needed which will bring us to about 300 for this year. We are going to need to upscale. That is a big increase, it is about a 50% increase in the staff of the board. Beyond that I expect that I will probably be coming back to the Department in due course saying we need smaller numbers, more bespoke skills, but getting the board to around 300 is the starting point.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Ms Buckley is a breath of fresh air. Unlike most other Secretary Generals or chief executives in that position she has not come in here having only taking up the position in January and said "oh I cannot answer that because I have only taken up the position". She has been very forthright and I thank her for that.

I have some questions on which I would like to elaborate. Ms Buckley said in the evidence she gave that the county development plan is the primary piece of planning policy. I read many of the planning decisions. The most recent one here is from Mr. Justice Holland. At paragraph 2.2.4 he says: “In my view the inspectors’ finding that the policy and objectives of the development plan do not accord with national policy, is wrong." Ms Buckley herself alluded to the fact that there are deficits within An Bord Pleanála in regard to the education as to what the hierarchy of legislation and planning is. Ms Buckley herself knows that the county development plan is the primary docuemnt when considering any planning application, and everything else is a guideline to which we must have regard. Is she happy that she now has a staff that are fully aware of that?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I congratulate the Deputy on reading all of Mr. Justice Holland's very lengthy rulings. They can be quite long reads. The move in the structuring, and the Department officials may wish to speak to that, under the forthcoming legislation is to put the county development plan back at the heart of the decision-making process. Oftentimes, the legislation under which those rules were coming through was from an earlier era. The SHD legislation, in particular, allowed for material contravention of the county development plans. We are moving from that to another space.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I am not sure that they did allow for any material contravention. We have many laws that say they did not. That is primary to where I am looking and much of the litigation. The question I am now asking is, how are we going to prevent this type of litigation, where inspectors, where the report is upheld, are not au fait with the hierarchy.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We are now in the happy place where there are almost universally newly-adopted county development plans that state what the democratic will of the local area is, in regard to what planning should be in those circumstances. It is therefore much easier in this instance for our inspectors and the board members to look to the modern plan and say "that is what that says". Let us hope it is entirely consistent in all other ways. I very much want to ensure that the board is a learning organisation and that we drive that learning and engage with lawyers. In fact we are going to institute a bespoke legal training programme for the new board members and myself, on law. I am quite looking forward to it. We will engage with the office of planning regulator, OPR, and with other stakeholders in training our inspectorate and indeed training board members around that. I expect to get into that space-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

I have a concern when Ms Buckley says that An Bord Pleanála is going to engage with the OPR. Prior to the finalisation of Wexford's new county development plan, I engaged with the OPR. In that case, he told me that in legislation there was a minimum density requirement of 35 dwellings per hectare. There is not, is there? This is something Ms Buckley would want to consider because if she does not answer this correctly, she is going to undermine her own position. The OPR, on the record, says that there is a minimum density requirement in planning policy of 35 dwellings per hectare. Is that the case, Ms Buckley?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I am going to do something the Deputy does not want me to do. I am going to refer her question to the people who set the policy on densities, who are my colleagues here from the Department.

Deputy Verona Murphy

In that case, if that exists, I want Ms Buckley to tell me where, please.

Mr. Paul Hogan

We responded to the same issue in writing on 14 October.

Deputy Verona Murphy

To whom was that, Mr. Hogan?

Mr. Paul Hogan

It was to the committee secretariat for the Committee of Public Accounts, Sam Keenan.

Deputy Verona Murphy

It did not point us to where it was in that, if I recall correctly. Mr. Hogan was not able to tell me what paragraph, in which SPPR. It did not identify where the minimum requirement-----

Mr. Paul Hogan

If it is okay, I will read out the paragraph.

An Cathaoirleach

We will allow Mr. Hogan to outline it.

Mr. Paul Hogan

It says the guidelines refer to the application of minimum net densities in section 5.8 and advise that minimum net densities should be specified in local area plans prepared by local authorities in sections 3.6 and 5.8.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I thank Mr. Hogan. I have heard all that before. In what has just been read out by Mr. Hogan, there is no mention of minimum density. I ask Ms Buckley to submit to the committee something on that. It is a particular issue that we now see is contentious around the whole country with the development of county development plans. Not only that, it is the subject of many of our judicial reviews. The false narrative that is portrayed is that judicial reviews all take place due to environmental grounds.

Given what she has already put before the committee, Ms Buckley will be aware that many of them were actually taken over density and compact development issues. Is that not correct?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Certainly, density is often one of the many grounds cited now in judicial reviews. Yes.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Would Ms Buckley agree that planning policy is the reason we have such poor delivery of housing?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I could not really. As the Deputy knows, I am not in a position to comment on policy. We are in a position of trying to apply policy and it is difficult if there are contradictions.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Ms Buckley can agree, because the evidence is there, that many of the reviews that were traditionally successful were successful because of the densities being applied. Is that not correct?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I actually cannot say. As the Deputy quite rightly pointed out, I have only been in situ for three months and so I have not yet managed to get to grips with-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

I was hoping we were not going to get to that.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I am sorry. What I am trying to say is I am probably not as au fait with the planning policy as I should be because I have been working on trying to fix the organisation. I have been taking very few decisions myself as a consequence. I have not been operating as a board member, if I can put it that way. The Deputy has revealed my ignorance, I am sorry.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I will put it this way: I will expect a different answer this time next year.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Absolutely, if I am still here.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I am very concerned about the 27,000 housing units. Ms Buckley said An Bord Pleanála had decided 6,000 in recent weeks. What is very concerning about that is that these were SHDs, is that not so? Clearly, we know that the new county development plans are in train. Many people involved in the sector know that. Developers were advised by members of An Bord Pleanála how they should make their applications - what should be contained and what they were eligible to put in it. Does Ms Buckley understand what I am saying? They would have sat down in tripartite meetings. Is that not correct?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Not that I am aware of. Sorry, there would have been pre-application discussions with inspectors, not board members but inspectors.

Deputy Verona Murphy

As well as maybe some representative from the council.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Realistically, everything that was applied for was the information they were given. Everybody knows when the changeover from one county development plan to the new county development plan happens. Why were the decisions that we now find falling between two stools not prioritised in the middle of the housing crisis? By no means is it Ms Buckley's fault. When was it known? Is she worried about the jeopardy with regard to further litigation because of the delay?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

As I explained in my opening statement, there was a big surge of SHD applications as the legislation was coming to an end at the end of 2021 and into 2022. Priority was given all the way through to SHD applications. No fine was paid until the very end of 2021. That big surge coincided with what happened in An Bord Pleanála and the loss of decision-makers. So, the backlog just grew and grew. As it happens, in many instances, developers would have been fully aware a new development plan was coming through. They might have had sight of the new draft development plan. Many of them would have dealt with issues arising under the new draft development plan, aware, as they would be, that the board would have to take a decision under the new plan as opposed to the old plan. That is dealt with in many of those applications. In other instances, the development plan will not have changed significantly, but we need to make decisions on those remaining SHD applications and I will try to get those completed by the end of this year.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Is Ms Buckley concerned that because of those engagements, such as what I term tripartite meetings, with all of those concerned, there would have been a legitimate expectation of a grant of planning permission? The jeopardy here strictly is caused by delays and problems of the board. Paying the fine is one thing; it does not in any way absolve An Bord Pleanála of being wrong. Is Ms Buckley concerned in any way that there may be a jeopardy to the taxpayer?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There is a legal provision as I recall it around pre-application discussions. It says nothing ties the hands of any decision-making body, whether that is the local authority or the board, following those. Nobody can have a legitimate expectation. Everybody knew the legal position that the board takes decisions on the current development plan, whatever the plan in place on the day of the decision is. That should not raise legal jeopardy. There is a possibility of legal action being taken perhaps if somebody is waiting on a decision from the board and so we could get a mandamus application, absolutely. Nobody can have an expectation of getting permission from An Bord Pleanála. Even under the SHDs, on average one in four of them was refused by the board. So, nobody can have an expectation that they are going to get permission from the board.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Ultimately, of the 6,000 dealt with, have they all been refused?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

No, about 75% of those were grants. Approximately one in four was refused which was approximately the rate of refusal under the SHD process.

An Cathaoirleach

The Deputy needs to conclude.

Deputy Verona Murphy

This is my last question, Chair. I will come back in.

An Cathaoirleach

The Deputy is over time.

Deputy Verona Murphy

What does Ms Buckley expect from the remaining 21,000?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I cannot tell the Deputy. We have to do the full process on those. Some will be granted; some will be refused.

An Cathaoirleach

I call Deputy Dillon and then we will take a short break after that.

Deputy Alan Dillon

I welcome Ms Buckley and her officials. I wish her the very best of luck in her new role. I thank her for her contribution and her statements earlier.

I start with the report which is concerning for the board's reputation for integrity, independence and impartiality. My first question is on the enhancements made to the controls regarding declarations and disclosures of interest following the various reviews. I welcome the appointment of the new members to the board. What steps have been taken since Ms Buckley's appointment in January?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There is, obviously, a very heightened level of scrutiny and awareness within An Bord Pleanála in relation to the declarations process, which was already under way when I started, clearly. That has continued. The new draft code of conduct has not yet been fully adopted because it is out for consultation. That contains additional requirements around the section 147 declarations in particular. We intend to make it mandatory for board members to give us a declaration, including a nil declaration if that is appropriate. Up to now it was not clear that board members had to actually declare that they had no interests. As the Deputy knows, there is discussion about that under the SIPO regulations. We have also included a provision that if there is any significant change in the declaration from year to year, we strongly advise people to give some sort of memo of explanation so that can be checked. That implies, obviously, that we will be checking back and reviewing those.

I have started to do the process of town halls with staff because it is important that they hear from me and that we improve communication within An Bord Pleanála. It was one of the big demands from staff. The second one I held was around the code of conduct and we put some scenarios to the staff present about when declarationf should be made and all that. It is all about enhancing awareness. We are still reliant on staff giving truthful declarations. We cannot be policing them. We do not have a police force in An Bord Pleanála, but we can try to make sure people are fully aware of what they need to do.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Following Deputy Verona Murphy's line of questioning on the new board members, how many of them are new and have never sat on the board?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

All but three members of the board are new with me since December and everybody else since January.

There are 12 new members of the board. I have certainly made my declaration, and the six who have arrived in the last eight days are currently going through the induction process. Part of that induction process is that they are talked through the forms and we require them to make those declarations. For the majority of public servants, this will not be an issue because they are all used to making those declarations anyway under the civil rules.

Deputy Alan Dillon

The code of conduct is currently out of for consultation.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It is indeed, yes.

Deputy Alan Dillon

When does Ms Buckley expect that to be reviewed?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The OPR returned observations to us. I expect the Minister to return observations to us, and then we have a partnership meeting with the union in the next couple of weeks. I hope that once we have cleared all of those hurdles, it will go back to one of the corporate board meetings and we will finally sign off on the revised version.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Regarding the training, which we have talked about previously, what level of training will be provided to ensure these new board members have effective decision-making properties with regard to planning cases?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We are doing quite a deal of internal training, because obviously there is a huge amount of expertise within An Bord Pleanála, among our inspectors and among the existing members such as Mr. McGarry. Our external legal firms are organising for us, in effect, a bespoke version of a course which is available externally. It is run from September to the spring, so we have obviously missed that timeframe, so they are going to organise it as a bespoke offering for six weeks over May and into June. That will be around the law and the decision-making process etc. Then, we will constantly reinforce the capacity of the board members around planning matters. There is a good mix of skills. A number of planners are part of those interim boards, but a number of them are ordinary, decent civil servants like myself, so we are going to have to try to upskill.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Is Ms Buckley concerned about the level of inexperience on the board at present, with 12 new members. Is that a concern?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I would be concerned if we did not have some very experienced planners in that mix and we did not have some very experienced existing board members like Mr. McGarry. Perhaps he might like to speak, as he has been working with the new board.

Deputy Alan Dillon

My concern is that An Bord Pleanála's compliance rate with the statutory objective period would, in essence, be challenging to meet, given the cases and future cases that will be coming before it.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

To go back, we are going to start to get the additional board members - the people who have arrived in the last couple of weeks - working on householder cases and normal planning appeals. These tend to be smaller cases, and they are less complex in planning terms. That is what we did with the people who arrived in January. We will build up their expertise quite rapidly in that space. That means we are using that additional resource effectively to try and get our standard operating procedure, SOP compliance up as quickly as possible. That is what we are going to be doing in that space.

Deputy Alan Dillon

For individuals, builders and developers who are looking into the Committee of Public Accounts this morning, what assurances can Ms Buckley provide them on how An Bord Pleanála intends to reduce the workload or the backlog, and restore timely decision-making in this process? This is especially important when there is such a new board in place that requires a number of weeks, if not months, to get up to speed regarding the decision-making process.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The most important part of this is having those very intelligent and well-got persons in place with a mixture of people moving around the board members, so we can match a mixture of experienced and inexperienced people in that space. We will be putting quantities of files through. In essence, what I-----

Deputy Alan Dillon

There are developers who have finance on hold for the last 12 to 18 months and want to get projects through.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I fully appreciate that. The last thing we need for them is to be faced with us making a weak decision, and then being subject to judicial review. We will be working very hard to process those. Backlogs in public systems can be fixed in only two ways, really: either one makes the system more efficient, or one adds more resources to the system. We are trying to do both, basically. With the help of the Department, we have added more resources into the system, and we will get those resources up and running. Based on our experience with the three civil servants who arrived in January and are now making robust and legally reliable decisions day in, day out, I am fully confident that we will get the new board members up to speed extremely quickly. They will then be in a position to take those good, solid decisions as we go forward. We may not have cracked the backlog entirely by the end of the year, but we will be well over it. By quarter 1 of next year, the board should be back, roughly, to where it needs to be regarding equilibrium on its yearly intake.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Finally, were there any severance packages or any other benefits provided to the former chairperson or deputy chairperson, or any other former board members, regarding An Bord Pleanála's-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

No. There were no severance packages paid. They obviously left on pension terms, but they received nothing additional beyond what would have been normal.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms Buckley. I am going to suspend the meeting for ten minutes.

Sitting suspended at 11.06 a.m. and resumed at 11.16 a.m.

An Cathaoirleach

We are resuming in public session. Deputy Catherine Murphy is next.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

On development plans, they have a long lead-in as our guests know. As a local authority member, I was involved in making development plans on several occasions and contributing to those and local area plans, so I am very familiar with the process. There is a high level of public engagement with that, which is encouraged. What is being measured there is not just zoning land but also school capacity, public transport capacity, water, wastewater and all of that. When we debated the legislation which included the strategic housing development, SHD process, I was highly critical of it because it bypassed those development plans. We were getting planning decisions on units as opposed to planning in the more complete sense where those things are central to decisions. I predicted at the time that if we took away an appeal process we would leave a vacuum to be filled. People who have engaged and who are interested in our communities will seek to challenge.

I know Ms Buckley addressed this and others have raised it with her, but I was really surprised to read her comments at the conference she attended very recently. Ms Buckley said she was intrigued that Fred Logue was invited to address the conference and that she hoped the questioning delegates subjected him to would be vigorous. She talked about him being responsible for half the judicial reviews. He does specialise in planning matters. People who go looking for someone to take a judicial review will look for someone with that specialty. I was really surprised at that. I know Ms Buckley has said that she regrets making the comments but is this where she sees the issue with An Bord Pleanála and judicial reviews, or is it something more integral to An Bord Pleanála that she sees as the problem? It feels to me like what has happened here is shooting the messenger as opposed addressing to the more fundamental issues. Prior to SHDs I do not remember any real issue with judicial reviews being taken in respect of decisions An Bord Pleanála had made.

That problem began to arise straight after the SHD process.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I thank Deputy Murphy for raising the issue again. I have learned real lessons, because I should not have been the story. The story should have been about how An Bord Pleanála is restoring itself. That was a mistake I made. As to the comment on being intrigued, I said it in a positive sense. I often find that when professional bodies have their annual get-togethers, they tend to talk to each other in a sort of echo chamber. What was really good here was the plan to bring in someone of a different mindset and from a different background to talk to them honestly about where he saw things were going. I knew there had been a vigorous question-and-answer session that morning, so I said that something similar should happen. I said it positively rather than negatively, which was how it was taken up in subsequent commentary. The other irony is that I was actually agreeing with that gentleman. I was using some reported comments he had made in the media where he said there was going to be a lot of litigation in this space. I was saying that I agreed with him when he said that. The context in which I said that was that I said that An Bord Pleanála has not been very good at adapting to this environment, that it needs to adapt to it and as quickly as possible and that it has to make better decisions. To that end, we need to recruit internal lawyers. The process in that regard is under way. We need to train people successfully to make sure we make robust decisions, because I was very taken aback at the level of concessions. I knew that there had been such a high level of concessions of judicial reviews coming to the board. That should not happen with any public body. The fault lies with the board. It does not lie with anybody challenging the decisions of the board. I completely garbled the message, however, because that was not what was picked up. It was a real lesson for me. I have to learn from it for the future.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I am not asking Ms Buckley to comment on this because I know she does not comment on policy, but the now-reversed SHD process that bypassed the local authorities would have been a significant contributor to that. It bypassed some aspects of local development plans that are critically important.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The board was taking in one judicial review per week, even before the SHD stuff. I have facts and figures to show that more and more planning appeals have been judicially reviewed in recent years. The weaknesses are inherent to the board, and it needs to get better across its decision-making.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I completely accept that there are weaknesses with the board. That is self-evident. Will Ms Buckley provide information on how many of those were first-party judicial reviews and how many were third-party reviews, even prior to the advent of SHDs?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

In taking judicial reviews.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Yes.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I do not have those figures in front of me, but I will try to work that through.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Ms Buckley might give the committee information on the position prior to SHDs and afterwards. That information would be important.

Obviously, there have been staffing issues. Even very basic things like appeals relating to extensions were taking 12 months. I am all in favour of people having the right to appeal, but I am all in favour of decisions being made in a timely way. I know people have been seconded. Ms Buckley said she has 33 additional staff. Are the 39 additional to that again?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The 59, yes. Those are not secondees.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Okay.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The only people who have been seconded are public servants who have been seconded as interim board members.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Of those, how many of the relevant positions have been filled?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It is a fast-moving process because we are recruiting as quickly as we can.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

How many have been filled as of today?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I will ask my team to come up with a figure as to how many have arrived so far this year.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

How many vacancies are there?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We employ 219 persons as of this moment. That is up from 203 at the end of last year. So, 16 have already arrived in the first few months and more are arriving apace.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

That is 16 of 59.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That is 16 of the 33.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

So 16 of the 33, and is there an additional number over and above the 33?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes. We received sanction before Easter for 59 additional staff. We will now go through the process of recruiting them.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Ms Buckley has yet to recruit half of the 33. She is making progress in that regard.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

As the Deputy knows-----

Deputy Catherine Murphy

There are another 59 to come. What length of time does it take to recruit staff? It is good to hear that people are making applications.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It very much depends on the competition. We are in the process of recruiting planning inspectors. We will set up a panel of planning inspectors from which we can draw. There are various stages we go through for that, including-----

Deputy Catherine Murphy

When did Ms Buckley get the sanction for the 33?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That arrived in December.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

It has taken from December to towards the end of April to recruit half of the 33 staff.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes, having started in January.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Progress is being made. We are looking at probably the end of the year before An Bord Pleanála will be up to its full complement of staff.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

If we can make it faster than that, we will do so. As already indicated, I may go back to the Department again, thank it for sanctioning those staff and ask it to sanction more in light of the fact that there are now more bespoke requirements. However, we will not require as large a number of staff.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

There are backlogs obviously and the 18-week requirement has not been filled. Does Ms Buckley know the number of cases in respect of which An Bord Pleanála has not managed to deliver decisions within 18 weeks, or is it all of the current decisions?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The last time we were asked for those figures, approximately 65% of the files had been on hand for more than 18 weeks. At present, there are something of the order of 900 decisions in respect of which reports have been done by our inspectors. It has moved to board level, so that is one backlog. Separately, we have a large number of files with the inspectorate. Many of those have been assigned to inspectors to report on but others have yet to be even assigned. There is a large swathe of files going through at both levels that need to be addressed.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

What would it take to get to, and when does Ms Buckley expect to get to the 18-week timeline for delivering decisions?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I am hopeful that with the additional board members, we will be there or thereabouts by the end of the year. Back to a normal rate of processing files in normal on-hands numbers commensurate with the 18 weeks. To that end, we need to make at least 300 decisions per month. That is what we need to achieve.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

How many people have been seconded?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Of the persons at board level, three secondees arrived in January. I arrived in December. Of the board members, four are permanent and the rest are secondees.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I will come back on some of those.

Deputy James O'Connor

The position relating to the processing rate is quite interesting. I would like to get some further information on that. Ms Buckley speaks of the need for a rate of 300 decisions per month. Where does it stand at moment?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We took 90 decisions in March. Approximately 50 were taken in February.

Deputy James O'Connor

For the benefit of the public, this is really interesting information. Those decisions obviously vary form apartment complexes in city centres to-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Velux windows.

Deputy James O'Connor

-----John who has an issue with his next door neighbour's extension.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes, and garden sheds and everything else.

Deputy James O'Connor

How does An Bord Pleanála differentiate in the context of what needs to be prioritised? Is it about where they are in a queue? Can Ms Buckley say that, within the organisational structure, she can go in and has the capacity and decision-making ability now to be able to differentiate between the smaller cases, dare I say, nimbyism, versus that of large-scale housing development that is urgently needed? Obviously, we are in the midst of a serious housing crisis and there is a shortage of new units.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We can. They are classified in different ways and I have indicated publicly that we will in fact move from a chronology-type approach to processing files to one where we are prioritising amongst those files. I do not want to minimise the impact of what we call those householder cases. It may be a small situation to somebody but that is somebody's kitchen extension. That might be the bedrooms they need to put into their attic to meet their growing family's needs. They may be small in size but they are really important.

Deputy James O'Connor

It is as much about the objector as it is about the person in that process. I genuinely believe it is a point worth making given the context of where we are right now today where there are tens of thousands of units-----.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

By law, the new large residential development appeals that are coming in, which is the substitute process for the SHDs, are subject to a 16-week standard operating procedure and if we fail to meet that we pay a fine. Obviously, we are prioritising this.

Deputy James O'Connor

How many fines did An Bord Pleanála have to pay in 2021 or the previous year?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We paid 134 fines on SHDs, totalling €1.34 million.

Deputy James O'Connor

That gives an indication of just how big a problem it is and gives context to it

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Correct. We have paid eight so far this year on SHDs as well.

Deputy James O'Connor

Ms Buckley is relatively new to her role. I do not want to be overly critical, but I want to tease this out. It is deeply helpful for us in the Oireachtas to know what is going on.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It is helpful for me to be able to say it in public as well. I know people get very frustrated if their appeal has been longer in An Bord Pleanála, but they see somebody else getting a decision ahead of them. We will have to move off chronology because we have to prioritise within the various decisions we have to take.

Deputy James O'Connor

An Bord Pleanála hopes to get from a processing rate of 90, as Ms Buckley said, up to about 300 per month.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I would say 300-plus.

Deputy James O'Connor

That includes everything, not just the new housing estates or the new Department development statistics. It is back to the nitty-gritty.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

With smaller householder cases, board members might be able to do six or seven in a morning whereas the decision on a large strategic infrastructure development might take a whole day or two days. The rate at which these things are approved reflects the complexity of the cases in front of people.

Deputy James O'Connor

Perhaps it needs to be legislated for. Ms Buckley made reference to that. Is there a system or a way of segregating new housing developments from individual planning complaints and concerns so they are not all in one bundle? Having all those developments lodged in with the small-scale issues is to me unacceptable. I cannot see from a financial point of view how that stacks up or represents prudent use of the limited resources An Bord Pleanála has. Does it not make sense to separate them?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We are planning to put streams of work into different streams, particularly with the new board members coming through. We are working with the inspectorate to put them into different streams and to meet our new requirements under the marine functions.

Deputy James O'Connor

I would love to get a definitive answer on that point.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It makes sense to separate them out but the big bulk of our numbers are normal planning appeals. If we are to get on top of the backlog, we have to put resources into making decisions on those smaller applications. In fairness to people whose developments have been appealed, they need a decision too. That is important. It is open to the Minister to direct us to give priority to certain types of application. That could be done but I think we are better off following through on the work I am doing with staff in the board, putting in place different priorities around different types of application and trying to deal with them in different streams. If we ignore those smaller householder cases, I or my successor will be coming in here next year and saying we still have 900 files waiting for a board decision because that is where the bulk of numbers are. I need to get to grips with those as well.

Deputy James O'Connor

I do not take away from that. Obviously, staffing is the issue. Did Ms Buckley said the board had gone to 209 staff?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We are at 219 staff now.

Deputy James O'Connor

From what?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We were at 203 at the end of last year.

Deputy James O'Connor

In terms of the proportion of work that has come before the board, that is nowhere need where it needs to be.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

No, but the really important one is that by November of last year, there were only four functioning board members taking decisions. We are now up to 14. That is the game-changer because it is about the 900-plus files the inspectors have done their reports on. They are physical files. We are not digitised in the board yet. They are literally sitting in every space on the floors around board members and we have to get to grips with them. They are a visual representation of the backlog at board level. Additional board members have been appointed by the Minister. We need to start pushing files through that and getting decisions out of An Bord Pleanála.

Deputy James O'Connor

On the interaction between An Bord Pleanála and the Office of the Planning Regulator, OPR, I understand, from my limited time in local government and from people I speak to with vastly more political experience in the area of planning, that there is a concern that the OPR has a growing and growing remit. In this year’s round of county development plans, it intervened in the draft stage of plans, which has not been seen before. Is An Bord Pleanála concerned about overlap of remit and about the growing statutory responsibility and remit of the OPR? Is the board concerned the OPR is going into areas it originally did not envisage going into and that that is having an impact and slowing the number of housing units being delivered?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I have no concern with the remit of the OPR in relation to An Bord Pleanála. Its remit is entirely correct and proper and it has done two excellent reports into the board. The Deputy’s question might be better directed to my colleagues from the Department.

Deputy James O'Connor

If the Department wants to comment, it would be welcome.

Mr. Paul Hogan

The OPR and the board have very separate remits in planning. The functions of the board are to evaluate the development planning process - so regional plans, county plans and local plans. The board also has functions related to training and education, as well as review of the systems and procedures of local authorities, and, as we saw last year, An Bord Pleanála. They are different organisations with different functions and roles. That is further reflected in the draft planning legislation being worked on at present.

Deputy James O'Connor

Why, at draft stage of the plans, are submissions now being made by the OPR when that has not happened before? That is new, to my understanding.

Mr. Paul Hogan

No, that has always been part of the process. The earlier the engagement takes place, the more opportunity there is for things to be clarified and addressed through the process.

Deputy James O'Connor

Does Mr. Hogan accept that when the OPR makes a statement on a matter, it is challenging for the local authority to contest it? It has to go before the courts. It is extremely costly. Members elected to the local authority - and pretty much the democratic aspect of the planning process - are sidelined by that action.

Mr. Paul Hogan

Not at all. The OPR was established by statute to oversee or evaluate the development plan process. It has a role to participate in that process at draft plan stage and at the final material amendment stage

Deputy James O'Connor

Does Mr. Hogan not feel the OPR’s remit and interventions are growing?

Mr. Paul Hogan

No. Particularly when it comes to serviced housing land, enormous care has been taken to ensure those sites are carefully evaluated.

Deputy James O'Connor

There are several sites across the country of which I am aware which are effectively serviced but cannot be built on because the OPR has come in and said “No”.

Mr. Paul Hogan

In many instances, the OPR makes an initial recommendation and there is a response due to local knowledge and information. Subsequently, in the next round, the OPR will take a view there is no need to pursue it further. That is the value of getting involved there.

Deputy James O'Connor

My final comment is this: the local knowledge aspect, I find, is being removed because the OPR steps in at national level and directs local authority members on how they should conduct their affairs and business. Maybe other members will take that up because my time is up and I do not want to wind down anyone else’s time.

An Cathaoirleach

Following on from Deputy O'Connor's question, can Mr. Hogan clarify whether, when the OPR steps in, it is the final arbitrator? Can it override the decision of the members of the local authority? I do not want to go into it all here but, in my time, the democratic aspect of local authority has been gutted. Planning is just one area. Is the decision of the regulator final and can it override the local authority members? There are financial implications here as well.

Mr. Paul Hogan

No. It is a function of the Minister. At the end of a development plan process, if there are issues outstanding, the OPR makes a recommendation to the Minister and the Minister can form an opinion as to whether he or she wishes to go further with that. The Minister is empowered to issue a draft direction. There is a process that follows, even where a draft direction is issued by the Minister of foot of the recommendation, that gives the elected members an opportunity to further participate.

An Cathaoirleach

I did a few of the county development plans when I was a councillor.

Mr. Paul Hogan

At the end of that process, having considered what the members and chief executive have had to say and, indeed, the final recommendation of the regulator, the Minister then forms a final opinion. In a small number of instances-----

An Cathaoirleach

More often than not the Minister will accept the regulator more than the local authority. That is what I have seen anyway.

Mr. Paul Hogan

To be fair, that has been the case more often than not-----

An Cathaoirleach

Not always.

Mr. Paul Hogan

-----but there are a small number of cases where the Minister has taken a different view and has justified that by submitting that view to the Oireachtas.

An Cathaoirleach

I wanted to clarify that. I have a couple of questions for Mr. McGarry regarding the board. It will have 15 members. Up until fairly recently, under statutes of the House, different interest groups had to be represented on the board. Different bodies had a right to appoint to the board, including An Taisce and other groups. Will Mr. McGarry briefly outline what was the situation? If 12 new members are on the board, as Ms Buckley outlined, will it still carry over that those organisations will be represented and, briefly, who are they?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Sorry, Chair-----

An Cathaoirleach

I do not mind who answers. The only reason I asked Mr. McGarry is he was referenced as the only person here where there has been an overlap. I did not want to put Ms Buckley on the spot.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

No problem. Board appointments are made by the Department of the Minister.

An Cathaoirleach

I understand that.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I will ask the departmental officials to speak to the changes that have been made to board appointments, which are completely different now.

An Cathaoirleach

I do not want to question any decision. I am asking who is now represented within that 15.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That were nominated by-----

An Cathaoirleach

Is it all civil servants? I welcome the fact there has been a big change. Mr. Hogan can go ahead.

Mr. Paul Hogan

It is important to say that the legislation was changed in December to enable the board to be increased to 15 people and for more than three temporary appointments to be made because there is clearly a very significant body of work to get through. There were a couple of stages of recruitment.

An Cathaoirleach

I do not want to use up the time; do not go through the whole thing. Those different bodies were represented, including An Taisce, architects or whoever. What is the situation now? I am sure the people that are there have a hard job to do and I wish them well in that, but who is represented there now? That is what I am trying to find out.

Mr. Paul Hogan

Okay.

An Cathaoirleach

Who was represented and is now? Briefly.

Mr. Paul Hogan

As things stand, the legislation that was put in place in December does not specify who is represented. It just establishes a more transparent procedure for the Public Appointments Service. It enables an advisory committee to be put in place to engage with the board, and to consider what the needs are, and the range of skills and competencies that would be required for those posts.

An Cathaoirleach

I am trying to form a picture in my head. Are the 12 newbies civil servants? Is there planning expertise there? That is what I am trying to find out. What happened to those bodies that had a statutory right to nominate to the board?

Mr. Paul Hogan

We are talking about temporary appointments here. Previously, it was only possible for the Minister to appoint from his own Department on a temporary basis. Given events last year, the legislation changed to broaden that beyond his own Department and allow more people. It was felt, in the circumstances of temporary appointments, and to get things up and running quickly, people who had already been through the vetting procedures for the public service and senior civil servants should be targeted. That meant recruiting people from other Departments at a senior level, including principal officer level or higher, and from agencies such as the Office of Public Works, OPW.

An Cathaoirleach

Are some of those bodies that had the right to nominate now left out? That is what I am asking.

Mr. Paul Hogan

No. They are not left out. We are moving away from that. We have yet to finalise the procedure for that. It is an absolute priority for us now. The first priority was to ensure there were 15 functioning board members, including experienced senior civil servants, some of whom were former directors of planning, for example. These are people who are planners and worked in planning functions in their own organisations. The first priority was to ensure the board is adequately resourced to take the decisions to deal with the backlog. The next process now is to design a procedure that enables representation as suggested.

An Cathaoirleach

I will ask Ms Buckley a question. Difficulties arose with many positions in the past - there were judicial reviews and costs associated with that - where two members of the board made decisions. As we move forward, will we have situations where there will be two members of the board? Will there always be three?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There will always be a minimum of three because the approach of two-person boards was stopped by my predecessor in July and made legally impossible under the 2022 Act cited by Mr. Hogan.

An Cathaoirleach

The question on juggling around was answered. It will not be the same three people-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It is constant movement around that.

An Cathaoirleach

Random. We welcome that. An Bord Pleanála has 219 members and needs about 100 more.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That is staff. We have about 219 staff and I estimate we need about 80 more at the moment.

An Cathaoirleach

I am not saying this as a criticism, but 16 have been done in the first four months of the year. We only have another eight months left. An Bord Pleanála will get about 30 more in-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I should say we have made offers to other people. Those are the people who have actually walked through the door and have started.

An Cathaoirleach

Ms Buckley is saying a number of others are in the pipeline.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There are others in the pipeline and competitions en route. We have made offers to people. I would say we will be at 240 or more in the next month or two. We are recruiting as quickly as we can. It is a very fast recruitment process.

An Cathaoirleach

An Bord Pleanála has to get that right; I understand that. Has the Minister confirmed An Bord Pleanála will have the resources it needs in terms of staffing, finance and firepower to do that? It has a lot of catching up to do.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

As CEO, I am in the rare position, and I am savouring it, of being promised all the resources I need, pretty much. I am taking full advantage of that.

An Cathaoirleach

It is a good job there is one. On the backlog of cases, what is the number of decisions that are over time at present?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The last time we did the calculation on this-----

An Cathaoirleach

Do SHDs have the largest-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

All SHDs are over time. We have managed to meet the timeframe on large-scale residential developments, LRDs, in all but one case to date. We are probably about to miss the timeline on a second one but we will quite close to it. We recently did an evaluation on normal planning appeals for a press query and, at that point, we were over time in about 65% of cases that were on hand.

An Cathaoirleach

Approximately how many are we talking about? How many cases are over time in An Bord Pleanála on at the moment?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There are about 2,700 cases before the board at present in various stages of processing.

An Cathaoirleach

Is there now 1,900?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Approximately. Maybe 2,000.

An Cathaoirleach

So it is 65%.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Approximately that.

An Cathaoirleach

It is heading for 2,000 cases that are behind and have not been dealt with within the-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Within the standard operating procedure, SOP, yes.

An Cathaoirleach

In 2021, only 58% were dealt with within the waiting period for SHDs. Ms Buckley said all the SHDs are outstanding at present.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That is correct.

An Cathaoirleach

How many is that in total?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There are about 77 or 78 SHD cases that are still on hand and still to be determined.

An Cathaoirleach

What is the longest case sitting in An Bord Pleanála at the moment? There are one or two that have not-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

This may be the point where I say, "It was like that when I got here."

An Cathaoirleach

I know. I am sorry.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I think one of the longest cases on hand is about four to five years old, and maybe even six. It might be a substitute consent. There is one in Galway as well. There are some that are stuck for various reasons, in some parts, because they are perhaps not being pursued. We have gone out for further information, which has not come back in. Some part of that delay might not be the board's doing but they are on our watch, as it were, or on our clock.

An Cathaoirleach

I do not want Ms Buckley to mention a specific case, but do the ones that are waiting three, four or five years relate to large housing schemes?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Generally, no.

An Cathaoirleach

What about more than one year?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There are some infrastructure cases perhaps and what are known as substitute consent cases, which tend to relate to quarries. We can get a breakdown. If the Cathaoirleach wants to find out what is on hand, say, over three years, I can get a breakdown of the type of cases.

An Cathaoirleach

An Bord Pleanála has one case for nearly five years.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes. I think there is one very large infrastructure case that would be going back quite a while.

An Cathaoirleach

Would that be prioritised?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The issue, without going into the detail of it, is that there is a specific legal case. It is called an imperative reasons of overriding public interest, IROPI, case. It requires a complex process to be done under the habitats directive. Where one is damaging or could damage a designated area, a special area of conservation, SAC, or special protection area, SPA, other systems might have to be put in place to replace it. It is called an IROPI process. That involves the Minister and that is the one that is longest on hands.

An Cathaoirleach

On the 15 board members, what is the status of them being trained up? Some of them are coming from a planning background, as Ms Buckley noted, but some will not be. Even for those who are, it is a new role that they are entering into. What is the level of training? Where is that at the moment?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Those who arrived in January are now fully functioning and trained up. They come from a variety of backgrounds, including some with a legal background. It is quite helpful to have that kind of background come into this role. We are currently putting the six who arrived last week and this week through their three-day induction process. The person who arrived last week is a planner by background. She will be dealing with planning files with effect from next week. I would expect, after a period of mentoring and watching what the board is doing, and taking advantage of the fact that we have many experienced board members now, we will start doing those three-person boards to bring those individuals into the space where they are taking decisions, particularly on those smaller householder cases that have been hanging around a long time.

I also have a programme of training, which we will introduce in May and June, around the law side of things. In addition, we are running an intensive series of half-day sessions using the in-house experience within the board, of which there is much, to train them up on specific planning issues. We will also start working with the Office of the Planning Regulator, OPR, to look at training more generally across the inspectorate and the board.

An Cathaoirleach

We have raised the issue of internal legal expertise before with An Bord Pleanála, particularly in respect of the cost of judicial reviews, etc. Ms Buckley said she is in the process of getting that in place and beefing it up. When does she hope to have that in place?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We made an offer to the person who came first in the competition for the director of legal services. Normally, it takes a few weeks. The person has to give notice or whatever. Hopefully that person will be in place as quickly as possible. We also will recruit a legal researcher to go to that unit. It is one of the 59 positions that we got sanction for in April. I will get that process in play fairly quickly.

An Cathaoirleach

How many staff will be working in that legal unit?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There is already a legal unit there – staff who process the judicial reviews and deal with our external legal firms. It is worth pointing out that we are ably served at the moment by two excellent legal firms that give us a huge amount of support. I do not have a figure in my head yet. I want the director of legal services to start, look around the landscape and tell me what he needs.

An Cathaoirleach

Is Ms Buckley looking at a legal unit of perhaps six or seven people?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

With that person arriving, I think it will already be a legal unit of six or seven. The real question I want that person to answer for me is how many lawyers he needs in that legal unit. That is the next question. I want to wait until the director has landed and had a look at what is on hand, and he can then talk to me about resources.

An Cathaoirleach

The reason I am asking the question is that I am looking at the cost of the judicial reviews and the different legal payouts. If Ms Buckley is hiring six, seven or eight staff, including lawyers, that could be a substantial wage bill, perhaps between €1 million and €2 million a year.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We already have people working in our legal unit, so that is already part of the wage bill. It will depend on how many lawyers we take in. I would suggest it is money well spent if it reduces the payments we are making out of the board in legal costs. It is money that is better spent on us getting our house in order.

An Cathaoirleach

Last year, that was €9 million.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Last year, that was almost €10 million.

An Cathaoirleach

Okay. I will let members back in for a second round of questions.

Deputy John Brady

I wish to home in on that figure of almost €10 million in legal costs for last year. Would I be right in saying that is the most that has been spent on legal fees in the history of An Bord Pleanála?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I see my head of finance nodding at me. Sadly, yes, that is the most we have ever spent on legal fees. Approximately half of that would have been to our own solicitors and barristers, by the way. Half is our own legal costs and half is the accrued costs to persons who have been either successful or where we have conceded the cases.

Deputy John Brady

Ms Buckley said earlier that of the 53 judicial review cases that were dealt with last year, the board won nine, lost nine and 35 were conceded. I think that is a pretty stark figure. Would Ms Buckley agree that it is a stark figure not in favour of the board?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I do.

Deputy John Brady

Of the €10 million that was spent on legal fees, what percentage of that would relate to the judicial review cases that were dealt with last year?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Some bit of the legal costs accrued because of the events of last year. It related to legal advice directly to the board in terms of governance and issues such as that. I am advised that 90% would have been on judicial reviews.

Deputy John Brady

Some 90%.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes.

Deputy John Brady

The 35 cases that were conceded by the board cost-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I do not have that figure immediately to hand but we can get it for the Deputy.

Deputy John Brady

I have a general question-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Concessions tend to be a bit cheaper than the ones we fight and lose.

Deputy John Brady

Costs would have been against the board in those concession cases.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes.

Deputy John Brady

It would be useful if we could get a breakdown in a written reply to us.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We will be happy to do so. I think that would then prove the point I was making to the Chair when I said we might be spending our money better employing lawyers directly to help us to make stronger decisions for the future.

Deputy John Brady

Would Ms Buckley concede that the legal strategy that had been adopted by the board was flawed in its previous approach?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Sorry. It has been pointed out to me that in many of those cases we conceded last year, we do not have a final legal bill yet. Either the final bill has not been presented or we have not agreed to what the final bill is. We can certainly try to get the Deputy a breakdown of costs of concessions, specifically in earlier years.

How can I frame this? In some respects, some of those concession cases are concessions because we just made errors, so there is not a legal approach that is wrong. However, it is important that we have a litigation strategy so that the dual role of legal services will be to introduce a litigation strategy for An Bord Pleanála so it can decide, at a quicker stage; for example, if you have to concede a case, it is just conceded, because it reduces the cost to the board. The second approach will need to be to introduce a thorough feedback loop to the board so we learn as we go along. We need to learn from the cases we lose and concede as much as we learn from the cases we win. This sort of absence of feedback loops is one of the things I have heard most since I came to the board. People, particularly on the inspectorate, feel that they need to know more about why the board is losing or conceding cases. Making sure we are robust about that learning will be one of the biggest challenges facing that internal head of legal services. That learning can relate to our procedures or to the robustness of decisions as expressed. Many of the times, in the stuff I have seen so far, when we are conceding or losing cases, it is not necessarily that the planning decision that was reached was wrong, but that the board failed to articulate its reasoning clearly enough to meet the rigorous standard expected by the courts. It is in that space that some of these decisions land. As I said, some of them arise because a case is argued on a particular policy point or whatever before the courts, and the courts rule against the board, but the same thinking has been underlying subsequent decisions, which have themselves been judicially reviewed.

As we have lost the initial case, we have to concede on that ground in the other cases. The other point to make, and which I have made before, is that there could be 30, 40 or 50 grounds argued in any individual judicial review and the board has to win them all. If it loses on one ground, the case has to go. It is quite a challenging thing. That is why we badly need these in-house capabilities to bring us up to speed.

Deputy John Brady

Thirty-five cases were conceded and nine cases were lost. Obviously, lessons need to be learned. I accept that Ms Buckley said every point has to be won in a court of law. Have all of the costings for the nine cases that the board lost come in yet?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Probably not. As I said in my opening statement, the board has a large accrued liability and has to keep cash on hand to meet that liability. The board pursues people and asks them to present their bills because it needs to pay them and it has a liability that it would like to meet. Interestingly, it can sometimes be slow to get legal firms to present their bills. It is something I experienced in the Legal Aid Board context as well in my previous role, in that there can be a large accrued liability, with bills not being presented.

Deputy John Brady

Would Ms Buckley agree with me in regard to the colossal legal bill of €10 million, which was taxpayers’ money? From what Ms Buckley is saying, the vast majority of that was certainly not money well spent. The decision was taken to legally challenge many of these cases on unsound planning grounds. Whatever about external legal people, and whatever about the decision that was taken to contest these cases, it certainly was not value for money.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I am not sure I could fully agree with the Deputy. There are novel points of law that are elucidated by sometimes contesting cases and there would have been long-established approaches. The one that always springs to mind is something called sunlight-daylight policy. We got a ruling and we contested it because what we were doing was what all planning authorities were apparently doing, but a judge said that, no, we had actually been applying the rules the wrong way. That was a useful elucidation of a novel or new point. It is surprising that even in the decisions taken quite recently, on some really long-standing assumptions around the planning system, we have only been given a strong ruling on them by a High Court judge in the last short while, or, indeed, by an appellate court. It is sometimes important to contest cases. I would like to move us to a situation where the board is contesting cases and winning more than it loses. That would be a good result.

It is important to point out that planning has always been a contested space. When you are the final arbiter, the final decision-maker in the planning sphere, and you are taking the final decisions, then your decisions are going to be challenged by somebody. That is part and parcel of this world. I think the board needs to be upskilled to make sure it is able to cope in that highly contested legal space.

An Cathaoirleach

Thank you. I call Deputy Verona Murphy.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I thank Ms Buckley for that. I want to clarify the point I was making earlier because I ran out of time. When I spoke about a legitimate expectation, I meant a legitimate expectation that they would have a decision granted within the life of the county development plan that was in being at the time of application. That is where I believe there is going to be a jeopardy arising. Would Ms Buckley agree with that?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I do not. Nobody has a legitimate expectation of anything other than that the decision will be taken on the plan in force on the day the decision is taken, not on the day they apply. That legal point has been clarified by Mr. Justice Holland recently.

Deputy Verona Murphy

It was. At the same time, that was Mr. Justice Holland in that case. However, if it was the case that developers were applying while knowing that they could run out of time, they could flush their money down the toilet because it would have the same impact. Given there were tripartite meetings, for sure they could be seen as having a legitimate expectation that the decision would be made in the lifetime of the plan that they applied under. If not, as I said, and would Ms Buckley not agree, why would they jeopardise vast amounts of money? It must be said that some of these applications can cost up to €500,000 and maybe more. Who in their right mind would go through that and spend that type of money if there was not a legitimate expectation that the decision would be made within the lifetime of the plan they were applying under? This is on the understanding that once a new county development plan came in, that was the end of their application if no decision was made.

Ms Buckley has a legal background. I am not putting her in a position where she needs to go beyond her role. However, it is very legitimate here to say that a jeopardy could arise on that basis. I am asking if Ms Buckley is concerned.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

No. The law is really clear on this point and has been clarified in the recent case that the Deputy was citing, the Crofton case, but it has always been the case-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

I am sorry. We are confusing this. Ms Buckley is telling me what Mr. Justice Holland said about which plan applies at the time the decision is made. We know which plan applies. We have known for years because it is intimated in several judgments, not just Mr. Justice Holland's. To be clear, Mr. Justice Holland said that the county development plan in being is the only county development plan, and that is what applies. What I am saying is that there is a legitimate expectation of the developer that a decision in a timely fashion, which would coincide with the development plan they applied under, would have been made. That is not unreasonable. That is not what Mr. Justice Holland ruled on. Is Ms Buckley clear about that?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Developers could probably argue they had a legitimate expectation that a decision would be taken within 16 weeks, albeit it is already built into the Act that if the board goes beyond that, they will be paid a penalty fine, so there is that. But no developers-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

To be clear, the fine is not to absolve the board of responsibility or further litigation. It is to penalise the board and to try to incentivise the board to make decisions in a timely fashion because that 16 weeks applies whether it is year one of a county development plan or year four. Do not try to muddy the waters. We are going really well here. The question is simply this. We are the Committee of Public Accounts. We are about value for money. I hope the €10,000 fines will be eradicated completely when the board has its new staffing levels. Does Ms Buckley agree that the developers who applied under what we now regard as an old county development plan in many counties had a legitimate expectation that their applications would be decided in a timely fashion in the lifetime of the county development plans that they applied under? Is that unreasonable?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

They had a legitimate expectation they would get a timely decision but-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

Within the lifetime of the development plan.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

No, they did not have that legitimate expectation. In fact, many of those applications, without going into detail, actually addressed the incoming plan as part of their application.

Deputy Verona Murphy

No, do not muddy-----

An Cathaoirleach

We will let the witness answer.

Deputy Verona Murphy

The thing about it is that no matter what we say about Mr. Justice Holland's decision, he only makes one point, which is that the relevant county development plan, of which there is only one, is the one when the decision is made. Clearly, that is the one in being, so there is only ever one. It is a different premise. The point I am making is that, whether Ms Buckley or anybody here likes it from our perspective on value money and potential litigation, it arises. The jeopardy arises. Would Ms Buckley agree?

An Cathaoirleach

I will allow the witness to respond briefly. We are running out of time.

Deputy Verona Murphy

The question is that the jeopardy arises.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I would be very confident that if somebody tried to take a case on that ground against An Bord Pleanála, we would win.

Deputy Verona Murphy

That does not mean that they will not. It means that we are on the hook for expenses. I am not finished as I have a few seconds left.

An Cathaoirleach

Very briefly. I want other members to get back in.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I heard Ms Buckley say this morning that the board is going to expand the legal credentials within An Bord Pleanála. I would be seriously concerned about the cost of that, given that the companies which specialise in planning are very specialised and earn a huge amount of money. Where are we going to see value for money in employing them? How many legal eagles does Ms Buckley anticipate will be required within An Bord Pleanála?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I have sanction for two so far and I expect I will probably need a few more. It is worth bearing in mind that we paid out something like €4.5 million to external legal firms on our own legal costs.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I am aware of that. I know that and I do not blame An Bord Pleanála for that. However, what I am looking at is the level of funding that goes into training the staff who are making the decisions that are being judicially reviewed. How much was spent on that?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I would have to check what our learning and development budget is and can come back to the Deputy on that figure.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I would be fairly confident it was nowhere near the €5 million mark.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That is correct.

Deputy Verona Murphy

That is the concern. We need to not concentrate on litigation; we need to try to avoid it.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I absolutely agree with the Deputy.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I agree with Ms Buckley on the employment in-house of legal expertise. If it is well used, it certainly can be a very good value-for-money initiative as well as everything related to good governance. Regarding the fines, have there been any fines in relation to the large-scale residential development, LRD, process yet?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes, we have paid one fine so far and we think we are likely to incur a second one imminently.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Is An Bord Pleanála projecting forward because timelines will be missed and is it making a decision on the prioritisation of strategic housing development, SHD. and LRD applications? Is that an aspect An Bord Pleanála is considering?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We are absolutely prioritising LRDs. That is what the fine approach, as Deputy Verona Murphy pointed out, is designed to do. It is designed to focus the attention of the decision makers in An Bord Pleanála and in the inspectorate on getting through those decisions as quickly as possible. That absolutely is a priority.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Therefore, those will be prioritised in front of other cases-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That is correct, and in front of the SHDs.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

When you consider the housing crisis we have at the moment, and that would be the bulk of the kind of applications that are coming in, whether they are one-offs or multiple units or whatever, not having a full board or a full complement of staff would be unconscionable given the need to get good decisions. I do not think every application that is made for planning is necessarily a good application and that is why they have to be adjudicated on. We want to make good decisions but in a timely way. It is quite astonishing that the number of people was below what was needed to keep up with that 18 weeks. Were warning signals sent to the Department? We could all see things that were taking time. Were warning signals sent to the Department in relation to missing the targets and not having sufficient staff? Obviously, this is a value-for-money thing in the sense that there is a huge cost involved in not fulfilling the need for having good planning decisions in a timely way.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I have to preface my remarks and response to that by saying this very much predates my time in the board. My understanding is that it was anticipated that there could be a need for additional resources in 2021 going into 2022, particularly around the SHD approach. A request for additional resources was made, which indicated that this was one of the reasons for that request. Those resources were sanctioned a few months later. There was no particularly inordinate delay that I can see about that. Yes, there would have been indications and obviously more as the system started to struggle. We report on a monthly basis to the Department and to the Minister and those monthly reports would have given indications around the fact that issues were starting and indeed, that fines were starting to be paid.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Obviously it was in the legislation that there would be fines, therefore it is incumbent on the Department to give An Bord Pleanála the resources to deal with that. When did the board start alerting the Department to that deficiency? I ask Ms Buckley to go back on that and come back to us with accurate information on it.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

What I can say is that a request for resources was certainly made in April 2021.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Can Ms Buckley look to see if there was anything that predated that-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Sure.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

-----because this is not a recent crisis?

When the SHD process was initiated, there was a sizeable increase in the staffing in An Bord Pleanála because of that. Will Ms Buckley also give us some information about the staffing numbers prior to and then after that process and whether they were evaluated as being sufficient?

Deputy Catherine Murphy

We will have to come back to the Deputy on that and on the way the staffing moved. We may also be able to give some indication as to how we estimate what additional planning inspectors were needed, if it is planning inspectors the Deputy is talking about here.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

It is actually both.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Board members and planning inspectors?

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Yes.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There were additional board members appointed in the context of the SHD. I think it was two members, if memory serves. Hindsight is perfect, of course, and there may have been an assumption that once the SHD system fell away, the board would be getting less work. However, ultimately that is not how it played out.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I have two more very quick questions. We have talked about the number of staff that was sanctioned. Are there other vacancies outside of the staff number sanctioned? There will always be some throughput but------

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There was a retirement piece going on so we are in the process of a number of the competitions which are aiming both to fill vacancies and to deal with the number sanctioned.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

What kind of numbers are we talking about in relation to that?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I am told it is about 18 to 20.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Therefore, the number that An Bord Pleanála has filled is about the same as it was losing by natural wastage. There is a whole other cohort. Okay.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I had one other question.

An Cathaoirleach

If the Deputy wants to take time, I can take someone else and she can come back in.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Very quickly on the point that the Chair made, the make-up of a board does matter. There could be three people, for example, from the construction industry and three from somewhere else. The board will always have to be mixed. When does An Bord Pleanála think it will get back to the point where people will be appointed from the cohorts that give that more rounded mix to the board?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

As Mr. Hogan said, that nomination process is never going to be resumed. Instead, people will be appointed through the Public Appointments Service, which is correct and proper, and I have already spoken to Mr. Hogan frequently about the need to ensure we have very timely appointments to those permanent members in order that we can start swapping in and out the interim members in a way that keeps consistency across the board and do not have any big lags again in board membership. I know the Department is very concerned to make sure that happens and I will be pushing its officials. They are getting used to me being very pushy about appointing people.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

It matters who makes up the board.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It absolutely does matter. What I very much like about the current make-up of the board is that there is a very good gender balance and a very good background of skills. There is a lot of variety in there; albeit that the members are largely made up of existing public servants but they come from a variety of backgrounds and skill sets and that is very healthy.

An Cathaoirleach

Can someone clarify something on that point. I am still not clear on this. Will those bodies that had the right to nominate onto An Bord Pleanála in the past, have the same right when we get beyond this interim period?

Mr. Paul Hogan

No, not in the same manner. We are in the process of designing the procedure at the moment but what the legislation says-----

An Cathaoirleach

They will not have it as a right under the legislation.

Mr. Paul Hogan

No, but we need to have a transparent, suitable, independent, and objective procedure which may include the establishment of a committee. We would expect the representation on that committee to be from a broad-----

An Cathaoirleach

Architects and environmentalists, and so on.

Mr. Paul Hogan

It will depend on the needs of the board at the time. What we want to try to do is make it responsive. In the same way there were panels before, there may well be different needs at different times for the board, and it is to be able to reflect that in a recruitment process.

An Cathaoirleach

Before bringing the next member in, will the representatives come back with the number of oral hearings in 2022 and previous years?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I actually have the figures for 2019 and 2018 in front of me. There were 44 in 2019 and 43 in 2018.

An Cathaoirleach

Okay. Does Ms Buckley have figures for 2020, 2021 and 2022?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

The 2021 figure should be in the-----

An Cathaoirleach

We take another Member, if Ms Hill wants to search for those figures. I call Deputy Colm Burke.

Deputy Colm Burke

That question asked earlier related to an application in request for a railway order. I understand it was submitted on 10 November 2022. Ms Buckley cannot give me an answer here. I fully understand that. The concern being raised with me is that there is €185 million of EU funding available for that project and the project must be completed by the fourth quarter of 2026. It is in that context that I raise why it is important that the issue is dealt with. I fully understand it is probably complex. It needs people with a lot of expertise as well before it can be signed off.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

There is a decision due on that. I am very conscious of that particular case, not least because I am from Cork, albeit not from that side of the county. It is a very important development. There is a decision on it due in May. We may not make that May timeframe but we are conscious of the need to make sure that that decision is progressed as quickly as possible.

Deputy Colm Burke

There is concern about the funding. We will not be able to take up the funding unless there is a decision.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Understood.

Deputy Colm Burke

I fully understand that it is complex and it is not straightforward. I thank the Chair.

An Cathaoirleach

In relation to the Planning and Development Act, regarding the pecuniary interest, what controls are in place now for oversight of section 148? I note there has been a reduction in the number of those made from 2020.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Yes, there was in 2021.

An Cathaoirleach

I recognise that this is a self-declaration but what oversight and monitoring is taking place of that by board members?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It is very much a self-declaration procedure. It is very important. The key point is we make sure everybody is aware absolutely of the requirements to declare in those circumstances. In the main, we avoid putting people in the position of having to make individual declarations by making sure they never handle those files so that it never goes near them. We have explicit language in place now as to how people would go about making those declarations and we have clear rules in the draft new incoming code of conduct about the circumstances in which they need to be made. It is really more a matter of strengthening our processes and procedures as to how they go about it. It is still very reliant though on people being honest. It is really more drilling in that is needed to be honest about the fact that if you do this, you present the board with an almost insuperable problem because we will not be able to defend a challenged decision on the grounds of objective bias. If you fail to make that declaration, we have a problem with that decision. It is really reinforcing that message all the time.

An Cathaoirleach

A number of the decisions where issues arose, particularly around a two-person board making them, were around telecommunication masts. I do not want to deal with any specific, individual one but how many of them is An Bord Pleanála facing judicial review on?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We currently have three judicial reviews in relation to telecommunications masts that would have been decided on some time ago. I do not know how many recent telecoms masts this affects. There is a couple that would have come in in recent times, if the Chair knows what I mean, but they are decisions that were made in the previous eight weeks.

There are three judicial reviews about decisions taken more than eight weeks ago.

An Cathaoirleach

Typically, would it be correct that they would have been individual masts passed by a local authority and appealed to An Bord Pleanála?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Absolutely, they would come under the normal planning appeals process.

An Cathaoirleach

There are three of them facing judicial review. In terms of the-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I beg the Chair's pardon, sorry, I am advised there were three previous judicial reviews taken as well so that there would be five or six judicial reviews, JRs, in that space.

An Cathaoirleach

In relation to the number of inquiries and reports, there are four in total. Somebody said earlier there were three but there are actually four. These were the one commissioned by the Minister where he appointed a senior counsel in April of last year; the internal report where the chairperson commissioned a team in July; the Office of the Planning Regulator, on 24 August, commissioned a review; and the external one, which is the fourth one, the previous chairperson commissioned Resolve, the consultancy company, to do. How much have all those cost? How much have the two that came from An Bord Pleanála itself cost?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

That would have cost very little, I suppose, because it was conducted by in-house staff and we would have been paying them anyway. They put a lot of work into it.

I would have to check how much was paid to the external HR consultancy for that specific report.

An Cathaoirleach

Could the interim chairperson come back to us with that figure?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Sure.

An Cathaoirleach

In terms of the reviews, particularly the issue of telecommunication masts and telecommunication decisions, was that a recurring issue or an issue that cropped up in those reviews, in terms of questionable cases or cases that might still be coming this way?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I am quite concerned about speaking too much about this because there are judicial reviews into this space before the courts as we speak, which we are fighting. I am concerned about discussing that.

An Cathaoirleach

Is An Bord Pleanála defending those cases?

Ms Oonagh Buckley

We are defending those cases-----

An Cathaoirleach

That is okay. That answers the question for me. I do not want the interim chairperson to go into it. I am trying to be careful around it.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

-----largely on the basis that they were taken very late. They are out of time.

An Cathaoirleach

I have one final question for the interim chairperson. From what Ms Buckley stated earlier, she welcomes the Planning and Development Bill and thinks that will help to put a better framework in place. Does she see it as reducing overall legal costs and putting the board into a better position? It is a policy question. Is she satisfied that it is-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Unfortunately, I do not. What will reduce the board's legal costs is if the board takes stronger and better decisions and people do not feel they are able to challenge them. That is the best way to reduce the board's external legal costs. As I stated at the outset, the litigation environment the board is in now is the litigation environment it will have going forward.

An Cathaoirleach

Deputy Verona Murphy has indicated. I ask the Deputy to be brief, with one question.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I only spoke to apologise for the comments on the basis that An Bord Pleanála became the story. I endorse the interim chairperson's comments because she is absolutely right. Mr. Hogan here, who does not agree, is part of the problem. If our planning policy does not change-----

An Cathaoirleach

Do not make comments about individuals.

Deputy Verona Murphy

If our planning policy does not change - the Chair just put it to the interim chairperson - An Bord Pleanála's legal bills will not be reduced and it will not be able recruit enough legal people to deal with the issues. It is our planning policy that is stalling the delivery of houses. Regardless of the process that we engage with An Bord Pleanála, etc., An Bord Pleanála is part of the problem but it is not the biggest part. An Bord Pleanála's portfolio of cases will grow and grow.

An Cathaoirleach

To be fair, I want to allow Mr. Hogan to respond to that.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I doubt he will respond.

An Cathaoirleach

In fairness.

Mr. Paul Hogan

The question was really about the legislative framework within which the policy sits. We are in a process to do with that legislative framework right now. We are awaiting, to the very day, the report of another committee of the House in relation to its evaluation of the draft Bill that was published and there is a lot of work to be done on that Bill to bring it forward.

Simply, there are approximately five things that the still-unfinished Bill will attempt to do. It will offer clear guidance as to what is mandatory and discretionary. It will strengthen the role of local development plans and increase the duration of the plans to ten years. It will provide a clearer context and longer defined timelines for decision-making in all respects. Therefore, the board will not have one 18-week period for all decisions, whether it is an extension or a large housing development.

It will address the question of environmental assessment in one part of the legislation, which has been added to over the years. It will also define the roles of the board as a planning commission and of the regulator and be accompanied by enhanced resourcing through what we have discussed today as well as in the local government sector and more widely.

Deputy Verona Murphy

It will also mean increased densities and compact development, which are the source of many of our judicial reviews. The matter is out for public consultation. Regardless of the feedback, if we want to do something in the short term, the new planning and development Bill is over 700 pages long and will not be introduced any time soon. According to much of the engagement I have seen at meetings of the Oireachtas Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage, the Bill will worsen the number of legal cases that will be taken. That has been stated by a number of stakeholders qualified to make that assertion. If the Department wants to do something in the short term, for which I have been asking for three years, it could advise the Minister to introduce a specific planning policy requirement, SPPR, reducing densities across the national planning framework, to be instituted in all current and draft county development plans. This would not cost anything. Instead, the Department is firing taxpayers' money at developers to build shoe boxes and the ghettos of the future.

An Cathaoirleach

Deputy-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

It is important that Mr. Hogan hear this because the public need to know where the issue is arising.

An Cathaoirleach

That is a policy decision of the Government. To be fair to the Deputy, though, there is frustration about appropriate densities. For example, we all see the need for higher densities in areas with transport hubs.

Deputy Verona Murphy

In Dublin only.

An Cathaoirleach

Ballacolla in County Laois, Wellingtonbridge in County Wexford or somewhere down in west Wicklow does not need the same density level. That is the issue. While I know it is a policy matter, Members of the Dáil and local authority members are frustrated and feel that, if officials include something in the draft Bill, it is difficult to get the Government to change it. It is not just Deputy Verona Murphy who has made this appeal time and again. I share some of her concerns. I am for more compact densities where that makes sense, but there are some places it does not make sense. There is also an economic argument. It is uneconomic to stick to such densities in areas with smaller populations. That is the-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

Not to interrupt the Chair, but just to set it-----

An Cathaoirleach

No. I am sorry-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

But it is important.

An Cathaoirleach

I will let the Deputy contribute again briefly in a second. In some more sparsely populated areas, it is not feasible for a builder to provide houses if densities are too confined, as the builder could not get people to buy them. There needs to be flexibility and a recognition of this fact.

Deputy Verona Murphy

The Chair is correct. What-----

Mr. Paul Hogan

May I-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

Before Mr. Hogan replies, perhaps I can answer both him and the Chair.

An Cathaoirleach

Briefly. We will not open up a debate on this.

Deputy Verona Murphy

The taxpayer is footing the bill for these compact developments because the higher the density, the dearer it gets to build. That is where the issue lies. We are building shoe boxes that will turn into ghettos. We know that no one on an income can afford them. Therefore, the only buyers for these apartments will be housing bodies and local authorities and we will end up with the ghettos of the future. The Department is not taking a step forward – it is taking a step back. We do not need them in rural Ireland. The same planning policy applies across the country.

An Cathaoirleach

I want to let Mr. Hogan respond.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I think Mr. Hogan responded earlier.

An Cathaoirleach

No.

Mr. Paul Hogan

Not on the policy matter.

An Cathaoirleach

I want to let Mr. Hogan respond briefly before we conclude.

Mr. Paul Hogan

I will be brief. There are two elements. First, we agree with the Deputy and we have issued a policy direction for consultation, which closes today. It sets out reduced densities in the sorts of place the members mentioned and refines them in respect of urban settlements. There is also a-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

It increases them in urban settlements.

An Cathaoirleach

I am sorry, but no interruptions.

Mr. Paul Hogan

The direction reduces them for most of the country. That consultation finishes today.

Regarding the policy direction, before we even do the guidelines and get a view of what people think, the more complex answer to the question of the cost of apartments is that there are significant externalities to low-density development because it is an inefficient use of land and everything has to be created from scratch, for example, new schools and new roads, with traffic congestion and people's time being wasted. I am sure there is another committee or other forum where these matters could be teased out and considered, as there are costs in that form of development and we need to get a better handle on them.

Deputy Verona Murphy

The costs of which the Department's policy is now to alleviate. That does not make sense at all, Chair.

An Cathaoirleach

In my innocence, I believed until recently that apartments were cheaper, but it turns out that-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

Up to €100,000.

An Cathaoirleach

-----they cost between 80% and 100% more to build. School capacity is also a consideration in many of the rural areas in question. I do not want to open up the matter, as we are not dealing with it today, but we are using the opportunity of the witnesses' presence to tell them this and for them to take it on board.

Deputy John Brady

May I make a brief point? Deputy Verona Murphy commented that these apartments could only be afforded by approved housing bodies and local authorities and that they would turn into the ghettos of the future. I hope she was not referring to current or approved developments by local authorities and housing bodies as "ghettos".

Deputy Verona Murphy

We do not have those developments in rural Ireland currently. That is what they will turn into.

Deputy John Brady

We have many local authority estates in my constituency. Approved housing bodies-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

Of high-rise buildings?

Deputy John Brady

Yes, we do.

An Cathaoirleach

I am sorry, Deputies, but-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

They will turn into ghettos.

Deputy John Brady

They are certainly not ghettos.

Deputy Verona Murphy

They will be because they will not be maintained.

Deputy John Brady

I represent many people who live in those and they would take serious offence at being described as living in ghettos.

An Cathaoirleach

What we need are mixed developments. The witnesses have been asked to revert on the question of the number of oral hearings in 2022.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

I have the numbers with me.

An Cathaoirleach

Ms Buckley might outline them before we conclude.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

It shows how contentious planning is.

An Cathaoirleach

Planning is always-----

Ms Oonagh Buckley

Challenging is always good. In 2022, there were 19 oral hearings.

Deputy Verona Murphy

What about-----

An Cathaoirleach

Please, allow Ms Buckley to continue.

Ms Oonagh Buckley

In 2022, there were 19 oral hearings. In 2021, there were 18. In 2020, there were 19. The number of oral hearings held was significantly affected by Covid. Interestingly, there has been a reduction in requests for oral hearings since.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms Buckley for that clarification.

We went through a great deal at this meeting. I thank the witnesses and staff from An Bord Pleanála and the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage for the work involved in preparing for the meeting. I also thank the Comptroller and Auditor General and Ms Henry for attending. Is it agreed that the clerk will seek follow-up information and carry out any actions agreed at the meeting? Agreed. Is it also agreed that we note and publish the opening statements and briefings provided for today's meeting? Agreed.

I thank Ms Buckley. She has been in the job for a short time and is being thrown in at the deep end. I wish the board well in the large job of work it has to do across a number of areas. That will be challenging. The information we received today informs us in our work. I thank Ms Buckley for that. I also thank the Department.

We will suspend until 1.30 p.m., when we will discuss correspondence and any other business.

The witnesses withdrew.

Sitting suspended at 12.39 p.m. and resumed at 1.33 p.m.