Vol. 404 No. 7
3 Mr. J. Mitchell asked the Minister for the Environment his views on whether a review of planning laws and procedures is now necessary; if so, if he will set up a review committee to make recommendations so that any possible abuses of section 4 motions, planning decisions or appeals are eliminated and to impose statutory time limits and decisions on planning appeals and building by-law applications; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
4 Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for the Environment if he will give details of the review group which he has established to examine systems and procedures of An Bord Pleanála; the exact terms of reference; the timetable of the group; the composition of the group; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 and 4 together. I have no proposals at present for establishing a formal committee to review planning law and procedures generally. However, the system is kept under continuous review to identify such changes and improvements as may be necessary from time to time. Arising from this, I arranged last September for a group of officers of my Department and of the Department of Finance to carry out a specific examination of the systems and procedures of An Bord Pleanála and a report on this was submitted to me last month. The group were asked to identify any changes that might be made to ensure the most expeditious disposal of appeals while ensuring that the board's procedures are adequate and fair for their purpose.
I am now examining the group's report and will bring forward any legislative proposals which may be necessary on foot of it as a matter of urgency. An Bord Pleanála have been asked to consider recommendations in the report which relate to matters within their control.
I do not propose, at this stage, to comment on specific legislative or other changes that might be made. I would point out, however, that the operation of section 4 falls to be considered in the context of the local government reform process which is the subject of subsequent questions today.
Would the Minister not agree that there is a good deal of well founded concern regarding the entire planning process? First, there is the question of the quality of and justification for decisions made by some planning authorities and the planning appeals board. Second, in the case of the planning appeals board there is the question of long delays and seemingly unjustifiable delays, coming to decisions on planning appeals. Third, there are concerns about the operation, in the relevant local authorities, of the building by-law procedures, including the delay in making decisions and the inability of people to appeal against by-law decisions.
There has been a significant improvement in the disposal of appeals before An Bord Pleanála, particularly in the last few months, and I would like to see that improved still further. In fact, the review which is taking place indicates some areas of activity that will help to improve that situation. I support the Deputy's view that we should do everything we can to improve on the procedures, and that will be done.
At the outset I thank the Minister for his good wishes. Will he acknowledge that there is an erosion of confidence in the operation of the planning appeals system? When does he expect to bring a mechanism before this House to restore that confidence? Has the Minister had discussions with the Minister for Justice on the operation of An Bord Pleanála? Is he aware of any continuing garda inquiries into the operation of An Bord Pleanála?
Responsibility for An Bord Pleanála rests with the Minister for the Environment. A review of the procedures has been carried out and I hope to be able to bring forward legislative proposals to the House at an early date if necessary. As regards the other matter to which the Deputy referred, I understand that the Garda report has been completed and that all the papers have been sent to the DPP.
In relation to the lack of confidence in the planning appeals procedure, to which Deputy Howlin has referred, would the Minister not agree that more than a Garda inquiry into an individual case is justified? Such is the lack of confidence and doubt about the efficacy of the planning appeals procedure that there is need for some sort of commission of inquiry into that area.
The Deputy will be aware that it is not proper for the Minister for the Environment to be involved in any specific way with an individual case and I do not propose to get involved in that way with the affairs of An Bord Pleanála. My interest is that the board should be administratively and efficiently operated and that appeals should be cleared as quickly as possible taking all matters into consideration. That is what the review has done and I believe we will be able to bring forward a package to enable that to be improved upon.
I put it to the Minister that he has a responsibility to restore public confidence in the planning appeals mechanism. Does the Minister intend to publish the report to which he has referred or, at least, to make it available to the Opposition spokespersons in this House? Finally, may I ask whether there are further prosecutions pending now that he has informed the House that Garda inquiries are concluded?
I am not aware of any activity that might be undertaken by the DPP. It would not be proper for me to comment on a matter which might be regarded as sub judice.
What about publication of the report?
It is not my intention to publish the report because it was carried out by officers of the Department in confidence and I must treat it in that fashion.
Deputy J. Mitchell rose.
I wanted to come to another question. However, if the Deputy will be brief I will allow him a brief supplementary.
While I agree that the Minister cannot and should not get involved in individual cases of criminal investigation would he not agree that prevention is better than cure? If there are defects in the planning procedure, and if crimes are being committed within it, is it not his job to bring forward measures to prevent any repetition? Would he not agree that there is need for a commission of inquiry into the planning appeals procedures?
I do not accept that there is need for a commission of inquiry. The review group of my officials have done a very good job and have put certain matters to me in their report. Those new changes in procedures and administration will be put in place and I have asked the board to take that on board now. There may be a need for some legislative change and I would ask the House to support me in bringing that forward as a matter of urgency.
By way of clarification is the Minister giving a commitment — because I am very aware of commitments made in this House so that we can pursue it on the Order of Business — that he intends to bring forward legislation to reform the mechanism for planning appeals?
It is my intention to propose legislation in the area to which the Deputy has referred.
