Adjournment Debate.

Rural Renewal Scheme.

Mr. Finneran

I call on the Minister for Finance to extend the rural renewal scheme to coincide with the period of Objective One status in that region. For the past six years, the rural renewal scheme has had a major impact on the upper Shannon region of north and west Roscommon. The scheme has achieved some of its goals in encouraging more people to stay and settle in the area, as well as stimulating economic activity generally. In north Roscommon, it is felt that a further extension of the scheme is necessary to allow us to build on the success of the scheme and arrest population decline in the upper Shannon area once and for all.

Sixteen sewerage and water schemes in the north and west of the county are substantially supporting further residential and commercial development. Planning applications refused on environmental grounds before the schemes were established will now be eligible. An opportunity will be lost if the sewerage and water schemes are not used to their full potential to support sustainable residential and commercial development. Large parts of north and west Roscommon were initially slow to take up the rural renewal scheme because they were so deprived economically. Evidence of growth resulting from the rural renewal proposals is now being found. Some people were unable to take advantage of the scheme because of delays in achieving planning permission for sewerage and water schemes in some designated areas. Hindrances to building houses and developing businesses contributed to the slow uptake of the scheme in such areas. We should take advantage of the recent infrastructural investment.

The Objective One status of the BMW region ends in December 2006 and eligible expenditure will have to be completed by 31 December 2008. The relevant areas would continue to benefit if the rural renewal scheme were extended to coincide with the dates I mentioned. The national spatial strategy has been published since the commencement of the scheme in 1998. Regional planning guidelines have been adopted to provide a more planned framework for regional development. The rural renewal scheme is consistent with the region's policy of distributing population in rural areas to support small towns and villages outlined in its planning guidelines.

There has been a drop in the population of rural district electoral divisions in north and west Roscommon. The population of Boyle decreased by 2% between 1996 and 2002. Such reductions in population constitute a serious threat to the viability of the county's villages and towns. The extension of the scheme would act as a protective mechanism to ensure that the populations of the district electoral divisions in the north and west of the county can be maintained and possibly increased. There is a high concentration of older people, a significant proportion of whom live alone, in north and west Roscommon. There is a low concentration of young people in the north and west Roscommon area, which has a high economic dependency ratio and low labour force participation. Extension of the rural renewal scheme would be a poverty-proofing mechanism to target the most marginalised part of County Roscommon.

Agriculture is the most important industry in County Roscommon. As a result of the farm restructuring system and the Fischler proposals, there is a growing emphasis on encouraging good environmental practice in rural areas, lowering stock numbers and facilitating rural diversification. Extension of the rural renewal scheme would help to sustain County Roscommon's farming and rural population in the north and west of the county. North Roscommon is considered to be a structurally weak area. The housing aspects of the rural renewal scheme would comply with the sustainable development initiative. Structurally weak areas need to accommodate any demand for permanent residential development. Extension of the rural renewal scheme would facilitate a greater uptake and give a greater benefit to structurally weak areas.

The future of employment creation in County Roscommon will involve entrepreneurs and small and medium sized enterprises. Major employers, such as Glanbia in Rooskey, have been lost in north and west Roscommon. The extension of the rural renewal scheme is essential if we are to support job creation in that part of the county. Small and medium sized enterprises are likely to be established in ancillary buildings at the homes of entrepreneurs. An incentive such as the rural renewal scheme would act as a business incentive as much as a residential incentive. The modernisation and rationalisation of the ESB power station at Lanesborough will lead to reduced employment opportunities in Bord na Móna for people in County Roscommon. Similar problems are encountered in respect of Shannonbridge power station.

Roscommon County Council and the county manager, Mr. John Tiernan, suggested that the area south of the N6 route between Athlone and Galway should be included in the rural renewal scheme. The Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, may see merit in the suggestion that areas further east, for example in County Offaly, should be considered.

I am glad the Minister of State is present to listen to my arguments in favour of the extension of the rural renewal scheme. I ask him to ignore those who suggest that the scheme is lining the pockets of millionaires. It is helping to bring people back to the upper Shannon region, specifically the rural areas of north and west Roscommon. Those who claim that it is helping millionaires do not know anything about the lifestyles of the people of the region. They travel through the area once a year as they travel to the west on holidays. They know nothing about the benefits brought to the region by the rural renewal scheme. I ask the Government to ignore the Opposition's calls in this regard and to proceed with the extension of the renewal scheme in the best interests of the further development of the rural areas of north and west Roscommon, and the upper Shannon region as a whole.

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Mr. Parlon)

I thank Deputy Finneran for raising this matter on the Adjournment.

The rural renewal scheme was introduced in the Finance Act 1998 to address some of the problems facing the upper Shannon region. It was apparent at that time that the region, which has a history of persistent high emigration, poor land and fragmented holdings, was not sharing in the economic rejuvenation experienced in other parts of the State since the mid-1990s. The 1996 census showed that the populations of counties Longford and Leitrim had decreased, even though there had been moderate or significant increases in every other county.

Following the achievements of a succession of urban renewal schemes, which had helped to rejuvenate many inner city areas since the mid-1980s, the former Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, decided that tax incentives for the rejuvenation of urban areas could be successfully applied to the upper Shannon area on a pilot basis. Consequently, he introduced the scheme in the Finance Act 1998. The areas designated for relief under the scheme included, counties Longford and Leitrim and parts of counties Cavan, Roscommon and Sligo. The objectives of the scheme were to reverse the pattern of continuing population decline and to promote private sector investment in the region.

The incentives available under the scheme are broadly similar to the reliefs in the other area-based incentive schemes, such as the urban renewal and town renewal schemes. Accelerated capital allowances of 100% are available for the construction or refurbishment of certain commercial and industrial buildings. Tax relief is available for the construction and refurbishment of owner occupied and rented residential properties. The reliefs were introduced on a phased basis. The rented residential reliefs were introduced with effect from 1 June 1998 and the owner-occupier residential reliefs were introduced with effect from 6 April 1999. The business elements of the scheme were introduced with effect from 1 July 1999, shortly after the approval under state aid rules of the European Commission was secured for the reliefs in June 1999.

It can be said with some justification that the rural renewal scheme is by far the most extensive and wide-ranging area-based tax relief scheme in the State. All the qualifying areas are eligible for the full range of reliefs available under the scheme. By contrast, only certain sub-areas of the towns and villages designated under the urban and town renewal schemes qualify for relief. Each qualifying sub-area or site qualifies for a limited range of reliefs in most cases. The entire area qualifies for rented residential or section 23 relief under the rural renewal scheme, whereas a limited number of areas or sites are designated for such relief under the urban and town renewal schemes. Those who are familiar with the areas in question can confirm that the scheme brought the benefit of enormous rejuvenation to such places. It is appropriate that we should consider the benefits during the ongoing debate about the existence and effect of tax expenditures and incentives.

While I appreciate that the Deputy is anxious for the scheme's deadline to be extended by five months until the end of 2006, he should consider that the scheme was originally due to terminate on 31 December 2001. It has been extended on a number of occasions since then. The original December 2001 deadline was extended by an additional year in the Finance Act 2000 and by a further two years in the Finance Act 2002. No qualifying conditions were attached to the extended time period in the case of the two-year extension. Such conditions have been imposed in other schemes such as the urban renewal scheme and the reliefs for multi-storey car parks, hotels and holiday cottages. The scheme was one of the few area-based tax incentive schemes to benefit from a straight two-year extension. In the Finance Act 2004, the deadline for incurring qualifying expenditure was extended until 31 July 2006 where a full and valid planning application is received by a local authority on or before 31 December 2004. This extension to the deadline, along with a similar extension for other reliefs, was given to provide for an orderly winding down of the schemes and to cater for pipeline projects that were subject to unforeseen delays.

Irish Emigrants.

Mr. Connaughton

I ask the Government, and particularly the Minister for Foreign Affairs, to treat with the highest respect and dignity the emigrants who sailed broken-hearted from Ireland in the dark years of the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. When the Estimates are published on Thursday, I demand that a clear and unambiguous message of support be sent from the emerald isle to the thousands of emigrants in the UK, the US, Australia and elsewhere. Such people should be assured that the beneficiaries of the Celtic tiger do not and will not forget where they and we came from.

In a country where materialism is rampant, it is vital that every generation take stock of its history, its commitment to the outside world and its responsibilities to its people — our brothers, sisters, uncles and aunts, most of whom were forced to emigrate to places around the world that were in most cases hostile to anyone calling themselves Irish. Over the past 50 years since the mass exodus of our finest young people we have behaved miserably when it comes to shouldering responsibility for their welfare. There are many lonely, broken-hearted elderly people living in little bedsits no bigger than a horse box in London, Birmingham, Manchester and many other places, and they often wonder what their Irish nationality has meant for them.

In the US, there are vast numbers of decent, respectable, law-abiding young people who dread the knock on their door in case the police are seeking out persons without official visas and other documentation required for them to be there. Stories abound of such people being unable to return to Ireland to attend their parents' funerals or the weddings of family members, scared that they may not be allowed back into the United States.

Many of those to whom I have referred sent money home to help their families in this country when we were down in the dumps. Their remittances were taken into account when budgets were put together in the 1940s and 1950s. Now it is our turn to help the needy and impoverished Irish, irrespective of where they are abroad. In the highly acclaimed task force report, Ireland and the Irish Abroad, published in August 2002, many worthwhile proposals were made to help our emigrants. This year alone, the allocation to Díon, the organisation that distributes aid to Irish emigrants in Britain, was approximately €4 million, certainly much more than we spent on them in previous years. However, it is far from the proposals contained in the report. The task force recommended that €18 million be spent in 2003, rising to €34 million in 2005.

I welcome the dedicated unit in the Department of Foreign Affairs, which is a good development. Everything humanly possible should be done to help the 57 Irish groups working among our kith and kin in Great Britain, those through whom funding is channelled. I do not have time in the five minutes at my disposal to discuss some very important matters contained in the task force report that I would like to see implemented, one of which is the question of bringing people back from the UK and America for holidays in Ireland. I do not have enough time to develop why, for a variety of reasons, that would be very important psychologically. We should tease that out. Many communities in Ireland that have shown such great civic spirit in recent years should be involved, and I hope that the Government will do everything it can to assist in that regard.

This is not all one-way traffic since there is also a bridge to be erected to our many successful emigrants who are of immense use to Ireland commercially. The success of the Irish abroad in the early years contributed to the building of a better Ireland at home, and we should never forget that.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Mr. Treacy)

Is cúis áthais dom freagra cruinn beacht a thabhairt ar an ábhar tábhachtach seo faoi imircigh — muintir na nGael thar lear. I welcome this opportunity to stress the Government's continuing and strong commitment to Irish people living abroad. Emigration resonates deeply with us all, touching as it does every family at some time or other. We feel empathy when we hear accounts of the sadness of parting, the difficulties of adjusting and the loneliness of separation from loved ones. Those of us who represent constituencies in the west are keenly conscious of the impact of emigration on our communities. We know that many of those who emigrated made good lives for themselves abroad. They made, and continue to make, distinctive and positive contributions in their adopted countries. They have also maintained close connections with Ireland and have helped us in our efforts to develop opportunities for current and future generations. We know that many made difficult sacrifices by leaving Ireland. We deeply appreciate that and recognise the great credit they have brought on themselves and on Ireland in international fields.

While celebrating the positive aspects of the experience of emigration, we know that it has presented some people with difficulties, and they can find themselves adrift and marginalised. Many who emigrated did so feeling that they had no other option. It has been a priority of successive Governments to ensure that Irish people who emigrate do so voluntarily, on the basis of informed choice and not because of lack of opportunities at home.

Our community abroad has benefited from the selfless and tireless work of individuals and organisations that assist Irish people abroad. I express the deep appreciation of the Government to those people. Their dedication and compassion reflect an invaluable community spirit that enriches us all. For many years the Government provided financial assistance to organisations that offer front-line advice, counselling and support services to Irish people abroad. Nobody should be in doubt but that our commitment and support are firm, growing and long term. Through its engagement with Irish people abroad, the Government saw the need for a more structured and strategic approach to emigration policy to respond better to the needs of emigrants. The task force on policy regarding emigrants was established to advise on the development of a coherent long-term policy. Its report provides us with a key resource in shaping Irish policy on this important issue. Its recommendations, which are wide-ranging and far-reaching, make clear that issues of concern can best be addressed by a collective effort involving governmental and non-governmental agencies.

The establishment in the Department of a new dedicated unit focused entirely on matters relating to emigrants is a notable development. I am convinced that it will inject fresh momentum to drive forward progress on all critically important areas identified by the task force. Our priority continues to be to get increased funding to the organisations abroad that provide critical support for Irish emigrants. Funding to those organisations has been increasing steadily and significantly. The Department's services for emigrants funding for 2004, rose to €5 million. That is being directed to voluntary agencies that provide front-line services for emigrants. This year's funding represents an increase of two thirds on last year. Most funding is directed to welfare organisations in Britain. As the Deputy may be aware, the Díon fund for Irish emigrant welfare in Britain is allocated by the Minister for Foreign Affairs on the basis of recommendations from the Díon committee. The committee's role is to advise and report on welfare services for emigrants, make recommendations on the provision of financial assistance and consider issues at the request of the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

This year we began planning to allocate €3.57 million to services for Irish emigrants in Britain through the Díon fund. That in itself represented an increase of over one third on last year's allocation. I am delighted to say that we have today approved a further round of grants. The Díon fund will this year exceed our initial target. This year, funding to front-line welfare organisations in Britain will reach €4.3 million, an increase of two thirds on last year. Since 1984, €21 million has been distributed under the Díon fund to welfare organisations in Britain. That will have risen to €22 million by the end of this year. The fund has increased fivefold in the past five years.

At the Minister's request, the Díon committee is paying particular attention to the needs of older Irish people resident in Britain. While the full range of advisory services is open to people of all age groups, several agencies receiving Government funding focus on meeting the needs of older Irish people. Furthermore, we are conscious of the entitlements of some of our older emigrants to Irish contributory pensions. In 2000, when he was Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, introduced a half-rate contributory pension scheme for people with pre-1953 contributions. This year under the scheme €72 million is being directed to older people who are resident abroad, most of them in Britain. This year organisations in the United States that offer invaluable support to our emigrants there, in particular the undocumented Irish people, have been awarded grants totalling €500,000. This represents an increase of more than 70% on last year's grants, which is the greatest increase ever. We would like to increase this amount further in the coming years to develop these vital services. I assure the House of the Government's further support for Irish people abroad during 2005 and the years beyond.

Factory Closures.

Mr. Sherlock

I hope when I have concluded my contribution the Minister of State will not say the Government or his party have no say on this matter. I refer to the closure of the Nestle plant in Mallow, which uses approximately 20,000 tonnes of sugar supplied by Mallow sugar factory and 15 million gallons of milk supplied by Dairygold. The plant employed 57 people and this is the greatest blow that has ever been struck in the north Cork region. Nestle produces chocolate crumb in Mallow and in Girvan, Scotland, and it is proposed that the Girvan plant will be retained.

The silence of the IFA and the ICMSA regarding the factory closure in Mallow and the transfer of jobs by Dairygold from Mallow and Mitchelstown to Cork is tantamount to them selling their birthright for a mess of potage. Nestle stated the Scottish facility would be retained in favour of the leased Irish based facility in Mallow. The property is leased from Dairygold. The co-operative voice of milk and beet producers should be conveyed to Dairygold management, otherwise the dairy industry and the jobs it provides in the region will be no more. The region has been hit hard and I seek Government intervention there. It would be worthwhile if the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment were to visit Mallow and meet the management of Dairygold and Nestle.

Dairygold staff are being transferred from Mallow and Mitchelstown to Cork. The staff were informed earlier that 20 December is D-Day. They will be supplied with boxes to move their materials and they will be bussed between both towns and Cork for 12 weeks. I call on the Minister of State to involve himself and the Government in this issue. The job losses at Nestle could impact on the sugar beet and diary industries. It is a serious matter and the development of agriculture and domestic production must be examined. I hope the Minister of State's response will be positive.

Mr. Treacy

I thank the Deputy for raising this matter on the Adjournment. On Thursday 11 November 2004, Nestle announced its intention to close its chocolate crumb production facility at Mallow, County Cork. The facility is based at the Dairygold plant in Mallow and employs 57 people. Nestle stated a strategic review of its business requirements for chocolate crumb identified that, due to improvements in production methods and the loss of the chocolate crumb contract for the Canadian market, these requirements could best be met at its facility in Scotland. Nestle also stated the closure of the Mallow facility is to take place by March 2005.

Dairygold does not accept that Nestle is entitled to implement such a decision and the co-operative has instructed its legal advisers to take immediate legal action against Nestle regarding the enforcement of Nestle's agreements with Dairygold. Pending the outcome of High Court injunction proceedings, Dairygold has indicated it will make no further public statements in the matter.

I assure the Deputy that Mallow is a location of focus for the Industrial Development Agency. The IDA is marketing Mallow as a location for foreign direct investment through its network of overseas offices, in particular the availability of a 6.27 hectare fully serviced site and an advance factory of 2,072 square metres. The relatively recent arrival of Kostal to Mallow has been a significant asset to the economic development of Mallow and north Cork. More than 400 people are employed at the Mallow operation. Mallow is designated as a hub town under the national spatial strategy, which will lead to significant development in the medium to long term, and this has the potential to benefit the north Cork area.

From an inward investment perspective, Mallow, due to its proximity to Cork city, also stands to benefit from the continued development in the Cork area where over the past ten years direct employment in IDA supported companies in Cork city and county has increased from 10,345 in 1993 to 18,162 in 2003. With 134 IDA supported companies in County Cork, the sectors contributing to this growth are ICT, pharmaceuticals-health care and international services. This growth is expected to continue into the future with IDA in 2003 announcing 11 new projects for Cork with the potential to create up to 800 new jobs.

Mr. Sherlock

That is not the issue I raised.

Mr. Treacy

To date in 2004 five new projects, McAfee, AK Pharma, Altera, Ecora & Centocor, have been announced with a job creation potential in excess of 800. Over the past four years more than 40 new projects have been approved for the Cork area with a jobs potential of up to 5,000 people at full operation.

IDA Ireland's main focus is targeting high value projects. This means companies that decide to visit Ireland today have more sophisticated business requirements. Their key requirements in determining where they will visit and, consequently, where they will potentially locate tend to centre on the following: a high quality business environment with access to a large population base; close proximity to an international airport and quality road infrastructure to allow ease of access; proximity to similar companies; adjacent to a third level institution; and often located on a business and technology park with high quality office accommodation and telecommunications infrastructure.

Mr. Sherlock

How did the Minister of State know about Dairygold's legal action?

Mr. Treacy

In line with addressing these industry requirements, IDA Ireland also has a focus in north Cork, on its new business and technology park adjacent to Fermoy. IDA Ireland has purchased this 20 acre site on the outskirts of Fermoy where site development works and landscaping have been completed at a cost of approximately €1.5 million. The IDA intends to seek proposals from private developers for the construction of a suitable office building on the park. It is intended that this building will be available mainly for inward investment purposes by qualifying manufacturing and internationally trading services companies.

Mr. Sherlock

The Minister of State has digressed from the main issue.

Mr. Treacy

In addition, IDA is also marketing the Fermoy business and technology park as a suitable location for potential green field projects. It is anticipated that future employment opportunities generated at this business and technology park will be of benefit to the north Cork area generally.

I assure the Deputy that the State development agencies, under the auspices of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, will continue to work closely together and with local interests in promoting Mallow for additional investment and job creation. I trust the legalities involved in this case have been put in context by the statement issued by Dairygold.

Departmental Bodies.

Dr. Cowley

I am grateful for the opportunity to raise this important matter. Will the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government consider the reform of An Bord Pleanála given the overwhelming view of the population that the board is incapable of operating independently, since it is bound by Government policy in making its decisions?

I attended a meeting of several hundred people about a proposed asbestos recycling facility in Killala recently. Nobody present spoke in favour of the development. I attended a demonstration involving 2,000 people two days ago in Killala. They abhor the possibility of this facility being located at Killala. The only people who have spoken in favour of the facility are the company's managing director and public relations man.

However, local people are concerned, particularly when they reflect on the decision by An Bord Pleanála regarding the Ringaskiddy incinerator. There was strong opposition locally to building the incinerator, including a written objection signed by 20,000 people. Despite the refusal of the necessary rezoning by Cork County Council, An Bord Pleanála overruled its own inspectors who had highlighted a long list of reasons planning permission should have been refused for the incinerator, thereby, upholding the view of the county council and the people. The board ruled that the incinerator should be built because it is Government policy.

That is amazing. I do not know how the board can be described as independent when it favoured the proposers of the incinerator because their proposal was in line with Government policy. What was the point in the board making, an adjudication and proceeding with its investigations when it was a foregone conclusion? This was a waste of taxpayers' money. The internal structure of An Bord Pleanála must be fatally flawed if it does not heed its own recommendations. The Minister of State and the Government are accountable for their decisions. However, natural justice does not appear to prevail in the case of An Bord Pleanála. It would be perverse in the extreme if this facility was allowed in Killala, when everybody in the place is against it. There will be the mother of battles if there is any attempt to send this project to the county council.

This is not the NIMBY syndrome. We must have a sense of proportion. The Minister said in a reply on this issue in the Dáil on 2 November that additional capacity is required nationally to deal with the hazardous waste we generate. However, this area has been totally neglected. It is a wasteground from a burnt out Asahi facility. The area needs the jobs that all other places get, not the jobs that nobody wants. We want necessary infrastructure and to keep our children in the area. The fear is that even if the county council goes against this, An Bord Pleanála will do a Ringaskiddy on it. An Bord Pleanála overrules the inspectors in 10% of cases. If this happens, the reason should be clearly stated.

There is a lack of democracy in planning. I suggest we should have a planning monitoring committee, like the rural water monitoring committee, that would shadow each local authority and would comprise local elected and rural stakeholder representatives. These should have the right of appeal to a national monitoring committee that could directly appeal to the Minister. This would return democracy to the planning system through allowing applications be kicked back to the planners for re-evaluation where indicated. This would reduce appeals to An Bord Pleanála.

An Bord Pleanála is seen as an anti-rural group. This is often attributed to the lack of proper representation of the rural groups on the board. The Minister of State should do something to ensure such representation on the board. That lack is a significant deficit. The Irish Rural Dwellers Association was set up as a result of a groundswell of opinion regarding what is happening around the country. The association, in which I am involved, has 1,600 members, but gets no funding from the Government. Organisations such as An Taisce get funding, but the IRDA, which is truly democratic, gets none. It should get at least the same funding as An Taisce. The reply given on the matter in the Dáil gives no comfort. Government policy is that if everything is all right with the EPA etc., this may be approved.

I speak a great deal on the issue of jobs and what is needed in my area. We need fair play. We need power, roads and rail. We also need the other essential infrastructure necessary to make the area competitive. Most of all we need to maintain the infrastructure we have. I seek reform of An Bord Pleanála in that regard.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. N. Ahern)

An Bord Pleanála is a body established under the Planning and Development Act 2000. It is mandated to operate completely independently in performing its functions. Members are appointed on the basis of nominations from 37 bodies prescribed under the Planning and Development Regulations 2001.

The board is required to make an independent determination of appeals on planning authorities' decisions. In dealing with an appeal, the board must consider all submissions on the file, together with the inspector's report and recommendation. It reaches its own conclusion in each case, in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. Section 34(10) of the 2000 Act provides for the board to make a decision, which is not in accordance with the recommendations of its inspector — a ruling passed in this House — but requires reasons to be given for not accepting the recommendations.

The Planning and Development Act 2000 requires planning authorities and the board to have regard to Government policy when taking decisions on planning applications and appeals. Section 29 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 requires planning authorities and the board also to have regard to ministerial policy and guidelines, and comply with such guidelines in the performance of their functions. This has been a requirement on the board since its inception in 1977.

It is right and proper that state agencies, like the board, should operate in a policy framework set by the Government, which has a democratic mandate. I am sure the Deputy welcomes this requirement in certain areas of policy, for example, with regard to rural housing. For the first time, the new guidelines provide a policy framework setting out in detail how Government policy on rural housing, as set out in the national spatial strategy, is to be taken forward by local authorities in planning more effectively for rural areas.

The board operates a number of measures designed to ensure fairness and impartiality in carrying out its functions. Section 150 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 provides for the adoption by An Bord Pleanála of a code of conduct for dealing with conflicts of interest and promoting public confidence in the conduct of its business. The code further requires that persons employed by the board are to carry out its work in an independent manner that embodies the public service ethos of integrity, impartiality and a desire to serve the public interest while giving due consideration to all legitimate viewpoints and interests.

An Bord Pleanála has recently adopted a customer service action plan that provides for a complaints procedure with regard to the quality of service provided to customers. While it cannot overturn a decision, it will endeavour to deal with complaints dealing with procedure and clarify matters relating to the decision. It has undertaken to endeavour to reply to any complaint within one month of the date of its receipt. The board's code of conduct and customer service action plan is available to the public on request. They are also on the board's website.

The provisions of the Planning and Development Act 2000 as they relate to the operations of An Bord Pleanála, and the measures taken by the board as outlined, ensure that practices and procedures are carried out by the board to the highest standards of impartiality and professionalism.

I understand the Deputy's concern as I have been a public representative for 20 years. As councillors and Deputies we often complain about the board one week but think it is great the next week, depending on its decisions. Everybody works within a general framework. The Deputy's constituents may be concerned about the plant in Killala, whether or not the concern is well founded. I always urge constituents to acquaint themselves with the facts. We, as elected representatives have the responsibility to provide the right information to people and not lead them into a cul-de-sac with misinformation.

Planning permission is not given lightly. A long process must be gone through although some people feel the process is over long. People are concerned about issues. The board does not always make the right decision. I recall the board came up with a decision that the Government did not like in regard to Belmullet. We complain about the board one day, but think it is great on other occasions.

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 16 Nov 2004