The former Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, John Gormley, established an independent review into the planning practices in a number of local authorities and had undertaken considerable work to ensure these would be completed.
Leaders’ Questions
Is Deputy Martin interested in corruption in planning now?
I will come to that. Why are the Minister, Deputy Phil Hogan, the Minister of State, Deputy Alan Kelly, and the Minister of State, Deputy Kehoe, misleading the public by suggesting that the former Minister, Mr. Gormley, had done nothing to progress his independent reviews of planning practices in a number of local authorities? It is more than one year since he took office. Why is there still no outcome to his internal reviews nine months after he suppressed the independent reviews the former Minister, Mr. Gormley, established?
I wish to put on the record of the House what the Minister, Deputy Hogan, had on his desk when he arrived into office.
What was on Deputy Martin's desk?
He had an extensive dossier prepared by planning officials in the Department following an internal review of complaints made from 2007 to 2009. He had a series of reports from the managers in each of the local authorities submitted in response to a formal request from the Minister using his statutory powers under the planning and development Acts. He had terms of reference for a panel of planning consultants to carry out independent reviews in the six local authorities. He had a completed tender process to select the panel of consultants and he had letters of appointment ready to be issued to the members of the panel. On the basis of the dossiers presented to him he was convinced that these matters required an independent review of planning.
A question, please.
Given the debate going on in the House this week everyone seems to be agreed that the planning process has to be above reproach. There are significant reasons the former Minister, Mr. Gormley, proceeded with these inquiries.
A question, please.
(Interruptions).
Frankly, questions need to be answered about why an independent review was suppressed by the incoming Government. It is a serious issue that demands a serious response from the Government.
What took place for the past 20 years was serious too.
Why were the independent reviews established by Mr. Gormley suppressed?
(Interruptions).
Excuse me. The Tánaiste is perfectly capable of answering the question without assistance.
Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle.
Can we please allow him to answer a question? I have worked with him long enough and I have every confidence in him.
He has no difficulty answering questions.
I am greatly reassured by the Ceann Comhairle's confidence. I welcome Deputy Martin's interest in probity in the planning system. The former Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Mr. Gormley, announced independent inquiries into seven local authorities in June 2010. When he left office more than seven months later, he had still not commenced these.
A Deputy
Do not be surprised.
He did not read that file.
The new Minister considered that the considerable cost of retaining consultants to conduct these inquiries required further examination. He instructed officials to conduct an internal review and to report to him on what further actions might be warranted. These further actions might include changes to legislation, new regulations or further guidance on a range of issues related to the operation of the planning system in the local authorities. However, the findings of the internal review were not to be prejudged and it was always the case that some further investigations, including independent inquiries as originally announced, might form part of these outcomes. This remains the position today. The review will be completed following the publication of the retail planning guidelines due before the end of April. The Minister has committed to issuing a public statement outlining in full the complaints at issue, the response and any appropriate actions to be pursued in regard to further policy development and guidance in line with the commitments in the programme for Government and the relevant recommendations in the report of the Mahon tribunal.
Deputy Martin should note that no planning inquiry is being suppressed. The reviews are being conducted in the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. When that process is completed following the publication of the retail planning guidelines at the end of April a full public statement will be made. This will set out in full the complaints made, the action taken in the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to review and examine those complaints and what further action might need to be taken arising from the review. Nothing is being suppressed. It is being looked at in the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. The full information will be published.
That is completely disingenuous.
Mirror, mirror on the wall.
It is important to point out that an internal review of these complaints has already been carried out.
Was Deputy Martin afraid of it?
The answer given this morning is a complete whitewash. As far back as 2009 the spatial planning section of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government had carried out an internal review of planning practices in these counties. I illustrate this with the comments of the former Louth county manager, Mr. Quinlivan, who carried out an investigation into matters in Carlow.
A supplementary question, please.
I am asking a question. This is a serious issue.
I appreciate that but you have one minute.
He stated that effective planning enforcement to ensure legislation was observed "was not in place" in Carlow.
What did Deputy Martin do about in when he was in government?
It rendered the whole enforcement process questionable. Mr. Quinlivan recommended that "prolonged consultation with those who breached the planning system must not take place". Complaints were received from many people, including members of the public, the Ombudsman, An Taisce and many other reputable bodies, about planning practices in these counties in recent years.
(Interruptions).
Who controlled those local authorities?
There is much heckling but I am not prejudging anything.
Government councillors control all those local authorities.
Please ask your question.
I am not prejudging anything. I have no difficulty without fear or favour of having independent planning investigations. Why?
Ask your question. You are over time.
I have spoken to the former Minister, Mr. Gormley. The bottom line is that there was resistance to these inquiries within the system.
(Interruptions).
There was internal resistance to these planning investigations. I asked questions yesterday evening including whether we are all satisfied that our planning processes are above reproach. I call on the Tánaiste to meet the former Minister, Mr. Gormley, and to look at the dossier himself.
Deputy Martin held meetings with him for long enough.
He should look at the extensive material. He established an independent inquiry and a process but it was suppressed. It is completely dishonest to say that there should now be another internal review. An internal review had been completed.
Thank you, Deputy. Please resume your seat.
Consultants were appointed. The Minister, Deputy Hogan, had stated previously that they were spurious complaints. He suppressed them when he came into office.
Next, Deputy Martin will be subscribing to An Taisce.
Please resume your seat. This is about asking a question. The Tánaiste will reply. Can I have some silence, please? Thank you. We cannot hear what is being said.
The position is that each year, the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government receives approximately 8,000 representations from various sources, including members of the public, NGOs, representative organisations and, sometimes, planning authorities. Some of these concern complaints and dissatisfaction with regard to planning decisions or policies that have been carried out. A number of these were identified by the former Minister, John Gormley, in a number of local authorities. The local authorities concerned were Dublin City Council, Carlow County Council, Galway County Council, Cork City Council, Cork County Council, Meath County Council and Donegal County Council. These are being examined.
They were examined, but the examinations have been suppressed.
What is the question here?
There is no suppression. There was nothing done about these in the period from when they were announced until the former Minister left office.
That is not true. The Tánaiste should not mislead the House.
There was some question of appointing consultants, but one does not need consultants for everything. One of the problems of the previous Government was anytime there was an issue-----
A Deputy
We have enough reports.
Any examination should be independent of the system.
Allow the Tánaiste to proceed.
Anytime there was an issue to be addressed by the previous Government, the first response was always to send for consultants and spend a large amount of money on a consultancy report.
The Tánaiste is playing politics again. There is something rotten in the State of Denmark.
There is no need for the Deputy to get excited.
I am getting excited because we are way over time on this.
There is no need at all for Deputy Martin to get excited about this. The issues that are being examined will be published in full. If there is any follow-up action required, that action will be taken.
The Government has suppressed the follow-up action.
There has been no suppression.
Comments should be addressed through the Chair.
I can understand why Fianna Fáil is on the back foot on planning this week, with the debate on the Mahon tribunal. It is classic political defence to make attack the best form of defence. What Deputy Martin is doing is-----
The Tánaiste is ignoring the question.
I am not ignoring it. The issue is being examined in the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and the review will be published in full. Does Deputy Martin understand that? It will be published in full and then, whatever action needs to be taken will be taken.
An internal review is being done, by insiders, civil servants.
Deputy Martin must have his An Taisce card at this stage.
I now call on Deputy Gerry Adams. I remind Deputies that we went four minutes over time on the last question and I ask them to obey the rules they set themselves and show some sort of respect to the person who poses the question and the person responding to it.
Stop the heckling.
I do not need any help from Deputy McGrath.
I was not helping the Chair. I was just saying the Government side should stop the heckling.
I call Deputy Adams and ask Deputies to please stay quiet.
Tá sé ag éirí níos soiléire go mbeidh méid mór airgid á n-íoc ag an Rialtas le Anglo ag deireadh na seachtaine seo agus ag an uair chéanna go mbeidh bochtanas ag ardú de bharr pholasaí an Rialtais. Nach bhfuil sé fíor nach mbeidh aon buntáiste ansin do ghnáth saoránaigh atá ag fulaingt faoi mheáchan an Rialtais agus de bharr an pháirt glactha ag an troika? The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform was briefed yesterday by the Governor of the Central Bank about the promissory note debt to Anglo Irish Bank. It is clear now, as the Taoiseach told us many times, that the Government intends to pay in full the €31 billion promissory note to Anglo and that it will pay Anglo €3.1 billion later this week. Will the Tánaiste confirm that Anglo will purchase an Irish Government bond at an interest rate of approximately 7% and does he accept that this interest rate is higher than would be paid under the promissory note? Will the Tánaiste also confirm that this agreement will not involve any write-down in the principal debt to Anglo and will actually lead to an increase in the State's overall sovereign debt? To help Sinn Féin understand, is this what the Tánaiste meant when he said it would be "Labour's way"?
Sinn Féin needs another meeting with Government to help it understand.
I am a little surprised by Deputy Adams question because following the meeting of the committee yesterday, Sinn Féin's spokesman on finance, Deputy Doherty, acknowledged on radio that this is a good deal and that it will enhance our ability to return to the market in 2014 and would get us over the hump.
That is not-----
(Interruptions).
I ask Deputies again to show respect. Thank you.
Yesterday at the committee, the Governor of the Central Bank confirmed what the Minister for Finance has said and what the Taoiseach and I have said here consistently, namely, that the Government is negotiating an arrangement whereby the cash payment of the promissory note will be settled by way of a long-term Government bond. He confirmed that those negotiations are going well and expressed optimism, which I share, that they will be concluded successfully. The negotiations are complex and technical and are proceeding. I share the Governor's confidence that they will be concluded successfully.
To be honest and in the country's interest, the time is here when Deputy Adams should put country before party. In the country's interest, he should wish this process well, rather than rise here every day and be gleeful, as he is now, at any prospect that the process will go wrong.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
I am bemused by the Tánaiste's unmitigated cheek, but will ignore that. I remind the Tánaiste of what the person who founded his party said: "Ireland without its people means nothing to me." Both the Tánaiste and Taoiseach have said they will never look for a debt write-down, would not have the name "defaulter" written on their foreheads and would not impose losses on bondholders. The Tánaiste used the phrase describing the process as "complex and technical". What is complex and technical?
Deputy Adams clearly does not understand it.
The Tánaiste also makes that point that it will be successful. Why would it not be successful? Let me try to explain to the Tánaiste that I understand-----
Please do not. Ask a question.
Will the Tánaiste confirm for me that Labour's way, regardless of what was said during the election, means that it intends paying this bad banking debt, that it will replace this bad banking debt with an increased sovereign debt, that its deal increases the State's sovereign debt and that it intends paying a higher interest on the €3.1 billion? Will the Tánaiste please answer this question? I urge him not to go off on flights of fancy but to answer the question put to him.
I share James Connolly's view that the country without its people means nothing to me. This includes the people who are no longer with us.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
On the negotiations, lest the Deputy finds the issue too complex, let me explain it to him in clear terms.
Answer the question.
When it was formed, the Government set out to negotiate a better deal for Ireland, to negotiate better terms for the bailout arrangements that had been made by the previous Government and better terms on the EU-IMF deal. Part of those negotiations was to negotiate an arrangement but we considered that the promissory note arrangement which was entered into by the previous Government, was a very expensive way of dealing with the bank bailout. We set about negotiating an alternative way of doing it. As the Minister for Finance has made clear to the House, that approach is based on settling the promissory note issue by way of a long-term Government bond. The discussions on the detail in this regard are continuing. The Governor of the Central Bank yesterday told the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform that those negotiations are going well and he expressed optimism about their outcome. While those negotiations are underway I do not think it is useful to get into the detail of what may or may not emerge from them. The negotiations are going well and the Governor of the Central Bank-----
The Tánaiste will not answer the question.
When it is done.
I have made it very clear.
We are over time, please.
Neither a shop steward-----
A higher interest rate. The Government is going to make this bad banking debt into a sovereign debt. Is this Labour's way?
Please, Deputy Adams.
-----in an individual employment nor the Governor of the Central Bank nor the Minister for Finance will negotiate in public.
Is this the way Labour does its business?
The Governor answered all those questions yesterday.
This needs to be understood-----
(Interruptions).
We are over time and I ask the Tánaiste to conclude.
What matters is that we get the best outcome in the interests of the Irish people and I am confident that the Government will succeed in doing this. When this is completed, it will be announced by the Minister for Finance in the House just as he announced the broad framework of his actions last week.
I refer to two announcements made yesterday, one of significance and to which Deputy Adams has referred, the confirmation by the Governor of the Central Bank, Patrick Honohan, that the deal was done or virtually done. The second announcement was made by the Tánaiste in the House that a referendum would be held on 31 May. An observer could be forgiven for noting that the timing was not possibly coincidental. I congratulate the Government if it has achieved a substantial progress on the Anglo Irish Bank promissory notes. Any concession is a good concession. However, I am worried by what the Governor is reported as saying yesterday. It was news to me that this is official policy when he said that the Anglo Irish promissory notes were a source of risk to the financial stability of the State. If this is the case - and if it is sealed within the next 24 or 48 hours - it is a deal on a very small part of the Anglo Irish promissory notes, in that instance a total of €3.1 billion. The Government is briefing that this is part of a staging post of ongoing negotiations and we will get further concessions on the debt. Will the financial stability of the State still be at risk from these notes next week?
I thank Deputy Ross for his acknowledgment and congratulation of the Government on the progress to date. The Government has been in discussions for some time with the troika on the overall size of the promissory note, the entire issue of €31 billion. The object is to reach a point in those negotiations where a paper will be produced with the troika which will address the issue in its totality. The issue of the promissory note which falls due on 31 March clearly has to be dealt with. As I have said in an earlier reply, the Minister for Finance has indicated that the approach being discussed to deal with this is to settle it by way of a long-term Government bond.
As Deputy Ross says, the whole issue is framed in the context of debt sustainability for the State. I do not think there is any secret about the fact that this time last year, when the new Government took over, this country was teetering on the edge of a cliff and the debt sustainability of the State and its future economic well-being, was very much at risk. Over the course of the past year, we have pulled this situation back from the edge and we have succeeded in a series of negotiations, with the troika in particular, to achieve changes in the terms of the bailout arrangement which were negotiated prior to our entry into Government. These changes in the terms included the issue of the interest rate, a number of changes which allowed the Government a greater degree of flexibility in our own recovery process. I refer also to the current discussions about the promissory note due on 31 March and the wider issue of the promissory notes in their totality. We are confident of achieving a good outcome from those negotiations.
At this stage, the Government has brought about stability in our economic situation and financial state and we now need to move on to recovery, to ensuring that jobs and investment are created. Therefore, in parallel with the discussions between the Government and the troika, we have also actively engaged in a strong marketing strategy in order to secure investment for the country. Part of that strategy is the work being done by the Taoiseach over the past days and today in China.
I thank the Tánaiste for his reply. I take it he means that the financial stability of the State, therefore, is restored. This brings me to my final question. If this relief on the €3.1 billion and on further bank debt is to restore the financial stability of the State, we have been rightly led to believe that the austerity package which the Government has imposed on the country and on the people of the country, is due to the fact that the banks have behaved in such an irresponsible manner and incurred such debt. Now that we are getting relief from the bank debt, can the Tánaiste point to some tangible relief from austerity to show the people as a result of the achievement this week?
This is a slow, gradual process and there is no instant one-day solution to take us out of the economic difficulties. We have moved from being on the edge of the cliff to a situation where we have achieved a stabilisation of the financial situation in the country. We are making progress as regards the arrangements made for the bailout. Separate to that we have a problem with our deficit in that we are spending more than we are taking in and as a consequence we have to borrow. The Government aims to reduce the deficit because no country can continue to spend more than it earns and continue to add to its borrowings. We also must achieve growth in the economy and the creation of more jobs. This is the reason the Government has put such a strong emphasis on getting jobs and investment and the reason we are investing so much effort in the restoration of our international reputation as we believe this will bring about investment.
The other dimension of this, the European dimension, is only partly within our control. There is no doubt that the uncertainty surrounding the euro and the eurozone in the latter part of 2011, moving into 2012, has created difficulties in terms of securing investment in this country. To return to the opening line of the Deputy's question, that is why it is important that the stability treaty is supported - in order to bring stability and security to the euro which, in turn, will underpin the confidence investors need to invest in Europe and, in particular, in Ireland.