Final Draft Revised National Planning Framework: Motion

Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage (Deputy James Browne)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the Final Draft Revised National Planning Framework, as approved by the Government on 8th April, 2025; a copy of which was laid before Dáil Éireann on 22nd April, 2025 together with the Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report, the Post-Consultation Natura Impact Statement, the Post-Consultation Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Report, and the Appropriate Assessment Determination.

I welcome the opportunity to come before the House to discuss and seek approval for the final draft of the revised national planning framework, which was approved by the Government on 8 April 2025. The finalisation of the approval process for the revised national planning framework and plays a key role in the delivery of our broader objectives across the Government. It reflects the importance and the urgency of a co-ordinated, plan-led approach for the effective delivery of critical development, such as housing, employment and climate-resilient electricity generation. This is an addition to the facilities and services required to meet the needs of our citizens.

I wish to give a brief overview of the revision process, which began formally on 20 June 2023. The Government gave approval to commence the process of undertaking the first revision of the national planning framework, in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended. The revision processes provided for a wide-ranging consultation, including stakeholders and the public. The process also included the reconvening of the planning advisory forum, the establishment of an expert group, a cross-departmental group and an environmental assessment technical steering group. Engagement was also undertaken with the joint Oireachtas committee on housing on two occasions during the revision process.

The draft first revision of the national planning framework and the associated environmental assessments was published in July 2024. A national public consultation ran from 10 July 2024 until 12 September 2024. An information campaign, including broadcast, print, digital and social media also ran to raise awareness of the consultation process and to encourage the public to engage with the first draft revision. A total of 272 submissions were received during the draft consultation stage. On 5 November 2024, the Government agreed to progress and publish a draft schedule of amendments to the first revision to the national planning framework arising from the public consultation on 8 April 2025.

The Government approved a final draft revised national planning framework following the conclusion of the environmental assessments. One of the key drivers of the revision process related to the real need to reflect updated population and housing projections further to census 2022 and subsequent demographic changes. It is essential that we pull in the real numbers to inform this work. The revised national planning framework strategy sets out the need to plan for a projected population of 6.1 million people in Ireland by 2040 under the baseline scenario provided by the ESRI, and a possible requirement to plan for a high migration scenario of 6.3 million people by 2040. Taking pent-up demand into account, the strategy sets out a need for a plan for the delivery of approximately 50,000 additional housing units per annum nationally to 2040. The original timeline for the revision of the process in order to ensure that the updated ESRI projections were available, noting that this independent and peer-reviewed report was a critical input to the revision. The targets draw on the ESRI's demographic and econometric modelling of population growth and structural housing demand to 2040, but also includes estimates relating to unmet demand, including homelessness data published by my Department. In parallel with the national planning framework, the Government approved revised housing targets on 5 November 2024, for the period of 2025 to 2030. The targets are set out at a national level, and provide for the delivery of at least 303,000 new homes over the period, at an average of 50,000 per annum, rising to an annual delivery of 60,000 by 2030. Work on translating the revised national housing targets into local authority and tenure-specific targets for social, affordable and private rented and owned homes is ongoing.

In that context, we will use data from the CSO, including census data, geographical profiles of income, the residential property price index and housing completion data, data from the Residential Tenancies Board on rental prices and data published by my Department.

The impact on development plans is also extremely relevant. This will result in the need for a plan for more housing delivery than the capacity currently available within development plans across the country. The strategy sets out the spatial planning policy approach to accommodate the projected population growth to 2040 in a manner which continues to deliver balanced regional development. This includes an even split of growth between the eastern and midland region, and the southern, northern and western regions combined, based on a city focus and a compact pattern of development. This aims to reverse the patterns of sprawl that have been a feature over recent decades. In terms of identifying locations for further growth and housing development at scale through transport-oriented development, a new element of the strategy, it is critical that planning for these opportunities is aligned with phased infrastructure investment.

Another critical element of the revision is the incorporation of the new policies in relation to renewable energy development, in particular the inclusion of regional, renewable electricity capacity allocations. This is in order to facility the accelerated roll-out and delivery of renewable electricity infrastructure for onshore wind and solar generation development. In addition to the related necessary grid development intended to support the achievement of the national targets set out in the climate action plan, the spatial planning system can play a key role in mitigating against climate change through the reduction of carbon emissions in sectors such as electricity, planning for renewable energy generating development and transport through the continued integration of land use and transport planning to support reduced commuting patterns and promotion of public transport, cycling and walking.

Areas of focus such as district heating, biomethane, biodiversity and the circular economy are flagged for particular attention. The national planning framework revision will ensure that our planning system can adequately reflect these important Government objectives. The revised national planning framework also acknowledges the clear link between climate action and the potential for investment generation and employment, including in connection with the offshore wind industry and green technology. The national planning framework highlights the need to plan for jobs and employment at locations that are integrated with the planned distribution of population and aligned to the development of the green economy and smart specialisation strategies that allow all regions to focus on their economic strengths.

The final revised national planning framework continues to support the overall development of urban and rural areas in Ireland and to deliver strengthened and diversified rural communities consistent with Government policy. In relation to supports for rural towns and villages, the draft revised framework has been updated to take account of the town centre first policy approach, and other Government initiatives such as the urban and rural regeneration funds, Croí Cónaithe towns and the continuation of the village renewal scheme and the vacant homes action plan.

In the context of the rural economy, the circular bioeconomy, rural enterprise, the agrifood sector and diversification are strongly supported. The development of tourism and other industries suited to rural areas are addressed throughout the document, aligned with the Department of Rural and Community Development's Our Rural Future, the Government's blueprint for rural development. Single rural housing based on social or economic need will continue to be supported.

The final draft revised national planning framework continues to reflect the commitment to achieve the objective set out in the 20-Year Strategy for the Irish Language 2010-2030 and retains the policy support for the implementation of language plans in the Gaeltacht language planning areas, Gaeltacht service towns and Irish language networks. The revision reflects on the ongoing co-operation and collaboration that exists between Ireland and Northern Ireland, with the Department for Infrastructure in Northern Ireland engaged in the revision process through membership of the planning advisory forum. Notwithstanding the challenges that exist in respect of the implications of Brexit, the draft revised national planning framework reflects on the opportunity for the strategic co-operation and investment for mutual benefit on the island of Ireland.

This includes, for example, continued support for the commitment of local authorities and other stakeholders to developing a co-ordinated approach to the development of the north-west city region comprising Letterkenny, Donegal, Derry and Strabane. The revision includes objectives for transport connectivity, health, education, investment in research and innovation, as well as reference to the PEACEPLUS programme, which is a major driver for cross-Border investment and co-operation. Approval of the revised national planning framework will ensure the most up-to-date policy position becomes formally imbedded as national planning policy with which the regional strategies and local level plans are required to be consistent.

The revised national planning framework will provide the basis for the reviewing and updating of regional strategies and local authority development plans to reflect matters such as updated housing figures, projected job growth and renewable energy capacity allocations, including through the zoning of land for residential, employment and a range of other important purposes. The plan-led approach to development that was further enhanced under the Planning and Development Act 2024 will continue to provide the basis for the identification and prioritisation of infrastructure delivery. The enhanced delivery of key infrastructure projects is a core objective of Government and a particular focus has already been placed on identifying blockages and ensuring they can be removed. In this regard, priority actions from the programme for Government are already being progressed, including the establishment of a new housing activation office. This office will enable infrastructure to support public and private housing development, while providing solutions to infrastructure blockages. It will draw on the towns and cities infrastructure investment fund to support strategic investment in housing orientated infrastructure.

Noting the urgency associated with the scaling up of housing delivery I, as Minister, have already signalled the intention to issue a policy direction to local authorities following finalisation of the revision process in order to enable rapid implementation of the updated planned housing requirements, by local authority area, into the current development plans. This will give a clear direction to be followed by planning authorities in updating their plans, allowing for stakeholders in the planning system to have clarity on the location and scale of the development proposed to meet housing need across the country.

I look forward to hearing the contributions from the Deputies in discussing and debating what is a very important revision.

Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage (Deputy John Cummins)

I welcome the opportunity to come before the House to discuss and seek approval for the final draft revised national planning framework, which was approved by Government on 8 April 2025. As already outlined by my colleague the Minister, the approval process for the finalisation of the revised national planning framework plays a key role in delivering on our broader objectives across Government and will allow the significant policy changes that have taken place and other factors that have come into play since 2018 to be integrated into the planning system.

I wish to provide an overview of the some of the key policy responses that have been incorporated into this revised NPF to ensure there is a robust strategy and a comprehensive national plan in place to guide and inform Ireland's future growth and development for many years to come. The revised NPF reaffirms the plan-led approach that is now firmly enshrined in legislation through the Planning and Development Act 2024, implemented at a regional and local level through our three regional assemblies and 31 local authorities. The importance of this plan-led approach cannot be underestimated as it aligns strategic planning policy from national level through to regional and local levels, giving effect to real sustainable outcomes for our regions, our cities and our communities, both urban and rural.

In 2018, the NPF recognised that continued investment in Dublin and the east coast is critical to support the future growth of Dublin as an international city of scale in the national interest but that this needs to be supported by a more balanced distribution of growth across all of Ireland's regions. The strategy recognises that a business-as-usual approach will not make the most effective and sustainable use of national and regional assets and resources. In contrast, more balanced and effective regional growth will harness the attractiveness and assets of all regions and places to a greater extent than it has to date.

The cornerstone policy of both the existing NPF and the revised version is the achievement of a greater regional balance in future population and employment growth. The goal is to see a roughly 50-50 distribution of growth between the eastern and midlands region and the southern, northern and western regions combined, based on a city-focused and compact growth pattern of development that will reverse the pattern of sprawl that has been a feature of recent decades. The ongoing shift to a more regionally balanced growth, supported by urban centres of scale, will be important in ensuring effective regional development and in supporting competitiveness, economic prosperity and environmental sustainability.

A number of specific projects to support better balanced regional development for the regions are referred to in the revised NPF, with such projects required to be advanced to delivery through the national development plan. The revision also includes objectives to improve interurban transport infrastructure, for example, through supporting the Atlantic corridor as part of the wider trans-European transport network, which link Ireland to the passenger and freight transport networks in continental Europe, in addition to examining recommendations in the All-Island Strategic Rail Review and key road projects that are essential for improving regional and interurban connectivity.

The compact growth policy approach of the revised NPF specifically addresses the need for a more sustainable form of development in Ireland's cities and towns. Its introduction was in response to an identified need to counter the trend of urban sprawl, to support the targeted delivery of infrastructure services and to promote cities and towns to be self-sustaining and viable places to live and work in. City-based population and employment growth is an important target of the NPF. The strategy sets a target of half of future population and employment growth to be focused in the existing five cities and their suburbs as a means of ensuring that cities deliver as accessible centres of scale. The proportion of national population growth achieved in 2022 in the five cities was 32% of overall growth. In order to achieve the overall increase in city-based population growth, the NPF sets out ambitious growth targets to enable the four cities of Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford to grow by at least 50% each to 2040.

To support the achievement of these targets, a new element of the NPF strategy included in this revision results from the possible requirement to plan for population growth that would exceed the baseline of 6.1 million set out by the ESRI in line with the high migration scenario the Minister, Deputy Browne, referred to of 6.3 million, provided in the same report. This is to be undertaken and delivered in line with longer term strategic planning for transport-orientated development in Ireland's five cities to support the delivery of new sustainable communities at brownfield and greenfield locations along existing or planned high-capacity public transport corridors. This will allow planning authorities to identify areas with significant potential for development within development plans and thereby provide medium- to longer term certainty around the status of those lands.

As regards identifying locations for future growth and housing development at scale, it is critical that planning for these opportunities is aligned with the phased infrastructure investment that will follow. Greater clarity is provided for as part of the revised NPF as to what the definition of a built-up area is, and there is a signalling to the monitoring system that will track implementation of the targets in a consistent way for all major settlements. The alignment of the NPF with the national development plan through Project Ireland 2040 governance provides a solid foundation for sustained growth and investment.

Policy coherence and co-ordination of investment programmes have been identified as critical elements for the successful implementation of the NPF strategy. The programme for Government has emphasised the delivery of essential infrastructure as a key driver in attracting and retaining investment in Ireland, growing our economy, fostering regional development and delivering on our housing targets, and achieving our ambitious climate goals. Given the strategic role of the NPF, any reference to specific projects or enablers is restricted to those that are of a strategic nature such as transport, water and grid infrastructure projects that are of a national or regional significance. It is also important to note that the NPF provides the spatial policy framework but in itself does not directly provide for investment but, rather, is aligned with the national development plan.

There are metropolitan area strategic plans for all of our five cities, and a MASP has been prepared as part of the three regional spatial and economic strategies for each of the regions. The MASPs set out a framework to guide development in the wider city region. The revised NPF indicates that, as part of phasing in the transition to achieving urban consolidation and brownfield targets, a proportion of up to 20% of the phased population growth targeted in the principal city and suburban area could potentially be accommodated in the wider metropolitan area - in other words, outside of the city and suburbs or the contiguous zoned area. This can be in addition to the growth identified for the metropolitan area itself.

As regards the potential for improved institutional arrangements to deliver on the NPF strategy, a new national policy objective has been included to highlight the commitment to reviewing reforms that may be necessary in terms of the governance of metropolitan area strategic plans, in recognition of the important role they will play going forward.

I reiterate the importance of this body of work and thank everybody who has engaged in the process recently, including the Oireachtas joint committee, of which I was a member prior to being elected to Dáil Éireann. I look forward to hearing the contributions of Deputies.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I will be sharing time with my colleague, Deputy McGuinness.

Statutory planning frameworks are enormously important. They not only set out a clear and legally defined basis for the entire hierarchy of plans, including the regional plans, the city and county development plans and local area plans, but they also provide a long-term strategic framework for investment and delivery of much-needed infrastructure and for housing. Getting it right is crucial and getting it wrong is more than damaging. In order to get the plan right, the process has to be got right. It gives me no pleasure to say that, having been through the previous national planning framework process, I believe the Government has made a number of mistakes in the process, which, unfortunately, is impacting the quality of the plan in front of us. The consultation period over the summer last year was too short. We had written to the Department's officials at the time asking for a short extension and that was denied. Notwithstanding the fact that there have been a significant number of submissions, having it over the summer made it difficult for many, ourselves included, to facilitate or participate in that.

Of greater concern, however, is that there should have been an enhanced role for the Oireachtas. The document itself should have been brought into committee. There should have been an opportunity for detailed scrutiny, not just in our housing and planning committee but in other committees as well. Instead we got a very brief session several days before the dissolution of the Dáil. I was very grateful to have had the benefit of at least some exchange with the Department's officials. However, we also had no opportunity to hear the view of sectoral organisations and third parties on the revised draft. Crucially, we had no opportunity to amend or even suggest amendments for consideration by the Government. When we received the revised draft in November, the Department's officials did give us a change-tracked version of it from the original NPF, which was very useful, but when I sought an updated version of that in advance of today, I was told it would not be available until after the vote. That has made it genuinely difficult to know what changes, if any, have been made between the document published in November and the one agreed by Cabinet only a week ago. As a consequence, this document is very weak. There are things that could have been done to make it better. I will go through some of those and colleagues throughout the course of the debate will refer to others.

The first issue I will raise is a concern about the calculations of population growth. The process, as the Minister of State knows, starts with a census. Two years later, the ESRI undertakes an assessment, and then, a year later, we have the review. That means a period of three years passes between the census data and the figures in the document in front of us, and a lot can change during that period. This was one of the fundamental flaws of the national planning framework in 2018. It was based on outdated census data and did not take into account changes between the 2016 census and the 2018 document. I think there is a risk of making the same mistake again. We argued during debate on the Planning and Development Bill that there should be more frequent reviews and they should be more timely on foot of the updated data becoming available from the census. Therefore, notwithstanding my concern, there needs to be a more frequent subsequent review to take account of whatever changes may happen in terms of population and migration patterns over the coming years.

This is particularly relevant when it comes to the housing needs assessment of the document. In fact, this was one of the strongest criticisms of the last NPF not just from us in the Opposition but also from the building industry, housing organisations and housing policy experts.

The 2016 census was out of date by the time Rebuilding Ireland was published. The housing targets that then fed into the national planning framework were simply too low. It took the Government far too long to accept what everybody else knew. The Minister is making the same mistake with this. I had a detailed exchange with his planning officials at the committee in November. The census was in 2022. There have been significant changes, as we know from subsequent ESRI migration and population reports. However, there has also been no adequate consideration of the issue of unmet demand. The ESRI report that has informed the planning framework is based on emerging demand, that is, future demand that will come. The only estimate we have of pent-up demand, as the Minister knows, is the Housing Commission’s. I understand some officials in the Minister’s Department do not agree with that and that is fine, but despite our having asked for the Minister and the Department to publish the methodology upon which their assessment of the deficit in its numbers in front of us today is based, that has yet to be published. We have a structural demand of 44,000 units per year, according to the ESRI, and an estimate of the unmet or pent-up demand that is about half of the Housing Commission’s. That is too low. The figure of an average of 50,000 new homes a year is too low. My reading of the report of the Housing Commission suggests it would need to be at least 60,000 per year. Every year, the Government misses that, the deficit grows and the overall targets need to be raised. This is not just a criticism of mine, as senior members of the Housing Commission are publicly on record saying the same. This is an issue that must be revised. There is a big difference between the targets Government set in the housing plan and its objective assessment of need. The latter should tell us what is required in the form of unmet demand and emerging demand. Then it is up to whoever is in government to say how that Government will meet that. The two are not the same but, for political reasons, they have been conflated, fatally undermining this plan.

I am also concerned about national planning objectives 2 and 3. I am not convinced that the 50:50 population distribution is balanced regional development. When we discussed these matters at committee, my colleagues and other Deputies, including Government Deputies, from Cork, Limerick, Sligo and Galway challenged and questioned the rationale of the 50:50 development. It is something that needs to be constantly revisited. I appreciate it represents significant growth in some of those regional cities but I am concerned it is still too Dublin- and greater Dublin area-centric, with all the problems that brings for the city, the greater Dublin area and balanced regional development more generally.

I acknowledge there has been a small change with national planning objectives 7 to 10, inclusive, on compact growth, but I am genuinely concerned "compact growth" still is not properly defined and allows outer existing settlement rather than focusing on inner urban genuine compact growth. The problem is if it is poorly defined and, as is currently the case, there are not adequate supports for public and private sector higher density inner urban development residential projects, then we are going to see continued suburban sprawl. The majority of what has been built in Dublin and the GDA over the past few years is on the other side of the M50 where I represent and in north Wicklow as well as east Kildare, Meath and south Louth. I am not arguing against housing there, but very little is actually happening in our inner urban cores in Dublin, Cork, Galway and Waterford and that is a fundamental problem.

Regarding national policy objective 45 on vacancy and dereliction, which relates to the conversation I just referenced, the crucial thing here is the NPOs, as they are the things that have legal impact, rather than the fluffy text around them. They are too weak and too ill-defined.

I bring to the Minister’s attention an ongoing concern I have with national planning objective 57 on the housing needs demand assessment. This is an important tool. If the data going into it is accurate and up to date and the methodology employed is correct, it cannot only tell us the total number of homes we need, but the tenure breakdown of those right down to county level, local electoral area and even below. However, when I met the Department a year and a half ago on this, nobody could tell me, for example, what data went into determining the social and affordable housing targets and what the actual methodology was. It seemed to almost be a mysterious black box where some stuff went in one side but very few people could explain how the numbers came out the other. I suspect if the Minister and I were to sit down with it, we would both struggle to understand where the numbers were derived from. We need to get that tool right. While the operation of the HNDA is a matter for the Minister and the Department, if it is not got right, everything that follows, including the targets for social and affordable housing, whenever they are announced, as well as targets for age-friendly accommodation and accommodation for people with disabilities, will be wrong.

I am also concerned there is no greater clarity on rural housing, Gaeltacht housing, housing on the islands or age-friendly housing from a planning point of view. We are still awaiting the guidelines. I think the Minister is the fourth Minister I have stood in front of discussing the rural guidelines. My colleague, Deputy McGuinness, will be raising both those and the Gaeltacht planning guidelines. What is in the NPF is too vague. It is too open to interpretation. There is too much inconsistency across Departments and that needs to change.

There is still no adequate attention to the spatial distribution of disadvantage. We asked for it to be mapped in the original NPF but it was not. That has all sorts of implications for ensuring investment helps us tackle disadvantage spatially. Chapter 8 on the all-Ireland dimension is vague and unclear but other colleagues will deal with that. In chapter 9, there is virtually no mention of embodied carbon in the built environment. There is lots of good stuff on energy efficiency but unless we are actually constructing a lower carbon built environment, it is going to be a problem.

This is a disappointing document. It repeats many of the mistakes of its predecessor as well as creating new mistakes. It does not have my party’s support at this stage and we will continue to make the case for a planning framework that will meet the social, economic, cultural and environmental needs of our people. This does not and it is on that basis we will be voting against it.

Deputy Conor D. McGuinness

A national planning framework should be a road map for fairness, decent living standards, balanced development and a future where no community is written off. What we have before us in the draft framework falls far short of that. It is a framework that gestures at ambition but lacks the backbone to deliver. It reads more like a vague wish list than a serious plan for action. This Government has failed to close the gap on many fronts, but especially in this document, between policy and delivery. Whether in the inner city or the rural parish, communities are battling for school spaces, access to a GP and gardaí, and left dealing with outdated and inadequate public transport links. The housing crisis is impacting all communities, rural and urban. By every metric, it is getting worse by the week.

The draft framework marks a slight shift by acknowledging these problems but offers no urgency, no binding targets and no real change in how power or funding is distributed. For years, rural Ireland has been neglected rather than supported. The current approach to rural housing is a case in point. It is often restrictive, inflexible and dogmatic. If a young family wants to build a home in the community they grew up in, then the State should support that. We need real investment in the basics in housing, connectivity, accessible public services and a planning system takes into account the needs of rural communities. A future in which rural communities thrive requires more than fine words. It requires the political will to back them with action.

Tá pobal na Gaeltachta fágtha ar lár arís agus arís eile. Tá sé soiléir nach bhfuil an Rialtas seo sásta ár bpobail Ghaeltachta a chosaint. Níl sa phlean seo ach ráitis agus gealltanais bhriste. Tá treoirlínte pleanála don Ghaeltacht fós gan foilsiú. Tá teaghlaigh óga ag fanacht, ag éirí mífhoighneach agus ag imeacht óna gceantair dhúchais. Tá an Ghaeilge agus pobal na Gaeltachta i mbaol má leanaimid leis seo. Ní leor focail. Tá gá le gníomh, le spriocanna soiléire do thithíocht shóisialta agus inacmhainne, le suímh sheirbhísithe sna Gaeltachtaí, le maoiniú dáiríre agus le polasaithe a thugann tús áite do phobail atá ag iarraidh maireachtáil agus fás trí Ghaeilge.

We cannot talk about planning without talking about power, including who holds it and who gets left out. Where is the emphasis in this document on community development and social inclusion? Where is the vision for a better, fairer and more inclusive Ireland? I do not see it. Sinn Féin believes community-led development is not optional but essential. Funding must flow directly to communities, both urban and rural. LEADER, regeneration funds and youth services are not luxuries, but the difference between vibrant communities and places drained of opportunity.

This framework is silent on coastal and fishing communities. That silence is damning. These communities are being hammered by EU quotas, underinvestment and the loss of young people, yet they are rich in potential for renewable energy, marine tourism and sustainable seafood. Sinn Féin believes in our coastal communities and our maritime potential and we have articulated that over many years. Successive Governments have failed to recognise the potential of our hugely valuable maritime resource. Sustainable and community-driven initiatives to exploit that resource need to be developed. The NPF should reflect that but it does not. It has no fleshed-out plan on maintaining and expanding our working harbours, supporting small-scale fishers or investing in other infrastructure.

The blue economy - fishing, tourism, aquaculture, renewable energy, sea safety, trade and maritime defence - are neglected in this document. The draft framework needs clearer targets, named projects and guaranteed delivery in every county, not just in the major cities and their commuter belts. Otherwise, our time is being wasted again. There is no reference to the development of Waterford Airport, for example, the port or the main routes of the N24 and N25, which are becoming more dangerous, congested and inadequate every day. There are harbours that barely have water due to a lack of dredging. Developing offshore wind energy was spoken about, yet one cannot even get a punt out of a harbour. This draft lacks urgency, vision and a tangible plan for rural communities. Sinn Féin will not support any version of the NPF that does not place the needs of communities front and centre. It is time to deliver more than promises; it is time to deliver real change.

Deputy Conor Sheehan

The national planning framework is a critical piece of work that underpins everything in regional planning, development plans and local area plans. It is vital we get this right, as this document goes to the very essence of how we do planning, development and infrastructure in this country. This plan should be an opportunity to set out and better reflect the need for a more balanced distribution of economic activity and population growth to close the gap between Dublin and the regional cities. The NPF should also set out a baseline for our ambition and not act as a ceiling on future development. We need more compact, low-carbon and balanced regional development.

The NPF refers to transport-orientated development. It must be clearer in the document that this refers primarily to rail-oriented development. Limerick and Waterford are ripe for transit-oriented development. Investment in the rail network is the most efficient, effective and climate-resilient way to move masses of people. The spine of our rail network should underpin the NPF, particularly in Limerick. This would allow us to maximise the benefits of increased compact growth, which is vital in solving the housing crisis and meeting our transport goals.

Regional cities outside of Dublin cannot continue to suffer as Dublin expands at an unsustainable pace, with infrastructure in the Dublin region in particular unable to cope. Cities outside of Dublin must be allowed more ambitious growth targets to achieve their potential to become regional cities of scale, particularly my city of Limerick. Limerick has potential for growth in excess of 60%, with existing third level institutions, road and rail infrastructure and access to a deep-sea port and international airport. The stated aimed of Project Ireland 2040 is to develop regional towns and cities as viable urban centres of scale that can act as alternatives and a counterbalance to the continued growth of Dublin and its surrounding region. Project Ireland 2040 envisages that the population of Limerick city and its suburbs will grow by between 50% and 60% by 2040. Limerick has huge potential to develop as a regional city of scale and become a counterpull to a sprawling Dublin metropolis. This potential cannot be realised unless growth targets in the plan are revised upwards for cities outside of Dublin. We need stronger and more ambitious targets for compact growth. Alternative targets are needed, such as densification targets for urban areas, including mature suburbs.

The NPF also needs to be stronger on the role of regional airports, in particular Shannon Airport, the biggest and most underutilised infrastructure in the State. It has the longest runway in Ireland and the capacity to take double the number of passengers it currently takes. At a time when Dublin Airport takes nearly 91% of air traffic into the State, the role of Shannon Airport and the Shannon campus in balancing national economic growth must be better recognised and reflected in this plan.

I call for the boundary of Waterford map to be expanded to include Waterford Airport, as Deputy Conor D. McGuinness referenced, and Tramore. Similar has been done in Cork and Limerick. From talking to my colleagues down there, there is a strong feeling that Waterford was treated differently when the NPF was first done.

The Labour Party believes the national planning framework must better reflect our climate goals and the need to reduce emissions from fossil fuels by 51% by 2030. I am concerned about the aspects of the NPF that pertain to energy, particularly LNG, after the recent policy reversal by the Government. My colleague, Senator Cosgrove, tabled an amendment yesterday concerning the national energy policy referred to on page 132 of the framework, which insists that all energy policy relating to planning should be built on the pillars of sustainability, security of supply and competitiveness. We support these goals and want to work with the Government to achieve a just transition. The target to cut greenhouse emissions by 51% by 2030 will be very difficult to achieve as is, with the SEAI report telling us that nearly 86% of our energy still comes from fossil fuels. We have five years to get this down to 51%. This will become completely impossible if the development of LNG infrastructure is allowed. This flies in the face of all three pillars of the national energy policy. I have other concerns that need to be addressed.

Colleagues from rural constituencies have contacted me about their concerns regarding the impact of the NPF on rural Ireland. There is no acknowledgement in the framework of the ongoing disaster of the defective blocks scandal in Donegal. Planning is required to restore the homes of thousands of people. It is not just in Donegal; there are people in my constituency. The shortage of housing in Gaeltacht areas is being made worse by the problem of holiday homes and short-terms lets. Senator Cosgrove yesterday spoke in the Seanad about the role of Sligo as a regional city. Sligo does not receive the correct level of support to grow and develop in a sustainable manner. My colleague, Deputy Wall, has told me Kildare County Council does not yet have exact figures on the population targets under the revised NPF broken down by county. There is no doubt that strategic plan-led development is needed regarding population growth. The plan must identify locations that have or are about to have the correct infrastructure to support population increases. We cannot see the situation at the moment, particularly in rural Ireland, where homes receive permission without the proper basic infrastructure in place such as transport, schools and other necessary infrastructure.

They must be front-loaded. I welcome that the Minister referenced rural Ireland. Too many of our rural communities are in trouble because of constraints on current county development plans. Many rural locations have the necessary infrastructure such as schools, sporting facilities and shops to sustain a greater population than they currently have. Will the Minister confirm when each local authority will receive the exact population and growth patterns the NPF mentions? A lot of my colleagues are waiting on these figures, as are local authorities, because they will need to re-examine their county development plans and progress the development of towns and villages in their local authority areas. My colleague, Councillor Thomas Phelan, in Dungarvan contacted me. He is concerned about what the revised NPF will mean for towns such as Dungarvan that have not yet done their local area plans due to the NTA insisting on local transport plans. They need to know these figures in case they have to rezone land or reopen a county or town development plan. These towns and villages are losing businesses and essential services.

Vacancy and dereliction in a lot of these areas is on the rise.

To go back to more urban areas, there is also concern about a lack of evidence-based planning. The concern is that this will lead to more land being speculated on and hoarded by a few developers and the lessons of the planning tribunals being forgotten. What we know for sure is that the revised NPF will lead to an increased supply of zoned development land but the Government itself does not know at the moment how much land is already zoned for residential development.

There is also a concern, as others have outlined, about the housing targets. Many county development plans were done relatively recently and there was an awful lot of back and forth with the OPR. The OPR came back to many local authorities, my own included, and told them that they were attempting to zone too much land. Those local authorities are now required to reopen their county development plans and re-examine them. Where does this leave the OPR in terms of its credibility and independence if councils reopen their development plans and zone more land?

While we welcome the fact that we finally have the revised document, the consultation process was far too slow over the summer. We believe that this is a weak document and that there are a number of key flaws in it. This should have come before the Oireachtas for scrutiny. It should have come before the committee and we should have had the opportunity to go through it in granular detail, which is what my colleagues in the Labour Party and I believe is necessary. That is why, at this stage, we cannot support this document.

Deputy Rory Hearne

This planning framework is important but, unfortunately, it is insufficient and inadequate in a number of areas, which I will talk about presently.

I wish to discuss the housing emergency because it is linked to this. It is linked to what is absent from the planning objectives. I refer to the absence of an objective to deliver affordable housing and any assessment of what scale of affordable housing is required or how it is going to be delivered and where. We heard a claim yesterday by the Taoiseach, Micheál Martin, that the Social Democrats and the Opposition had not put forward ideas, alternatives or solutions around housing but we have put forward a number of evidence-based solutions and I want to put them on the record again. For example, I wrote to the Minister about the proposal we put forward for a homes for Ireland savings scheme that would offer a new source of finance for housing. Indeed, it would be private financing. It was very frustrating to hear the Taoiseach say that this would not build any homes but that what was needed was institutional investors and private equity funds to provide finance to build homes. That is actually a contradictory statement. He said the issue was that we did not have finance to build homes but the home for Ireland savings scheme is a solution that can access additional finance to build homes and potentially leverage the €160 billion that is in the banks. I ask that the Minister take this proposal on board and see how it can be implemented rapidly and start providing an additional financing stream for affordable housing that would actually help to deliver homes.

The reality is that we are in a catastrophic situation. The level of homelessness that we are seeing right now is unprecedented but, unfortunately, it is becoming normalised by this Government. It is not just the current Minister, who is relatively new, but also previous Ministers. We must restate that current levels of homelessness or, indeed, any level of homelessness or any child being left homeless is a national scandal. I cannot get over how we have allowed the situation to develop whereby it is not a case of stopping everything because we have thousands of children growing up in emergency accommodation. I just cannot get my head around it.

We have measures like the tenant in situ scheme, which was working well and the Department accepted was working but has now been restricted for some reason. It still exists but its ability to function for local authorities is being restricted. It has already been reported that Dublin City Council in my own area has issues with regard to the funding that is available to make it work. The same is true of Kildare County Council and Cork City Council. These councils are saying that, due to the changes, they cannot use the scheme to the same extent they did last year. Will the Minister reinstate in full the tenant in situ scheme?

On the planning framework itself, there are clearly issues with zoning, the servicing of land and infrastructure but these problems have been there for years. It is extremely frustrating that they have not been tackled. It is only now that this is being looked at and the Government is asking if there are new ways in which we can tackle these issues. Why have they not been tackled up to now? I am concerned that what we are going to see is more lip service and claims that these issues are going to be tackled rather than properly tackling them. There are some fundamental issues at play here.

The proposal we made to zone land for affordable housing is not in this plan. I do not understand why we are not zoning land for affordable housing as has been done in other countries. It is a way to ensure that, when we are zoning land, it will deliver affordable housing in perpetuity. There is a fundamental problem in the zoning of land currently. If local authorities zone land for residential development and there is no set allocation for affordable housing, what we will see, which is what we see currently, is land being speculated on. When the land is rezoned, the private owner of the land gains the uplift from that rezoning and can sit on it or sell it on to someone else who buys it and then sits on it. There is no mechanism through which that land can be developed. There are no proposals or measures put forward to ensure that zoned land is developed. There is a flaw in this framework because there is no use-it-or-lose-it mechanisms in terms of planning permission or zoning. While the tax measures on zoned land might go some way towards forcing development or ensuring zoned land is developed, what the framework is not doing, ultimately, is addressing the issue outlined by the Kenny report in the 1970s of the speculative, windfall gain from land that is rezoned. It is home buyers who have to pay this. Countries like the Netherlands have a much more active land strategy whereby the state purchases the land, gets the planning permission and puts in the infrastructure. Essentially, what we are going to do is zone all of this extra land for residential development with no mechanisms by which to ensure that the infrastructure goes in and homes are actually built on it.

We can put the infrastructure in there but it may not necessarily be built on. We have a fundamental problem in how we are doing that because, ultimately, we are still taking this market-led approach to housing delivery and it is still in this plan. The entire planning objectives contain no mechanisms by which affordable housing will be built on land. There are no mechanisms by which this will be implemented, apart from aspirational references to what the Land Development Agency might do with public land. However, there are no mechanisms by which that will happen for private land. That is a major flaw that must be addressed. We need mechanisms by which, for example, the Land Development Agency is given full compulsory purchase order powers to compulsorily purchase private land on a significant scale and start looking at ways in which it can prepare that land and ensure that affordable housing is built on it and getting builders to build on it. Local authorities could also play that role. We are limiting what the State can do with land by only focusing on public land. There is a real issue about the public land we are using.

There is a lack of clarity on this and on outcomes and strategies in the planning framework.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

Thank you, Deputy. I call Deputy Whitmore. Ceithre nóiméad, le do thoil.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

I looked through the document. When you read it, it all sounds very worthy as did the document before it and many other documents this Government and previous governments have produced. These are all nice, shiny, glossy documents that have very good sounding objectives and visions in place. Take, for example, national policy objective 12. It reads: “Ensure the creation of attractive, liveable, well designed, high quality urban places that are home to diverse and integrated communities that enjoy a high quality of life and well-being.” That is absolutely fantastic. How could we argue against that? However, the reality is we have seen many of these documents with many similar objectives. The issue for us as a country is not writing these documents but rather implementing them and seeing them delivered. To date, we have not seen the development of communities.

I only have a few minutes, so I will use this opportunity to talk about my constituency in Wicklow. Wicklow neighbours Dublin. We have seen considerable population growth over recent years and compared with other parts of the country we have seen quite a bit of housing go in. However, the housing is not affordable. We are talking €800,000 for a four-bed and €650,000 for a three-bed. That is a pretty standard price. For many who were born and raised in Wicklow, the reality is they will not be able to afford to remain in Wicklow. Many parents with adult children in Wicklow are really conscious of that and are incredibly worried about their children. Once you force children to a different county, or indeed country, you are breaking up that family network and the core fundamentals of community. You are taking away families' opportunities to engage with their grandchildren and taking away childminders in many instances, and when there are elderly parents you are taking away adult children’s ability to care for their parents as they age and that fundamental promise of community is gone.

The document talks about schools, public transport, healthcare facilities, primary care centres and Garda stations – all the things we need, should have and should be investing in but that we have not been investing in.

We talk about education and the need to have sufficient educational facilities and infrastructure but we just do not have it. It seems like the Department of Education is continually chasing its tail in providing sufficient educational spaces. Again, I am talking about Wicklow. At the moment, I am dealing with five children who have no place for secondary school this September. That could be seen as a blip, an unfortunate instance where the Department will hopefully step in and resolve that, but last year was the same and previous year and the year before that. Every year the exact same thing happens. We do not have enough primary school or secondary school places. You can see the problems moving from Greystones to Newtownmountkennedy to Wicklow town and in Blessington where we have infrastructure and where kids are in modular buildings. It takes years to get the proper permanent building in place. Not only does it take years but it takes hours, weeks and months of parents fighting for it to get it in place. That is not acceptable.

This week, public transport for Greystones and Kilcoole went up in price. That is a crazy decision.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

Okay.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

We do not have sufficient, affordable and proper public transport. We do not have investment in the infrastructure we need. Unfortunately, I do not have much faith that the Minister will be able to deliver the communities we need.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

I call Deputy Sinéad Gibney.

Deputy Sinéad Gibney

I welcome the opportunity to comment on the revised national planning framework. It is such a crucial piece in the infrastructure of our planning in this country. Obviously, it flows down into regional plans and into local area plans and sets those parameters which we need to guide the development of our population and our communities over the coming years. In particular, I welcome that brownfield sites and infill development is a feature in this. In my constituency, although really across Ireland, we need to make sure we harness that as a way to make sure we reach our targets in terms of housing development but that we do it in a way that is sustainable and in a way that keeps communities together, which is so crucial.

I agree with my colleagues in terms of what we need to see match this. It is the infrastructural development that unfortunately we have been crying out and which has been under-delivered again and again by this Government. In my constituency of Dublin Rathdown transport is such a problem for people. The bus routes are not working for them. The Luas was such a great success but now capacity is such that people cannot even get on at certain stops. Even at my local stop in Sandyford or in Stillorgan, it is difficult to get a seat in the morning at rush hour. Healthcare, GP visits and secondary school places are a problem as well. With regard to amenities and sports facilities for young people, there are issues in Sandyford where conflict has arisen because young people have so little available to them in the local area-----

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

Okay.

Deputy Sinéad Gibney

-----and indeed sports facilities are crying out-----

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

Thank you, Deputy.

Deputy Sinéad Gibney

Just to finish-----

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

We are well over time.

Deputy Sinéad Gibney

There is such a positive story here in terms of the population development we will see.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

Thank you, Deputy.

Deputy Sinéad Gibney

It will be 296,000 people by 2040-----

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

Thank you.

Deputy Sinéad Gibney

-----so we have to build the appropriate infrastructure-----

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

Thank you.

Deputy Sinéad Gibney

-----to meet those needs.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

Thank you very much. We will go back to the Sinn Féin Party and to Deputy Pa Daly. Cúig nóiméad, le do thoil.

Deputy Pa Daly

The national planning framework had the potential to unlock a brighter future in this country and to right the wrongs of the past, to develop a co-ordinated strategic and ambitious approach to the social, economic, environmental and cultural development of the island but what has been presented is certainly not that. It lacks ambition, is devoid of detail and is certainly not going to bring in the transformative change that the country deserves. Unsurprisingly, the Government has once again decided to rush through today another essential policy tool without allowing for proper Oireachtas scrutiny but that is par for the course for Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael - skipping the essential democratic processes so they can evade criticism and let the Minister off the hook.

This framework will not deliver our climate ambition nor will it deliver the interconnected transport system that will facilitate balanced regional development and ensure proper rural connectivity. There is also nothing in here - faic - for the Gaeltacht area. There is a basic failure to marshal this plan to address the twin crises in climate and biodiversity and ensure that Ireland’s future development is informed by these existential threats. These challenges are intertwined and should not be treated in isolation. Ireland is one single biogeographic unit. We know about the challenges of ecological collapse. They do not pay attention to borders, so we need an all-Ireland approach. What engagement, if any took place, between Ministers and officials with their counterparts in the Six Counties? I would love to know.

The integrated electricity market already demonstrates the benefit of an all-island approach and there is no reason we cannot build on this in terms of energy but also a united transport system. However, to achieve this we need more than the vague nods to deeper collaboration that we see in the NPF.

The framework also fails to ensure that Ireland is operating within carbon budgets. We are already on track to exceed them by a large margin, which is getting wider and wider. Carbon emissions are cumulative and it is a flawed approach to simply focus on 51% by 2030, especially given that the NPF is a national policy document up to 2040. A destination without a roadmap for how to get there is not a proper plan. We must think of our future and our children's future. We owe them that much.

The NPF additionally fails to take the necessary steps to seize control of Ireland's incredible renewables potential. This was a real opportunity to course correct and make up for decades of inaction, bad planning, mismanagement and the reasons we are so far behind on our targets. The Government, however, has declined to take up the mantle. Take, for example, the regional renewable capacity allocations. They are nowhere near ambitious enough. While I am glad the Government has finally recognised the need for a regionally balanced approach, which distributes the burden and benefit more equitably, the targets it has set almost guarantee we will miss them. That will cost us billions in fines and place energy independence out of reach, and will not deliver on the potential to reduce people's electricity bills every two months. That is not going to happen with these targets. With these allocations, we will continue to be dependent on international gas markets for our electricity prices.

The allocations fail to take account of our infrastructural deficits in the grid and water provision. What hope have towns in Kerry, which need increased infrastructure so they can increase development in towns and village centres, without a proper plan? It is not just about available land but is also about capacity. The Government is falling short in that regard. To make matters worse, the NPF fails to deal with the fact that data centre expansion has gobbled up all the renewable energy capacity. There are serious risks to our energy security and climate ambition. What obligations are there going to be on companies that are promoting data centre expansion to ensure renewables are available?

As the Government eyes up LNG in a move that it considers necessary, and we will see what happens with the reports that are pending, we must ask ourselves what is really happening here and what is the ultimate agenda. Similarly, the framework also fails to introduce a specific national policy objective that supports repowering. Everyone agrees this will be essential for the transition to net zero but the NPF says and does little in that regard. The same, unfortunately, can be said of our plan for long duration energy storage. I was disappointed, but not surprised, that the Government seems determined to stick with the model of private ownership. Corporate developers are at the helm of our transition and they ensure that any benefits of transition will be siphoned off into the pockets of their shareholders rather than translating into national wealth for all. We see a higher role for the State. At the heart of our vision is the expansion of community, public and domestic ownership of renewables to bring down energy costs-----

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

Thank you.

Deputy Pa Daly

-----and share the costs more equitably. I will finish on the following point.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

Thank you. No, you are finished, Deputy. We must keep to the schedule.

Deputy Pa Daly

Language planning in the Gaeltacht has been totally ignored.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Cathal Crowe)

I call Deputy Timmins. I apologise, but we must keep within the time limits. Thank you.

Deputy Pa Daly

We are way ahead of time.

Deputy Edward Timmins

It is important that these guidelines are rolled out to the county councils as soon as possible to allow them to amend their county development and local area plans. Because of the delay, I have seen a planning application for 335 houses in Blessington, County Wicklow, which was supported by the council and all the elected members, refused by An Bord Pleanála because the local area plan was not up to date with the new housing targets.

No guidance has been issued at this stage on headroom. From my experience of development plans, the previous direction from the Office of the Planning Regulator was 0% headroom, which was misguided. It is imperative that there is a considerable percentage of headroom because in practice, many sites will not be developed for various reasons. All landowners are not ready-to-go developers and real-world site development often has many obstacles, including cost, and may lead to planning refusals. I would suggest headroom of the order of 70%.

I welcome the reference to substantially better linkage between the zoning of land and the availability of infrastructure. Policy objective 103 states, "When considering zoning land for development purposes that cannot be serviced within the life of the relevant plan, such lands should not be zoned for development." The problem with that is we do not know what Irish Water's specific plans are for the lifetime of the development plans.

Tiered zoning refers to lower tiers with fewer services. Many current plans are tiered even when they both have access to services. There should be no tiered zoning in these cases. If, for example, tier 1 zoning is not developed, it stops tier 2 development, even though tier 2 could have access to infrastructure.

I will make a suggestion regarding expired local area plans. Currently, if someone appeals a grant of planning permission, An Bord Pleanála will refuse on the grounds that the local area plan is out of date. Would the Minister consider giving expired local area plans legal status or extending their lifetime to avoid such refusals until such time as they are updated? The challenge now is that the forward planning units of the county councils will have to choose between updating the local area plans and updating the county development plans. My suggestion could avoid that resource issue. In any case, the forward planning units need guidelines from the Minister. I know that in Wicklow, some local area plans have expired, such as the one in Blessington. I am aware of the same issue in other counties, including Kildare and Wexford. How long will this review of the local area plans and county development plans take? Normally, this process takes nine months but we do not have that time. Is there any way we can expedite this? The target figures for each town should not be caps, which is how the system currently operates. Can An Bord Pleanála be given deadlines for planning decisions? I know of a case where a decision was due from An Bord Pleanála last July and still, over nine months later, no decision has been made.

From a national point of view, councils must be closely involved in the delivery of housing. Delivery must be micromanaged. These county targets must be drilled down further, with monthly figures produced by all local authorities showing actual figures versus target figures, and explanations given. That is the only way to deliver large numbers of houses. The Minister must then meet the CEOs of the councils and the heads of planning on a quarterly basis. This method is exactly the way a business would aim to achieve its targets.

The residential zoned land tax is referred to a number of times in the document. As in many aspects of planning, there is a real gap between the planners' view of the world and the economic realities on the ground. Many areas of the country that are zoned are uneconomic to develop. That means the cost of developing and building a house would exceed the selling price of the house. It is, therefore, uneconomic and development will not happen. Under current market conditions, such a house would not be developed. That is not to say it could not become economically possible to develop in the future so the land should not be dezoned. The tax should not apply to such locations. Flexibility is required as market conditions change. In practice, the only housing that is viable in these areas is by the councils or housing bodies. This results in locations not having a balance between social and private housing, and results in private house buyers being shut out of the market. I know of several examples where housing bodies have bought up estates in small towns and local buyers cannot purchase them.

Affordable houses are mentioned several times but without figures or targets. Can we consider working with housing bodies to deliver full, affordable housing schemes? They currently do hundreds of social schemes but can they do affordable housing schemes? This is really badly needed. Could the council work directly with developers to deliver affordable housing estates?

The rural regeneration and development fund, RRDF, is referred to in the plan. This has proved a good scheme but it needs to happen quickly.

On rural planning, the definition of areas under urban influence was far too stringent in the previous NDP. I hope that definition is narrowed in this plan because in County Wicklow, apart from one townland, the whole county is deemed to be under urban influence. This can result in the refusal of genuine rural planning grants, which I have witnessed.

The plan refers to maintaining the strategic capacity and safety of the national roads network, including planning for future capacity enhancements. This must include the new N81 and the upgrade of the N11-M11.

Deputy Cathal Crowe

I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate. It is good that there has been a review of the NPF. The previous planning framework was introduced too hastily. It is good that we slow down a little, take stock and review where all of this is going.

I know there is a different term used in government but I welcome the appointment of this "housing tsar", as it is being dubbed in the media. It is important that someone in the Department gives a high-level briefing to the Minister of State and Minister so that decisions can be taken to really move this forward. The judgment will be how many houses have been delivered by the end of this Government's term. It is really important that headway is made. It would be useful for each local authority to present an audit of refusal reasons across a defined period, maybe a two-month period, and that this be brought into the Department by way of analysis. Some refusals are applications that should never have been lodged in the first place, people who did not qualify to build in areas. However, like the last speaker, I can say that in the part of County Clare in which I live, the predominant amount of land is designated as being under urban-generated pressure. It means unless you are born or bred in, or have a social link to, the area, you will never get to build. If we are looking at population increases and urban growth, then what we define as an urban-generated pressure area also needs to change by virtue of that. There cannot be large swathes of a county where pretty much no one gets to build thereafter.

Another thing I have seen creep into our county - and I think it is replicated across the country - is the definition of what constitutes a farmer has changed. In County Clare and perhaps other counties, the majority of a household's income must come from farming. In County Clare, 85% of farm families are suckler farm families. Each year, the cows calve, the calves are sold after nine months when they are weaned and the cycle continues. That is how it has gone for generations. County Clare is not dairy country so it is hard to find a family where the majority of the household income comes from a farming enterprise. It is quite different when someone is dairying; the farm is generating enough income that the entire family can work at that enterprise. It may not always be like that because it fluctuates, but the trend in suckler in recent years has been that one or two adults in the household have to work during the day and do foddering and all the other jobs in the evening. The metric by which "farmer" is defined does not work anymore and can be rather punitive. Someone with 28, 30 or 35 suckler cows needs to be able to live on their farm. They have a social need to be there. To crudely assess their social need on the basis of their income filed with Revenue in the past year does not cut it.

The Minister of State, Deputy Cummins, and the Minister, Deputy Browne, need to keep a close eye on the pilot sewerage schemes. A package of schemes to the tune of €50 million was announced about a year and a half ago. None of them have progressed so far.

I want to say on the record something that concerns me greatly. Irish Water at a high level has been briefing against the scheme. This is a wonderful scheme that needs to happen. There are many villages in our county and country unsewered. When you flush a toilet, it percolates somewhere into a drain and ends up in a local stream, river or lake. That has to stop. Broadford and Cooraclare are two villages in my county that were selected for this pilot scheme. I have overheard senior officials in my company say it does not make economic sense to do that. They use the example of Broadford, which has approximately 100 houses that would benefit from the sewerage scheme. The cost of the scheme is €5 million and they crudely said that works out at roughly €50,000 per house to connect to sewerage and is economically unviable. That does not factor in the environmental damage that non-action involves. We will have to deliver these schemes. They have waited 40-plus years for them. Government has funded and approved them. It is time someone in the Department drove on and overrode these illogical arguments being put forward by way of resistance from Irish Water.

Population targets cannot become caps. Also, in a county like Clare, where much of our road network is constituted of regional and national routes in the west of the county, we cannot prohibit people who have always lived there intergenerationally from building in those areas.

When we talk about planning, we do not talk so much about forward planning as about applications that go in for an eight-week period and result in a decision. We need to significantly beef up in all local authorities the number of people working in planning enforcement and pre-planning. There was a time when you would apply for a pre-planning meeting and a few weeks later would be called in and given a pretty good indication of whether it was a runner. That does not seem to happen anymore.

Planning guidelines on wind energy are grossly outdated. I think they date back to 2008. They are not purposeful for the industry and they are not fit for purpose in terms of protecting the communities these colossal pieces of infrastructure go into. We heard time and again through the lifetime of the last Government that the guidelines were coming. I heard at one point they made their way onto the desk of the then Minister, Eamon Ryan. He had concerns about the noise output of turbines. Fine, but where are they? When will we see the new guidelines? The industry is demanding them, as are the communities where planning applications have been lodged. We need detail. Will the Minister of State come to that in his response?

Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh

Today, the Minister of State is presenting the national planning framework and it is the blueprint for how the State will manage strategic planning and sustainable development out to 2040. It is essential that the framework deals strategically and systematically with the major issues of our time: housing, climate change, energy security and the prosperity of everyone living on the island. These issues can only be dealt with on an all-island basis. As we prepare for constitutional change and a referendum on Irish unity, there is a responsibility on Government and all agencies to ensure the plans they publish are future-proofed. There is probably no more important document than the national planning framework to ensure we prepare in a cohesive and planned way to create a better future for all living on the island and for future generations.

The section "Working with Our Neighbours" is not adequate in that context. As a west of Ireland representative, I believe the framework is skewed in favour of development in Dublin and the eastern region. This is not good for the west and north west - it is not good for Dublin and the east either. Unless we see regional development as an answer to national challenges, we are missing opportunities and ingraining inequality. CSO statistics show the eastern and midland region has grown by 55%, while the northern and western region has grown by only 15%. Residential unit commencement data from the Department of housing and collated by the Northern and Western Regional Assembly is even more stark. In 2024, 63% of commencements were in the eastern and midland region, while only 10% were in the north and western region. The assertion in the national planning framework that the population in the eastern and midlands region will grow at twice the rate of the northern and western region combined with the southern region sets a flawed narrative for everything else in the plan. How will a 50-50 growth strategy tackle the imbalance that currently exists and the stagnation of growth in the west and north west? The Northern and Western Regional Assembly has also reported that this part of the country is in the bottom 20 EU regions for transport infrastructure, with notable underinvestment also evident in the region's higher education, research, water, rail, road network and grid.

Unfortunately, this plan in its current form fails to meet those needs. On that basis, we will not be able to support it in this form.

Deputy Thomas Gould

This is not a revision of the national planning framework; it is just a tweaking around the edges. It is very disappointing that no analysis has been provided on why the objectives of the original national planning framework have not yet been reached or on how this plan will operate differently. In the Dublin area, €19,000 is spent per capita on the NDP. This compares to just €10,000 in the Cork metropolitan area. All of the planning frameworks in the world are worth nothing if the money to implement them ignores the objectives. How is the regional counterbalance supposed to happen if it is not plan-led? Instead, the Government is demand-led, focusing on objectives and requests from developers and speculators.

The revised national planning framework does not properly emphasise the need for infill developments and brownfield developments in our towns and villages. We are seeing large estates being built on greenfield sites around towns. This can have a negative effect on local economies and force more people into cars. I will give one example. Twenty years ago the people of Grenagh in Cork were promised a bus service. They have virtually no bus service now. Loads of houses have been built, but there is no plan. It happened in Whitechurch, White's Cross, upper Glanmire and many other areas.

At the same time, many of our main streets are full of derelict and vacant buildings. One of the key ambitions of the national planning framework is the guidance on "meanwhile use". Local authorities, landowners and prospective tenants are very cautious because there is no clarity on the legal standing when it comes to "meanwhile use". This should be rectified because it is one of the most powerful tools to help regenerate areas and deal with dereliction and vacancy.

There is so much more that could be done in this regard. It is a missed opportunity.

Deputy Joe Neville

I congratulate Deputy John Cummins on his role as Minister of State. He has been there for a few months but it is my first time speaking to him directly in the Chamber. Deputy Cummins was a great councillor friend of mine. Obviously, he is from Waterford and I am from Kildare but we were great friends for so many years that is a great honour to be able to speak to him in this way today.

I want to support the revised national planning framework but also to call for its full and fair implementation, particularly, as the Minister of State will know, in regions close to my heart like north Kildare, where the gap between population growth and infrastructure delivery has ever widened. The varied plan on page 27 clearly states that the mid-east region, which has Kildare at its heart, has experienced population growth at more than twice the national average in recent decades. However, when we look at the detail, the imbalance becomes stark. I did a word count and, in the entire framework, Dublin is mentioned 169 times, Cork is mentioned 94 times and Galway is mentioned 71 times. These are the three largest counties in the country. County Kildare, despite being the fourth largest county, is referenced just seven times. That disparity speaks volumes to me.

Towns like Leixlip, Celbridge, Maynooth, Naas, Clane and Kilcock have, to an extent, become commuter hubs and, as I have referenced before, are absorbing wave after wave of housing development without the commensurate delivery of roads, schools, transport links or community amenities. We are seeing the results of decades of, if not necessarily a planning failure, then definitely a lack of implementation of the required infrastructure. Houses were built first and everything else was left to play catch-up, and in many cases, the catch-up has still to be done.

Let us be very clear. The framework does acknowledge this issue. It states:

... local infrastructure needs, including in particular social and community infrastructure in areas such as education and amenity, and addressing the legacy of rapid growth, must be prioritised.

[...]

... housing development should be infrastructure led and primarily based on employment growth, accessibility by sustainable transport modes and quality of life ...

I fully support all of those principles but, at the same time, while we are seeing those principles on paper, so far, they have not been continued in north Kildare. Therefore, while I support the document and everything in it, I call for it to be delivered when this actually gets rolled out.

North Kildare is home to world-class employers, such as Intel in Leixlip, of which we have heard a lot in the news in the last two weeks in a way that we would not have liked, and the Kerry Group in Naas, as well as the rapidly growing research and education footprint of Maynooth University. We are pulling more than our weight economically in Kildare yet, on the ground, I feel we are being left behind when we talk about investment in infrastructure. The key deficits must be addressed.

Today, in the House, I will call out a few of those places. Celbridge, a town where the population might have been 1,000 people 30 or 40 years ago, is now home to 23,000 people yet it only has one bridge across the River Liffey. The need for the second bridge was there 30 years ago but it still has not been given. In Maynooth, LIHAF funding was put in place in 2010 but the relief road has not been delivered. There is talk of bringing DART+ out to Maynooth yet only a few miles down the road, there is a train station sitting in Kilcock that we are not planning to bring DART+ to. Clane is a town that is growing and growing and traffic congestion is a huge issue. At Castletown House, which was the major amenity in the north east of the county, public access was lost. Three years ago, it had 1 million visitors but that is now down to a trickle because we have lost access from the M4.

While we need these reports, we also need delivery. Strategic planning must result in shovel-ready projects that are properly funded and fast-tracked for areas that have borne the brunt of previous unbalanced growth. That is why I am in favour of the revised planning framework. I do not feel that north Kildare has benefited in the way it should have. We must redress the imbalance not by slowing growth in our county but by accelerating the delivery of infrastructure. We will then be able to take more.

North Kildare has played its part and is ready to continue to play its part. I, for one, will be at the forefront of that. I have done it as a councillor. I have worked on local area plans. I have delivered houses in Leixlip, where we have seen thousands more houses delivered in my time as a councillor. I have done the same for other local area plans in Celbridge. I have pushed for county development plans to have more houses. Yes, we have allowed them because, ultimately, we know that with housing, we need to find places for everyone to live. However, at the same time, in our area, we also need to get the infrastructure delivered behind that.

I wanted to give my message today because I am in favour of the plan and I know the plan needs to change. However, I also wanted to speak strongly about the need for the key items that were raised in that plan to be delivered in my area of north Kildare and to speak on behalf of my constituents.

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Cummins, for taking the time to be here today. As I said, it is great to be able to speak to him in this way. I wish him the best of luck in the coming years of his term.

An Ceann Comhairle

We move to the Independent and Parties technical group. I call Deputy Charles Ward, who is sharing time.

Deputy Charles Ward

The revised national planning framework includes many great suggestions, such as improving local connectivity to broadband, energy, transport and water networks, recognising Letterkenny as an important cross-border network for regional development and addressing the town and village rural population decline by encouraging new roles and functions for buildings, streets and sites. However, it is clear to me there is no intention of actually implementing many of these suggestions, including the revised planning network, given they are clearly not rooted in reality.

The suggestion, for example, to implement a proper, planned local authority-led approach to identifying, meeting and managing housing needs arising in the countryside areas is laughable. Anyone with experience of local politics knows this is just not possible, given how little power our county councils actually have. Shockingly, councillors currently have no power to identify, meet and manage housing needs. My party colleagues, the councillors of the 100% Redress party, had to walk out of a special plenary meeting on housing in Donegal County Council on Monday in protest at the lack of engagement on housing at council level.

The lack of action by the council and the Minister for housing on housing issues in Donegal, particularly the defective concrete crisis, is extremely frustrating. There is a complete disconnect between the Department of housing in Dublin and Donegal. We have asked the Minister, Deputy Browne, many times to visit Donegal so he can witness for himself the devastation caused by the defective concrete crisis. It is clear to me that the Government is far too removed from this issue. The crisis requires the experience of those who are impacted and councillors who know this crisis at first hand and who truly understand what is needed to tackle it. Decisions being made at local level regarding regional issues such as defective concrete should be made by elected representatives in the area, not by Government-appointed staff. County councillors should not have to serve as decision-makers or be forced to act as opposition in their own councils. We need to expand the remit of the local authorities and give more power to county councillors.

Deputy Brian Stanley

I congratulate the Minister of State on his appointment. The revision of the national development plan is supposedly to accelerate the delivery of housing in particular. There are a couple of things needed to accelerate that. The first is the need to replicate existing plans so the same plan for social and affordable housing and other houses can be used in Waterford, Laois or Donegal. The private sector is doing this. If we look at what it is building, it is replicating the plans all over the country. However, what is happening with local government and Government-sponsored housing is that it is back to a blank canvas every time. It is costing between 10% and 15% more to build houses and it is slowing it down. The Department in the Custom House is micromanaging the local authorities and it needs to stop. I have told previous Ministers that and I am telling Deputy Cummins that as the new Minister of State. That is the first thing.

The second is that we need builders, in particular small builders. The Minister of State knows that in rural towns and villages, small builders need the low-cost finance that is available to the larger builders. We also need to accelerate the apprenticeship programmes.

We need to stop micromanaging the local authorities with regard to social, affordable and cost-rental housing. Infrastructural deficits need to be addressed, particularly the infrastructural deficits in water supply. I ask the Minister of State to think about this. His constituency counterpart, Phil Hogan, created Irish Water.

I was Opposition spokesperson on that at the time. I argued with him about it over several days. The Minister of State knows the difficulties in trying to deal with Irish Water. Money needs to be given directly to local authorities to put in the infrastructure into small towns such as Mountmellick, Mountrath, Rathdowney, Graiguecullen, Ballylynan, Portarlington and Abbeyleix. Many of them are connected by rail so they are very easy to get around. We need the infrastructure to go into those towns. We need to get the foot off local authorities and stop micromanagement of them. We need to use the same plans throughout the Twenty-six Counties in trying to rapidly build up and speed up delivery. If you want to quickly produce something that is good quality, you mass produce. That is what we need to do.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I did my best to read through the report. I have two minutes so I cannot do it justice, but I have certainly read it. I would like to welcome it but I cannot. When you look at it, the words, such as "sustainability", are good, but you then realise it is business as usual. It is significant that in a few days' time we will - I will not say celebrate - recall that we declared a climate and biodiversity emergency on 10 May 2019 and there is absolutely no indication that the Government realises the transformational action that is required.

On housing, the Department's press release states that the Government will accelerate housing delivery. I welcome that. However, as other speakers said, the Government will accelerate housing delivery on the basis of a model that has proven to be completely wrong and has led to a housing crisis. This is in addition, and I do not want to personalise this at all, to using the man from NAMA, which in itself as an entity is a major part of the housing problem, and not realising that it has created, if not a monster, then something that is totally geared towards keeping house prices high. The Government is now going to take that person and put him in charge as the housing tsar. It could not be more bizarre. It is a whole jigsaw of pieces on housing without an overall picture.

I will mention transport in Galway city, which is one of the five cities destined to grow in a sustainable manner, with 50% of that growth to be within the footprint of the city. That is all very welcome. However, there is not a single commitment to a light rail for Galway to lift the traffic off the road. There is no analysis of the lack of regional development within the county and region, including no sewage treatment plant in Barna. The major siphon carrying the sewage under the River Corrib is in imminent danger of collapse, according to an engineer's report. There is no commitment to a sewage treatment plant on the east side of the city. There is no commitment to regional development, although there is an acknowledgement that the region has been demoted.

Three paragraphs are given over to the Irish language. This confirms the mindset of a Government that thinks the Irish language is for learners and is an addition, instead of realising there is a serious emergency in every single Gaeltacht because of the lack of housing.

Deputy Roderic O'Gorman

This is a highly important document and there is only a short time to speak to it. I will mention some of the positives. I am encouraged by the stronger focus on compact, low-carbon growth and the formal integration of environmental assessments. The new national planning objectives, NPOs, reinforcing a commitment to biodiversity are important. Likewise, I welcome the commitment to transport-oriented development, which I will speak about in a moment. In particular, I welcome the measures to support offshore renewables and the regional targets for onshore renewables because the tendency of some local authorities to designate large parts of their county as renewable energy free zones is very problematic.

I will also address the inadequate focus in this document on balanced regional development. Deputy Connolly mentioned the issue of there being no reference to light rail for Galway. There is no reference to commuter or metropolitan rail in Limerick to provide a link between Limerick and Shannon, or to the western corridor. We have a document that speaks to transport-led planning and transport-led housing, but the actual indicators and projects that will deliver that are not referenced.

I will take a step back to the previous Government, when the Green Party was regularly criticised for being Dublin and urban centric. I am a Dublin TD. I am very proud to represent a suburban Dublin constituency, but the new national planning framework does not address the imbalance in our country towards Dublin. As a Dublin TD, I want to see that imbalance addressed. It is important because, in the previous Government, our party was focused on as the driver of that imbalance, but I say to TDs in Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and, indeed, Independent TDs, they are adopting a document that fundamentally maintains the imbalance towards Dublin. That is bad for our regions and for Dublin as well.

Deputy Seamus Healy

Any national planning framework will be a failure unless it is underpinned by real and serious consultation with communities and community representatives at local level in a bottom-up approach. Communities must have the opportunity to make representations to statutory, elected democratic bodies to ensure their voices are heard. The only way this will be achieved is by re-establishing local democracy in our towns, large and small, for instance, the re-establishment of borough corporations and town councils. Local democracy was abolished in 2014 by the Fine Gael-Labour Party Government at the stroke of a pen. It has seriously damaged our towns and their economic and social development.

The corporation for Clonmel borough, one of the five boroughs in the country, with a mayor and form of local democracy dating back to the early 1400s, was dismissed without a thought. It was replaced by a toothless committee with no powers or funding that is effectively a talking shop. The abolition of Clonmel Corporation has done serious damage to what was a thriving town but now needs serious regeneration and redevelopment. Not only do we need urgent access to urban regeneration funding for the renewal of our town centre, we also need the re-establishment of Clonmel Corporation, South Tipperary County Council and the town councils of Carrick-on-Suir, Cashel and Tipperary.

Local government is the beating heart of our democracy. The programme for Government references strengthening local government but in a generalised and non-specific way. One of its very few specific commitments is the promise to convene a local democracy task force. I call on the Minister of State to set up that task force immediately, with the specific objective - not the generalised woolly thinking and talk in the programme for Government - of re-establishing town and borough councils throughout this country. No planning framework can succeed without local democratic input from locally elected representatives, especially in our large towns, cities and urban centres throughout the country.

Deputy John Connolly

I welcome the publication of the revised framework. It has been somewhat signposted as part of our response to the housing crisis. I hope it will have that impact as it goes on in the alignment between national, regional and local planning policy.

The revised framework reaffirms the commitment of the 2018 framework to balanced regional development, where 50% of the population's employment growth will be shared between the Dublin and eastern region and the rest of the country, essentially, through the north, western and southern regional assemblies. The great challenge for this Government and for subsequent Governments with this plan is whether we can realise that desire for regional balanced development with our Exchequer commitments. A certain number of submissions to the revised framework noted that this has not happened since the publication of the 2018 framework. The Planning Regulator, a State authority, noted that this document goes some way towards bringing the country to the point where we will have that type of regional balance, but it will be a matter for Government to hold to that objective from a number of frameworks. You would imagine that one of the frameworks could be from the Exchequer and the development of projects included in the national development plan. Similarly, the Irish Planning Institute stated that the framework had a laudable emphasis on limiting the dominance of Dublin and the midland region on other regions but, unfortunately, since 2018, we have seen a business as usual approach that has allowed for the Exchequer to prioritise projects in Dublin and the east as opposed to the rest of the country. That is the great challenge for us. It is to be hoped that subsequent to the publication of the framework, we will see the Exchequer imbalance also being addressed.

To be somewhat more parochial, the document states that Galway city has grown at a level somewhat below the national average since 2016 whereas the other regional cities have grown at a level slightly above it. That is concerning, particularly when one considers that in the previous two decades Galway grew at a somewhat greater level than other cities, particularly the regional cities. I wonder why this is happening. One of the challenges in Galway is the MASP framework. Galway has a particular challenge that the area covered by the MASP is divided between two local authorities, namely the city council and the county council. That is not the case in Waterford or in Cork. In Limerick, it exists to a different degree somewhat whereby the MASP area probably runs into some parts of County Clare.

The MASP is causing a problem in Galway, and this not gone unnoticed by the local authorities. Galway City Council, when it made a submission in respect of Galway County Council's development plan, noted that there is an overly generous residential zoning in the county MASP area that will greatly undermine the vision for success for the overall city and county MASP area, which, despite the ambitious targets, needs to be driven by compact development, regeneration and strengthening of the existing urban area. Galway County Council, in its submission to the planning framework, has sought greater clarity in respect of Galway County Council's role within the Galway MASP area. The regional social and economic strategy also notes that it will now be necessary for the Government to develop some mechanism that will link Galway City Council, Galway County Council, the regional assembly and the Departments of housing and Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. We need that. We need the Department to take a stand in that regard. We might need to legislate for that because there is uncertainty as to where responsibility for the development in the MASP area lies. The ambition we had regarding the framework put in place in 2018 has not been realised.

The other great issue, of course, is that there no form of financial backing. There is no funding for the MASP area, and that is causing concern as well. I ask the Minister to look at that. Subsequent to the publication of the framework, there might be a need to legislate in this regard. There is certainly need for the Department to take the lead or to issue a circular on it.

If I look at some of the key enablers for Galway in the revised framework, they are remarkably similar to those contained in the original framework. This might suggest that we have seen little progress on some of them. Those mentioned by previous speakers very much relate to transport. Deputy O'Gorman noted that a particular rail project in Limerick is not mentioned in the framework. However, the key enablers for Galway are the only ones devoid of any reference to rail. There is reference to rail in terms of Waterford, Cork and Limerick. However, despite the fact that Galway City Council's submission noted the great potential for transport-orientated development along the rail track between Galway and Athenry, there is no mention of it in the key enablers for Galway. That is very disappointing. I hope this will be rectified in the national development plan. Will the Minister of State see to it that an ambition to implement the outcome of the strategic rail review in relation to Galway and to double the rail track to Athenry and develop the track between it and Tuam is included in the national development plan?

I welcome the fact that the Minister ignored the NTA's submission in which it sought to exclude the reference to the Galway metropolitan area transport strategy. Deputy Catherine Connolly stated that there was no mention of light rail for Galway. However, the metropolitan area transport strategy should state, as was outlined in the study carried out before Christmas, that there is potential for light rail in Galway. I think that is covered there. I was disappointed that the NTA sought to eliminate reference to the Galway metropolitan area transport strategy, but, in fairness to the Minister of State, Deputy Cummins, and the Minister, it has been left in. It is time for the NTA to complete its work, particularly in the context of the only area of the city in respect of which there has been no review of the transport strategy. Galway needs such a review now. Will the Minister of State make sure it happens?

I echo the sentiments expressed in respect of the Galway city ring road.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Connolly is eating into Deputy Moynihan's time.

Deputy John Connolly

The Minister of State cannot get involved with An Bord Pleanála. However, will he ask it to make its decision as quickly as possible?

Deputy Shane Moynihan

I am delighted to have this opportunity to speak in support of the revised national planning framework. I welcome the revision. It also acknowledges the changed context of the need to accelerate housing construction. It is important to emphasise the equal importance of infrastructure and all the associated services that need to be delivered. The revised framework represents the step-change that we need. I hope that, in tandem with the full commencement of the Planning and Development Act 2024, we will see that step-change in terms of delivery.

I come to this debate with a dual perspective, namely as a Member of Dáil Éireann but also, like many colleagues in the House, as a former county councillor who was involved in the formation of a county development plan. Such plans, for anyone who is new to politics, are instructive in how the entire planning process and the planning framework are set up in terms of the hierarchy of regional and local needs. They are also quite instructive for those of us who are frustrated with the pace of the delivery of housing in the context of how comprehensive and significant is the overall volume of movement that is required.

Making this revision and extending it to local authorities demonstrates the agility that we need to see at all levels across the State in terms of coping with the need for the accelerated provision of housing but when it comes to thinking about how we future-proof the developments we need to put in place. It is important that the Department and the Minister extend that agility to the local and regional authorities in terms of how they take direction from the national planning framework and bring it to their elected members for translation into local county and city development plans. It is also important to ensure that there are no gaps and that it is treated with a housing first urgency by all authorities across the State.

Like many Members, I have been acquainted with decisions that have been made by local authorities, in and outside Dublin, which seem to fly in the face of housing first and the urgency relating to housing delivery that we hear about on the airwaves and in this House. It is almost a case that it is being made difficult for developers to proceed with minor or smaller schemes because they do not necessarily adhere to every letter of every objective. Rather than have a can-do attitude on the part of local authorities in engaging with those developers, it is important that we listen to those who are at the coalface of developments of all sizes, be they small builders or large developers, in order to ensure that we get on top of what is possibly one of the most defining social crises of our generation.

I agree with much of what my colleague Deputy Connolly said with regard to the importance of the NDP. In the documents relating to the national planning framework, there are many references to it being aligned with the NDP. I would like to see the NDP being used, in the context of the national planning framework, as the instrument to enable what we need to happen. We are going to have a population of nearly 6.5 million people in five, ten or 15 years, so we need to ensure that the necessary transport infrastructure is put in place. Transport-oriented development needs to be a priority in the context of what we do. In terms of my constituency, the NDP must be seen as an instrument of delivery when it comes to adequate roads infrastructure for places such as Rathcoole, Saggart and Newcastle. Infrastructure projects listed in the South Dublin county development plan, such as that relating to the western Dublin orbital route, need to be advanced. Those projects need to be completed in order to enable the housing delivery which will happen in that part of Dublin over the next five or ten years and which has already happened. It must be remembered that we are playing catch-up in this regard.

There needs to be urgency in respect of projects such as the Luas for Lucan, which is listed in the greater Dublin transport strategy, in order to ensure that further development will happen in Lucan. These projects must be completed to ensure that adequate public transport infrastructure is provided in areas where demand for housing will remain high. It is not as if people will not want to live in these in 40, 50 or 60 years' time. Ultimately, the aim behind the national planning framework should be to build up large cities which are hubs for their economic regions and the populations of which will ultimately be replaced. These places should not just be home to ageing populations; they should remain attractive to families over time. The facilities necessary to underpin this should be provided.

I am particularly keen that the national planning framework would be taken on board by the Department of Education, particularly its school building section. I do not know if colleagues are of the same view, but sometimes I feel there is a frustration in terms of the speed with which the school building section acknowledges and looks at the demographic projections for a particular area or if the school planning areas are aligned with what is set out in the national planning framework or in county or city development plans. It is important for that to happen. This comes back to my point about the importance of a housing first culture in terms of how we implement the national planning framework and how we deal with issues such as childcare. During questions to the Minister for children last night, a number of Deputies discussed the need to ensure that where provision is being made in developments for the provision of childcare facilities, that these facilities are actually delivered. We know there is a patchy record in that regard across the country. This also applies in the context of matters such as Garda stations and Garda numbers.

I encourage the Department and the local authorities to engage with bodies at all levels of delivery, whether they be State agencies such as Uisce Éireann or ESB Networks or small developers, to ensure that the urgency required to deal with this crisis is reflected across the country. I also urge all involved to look abroad at some of the reforms that are being pursued in, for example, New Zealand with regard to easing zoning rules and consider whether these are things that we should look at in order to get the supply of houses up to the 50,000 a year that we will need, not only for the next three or four years but, ideally, for the next ten to 15.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

I will focus my comment on fisheries, the seafood sector and the wider marine space. Looking at the east coast of Ireland, we made serious mistakes as a country in developing offshore renewable energy in a way that took away the livelihoods of fishermen. That is how not to do it. However, there has been positive progress in recent years. I commend the work of the offshore renewable energy seafood task force. This has been looking to bring together both industries to work out a way forward that does not threaten the livelihoods of fishermen. As the Minister of State will know, it has been a tough number of years for our industry since Brexit. We need to realise the potential of offshore renewable energy but, in doing so, we must talk about co-creation.

I will also touch on marine protected areas. We need to develop such areas and embrace their potential but, again, there are a number of partner stakeholders. These include: the fishing industry, including fishermen; the environmental campaigners, who campaign on important issues; and the offshore renewable energy industry. All three have to be at the table. No area should be designated as a marine protected area unless the maps are co-created. We are not talking about drawing on a map and then consulting afterwards. It has to be done together. It has to be done in partnership. The fishing industry is up for this. It also has to be done with respect and it must look at the real threats to the industry. There is positive work we can do in the time ahead if it is done with respect. I commend the offshore renewable energy seafood task force for the way it has conducted its business. I get good feedback from everybody. These are not going to be easy issues to deal with.

The Government needs to strengthen the seafood section of the plan before us right now. We need to send a clear signal that there is a vision for seafood and fishing communities. We are surrounded by the richest waters in Europe. We have to do better as a country. The appointment of a Minister of State and a dedicated committee is welcome. Let us now strengthen the plan, too.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

One of the big issues of the day is the housing crisis. I am sure the Minister of State will agree with that. However, the last planning framework, from 2018, significantly underestimated the level of housing need in the State. As a consequence, two successive Government housing plans failed to address the volume of housing required, although the previous Governments did not meet their targets in any case. The new framework being proposed involves a housing needs demand assessment as one of its core features but it seems to have underestimated the level of demand. The published draft targets an annual average of 50,000 homes a year for the duration of the plan but that seems way off at this point. I do not need to point it out but the further you fall behind in a race, the faster you have to go to catch up. Like its predecessors, this Government's estimated targets will cause it to fall further behind, as it is using the same original estimates despite an increase in pent-up demand. It seems there has not been an independent assessment of unmet demand. This is maintaining high property prices. All of the solutions seem to start with the assumption that we cannot move away from rising prices.

In my constituency of Galway West, the housing crisis is not just an economic one, but a linguistic and cultural one as well. The Welsh Government's Welsh language communities housing plan commits to "taking immediate and radical action using the planning, property and taxation systems to address the negative impact that second homes and short-term holiday lets can have on the availability and affordability of housing for local people". Here, the revised national planning framework does not mention housing and the Gaeltacht together. Neither does the Government's 20-Year Strategy for the Irish Language 2010-2030 refer to housing. Both documents have failed to identify this core threat to the language's continued existence. That is literally failing to plan. Ní luann an plean seo ná an straitéis 20-bliain don Ghaeilge an Ghaeilge, an Ghaeltacht agus an tithíocht le chéile. Más rud é go bhfuilimid ag iarraidh dul i ngleic leis an nGaeilge agus an líon daoine a labhraíonn an Ghaeilge i ndáiríre, caithfimid breathnú ar thithíocht sa Ghaeltacht. Is rud é sin atá soiléir do chuile dhuine nuair a bhreathnaíonn siad air seo. Ar ndóigh, táimid fós ag fanacht ar na dréacht-treoirlínte pleanála Gaeltachta. Teastaíonn siad sin.

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

I acknowledge Richie Herlihy and his friend Paul Lenihan who are in the Gallery. I welcome them to the Dáil.

We can do all the frameworks we like with all the best of intentions but unless you have the infrastructure, you can build nothing. I will provide the Minister of State with an example of an application that is with Uisce Éireann at the moment. There are 42 houses to be built in Pallaskenry. I will ask for the Minister of State's help with this. All that is needed is an A4 page stating that there is capacity in the sewerage system. This is delaying the building of 42 houses in Pallaskenry. I have been on to Uisce Éireann and our local county council. The executive met with Uisce Éireann, which said it would be looked into. It has taken a month for Uisce Éireann to look into an A4 page. I sent it the last one it issued. It has expired but Uisce Éireann just needs to change the date on it and send it back. This is holding up 42 houses. How are we going to build houses for people if we have this type of delay? It is the same thing in Croom. Infrastructure is key if you want to build houses. Some 60 houses in Croom were held up for six months due to Uisce Éireann. It was not all its fault. When the local authorities handed stuff over to Uisce Éireann, they delayed because they did not realise they had given commitments to people building houses before the handover. There was a lack of communication.

On people building one-off houses, everyone should have the right to live where they grew up. If there is adequate land, road frontage, visibility and percolation, people should be allowed to build. In a town, you can put 15 houses into half an acre. However, if somebody wants to build a house in the county, they are told they need half an acre. With the new guidelines, people can build a second house of up to 400 sq. ft or 40 sq. m on the same property if somebody wants to downsize, for example. If somebody in a family wants to downsize, 400 sq. ft means only 20 ft each side of a square. We should be allowed to build something a little bit bigger on a half-acre site, especially if we can build 15 or 16 houses in the same area in a town, city or village. In the county, the Government says we can only build one but that we might be able to put in another building of 400 sq. ft afterwards. We need to make sure we can invite our people to come home. If they want to build their own houses and put a roof over their own heads, that comes at no cost to the State.

Deputy Michael Collins

We are here today to discuss the final draft of the revised national planning framework, a crucial step towards Ireland's sustainable future. It is imperative that we address the acute infrastructure challenges in the areas of housing and transport. West Cork suffers from inadequate sewerage systems, particularly in areas like Dunmanway, Goleen, Shannonvale, Rosscarbery and Ballydehob. This makes even basic housing development impossible in some areas. The road conditions remain dire, with only €70.2 million allocated for maintenance in 2024. This is a slight decrease on the previous year and insufficient for the 12,000 km of road that need attention. Transportation is another critical issue. Despite the restoration of some bus routes in 2024, west Cork still lacks comprehensive public transport services. The absence of light rail, trains and frequent bus services exacerbates our isolation and limits economic opportunities. This lack of infrastructure and transportation services hinders growth and quality of life. We must advocate for strategic investment to foster sustainable developments in west Cork.

I am absolutely delighted Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan is here. As a newly appointed Minister of State, I hope that he will take on board what I am going to raise regarding infrastructure in Dunmanway. The fact is that people are not allowed to develop a house in a town as big as Dunmanway. That can is kicked down the road at every meeting we have. It is to go on to 2030 or 2032. We really do not know because Irish Water cannot give a clear deadline. The people in Dunmanway cannot wait until 2030 or 2032. We need delivery. The Minister of State knows that and he has to deliver. He is the Minister of State now and I am putting my faith in him to deliver for these people but also for the people of Rosscarbery, Goleen, Ballydehob and Shannonvale.

They have every right to have a proper wastewater treatment system in their communities and not have wastewater pouring into local community gardens where people have cordoned it off for the past 20 something years. It is outrageous.

It is the same with light rail. We do not have light rail going to west Cork. We do not even have a sign from west Cork showing where rail is in Cork city.

Deputy Ken O'Flynn

I would like to acknowledge the presence in the Public Gallery of my good friends, Paul Lenihan and Richie Herlihy. I invite the Ceann Comhairle to Cork to dine at Richie's restaurant, which is a food truck. He has the best battered sausage in Cork. I know for a fact that you too can have a body like this.

I welcome the report but I feel there are lots of holes in it. In fact the entire planning framework itself has difficulties from top to bottom. I heard Members from the Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael benches saying that it is now up to the local authorities to implement these plans that are being put together, but it is not. The Government has restricted the powers of the local authorities continuously, year after year. Irish Water is now dictating what can be done. The National Transport Authority, NTA, is dictating what can be done. BusConnects is dictating what can be achieved in our cities. From Ballyviniter down to Carrignavar and over to Grenagh, we do not have orbital buses. You cannot get an orbital bus in Mallow at the moment. We have not built the Mallow distributor road. How can we talk about counterbalanced cities? Bear in mind that Cork was only mentioned 94 times in this report, which is meant to be the counterbalance to the capital city, Dublin. There is a counterbalance problem in Cork, full stop. The north side is deprived of a northern distributor road, of a northern ring road, of a Mallow distributor road, and a Cork to Limerick motorway. How can we really start developing the southern city as a capital until we have these in place?

I put it to the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, that Irish Water is dictating continuously. Only 200 houses can be built in my home parish in Blarney because Irish Water is refusing to put a water treatment plant there. We cannot build one house in Carrignavar for the next five to ten years because we have no water treatment plant. We have a ghost estate there that cannot be redeveloped because we cannot get water to the estate. We have people with land all over Cork who want to put individual houses there for their children. This would take them out of the housing market so they would not be competing against some couples who do not have that opportunity. Yet we are not doing anything on that.

Deputy Paul Lawless

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the national planning framework. I welcome any attempts to future-proof infrastructure in this country. I am very disappointed, however, in reading the report. It is high on vision but it is almost like the report is detached from reality. I do not have long but I will give just one example. The report references the value and importance of the serviced sites scheme. I put it to the Minister of State that there is no serviced sites scheme in Mayo. Despite several attempts by many councillors there are none. You would not think that from reading the report.

Another point I wish to raise relates to the housing targets. We saw in 2018 that the same report underestimated the demand in housing. We see this again in this report. The Housing Commission has said that we need to build 60,000 houses. I wonder if this is purposely done given that we are so far off our targets. Is it purposely done to reduce the targets? The Housing Commission does not agree with the targets contained in this report.

The apprenticeship situation is a major issue. In order to build more houses and more infrastructure, we need manpower. Apprenticeships are mentioned once in the report. The reference is in the context of more collaboration around cross-Border apprenticeships. I have friends who have been waiting for years to be called to the next phase. We have made the apprenticeship system a second class citizen to the universities and yet we wonder why we cannot attract more people into trades, which we so desperately need. This report is meant to set out the blueprint-----

Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan

It is a framework.

Deputy Paul Lawless

The framework rather. There is not even a mention, or hardly a mention, of it. That is hardly progress. We need real delivery. I do not have any longer but could go on to speak about a litany of things in relation to this. I ask the Minister of State to focus on the delivery.

Deputy Paul Nicholas Gogarty

It looks fantastic. It is a great plan with great graphics. If one reads it line by line and bit by bit, it has so much to offer but we all know it is aspirational without the investment. I give the example of water infrastructure. We need massive investment in water infrastructure to facilitate housing. The plan references offshore energy potential. We need massive investment in our ports. To work towards it or to progress towards it is not enough. We need tangible achievable objectives.

The housing targets have not been met before so I am still a bit sceptical about what is in this plan but I am more sceptical about the delivery of infrastructure alongside housing. In my constituency, I have seen two strategic development zones, Adamstown and Clonburris. Clonburris, for example, has one full size GAA-rugby pitch and five soccer pitches for an eventual population of 25,000 people. That is all that has been put into the framework plan. If that is what we are going by at the moment, then we need to deliver things a lot better.

Every type of housing needs to be a strategic development zone. Newcastle in my area has a local area plan but it is not worth the paper it is written on because, again, one cannot tie in the schools and the infrastructure alongside the housing. We need to look at that.

We also need to focus on our cities. I have said this previously in other contributions. Dublin should have twice the population within the canals. We must look at how to change the planning laws to make it easier to repurpose business units and commercial units. Similarly in regional distribution we are not looking enough at the midland towns and possibly even a new town to be planned from scratch. We have to do it piece by piece and in an integrated way.

Deputy John Lahart

I thank the Minister of State for his presence today. I am keen to make a contribution on the national planning framework, which is essentially the creation of an environment for accelerated housing development in Ireland, and other issues it concerns itself with.

In no particular order I will just throw in a couple of ideas or issues close to my heart. I do not represent a Dublin city constituency: I represent a suburb constituency of Dublin South-West. I said recently that Dublin has suffered from neglect over the last number of years and a lack of love, generally speaking. It needs to be front and centre. For some people in this House prioritising Dublin - generally speaking - never seems to be met with a serious response but often with a jaundiced response. It is the capital city.

Consider the party that built this city, including Terminal 2, the red and green Luas lines, the various stadia around the city, the Dublin Port Tunnel. We see there has been very little done in the last decade in relation to landmarks and legacy buildings and infrastructure in Dublin. I think that needs to be front and centre. I ask the Minister of State to look at his own Department, for example. The north side of Dublin is particularly lacking in love. I have felt for a long time that the Custom House should not be a Government Department. The Department of housing should not be in an old building like that. The entire Custom House should be open to the public. It should be a performance centre. We do not have a major music performance centre in this country. I would move the Department out to a purpose built, A-rated, modern and dynamic building where civil servants can work properly in devising plans in an environment that promotes this. That building should be open to the public. The Minister of State should really consider that. It would begin the transformation of Dublin's northside.

The Minister of State is familiar with metro south, so I will not take up too much time on that. The Minister of State's colleague has spoken about downsizing and it got a kind of a mixed press on Monday night on the television.

I am very much in favour of it, whatever term is used. I know loads of people - they do not have to be older people - who would move to different-sized accommodation if it were local, which would allow them to stay in their parish, their locality and with their friends, thus freeing up a three-bed or four-bed house for younger families. We have to get serious about that. Of course, the win for the State there is that one does not have to put in the utilities. The utilities, services, roads, schools, shops and everything else are there. It is about trying to maximise the use of the space that is available. Much of the national planning framework is all about that proper land use.

One thing we have to do is - I know the Minister of State would be in favour of it, as would I - incentivise the use of the high number of cycle tracks that have been built, because they are not being used. That is a function of the Government. I have had ideas about that in recent years. It is like pushing a boulder up a hill, but we keep pushing, as it was with the co-location of preschools with primary schools. It took me about eight years, and we finally got that concept over the line. We need to incentivise people to use all the cycle infrastructure that has been put in.

A number of active travel schemes in Dublin impede the movement of public transport. It is something I have spoken to the NTA about. I am positive with its response, even though it took a while. I will be positive where I need to be positive. Public transport is impeded because the active travel part of a local authority is not talking to the public transport part. That has to stop. If it means that the decision or the oversight of this goes up to a major decision-maker, that has to happen. I have so many examples of this. Where it is done well, it is exceptional. In the city, for example, from Busáras all the way out to Fairview, there are cycle tracks and dedicated, end-to-end bus corridors. It is really impressive. It cost a sackload of money, but it is as good as a tramline. There is no excuse when it is done badly and impedes public transport.

Deputy Moynihan's and my constituencies are contiguous, and we therefore share some things in common, such as Garda stations. They should be discussed with the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan. I do not believe the Garda stations in Dublin have been rationalised in about 50 years. They are like the old parishes. Five or six Garda stations cover my constituency where two could do it if they were rationalised properly. That does not help. We need a Garda station out in Citywest.

I support housing first; that is our absolute priority. My God, if the Government is successful, it will be remembered forever. If not, the Government will also be remembered forever. With housing must come amenities, though, and I often fear that the concept of amenities can be lost, so please keep it front and centre.

Deputy Emer Currie

I welcome the new planning framework recognising the need to reflect changes since 2018. Back then, it was an innovative plan. Today, we must double its ambition. Setting objectives is one thing, but delivering them is another. We speak of building 50,000 homes per year until 2040. That is achievable, but it demands radical change in efficiency and execution. People are asking about housing now, not just in the future. This morning, I met fifth year students from Mount Sackville school in Castleknock. Their biggest concern is where they will live in the next five to ten years. It is not an abstract worry; it is a real, pressing issue. More land must be zoned. Builders should not be forced to sit on stalled projects with no alternatives. If they can work on multiple sites simultaneously, their skills and resources will be fully utilised instead of being wasted by bureaucratic bottlenecks.

We must also take a serious look at planning permissions that are set to expire despite no substantial work having been done. Complex developments face unique challenges such as funding delays, rising interest rates and logistical hurdles. Banks will not release funding unless developers have sufficient time to complete their projects, for instance. If we do nothing, we risk losing between 50,000 to 100,000 approved homes, I am told, simply because time runs out on permissions. That would be an indefensible failure. Local authorities need clarity on enabling infrastructure beyond the serviced sites fund or urban regeneration and development fund. Without clear direction, they cannot move forward effectively.

I am sure the Minister of State is aware of Dunsink, the long-standing, 1,000-acre strategic land bank in Dublin West bordering Castleknock, Ashtown and Finglas. Approximately 10,000 homes could be built there. It is the last major undeveloped land inside the M50. It must not remain just another potential solution; it must become a reality now. The urban regeneration and development funding has already supported a feasibility study on transport showing the site's potential, yet Dunsink continues to be talked about like a distant prospect. That cannot continue. The Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029 suggests regeneration could take longer, maybe more than 20 years. That is simply not acceptable. We do not have two decades to wait while demand spirals out of control. Yes, the challenges are real. Land ownership there is diverse and there are existing institutions, such as Dunsink Observatory, the Teagasc food research centre, the National Orthopaedic Hospital in Cappagh, Elmgreen Golf Club and the former Dunsink landfill. These should not be reasons for any more delay. They should be factors that are actively addressed. If housing is truly a priority, then we must move forward with national funding access, strategic planning, infrastructure activation and ambition. This must be treated as urgent. Fingal County Council needs to bring all stakeholders, including Uisce Éireann and the ESB, to the table immediately and maintain consistent engagement until these lands are activated. We need to stop asking what can be done in ten to 15 years and start asking what can be done today.

While we are talking about density, we must also recognise the economic realities of housing development. High-density projects are necessary, especially near major transport hubs, but we must acknowledge that funding for those large-scale apartment developments is complicated. Few developers can execute them at scale and there is an over-reliance now on State intervention. That is not sustainable. Even when homes are built, purchasing them remains out of reach for many. They are seeing development in their communities but they cannot access those homes. Planning must prioritise viability, not just density targets. We can still meet our compact urban guidelines while allowing greater variety in housing solutions and sustainable planning. That means supporting more builders, encouraging more accessible financing and reducing reliance on State support. These are practical solutions. We have land, plans and solutions. What we need now is ambition and urgent action.

Deputy Louis O'Hara

This framework will have a significant influence on the development of major strategic projects in the State. It should show ambition for future balanced regional development. As a TD from the west of Ireland, however, I think this development plan fails to address the current regional imbalance between the greater Dublin area and the rest of the country. If anything, the population growth targets contained within the document further cement this imbalance against the western region. This is a missed opportunity for the west. It demonstrates the hollow commitments of this Government towards regional balance and development. Future development in the western region will depend on the delivery of major infrastructural projects, especially in the area of transport. We need serious transport infrastructure investment in the west. I am thinking of projects affecting my own constituency, such as the western rail corridor, the double tracking of Athenry to Galway and the Galway ring road. These projects have not been delivered. Plans are one thing, but delivery is where the west of Ireland has always been let down.

Going back to the plan, it is disappointing to see that there is no national policy objective that addresses regional connectivity and transport.

This sentiment is shared by many stakeholders, such as TII. While the revised planning framework puts great focus on the growth and resilience of rural communities, this is wishful thinking without a policy commitment to rural connectivity. Similarly, there is limited reference to the role that the State's regional airports will play into the future. The development of this island's regional airports should be viewed as a clear, strategic priority, especially in the delivery of balanced regional growth. More than 84% of all flights in the State are processed through Dublin Airport. This imbalance reflects an underutilisation of regional and western airports, such as Shannon and Knock airports. Addressing this imbalance requires investment in both bus and rail links to regional airports, yet this document does not signal any intention to prioritise such strategic development.

This planning framework is vague in its language around the re-powering of existing renewable energy projects. Such re-powering projects can extend the lifespans of already existing renewable energy projects and reduce the need to develop these in new areas. Overall, the tone of the document reflects a missed opportunity to deliver the strategic needs of this island. I call on the Government to reconsider the policy objectives, especially from a rural connectivity and energy perspective, and to direct the development of the State in a way that is more regionally balanced.

Deputy Danny Healy-Rae

People in Kerry are looking forward to the new planning framework and hoping it will deliver from them in a way previous plans have not done. I am talking about people who own land, not farmers' sons or daughters because they are being looked after. There are others who own an acre beside their parents' house, four or five miles outside Killorglin or seven or eight miles east of Killarney, but are still not allowed to build. We talk so much about housing here every day. It is scandalous that people who want to build and are asking for nothing but planning permission - no money or funding because they would build the houses themselves - are not being allowed to do so. It is all because of this significant urban-generated pressure that has been thrown at them.

For people who want to buy their own house, there have been no affordable houses in Kerry. The Government's plan did not provide for one affordable house in Kerry. As regards sewerage schemes and water schemes, we are totally ruined. Treatment plants in 38 settlements need upgrading. People in places like Scartaglen, Curragh, Castleisland and Moyvane cannot build another house. We then have group water schemes in places like Knight's Mountain, Gneeveguilla, Bawnard, Knocknaseed, Castleisland and the higher areas that are without water for a lot of the year. We need to do something.

People are blaming Irish Water and that is wrong because the company is not being funded. It cannot do this work without being funded. I ask the Government to show that if it is real about building houses, it has to build treatment plants and provide water sources. To do that, we need to fund Irish Water to provide those services.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Níl tagairt ar bith sa chreat seo do riachtanas phobal labhartha agus tíreolaíoch na Gaeltachta a chosaint agus deis a thabhairt don chéad ghlúin Ghaeltachta eile cónaí ann, in ainneoin aighneachtaí cuimsitheacha curtha isteach ag Conradh na Gaeilge. Níl aon rud faoin nasc idir an soláthar tithíochta agus pleanáil teanga sa Ghaeltacht, agus níl tagairt ar bith don fhadhb a chothaítear nuair atá breis is 1,000 teach ar fáil ar Airbnb i gceantar Gaeltachta i gcomparáid le níos lú ná deich dteach ar fáil ar cíos fadtéarmach ar daft.ie, mar a léirigh iniúchadh a rinne TG4. Ba chóir cur chuige Rialtas na Breataine Bige a ghoid, a deir ina phlean go ligeann dlús na dtithe saoire sa phobal teanga "detrimental effect on the vibrancy of the language in these areas. When young people in particular are unable to live and work in their Welsh-speaking communities this clearly has an effect on Welsh as a community language and the sustainability of these communities." Ba chóir na pleananna daonra agus tithíochta do limistéir pleanála teanga na Gaeltachta, a gealladh sa chlár Rialtais, a thionscnú, agus na treoirlínte a gealladh dúinn ó 2021 a fhoilsiú gan mhoill.

Ó thaobh na healaíona de, of 1,000 people who answered a Sinn Féin arts survey last year, 74% said they were not satisfied with the local arts space. There is nothing in the national planning framework incorporating space for the arts, culture, nightlife, new developments or protecting existing spaces. The planning objectives 89 and 90 around protecting, conserving and enhancing built heritage, including streetscape vernacular dwellings and other historical buildings and monuments through appropriate, sensitive investment and conservation, are welcome. This should have been interpreted to rule out the disastrous Hammerson plan and envisage the vision outlined in the Moore Street Preservation Trust.

Deputy Barry Heneghan

The NPF is a critical tool in how we shape our housing infrastructure, services and communities. I welcome the revision placed before the House following public consultation and a comprehensive review. However, we need a plan that reflects the major changes our country has seen in recent years. Planning is not just about numbers and maps; it is about the kind of people and communities we build.

Too often, especially in north Dublin, as I have seen time and again, including in the examples of Belmayne and Clongriffin, we have built thousands of new homes but we do not have public amenities to match them. I have gone to multiple residents' meetings since being elected to this House and while I was a councillor. There are more than 10,000 residential units in this area but not one single community service where residents could leave their children and allow them to do anything other than hang around on the streets. It is no wonder we have antisocial behaviour in these areas.

A stitch in time saves nine. We should put a community centre, library and other facilities for children in north Dublin on the L-shaped land in Belmayne. We all know what happens to young adults who not have an option. I hope the Department will look at this because it is really important. We need an idea that would allow people to access key services within a short walk or short cycle of their homes. That is not an aspiration but a requirement. Planning is the most powerful tool we have. It is proactive rather than reactive. It looks ahead and is a framework that delivers, not just for housing but for better communities.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

I wish the Minister of State well in his new position. I welcome some of the proposed changes in the NPF review. Ultimately, the document must restore power to councils to form their own plans and address the overriding powers of Uisce Éireann, the Office of the Planning Regulator and Transport Infrastructure Ireland in dictating the development of rural constituencies. When I was a comhairleoir on my council, we had none of this. We had the National Roads Authority, NRA. As I often said, I thought we had decommissioned it but apparently it is still there. This is the problem with this document.

The Cahir local area plan is a prime example of the failings of the NPF and the heavy-handed nature of the Office of the Planning Regulator. The plan that was reviewed in 2021 - my daughter, Máirín, is on the council in that area - sought to reduce the quantum of residential zoned land from 50 acres to just 10 ha. It ignored concerns from the councillors and anybody else at the time. It was the height of stupidity. Now they want the council to rezone the land again, having admitted their mistake. Anybody would know that reducing the zoned land from 50 acres to 10 ha was way too much but they just would not listen. They were obstinate.

I have cases involving planning for rural farmers. One is on the N24, between Cahir and Tipperary, and one on the N74 on the way to Kilkenny. These farmers are living with their families and even though they have land and are farming it, they are not allowed to build a house on it because of more turning in circles. In actual fact, the opposite is the case. If they have to build elsewhere, such as a town or some place else, they have to go to and from the farm to do their work. It is patent nonsense and these bodies will not listen. We have more of these agencies that have CEOs and directors and brass plates on the walls. They are doing nothing only confusing.

They cannot go on the way they are going because they have stalled progress on housing and infrastructure with Uisce Éireann. How many villages and towns in Tipperary that are full up have no access to this? There is no funding and they have no power. We must go back and look at what happened in 2014 with the set-up of Irish Water.

Deputy Gillian Toole

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire Stáit as a bheith anseo um thráthnóna.

I welcome the updated draft of the NPF. There are several opportunities here to correct the mistakes of the tiger times. I speak as somebody from east Meath, a commuter county which has been seriously impacted. I sincerely hope the concerns of residents will be listened to and opportunities that present will be enacted.

The focus on compact growth and community infrastructure is highly commendable. It is essential that age-friendly housing is the priority there in terms of brownfield and whatever incentivisation is used for the development of brownfield and town centre sites.

Infrastructure, including transport infrastructure, from a climate perspective and from the point of view of connectivity of communities with their places of work, leisure, health needs, etc., must be a priority. All this, however, is entirely dependent on interdepartmental and interagency co-operation and collaboration. Without that, this will be doomed.

I will highlight two key areas: the high-quality international connectivity and Dublin Airport. There is a serious issue with a breach of planning permission there from the north runway which is seriously impacting residents in Meath East, but there is a solution that will allow the growth in connectivity and mitigate the current situation.

As regards the transition to a climate-resilient society, when will phase 2 of the land use review be published? Again, Meath East is seriously impacted, with a proliferation of solar farms, gas generation and battery storage facilities. There is no balance there.

Finally, will there be financial penalties for local authorities that do not adhere to the NPF or the regional spatial and economic strategies? Otherwise, we have learned nothing from the mistakes of the past.

Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage (Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan)

I thank everybody for their contributions. I listened with interest. Many valid points were made by Deputies who are clearly in touch with their constituencies. They know the reality on the ground in their constituencies. I might come back to a lot of those comments at the end of my closing remarks.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to outline the importance of the first revision of the national planning framework. I welcome the valuable discussion that has taken place, which reflects the importance of ensuring there is an up-to-date national strategic plan in place to guide the decisions that will shape Ireland for the next 20 years and provide the policy clarity that is needed to give certainty in these challenging times.

The national planning framework is the Government's high-level strategic plan for shaping the future growth and development of our country out to the year 2040. As outlined earlier by the Minister, Deputy Browne, and the Minister of State, Deputy Cummins, this framework has been revised and updated to take account of changes that have occurred since its initial publication in 2018. It is a framework to guide public and private investment, to create and promote opportunities for our people and to protect and enhance our environment, from our villages to our cities and our unique rural areas.

As set out in the opening statements of my Government colleagues, the spatial planning system plays a key role in managing the impact of growth and development on our natural environment and mitigating climate change. In particular, I welcome the emphasis on biodiversity and the need to promote nature restoration in the revised NPF, which will provide the opportunity to align our future national restoration plan with the statutory planning system.

Countering the trend of urban sprawl, supporting the targeted delivery of infrastructure services and increasing the availability of new homes is a key focus of the revised NPF.

In the period between 2022 and 2040, it is expected that there will be roughly an extra 1 million people living in our country. This population growth will require new jobs and new homes which we need to plan for in a sustainable manner. This will require more land to be zoned, as well as more housing from other sources, such as through tackling vacancy and dereliction to utilise our existing building stock and to assist with meeting our climate obligations.

The NPF does not itself zone land and there must therefore be a further step to formalise the translation of updated NPF population and housing figures to the local level. The allocation of updated planning housing growth requirements on a local authority by local authority basis will involve a balanced methodology that factors in the level of housing demand arising from performance in terms of recent housing delivery and capacity while ensuring adherence to the policy parameters of the NPF strategy. Work on this stage is under way based on the revised NPF housing figures, and it is intended that this will inform the updating of development plans across the country over the coming months. The strategic plan-led approach to future housing development will inform the making of decisions in relation to planning applications in a robust and efficient manner, assisted by the statutory decision-making timelines contained within the Planning and Development Act 2024.

The impact of this will be significant and will require co-ordination and prioritisation to ensure that the necessary infrastructure is in place to support and enable housing delivery and to ensure that housing delivery is aligned with the provision of services and facilities, including education, childcare, healthcare and recreational facilities, to support the expansion of existing settlements and the creation of new sustainable communities. Therefore, it will be critical to deliver compact and sustainable growth patterns, and any allocation of land in relation to updated targets will need to reflect the potential of brownfield land, including infill sites, the conversion of existing buildings and the reuse of vacant and derelict buildings, in addition to greenfield land, to deliver housing.

Addressing vacancy and making efficient use of efficient housing stock is a key Government priority. To address this, a number of structures have now been established, including a dedicated vacant homes unit in my Department, a full-time vacant homes officer in each local authority and the publication of a vacant homes action plan to draw together a number of vacancy-related measures across relevant Government Departments. The latest vacant homes action plan progress report, published in March 2025, shows that real progress has been made in tackling vacancy and dereliction, with significant investment through schemes such as the urban regeneration and development fund, the vacant property refurbishment grant and the repair and lease scheme, which help both local authorities and property owners to bring vacant and derelict properties back into use and revitalise towns across the country.

The NPF also highlights the benefits of protecting and enhancing our built heritage. The town centre first heritage revival scheme is utilising Ireland's ERDF EU-regional programmes to rehabilitate publicly owned vacant or derelict heritage buildings through renovation, renewal and adaptive reuse. This scheme is allocating over €117 million to transformative capital works to such buildings in Cork, Galway, Waterford, Donegal and elsewhere around the country.

The cornerstone policy of both the existing and draft revised national planning framework is the achievement of a greater regional balance in future population and employment growth. Critical to the achievement of greater regional balance is the overall development of both urban and rural areas in Ireland, with a particular policy focus on delivering strengthened and diversified rural communities, consistent with Government policy. This extends to the Gaeltacht areas across the country, where promotion and protection of the Irish language through the implementation of language plans are supported in this revision.

The opportunities provided by the green energy transition to effect regional development are promoted by the strategy, in addition to the need to deliver essential infrastructure such as transport, water, wastewater and electricity projects that are needed to support additional population and employment growth in all our regions. The funding of infrastructure projects, with specific public investment projects to support and promote a greater balance in regional development aligned with the NPF, is facilitated by the national development plan. Accordingly, the important interaction between the NPF and the NDP is essential to realising our objectives. The Government is committed to providing increased support for infrastructure through the creation of a dedicated infrastructure division in the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform and through the new housing activation office in my Department, and it is essential that we continue to address barriers to delivery in order to meet the needs of current and future generations. The NPF revision builds on existing policies to ensure we develop resilient, vibrant and inclusive places and communities to live.

This is a framework to allow Ireland to grow sustainably. The demographic of Ireland is changing; our population is increasing. Therefore, our housing targets are increasing. This framework recognises that and puts in place a framework that will tie in with our national development plan in order to achieve those housing targets, along with the revision of county development plans on a local authority basis. Climate action and nature restoration are at the key of the framework as well, which is very important, especially from my point of view and the remit I have within the Department. We must remember also - because I have heard a lot of criticism about the lack of targets in terms of regional development - that prior to the 2018 framework there was no 50:50 split.

In other words, the split between 50% growth in Dublin and the east compared with the north west, west and south was not there. Now it is there and that will allow investment in the regional areas but also protect a very important capital city we also need to invest in. There is a need for compact growth but this framework also allows and acknowledges the need, the requirement and the right of people living in rural areas to get planning permission within their communities. I take the point there is a need to empower local authorities to zone land where they deem it necessary and for them to have more say, as well as the reserved function in terms of how their development plans come together. I guess the criticism of the Office of the Planning Regulator is coming from that point, but this framework allows autonomy within the local authorities in order to do that.

The issue of one-off housing was a constant theme, especially from Deputies living in rural parts of Ireland. That is where I live and it is an issue I see cropping up daily. I have never heard of planning permission being refused because of the national planning framework. However, I absolutely accept young people, young couples, individuals and older people as well are experiencing many difficulties with getting planning permission in their communities, neighbourhoods and sometimes on their own land. When the development plans are reopened after this national planning framework is adopted there is an opportunity for local authorities and councillors to make decisions and write county development plans that support young people living in rural areas to get planning permission in rural areas. I accept it is a difficultly and that many young people are having to jump through too many hoops and go through two, three or four applications before they finally get permission on their land, in their community or neighbouring areas. These are people who want to contribute to their community, to their local sporting organisations and to live and work in their community.

Many Deputies made reference to infrastructure and wastewater in particular. This framework underlines the importance of this infrastructure. It is now down to the NDP and investment in Uisce Éireann, as well as the organisation itself, to ensure that infrastructure is delivered. I thank Deputies sincerely for their contributions.

Question put.

An Ceann Comhairle

In accordance with Standing Order 85(2), the division is postponed until the weekly division time on Wednesday, 30 April 2025.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 30 Apr 2025

Final Draft Revised National Planning Framework: Motion

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 30 Apr 2025