Skip to main content
Normal View

JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, HERITAGE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT debate -
Tuesday, 24 Jun 2008

Vol. 190 No. 6

Business of Joint Committee.

The proceedings of the meetings of 4 and 18 June have been circulated. Are they agreed? Agreed? There are no matters arising therefrom.

We have received a significant amount of correspondence. No. 144, is an e-mail suggesting areas for our work programmes which may warrant research, will be discussed later. Is it agreed to note No. 146, a journal article for a thesis? Agreed. No. 147 is a request to address the joint committee on spending limits at elections. The suggested date for the meeting is Tuesday, 15 July 2008 at 2 p.m. and has been agreed with the Minister. Is the date agreed? Agreed. No. 148 is a request to address the committee on the waste management of tyres. Is it agreed to note the correspondence and meet the delegation in question?

Do we have an indicative date for a meeting?

We can decide on a date later.

It is proposed to note the following items of correspondence: No. 149, an invitation to a book launch; No. 150, a homelessness newsletter; No. 151, the GLOBE Europe and GLOBE Canada newsletters Nos. 76, 77 and 78 providing policy updates on environmental issues; No. 152, a calendar of meetings planned for the French Presidency; No. 153, a European Water Partnership update newsletter dated 4 June; No. 154, a ministerial press release on another death of a white tailed eagle; and No. 155, a press release on an appointment to the board of the Environmental Protection Agency. Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. 156 relates to the Green Paper on local government reform. Is it agreed to note a reply to queries raised on voter turnout at local elections? Agreed. Members may wish to follow up on the reply. The Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland has requested to make a presentation on the Green Paper. Is it agreed to meet a delegation from the organisation on 1 July 2008?

Will we invite other groups to attend the meeting?

Only one organisation has requested a meeting.

Is it not possible to invite representatives of the county councils to attend the same meeting? We might as well meet representatives of the municipal authorities and local councils on the same day.

I presume that is possible. Is it agreed to invite representatives of the Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland, county councils and the Local Authority Members Association to the meeting? Agreed.

No. 157 is a follow-up note providing an update on a proposal for legislation to revise and merge directives on industrial emissions. This update was sought by members at our meeting of 27 May 2008. The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny requires our written observations on this proposal. We can write to advise that we are satisfied with the Department's update on the proposal or invite officials of the Department for further discussion of the matter.

I propose we invite the Department in on 15 July.

Is that agreed? Agreed. On No. 157, information pack on arrangements for the Lisbon referendum, with press pack information on polling arrangements, etc., we must note the correspondence because it is in the past. On No. 159, waste management, SI 168 of 2008, Waste Management (Landfill Levy) Order 2008, is it agreed to note the correspondence? Agreed.

On No. 160, local governance decentralisation and territorial development, EU Commission discussion paper on local governance decentralisation and territorial development, is it agreed to note the correspondence? Agreed. I will take it what we are discussing is agreed unless somebody says it is not.

On No. 161, planning and development regulations 2008, briefing on planning and development regulations 2008 and proposed SI to be discussed at our select committee meeting next week, is it agreed to note the correspondence? Agreed.

On No. 162, payment dispute between Kildare County Council and a contracted company, initial reply to letter sent from this committee for Deputy Fitzpatrick, is it agreed to note the correspondence and wait for further updates? Agreed.

I agree but we should keep our minds on this important issue, which needs to be addressed. Deputy O'Sullivan raised it at the second to last committee meeting and he was anxious about it. I am not clear on the matter, and although the Minister is here I will not ask him to comment on it. With all the legal people involved in this type of inquiry, who pays the fee? Is it the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government or the local authority? I assume that if the local authority is responsible for paying the fees for these very high-powered people, it might do more research into the particular projects at stake.

A letter has been sent from the committee, so we will probably await its outcome.

Agreed. On No. 163, a journal article, is it agreed to note the correspondence? Agreed. On No. 164, Lisbon treaty discussion paper, is it agreed to note the correspondence? Agreed. On No. 164(a), European water partnership update, newsletter dated 11 June, is it agreed to note the correspondence? Agreed. On No. 165, GLOBE Europe newsletters, policy update newsletters on environmental issues, is it agreed to note the correspondence? Agreed.

On No. 166, Environmental Performance of Agriculture in the OECD Countries, is it agreed to note the OECD report? Agreed. On No. 167, construction industry federation event, an invitation to the international congress in Dublin, is it agreed to note the correspondence? Agreed.

On No. 168, composition of the board of An Bord Pleanála, follow-up letter to recent presentation to the joint committee, is it agreed to note the correspondence?

I raised the issue some time ago and we did not get clarity in the reply from An Bord Pleanála on the composition of the board. I queried that there were certain guidelines assessed when the board was established some 30 years ago. There were certain criteria laid down regarding the composition of the board, as the members were to be drawn from various rural organisations.

There will be an opportunity under No. 5 on the agenda to discuss that. The Minister will comment on that and the Deputy will have an opportunity to speak then.

It relates to the follow-up to the Irish Rural Dwellers Association.

We will note the correspondence in the meantime.

On No. 169, report on the Lisbon treaty, committee report entitled The Enhanced Role of the National Parliaments in the Lisbon Reform Treaty, is it agreed to note the correspondence? Agreed. On No. 170, list of EU legislative proposals sent to us for information only, is it agreed to note the correspondence?

Are they directives?

It is the list of legislative proposals sent to us for information only.

May we debate them? There is a serious issue about directives coming from Brussels. Annoyance was expressed to canvassers during the recent referendum campaign regarding legislation affecting turf cutters. Serious concern was expressed by people who feel it is their right to use their own bogland to cut turf for their own use. Turf cutting is part of our heritage and this should not be overlooked when the Minister is signing any directive into law. I ask him to take this into consideration.

A presentation will be made on that issue to our meeting on 1 July.

A draft report has been circulated on the visit of a delegation of the joint committee to the European green policy summit in Brussels earlier this month. I thank Deputy Bannon for representing the committee at the summit meeting. Is it agreed to approve the draft report and lay it before both Houses of the Oireachtas? Agreed.

As discussed at our meeting of 27 May, the research service provided by the Oireachtas Library has been expanded greatly and new teams of researchers are now in place to assist members with their parliamentary duties. One major piece of research is available to each joint committee of the Houses. In this regard, we are to choose an area from our work programme which might warrant this service. The clerk has circulated the relevant extract from the work programme and one of the researchers has e-mailed his suggestions for areas on which to focus. His e-mail is included in members' correspondence. Do members have any ideas on this matter?

What is the researcher proposing?

The research service has offered to research a topic and asks the joint committee to indicate the topic we would like to have researched.

There are Bills in the heritage area in the pipeline. I would appreciate a report on that area.

We should look at planning, and particularly the effect of recent ministerial guidelines on planning in north Kildare, which is on the periphery of Dublin. I am particularly concerned with how the guidelines relate to settlements, towns, villages and one-off houses. Planning on the periphery of Dublin is a major issue. We could do some important work on planning.

I note that the Minister wrote to the committee on 29 May indicating his intention to speak to us on the matter of electoral spending and the measures we might put in place before the next local elections in 2009. I suggest that we commission research on election spending, particularly with regard to local elections, consider the report early in the autumn, and take the Minister up on his invitation to discuss the matter.

I support Deputy Fitzpatrick's suggestion. Planning is a matter which the committee should examine and is always a live issue. It concerns many people, whether from a rural or urban background.

Is the joint committee asked to identify one piece of research? Could we list three topics in order of preference? Will the library do more than one piece of research over the coming year?

They have requested one suggestion.

Is that one piece at a time?

One piece per year. I suggest that we bring three suggestions to our July meeting.

I do not think we can make a decision now.

Would heritage and planning come under the same heading?

In answer to Deputy Lynch's question on election spending, the Minister will appear before the committee on 15 July to discuss the matter.

I propose to commission research to inform the committee as to the options. If we are to have a debate we should be informed rather than come to the meeting simply to express an opinion.

How does the committee propose to send forward just one item?

Is the Department able to produce some comparisons with other jurisdictions on expenditure limits for local elections and how they are run? Could that be achieved by 15 July? Perhaps we could start the ball rolling.

We can defer a decision until after the Minister attends the meeting on 15 July.

I cannot understand why the library and research service cannot study more than one topic.

It seems strange.

We will not spend the whole year talking about heritage or planning.

Maybe we will consult them again.

I have already commissioned research from the library and research service on electoral spending and it has been published and is available to the committee. Maybe it could broaden the scope of the research I have asked it to complete. We can take its results on board when we discuss the issue with the Minister.

We will consult the library again to see if, in line with Deputy Hogan's suggestion, it can carry out research on more than one item. We will go ahead with the meeting with the Minister on 15 July.

I ask that the meeting be deferred or brought forward.

Top
Share