Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 27 November 2008
7 Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the steps he will take to remedy the situation in which many housing developments are not being completed by developers up to the standard demanded by the local authorities which result in local authorities not taking them in charge for a considerable length of time; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42928/08]
View answerPlanning authorities have a range of powers under the Planning and Development Acts 2000 to 2008 which may be used to ensure the timely completion of housing estates in accordance with relevant planning permissions. These include attaching a condition to a planning permission requiring the giving of adequate security for the satisfactory completion of the proposed development and, if necessary, applying any security given for the satisfactory completion of the development in question; the taking of enforcement action for non-completion of a housing estate in accordance with the conditions of the relevant planning permission; and the power to refuse to grant planning permission where the authority forms the opinion that the applicant for such permission has substantially failed to comply with a previous planning permission. My Department issued updated policy guidance to planning authorities in February 2008 on Taking in Charge of Residential Developments — Management Arrangements. This required each planning authority to develop or update, as appropriate, its policy on taking estates in charge by the end of June 2008.
A new local government service indicator in regard to the taking in charge of estates has been introduced, which will provide benchmark data from 2009 onwards for monitoring the taking in charge process. The information to be reported will include the number of estates that were taken in charge in the year in question, the total number of dwellings in these estates and the number of estates in respect of which enforcement action was taken. Informed by this data, which will be available in mid-2009, l intend to keep the issue of taking in charge under review.
This question was raised by me previously and the Minister spoke about issuing the circular, which he did. In October this year it was reported that 300 estates were left unfinished. What improvements have come about as a result of the issuing of the circular on the taking in charge of housing estates? Will the Minister give us some information on the Government service indicator and the benchmark data to be provided from 2009?
Will developer bonds be increased substantially to more realistic levels than what they are currently? What extra penalties will the Minister impose on developers in respect of unfinished housing estates?
The information we got from the local authorities in 2006 indicates there were 2,423 housing estates for which the relevant planning permissions had expired more than two years previously that had not been taken in charge at that time. Of those, some 785 were considered to have been finished to the required standard, while 1,160 were not. The status of the remaining 478 was not determined. My Department does not have the information on the current position but such information will be available on an ongoing basis from mid-2009 when the first data on the taking in charge process relating to 2008 become available pursuant to the recently introduced local government service indicators.
Following on from Deputy Flanagan's comments, the Minister issued a number of directives to local authorities to provide reports on the taking in charge process. I have put down a number of questions to the Minister on that matter but the response is opaque. The Minister might indicate to the House how the local authorities are responding to the circular he sent to them and the local authorities who appear to be failing in that regard because they are failing in other areas such as inspection of standards. What action will the Minister be taking?
The Deputy is correct. As part of the monitoring and review arrangements set out in my Department's circular, each planning authority was advised to make available to the public their policy on taking in charge. They were to publish it on their website and continue to report on it to the elected members, which is an important aspect, on a regular basis or at least on one occasion annually. Planning authorities were not requested to report to my Department on their responses to the policy advice. Accordingly, the information requested is not available in my Department.
This is where we must strike a balance between micro-managing and allowing local authorities and the elected representatives to get on with their business. They are to report back to the elected representatives. Many of the local authorities are now Opposition controlled and that is where the accountability lies.
The Minister is well aware of the limited roles in terms of elected representatives and full-time staff of councils. The buck stops at the Minister's desk, regardless of the circulars he sends out to local authorities, because his Department is funding them. This situation is concurrent. We are aware that inspections of the private rental sector in local authorities are a farce, despite all the regulations the Minister has circulated. We are also aware that this could well be a farce. Is the Minister, by way of the statement he just made, washing his hands of any accountability on this matter because that is what I am hearing?
Can the Minister not issue a directive to local authorities to ensure that a developer finishes a particular development before moving on to a new one within one's county? He has the remit to increase the penalties when developers do not comply with planning permissions. That is an area on which I would like to see the Minister take action.
I thank the Deputy for that proposal. To reply to Deputy Lynch, we can have a centralised system. I have been criticised here for my interventions, as the Deputy is aware.
I did not criticise the Minister in respect of any interventions.
He did not compliment me either.
The Minister is out of order. We spoke in person on this matter——
Yes.
——and the Minister should not be telling tales out of school.
The Minister, without interruption.
No, I was not doing that.
That is what he is doing. He is being underhand in his response and that sets a precedent in that the two of us cannot have a conversation in a corridor of this House without him coming in here and——
Allow the Minister to respond.
He is out of order.
The Chair will determine whether the Minister is out of order. An tAire, without interruption.
With respect, I made no reference to any——
We spoke about that matter in the hallway here. The Minister is completely out of order.
I think the Deputy is out of order, and the Chair is right to point that out.
Neither the Minister nor the Deputy will determine what is in order. The Chair will do that.
I compliment you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, on pointing out what is and is not in order.
The Minister is in order in giving his final reply briefly.
I am saying to the Deputy that I have been criticised in the Oireachtas joint committee for interventions I have made in regard to planning matters in certain counties. I am criticised in the committee but then people say we need to take a stronger hand with the local authorities. I have to try to get the balance right. I have always said, in regard to those rezonings, that I only intervened as a matter of last resort. That is the way I try to operate. If anything, I am trying to give more powers to elected representatives and it is up to those elected representatives from Deputy Lynch's party, my party and Fine Gael, to come forward and hold the local authorities to account on these issues and ask management what they are doing in regard to this matter.
Go raibh maith agat. Ceist a hocht.
I was going to complete it but anyway——
The Minister did not answer my question.
We are more than two minutes over time on this question. Question No. 8 is in the name of Deputy Joe Carey.
