Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 23 Mar 1939

Vol. 74 No. 18

Committee on Finance. - Town and Regional Planning (Amendment) Bill, 1938.—Report and Final Stages.

Minister for Local Government and Public Health (Mr. O Ceallaigh)

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 5, before Section 11, to insert a new section as follows:—

(1) When a planning authority has passed a resolution for the making of a planning scheme and has, before such planning scheme comes into operation, made a special prohibition in relation to any work, such planning authority, in addition to the powers conferred on them by sub-section (1) of Section 58 of the Principal Act, may, if they are of opinion either—

(a) that the remedying after the coming into operation of such planning scheme of the prejudicial effect of proceeding with or doing the work to which such special prohibition relates would be unduly costly or would involve undue delay in the enforcement of such planning scheme, or

(b) that such effect would seriously injure the amenities of the neighbourhood during the period before the coming into operation of such planning scheme,

declare, at any time before such planning scheme comes into operation, that any contravention of such special prohibition before such coming into operation shall be unlawful.

(2) a declaration under this section shall, for the purposes of the Principal Act and, in particular, for the purposes of sub-section (2) of Section 58 of the Principal Act, be deemed to be a declaration under the said Section 58.

On the Committee Stage several amendments were down in the name of Deputy Benson, who took a great interest in the discussion on this Bill. Amongst other points raised by him there were three in connection with which I promised that I would try to look into the matter again and see how far I could go to meet the points of view he had been putting up. In this amendment, which is now on the Order Paper in my name, I think I am going a considerable way to meet Deputy Benson's point of view with regard to one of these matters. I have had long discussions with those responsible for the drafting of the Bill—the experts in my Department—and they were rather timorous about going so far. A lot of this legislation in town planning is experimental. It is new; there has not been anything like it before, and we have not had any experience of its working. Therefore, we hesitate to tie it up too tightly in rules and regulations, especially in regard to any to which penalties might be attachable for the infringements thereof. However, we have decided to go as far as is suggested in this amendment, and I think it meets the Deputy's point of view to a considerable extent.

Mr. Benson

The only thing I have to say about this amendment can be very briefly summed up, and that is by saying "Thank you"; because I think the Minister has met everything I suggested on this point. It is very satisfactory, and I am sure it will be a big help to the town planning authorities in carrying on developments, because it will enable them to control certain things which, previously, they could control nominally, but which, in actual fact, they could not control until the plan became operative. I think this is perfectly satisfactory.

Amendment No. 1 agreed to.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 12, Section 28, line 49, to delete the words "the owner of the land to which such road plan relates" and substitute the words "an owner of land."

This amendment is one that, I think, could properly be described as a drafting amendment. It is merely to change the words "the owner" to "an owner."

Mr. Benson

I am not clear as to the purpose of this amendment, but it seems to me that possibly it is rather too wide. The section, as now proposed to be amended, would read that a local authority charged with the construction and maintenance of roads may, in pursuance of a road plan and at the cost of an owner of the land to which such road plan relates, construct any new road, and so on. Surely if that is taken in its broadest sense, it would mean that if the local authority is going to do something on, say, the North side of Dublin, they can make an owner of land on the South side pay for it. The words proposed definitely suggest the owner of the land to which certain road planning relates, and I think this is very much broader. I suggest that it is too wide altogether, and does not confine the matter to the actual land which is being developed.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Well, it is to be read in connection with the other sections of the Bill. When taking this section and the others that go before it, it means in reality the developing owner. There might be a case where there would be two owners, the developing owner and another owner, but the person we would be interested in for these purposes would be the developing owner finally. We have thought of the point of view put by Deputy Benson, and we think that this will be more accurate, will give us wider scope, and will not lead to any injustice or to anybody who is not the right owner being brought in.

Mr. Benson

If the Minister says that it is not too wide, I am prepared to agree to the amendment.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

We have examined it from that point of view.

Amendment No. 2 agreed to.

Question proposed: "That the Bill, as now amended, be received for final consideration."

Mr. Benson

On that question, Sir, there was one other point of some importance that I raised with the Minister on the Committee Stage, and that was on the question of advertisements affixed to structures. The matter was also raised by Deputy Walsh, of Drogheda, and the Minister said that he would look into it. I rather gathered from what the Minister said, in reply, I think, to Deputy Brennan, that there was a suggestion that there might be further legislation on that subject. I should like to know what has been the result of the Minister's consideration, if he is in a position to inform us yet?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

As I said earlier, I promised that I would give further examination to three of the points raised by Deputy Benson. We have examined this one regarding the control of advertisements, and we are satisfied that we have gone as far as we can to meet the suggestions that have been put up in the course of the discussion on this Bill, and, before these discussions arose here, to meet the point of view that there should be in the hands of local authorities power to control these advertisements. There are advertisements in existence in, say, the City of Dublin that are objectionable, but a number of these, perhaps, cannot be interfered with, or you cannot oblige the owner to take them down until the planning scheme comes into operation. I think the Deputy was chiefly interested in advertisements that were indestructible, or rather advertisements that are an obstacle to the improvement of the city of a permanent nature. We will have all the power that is necessary, of course, when the planning scheme is adopted, but it is difficult in the interim to give power now to any local authority to go around looking at these things that are objectionable from the aesthetic point of view or the building point of view, and giving too widespread powers to them to wipe out these objectionable things. Some of these things have been there for many long years and, even though they are objectionable, it is difficult to deal with the matter, and the giving of such powers might lead to destructive work of a wholesale kind and God only knows where it would end.

If we give too much encouragement, now that we are getting town-planning conscious, so to speak, elements who are enthusiasts on the subject and some who might even be fanatics on the subject, would perhaps go too far. Those who have any association with town planning in my Department and I myself would like to see the ideas that the Deputy has in mind put into operation but we have to go slowly. A beginning is being made. The idea of town planning is new and festina lente is a wise motto in regard to putting into operation certain aspects of town planning. There are any amount of these bill-posting signs on buildings and on railway bridges, and even the railway bridges themselves, that I should like to see removed from a purely aesthetic point of view. They do not add anything to the beauty of the City of Dublin, at any rate, but there are great difficulties in the way and I think we shall have to hasten slowly.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take the Final Stage now.

Question—"That the Bill do now pass"—put and agreed to.