JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, HERITAGE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 24 Feb 2009

Business of Joint Committee.

Chairman

Apologies have been received from Deputy Bannon. The first item on the agenda is the minutes of the meeting of 17 February which have been circulated. Are they agreed? Agreed.

The next item is correspondence received by the joint committee and circulated since the last meeting. Item No. 1 is 2009/348 and has been sent by Mr. Martin Miley from County Kildare. It follows on from a previous letter asking the joint committee to investigate the cost to the taxpayer of a planning case involving An Bord Pleanála which is before the High Court. Do members wish to comment? This councillor contacted us about the cost to the local community of taking An Bord Pleanála to the High Court and the fact that the community was liable for the costs arising from the case, which are massive. It was argued that An Bord Pleanála was able to use taxpayers' money against the local community. We contacted An Bord Pleanála and received an anodyne response. Councillor Miley is not satisfied with our response.

Deputy Christy O’Sullivan

Is it in order for us to discuss a case that is before the High Court?

Chairman

This is a case that has been concluded and in which costs have been decided upon. The project in question will be the subject of a new case in the High Court. The councillor is complaining about the fact that although An Bord Pleanála conceded on the steps of the court, meaning the residents had won their case, both parties were landed with enormous costs. The residents felt aggrieved about An Bord Pleanála's approach to costs, rather than the planning issue, and that it did not have due regard to the taxpayer who was paying for it. Deputy Fitzpatrick might be familiar with the case as it arose in Usk.

Deputy Michael Fitzpatrick

I am somewhat familiar with it. I raised a similar issue at this forum involving Kildare County Council and Regan and Company. An Bord Pleanála has access to expert advice and it is very difficult for the local community which is solely funded by donations and money raised locally to fight such cases through the High Court. It is disadvantaged in not being able to bring a case to the highest level. Councillor Miley is close to the people involved and would know the hardship caused and stress under which they were put as they attempted to prevent a landfill site being created on their doorstep. I support their action because there is already in County Kildare one large landfill site which is quite adequate. I do not know what the committee can do to assist the councillor other than highlight the issue and draw attention to the fact that unlimited public funds are being used by An Bord Pleanála. It is wrong of it to do so.

Chairman

I am looking at a reply from the chief officer of An Bord Pleanála which we received on 10 December. We will write again for further information but I will read the relevant paragraph. He says he was asked to advise the committee that in the legal proceedings the board was at all times conscious of the need to keep legal costs to the minimum possible level. He goes on to say that this was one of the considerations that influenced the board in its decision not to oppose the application for a judicial review at the leave stage and to concede the case at an early stage in the substantive proceedings.

It appears that An Bord Pleanála is accepting that it conceded the case; we should write to it seeking full details of the legal costs associated with the case. An Bord Pleanála should specify who was paid in this regard as it could be interesting to see what costs were incurred. We will revert to An Bord Pleanála on the basis that the earlier letter was not satisfactory.

Deputy Michael Fitzpatrick

If it would be in order, would it be possible to ask An Bord Pleanála why it did not concede at an earlier stage? Why did it take the case so far, with legal representatives and so on?

Chairman

This is what caused angst for the local community in dealing with State bodies. An Bord Pleanála said it decided not to oppose the application for judicial review at leave stage but the local community spent €80,000 from its own funds and no commercial interests were involved; the money comprised small contributions from members of the local community. The local community employed barristers and environmental experts to bring the case to that point but An Bord Pleanála conceded after €80,000 was spent. It is felt in the local community that An Bord Pleanála should have examined the case earlier and reached its conclusion not to oppose the judicial review at a much earlier stage. We will revert to An Bord Pleanála on this matter.

The next item is a letter from Ms Emily O'Reilly, the Ombudsman, following up queries raised at the meeting of 2 December regarding the report on the waste waiver schemes. It is a detailed and helpful letter with many interesting points. We have discussed the issue of waivers by local authorities and privatised and non-privatised waste collection facilities. It is proposed that we note the letter and thank Ms O'Reilly for the comprehensive reply. I do not agree with everything she said but she makes fair comments.

The next item is another letter from Ms Emily O'Reilly regarding delays in the planning process. The committee wrote to the Ombudsman about such delays because some committee members complained that under the farm waste management scheme, some planning applications were delayed and work was not completed before the expiry of the scheme at the end of December. The Ombudsman makes it clear that her role relates to the process rather than the substance of the planning decision. The reply is helpful and clarifies that the Ombudsman is not a planning expert and does not cover such areas; she is there to oversee the process.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

Can that letter be circulated in hard copy, if possible?

Chairman

I think the Deputy got a copy.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

I get around 50 such e-mails and it is difficult to decipher which is which.

Chairman

I know the feeling. We have extra copies of the letter and will pass them on before the end of the meeting.

The next item relates to Friends of Europe and is a report on the policy summit attended by Deputies Bannon and Hogan on 5 November 2008. Is it agreed that we note this? Agreed.

The next item is an invitation to the economic summit in Munich on 28 and 29 May 2009. It is being hosted by the BMW Stiftung & CESifo Group and it relates to climate and energy; rights, goals and wrong approaches. I propose we pass on this invitation to the Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security.

The next item is a letter from the Irish Direct Marketing Association seeking to make a presentation relating to our report on the register of electors. Strictly speaking this is a matter for the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Do members wish to see a presentation from the Irish Direct Marketing Association following on from our report? The association takes a different view and seeks to use the electoral register for direct marketing and other purposes. This would be of benefit to members of the Irish Direct Marketing Association. Should we get involved in this? I suggest we thank the association and forward the matter to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, which is responsible for the electoral register. We conducted a report on the electoral register but its commercial use is not our bailiwick.

The next item is a circular from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on landfill levies for local authorities and it relates to SI 199 and Circular 1.09. We will note this. At the last meeting a member asked for a briefing on this matter and a letter arrived this afternoon, too late for inclusion, from the waste policy review and regulation section. We wrote to the Secretary General and it has been confirmed that Eunomia Research and Consulting and its partners are undertaking the study to review waste management policy, which was provided for in the programme for Government. The study is well advanced and is scheduled to conclude this summer. A briefing can be arranged for the committee when the study is completed. Is it agreed to take the briefing when the report is ready? Agreed.

No. 361 is a referral notice from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. As we predicted at the meeting on 10 February, both Houses have referred the planning and development regulations to this committee. This matter relates to the linking of regional planning guidelines with county and city development plans and we note it. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy John Gormley, will attend the committee meeting next week to discuss this.

The next item is a press release from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on the home choice loan scheme and the social housing investment programme. We will note this correspondence.

No. 363 concerns the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA. Howard McConnell, of McConnell's Coatings Limited, has complained about the management and running of the EPA in regard to the company's dealings with the agency. As representatives of the EPA are here today we can provide them with a copy of this, if they have not had advance notice of the correspondence. I do not expect the delegates to be able to address this matter today but they can come back to us. It is merely a coincidence that they are here today.

We will note the next item, a newsletter entitled GLOBE.

The next item is from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and relates to spending limits at local elections. I presume this will come before us by way of legislation as the spending limits at local elections were announced.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

From what I understand, having questioned the Minister, an amendment is due when this matter reaches the Seanad; it will be included in the Electoral (Amendment) Bill. There is no clear indication of when this will be introduced but it has been suggested there will be a 60-day window when it comes into force. No timeline has been agreed on the legislation coming before the House.

Chairman

The legislation will come before this committee in the normal course of events.

No. 366 is a press release from the End Child Poverty Coalition, No. 367 is a paper on housing from the European Urban Knowledge Network, No. 368 is a newsletter on the European Water Partnership, and No. 369 is a newsletter from the European Organisation for the Homeless. We note all of these items. No. 370 is a list of decisions made at the 1 February meeting of the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny. We note the correspondence because no action is required by this committee. The next item relates to waste management and the national waste report from the EPA. This has been e-mailed. There are copies here today and it will be discussed at today's meeting. The next item is the Private Residential Tenancies Board's annual report. Is it agreed to note that? Agreed.

Before we leave correspondence, members will recall that at a meeting on 3 February the Oireachtas Library and Research Service offered to do one major piece of research for the committee in 2009. Is there any particular issue the committee would like taken into account in that? We will keep that topic open for the moment. On the issue that arose following the Mayo county development plan and recommendations on legislation in that area, I hope to a draft report for discussion at the committee's next meeting but if not certainly within the fortnight.

The next item is a travel report. A draft report has been circulated by e-mail on the visit by a delegation of the joint committee to Letterkenny, County Donegal on 13 February 2009 for the spring seminar of the Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland. I extend thanks to Deputy Fitzpatrick and Senator Glynn for representing the committee there. Is it agreed to approve the draft report and lay it before both Houses of the Oireachtas? Agreed.

Sitting suspended at 3.51 p.m. and resumed at 3.52 p.m.

Chairman

We noted the minutes. By way of clarification, at our last meeting there was a proposal to invite the board of Anglo Irish Bank to the committee to discuss its relationship with Dublin Docklands Development Authority on condition that such a meeting did not duplicate the work of other committees of the Houses, notably, the Houses of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service and the Joint Committee on Economic and Regulatory Affairs. We are taking advice to ensure we are not duplicating work already being carried out. There is no point in this committee inviting the board of Anglo Irish Bank if another committee is doing the same. Furthermore, I heard on the news at lunchtime that the Garda had visited the offices this morning. We do not want to be in conflict with anything like that. We will keep that matter under observation before making a definitive decision on it. In any event, Anglo Irish Bank issues are a matter for the Dublin Docklands Development Authority, not for this committee. The banking industry would be more appropriately dealt with by other committees of this House.

We will now proceed to the main item on our agenda, namely, waste management and the markets for waste.