Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I agree with Senator McDowell. I have highlighted the inadequacies of the measures in this section as they relate to Article 6.1.(b) of the Aarhus Convention. The attempts to address that issue are inadequate. This is not the only issue, however. The wording in section 9(6) effectively provides that almost any class of development in which the issue of environmental impact assessments has been elsewhere addressed can be exempted. The bar for exempted development should be high. We need a clear list of what the exceptional circumstances are for developments exempted from the planning process, rather than this sweeping provision where the Minister will determine the categories of development.

I lived in a converted office building at one point. I know, however, that important things are added by the planning process when it comes to conversion. Someone seeking to convert an office building who goes through the proper planning process may, for example, get input on the importance of providing play spaces or that, given the demographics of the area, more family accommodation is needed and this should be reflected in the design. The kinds of conditions attached to planning permission make for better developments and better planning. A lot gets lost when we short-circuit the planning process. If there is a case for short-circuiting the planning process, it should be done in exceptional circumstances and the bar and burden of proof should show there is a reason for the exemption.

The measures we proposed on strategic housing development and the use it or lose it idea were not taken up, to the detriment of the housing supply. In the case of strategic housing development, we short-circuited the process and people were left with a greater asset, one that did not go through any of the constraints of the planning process and is potentially worth more on paper than it was as a site previously and then may or may not get built. We do not want either a development or a class of developments to benefit from the exempted development process, skip the planning process and then still not happen, and we have simply created assets.

Huge profits have been made from property in Ireland by speculative investment firms. I have the figure here. I will read it into the record later but some of these speculative retail entities almost doubled their profits. That has not been matched by all these things being built. In some cases, they just have a more valuable site with a different permission on it. While we want to see conversion of office buildings, pubs and so forth, skipping the planning process and public participation in it is legally problematic under the Aarhus Convention. It is also a serious and high stakes thing to do. I am concerned that it may be done in a way that the benefits will not outweigh the risks. The cost-benefit analysis should be built in for planning exemptions. They should be applied in a transparent way, rather than the power being simply delegated to the Minister.

I am concerned about the class of exemptions. Exempted development goes against the core principle that we previously had in planning legislation, where a Minister would not be involved in individual planning decisions. That was the fundamental principle in our planning legislation, whereas now we have a situation where the Minister may decide that the planning process will not apply for certain individual developments or categories of development. As I said, data centres are another area I have concerns about. That is one example of something that could end up falling under this category. The concerns expressed by others are valid and I hope the Minister can address them.