asked the Minister for the Environment if it is envisaged that a fee will be charged by local planning authorities for applications for planning permission.

I have no proposals to amend the Planning Acts to require the lodgement of fees with applications for planning permission.

I do not wish to monopolise Question Time, but would the Minister not consider that in some areas there is a legitimate charge open to an applicant? The instance I am thinking of is one in Harcourt Terrace where there have been ten applications and ten refusals by the local authority. We are now incurring our third appeal to An Bord Pleanála and the developer in this question—a major financial institution—has not paid one penny of the administrative cost of these ten applications which have been refused. Would the Minister not consider having something equivalent to a vexatious application, which is equivalent to the provision in the 1976 Amendment Act of a vexatious appeal?

The question relates to legal costs. There is no requirement on anyone to have legal representation at an oral hearing.

(Cavan-Monaghan): There is nothing about legal matters in this question.

Perhaps I am looking at a different question. I am looking at Question No. 10.

Sorry. Yes, it has to do with legal planning authorities but not with An Bord Pleanála.

Through the Chair, the organisation, whose name is not relevant to the debate, have made ten separate applications to the planning authority as set out in this Act. The planning authority have processed the application on ten separate occasions, on each occasion saying it was in contravention of development. The cost of the administration of this processing has been carried entirely by the Minister and myself and the taxpayer. These, I would argue, are vexatious applications, as distinct from vexatious appeals, under the meaning of the 1976 Act. In the light of that application, which comes from a colleague of the Minister's own backbenches, would the Minister not consider, under the orders open to him under the 1976 Act, suggesting provision for the recognition of what I would describe as a vexatious application, which the Harcourt Street Terrace application undoubtedly is?

The Deputy is making a long drawn-out statement.

I shall have that matter checked out—if vexatious is properly defined in the Act; as far as I know, it is. How one would recognise a particular application as being vexatious is another matter. I am prepared to consider the Deputy's question, but it seems to prevent difficulties with regard to the description of vexatious.

I shall write to the Minister. This is a specific case which has arisen.

(Cavan-Monaghan): A very short question. Would the Minister not think that ten successive planning applications in respect of the same property, the first nine having been refused, are at least, an abuse of the planning procedure?

It would seem vexatious, but I have only become aware of it now. The question has nothing to do with that.

(Cavan-Monaghan): They are sometimes simultaneously submitted.

11.