Amendment of Planning and Development Act
The Minister plans legislation to replace section 29, extend planning permissions that expired in 1981, and review planning law, but gave no introduction date. A dispute over whether supplementary questions could address the Minister’s reference to other urgent matters continued until the Chair ruled Question 7 unanswered and deferred it to tomorrow.
asked the Minister for the Environment when he intends to amend the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1976.
Comment on this
(Dublin South-East): I intend to introduce legislation in this Dáil session to repeal and replace section 29 of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1976. This legislation will extend the duration of planning permission, including those which ceased to have effect on 31 October 1981 and will also cover a number of other urgent matters. In addition I intend to review planning law generally but I cannot say at this stage what proposals may emerge from this.
Comment on this
How long does the Minister intend to extend those planning permissions which have expired since October 1981?
Comment on this
(Dublin South-East): At this stage that is all the information I can give the House. As soon as further information comes to hand I will be very pleased to furnish it to the Deputy.
Comment on this
This is a very important question. Many planning permissions have expired and people do not know where they stand. It is time that the Government stated clearly what they propose to do. When does the Minister intend to introduce this legislation? Can he give a date?
Comment on this
Would the Minister elaborate on what other urgent matters, if they do not include some of the matters we have been discussing, he intends to reform in this legislation?
Comment on this
In his reply the Minister referred to other urgent matters.
Comment on this
This does not relate to the question tabled by Deputy Naughten, which refers specifically to when the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act will be amended. Question No. 7.
Comment on this
It has always been held appropriate to ask a supplementary question arising from the Minister's answer and that is what is being done in this case.
Comment on this
The Chair decides as to the appropriateness of any supplementary question and I am now calling Question No. 7.
Comment on this
I am putting it to you as a point of order that in ruling out a supplementary question because it relates to the Minister's reply you may be acting not in accordance with precedents of the House.
Comment on this
That may be the Deputy's view but as far as I am concerned all questions, supplementary or otherwise, refer to the question tabled on the Order Paper. I am calling Questsion No. 7.
Comment on this
That is not in accordance with precedents of the House and it is a matter we will have to take further. Supplementary questions have consistently and for decades related to the Ministers' replies and they would not be much use if they did not.
Comment on this
If the Minister's reply does not refer to matters material it should be ruled out of order. Once you allow him to make the reply it is by definition in order and supplementaries are by definition in order.
Comment on this
On a point of order, are you implying that in the Minister's reply he was not giving the information required and that he was in fact talking about urgent matters relating to something totally irrelevant to the 1976 Act? If he was not, then I am entitled to ask——
Comment on this
I am making no judgment on the nature of the Minister's reply, but rather that questions should refer to what is material to the question tabled. We cannot have a situation here where we discuss the legislation on a question.
Comment on this
The Minister's answer was in reply to a question about amendments to the Act. My understanding was that everything he said related to the Act. I do not understand the grounds for ruling it out of order.
Comment on this
(Dublin South-East):: With the permission of the Chair, I should like to answer Deputy Owen's question. As I said in my reply, I intend to review planning law generally. It will be a general review but at this stage that is as far as I am prepared to go in my reply.
Comment on this
(Dublin South-East): I do not agree with Deputy Quinn's interpretation that it is a trick.
Comment on this
In the early part of his reply the Minister mentioned extending—
Comment on this
We must proceed to the next business as the time allocated to Question Time has expired.
Comment on this
On a point of order, I was not trying to be insulting to the Minister of State. The Chair called Question No. 7. Is it in order for it to be answered? I will not press supplementary questions.