I thank the Ceann Comhairle. Our country is currently facing the greatest housing crisis since the foundation of the State. At the heart of our housing delivery problem and the requirement to increase supply in this precarious market is the application of planning policy. Some 80% of strategic housing development, SHD, grants of planning permission that were judicially reviewed were quashed, primarily because the board went rogue and attempted to apply ministerial guidelines as higher planning policy, completely ignoring 20 years of jurisprudence and the laws laid down by this House. Professional planners and this Government deployed a narrative that it was not they who had caused this problem but the NIMBY objectors who took judicial review proceedings.

Last Friday in a landmark judgment, Cork County Council v. the Minister, the Attorney General and the Office of the Planning Regulator, OPR, laid bare the rot that exists at the heart of the planning system. The judgment filleted the Office of the Planning Regulator and the Department’s planning policy unit. An eminent planning senior counsel described this planning judgment as one of the most accurate and scathing he has seen. What is striking about the judgment is the frustration of Mr. Justice Humphreys at the obvious and fundamental lack of knowledge of the Office of Planning Regulator in respect of the basic legal principles of planning law. At paragraph 30, Mr. Justice Humphreys said of the regulator that, “If the caselaw had been engaged with, the untenability of [his] point would have become apparent.” He continues at paragraph 62 to state, “The attempt by the OPR and the Minister to turbo-charge non-binding guidelines by drawing the conclusion that non-compliance contributed to a conclusion that the council was in breach of s. 10(1) is unfortunately a rewriting of the Act."

I could continue with these damning quotes because they are endless. No planning system or those who operate it could survive such a damning judgment. Thankfully, Cork County Council saw fit to bring proceedings to vindicate its decision and, as a consequence, it has been made plain that it is the regulator and the planning policy unit that are undermining the planning system by making it up as they see fit and consequently we are removing certainty from the system. Having regard to this judgment, the dissemination of unlawful advice by the regulator to local authorities concerning the application of section 28 guidelines will potentially undermine the legality of county development plans and cause further expense to the State in legal proceedings.

What actions is the Government taking to restore confidence to the planning system to ensure that the Office of the Planning Regulator complies with and operates within the law? Further, has the Government confidence in Mr. Cussen to continue in his position as the planning regulator?

The straight answer to the Deputy’s last question is “Yes”. The Government has confidence in the Office of the Planning Regulator and in the individual referred to by the Deputy. The role of the Office of the Planning Regulator is clear. This office ensures that county development plans, as they are developed, are consistent with national planning framework. If mistakes are made and there are legal challenges, then that is why we have a court system. I do not want to go in to the detail of the particular court judgment referred to by the Deputy but if mistakes were made there, then we need to learn from them. The principle of having a planning regulator, however, which ensures that we have consistency across the country in how we plan for and pursue development into the future is a good one.

Countries need national planning frameworks which set the guidelines and parameters within which the local authorities work in how they plan in a sustainable way for how we live and move around, and the infrastructure that is needed to facilitate that.

There will always be tension and challenges when there is disagreement, and that happened here. I am very familiar with the case referred to by the Deputy but it does not call into question, in as fundamental a way as the Deputy is suggesting, the role of the Office of the Planning Regulator. The planning regulator has a difficult job to do and sometimes it is not a popular one. He, of course, needs to be transparent about how he makes his decisions and has to be consistent with planning law and other legislation. His office’s relationship with the local authorities is an important one, so that we have consistency across the country from all local authorities in our national planning framework. It is the role obviously of the Minister and his Department to ensure we get that balance right.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle and the Minister. In regard to the Minister being familiar with the 26-page judgment and him making a statement like that, this was not a disagreement. It was ignorance of basic planning policy and the legal framework. Mr. Justice Humphreys spelled it out in black and white, saying that irrespective of the law of the land, the regulator fails to operate within the law and makes it up as he goes along. Those are Mr. Justice Humphreys’s words on the case the Minister is familiar with. They are not my words. I will give the Minister another quote from the judgment that demonstrates the total incompetence.

... the [planning regulator] and the Minister are trying to shoehorn the circumstances here ... even though the council did not fail to comply with any requirement ... That is in effect a shortcut and a failure to do the necessary groundwork ...

The Minister’s endorsement of the planning regulator is unbecoming. Even the most ardent supporters of the regulator could not have confidence in him, having read last Friday’s judgment that the Minister states he is familiar with.

I have not read the judgment. I said I was familiar with the case and the issues around it as are others in this House. I have spoken to the Minister about it at different points because it is an issue that has been ongoing for quite a period of time. It involves both Cork City Council and Cork County Council and an ambition to develop a big new retail centre in east Cork.

This is a landmark case, Minister.

Yes, if it is a landmark case, we will learn from it. That is what the courts are there for.

Who regulates the regulator?

Cork County Council felt aggrieved on this issue and took a court case. We now have a judgment and we need to act on it. That is how the system works.

What will that mean?

That does not mean that the role of the Office of the Planning Regulator is not still an important one. It is. If mistakes were made here, they need to be corrected and we need to learn lessons from that. I do not want to comment on the judgment or its text because I have not read it yet but, as I said, I am familiar with the overall issue here and the tension and differences of views around it and the role of the local authorities and of the OPR in regard to it. I am glad we now have clarity in a court judgment and I hope that we can learn some lessons and move on from it.