Paul Lawless
Mayo · Aontú · Ireland
“Confidence in our education system depends on quality resources but parents remain seriously concerned about inappropriate material that is being promoted in our schools, libraries, etc. Concerns have been raised in relation to the book What's the T?”
“They would make up a higher proportion of the membership of the Dáil than is the case at Westminster. Aontú's leader, Deputy Peadar Tóibín, during his time on the Oireachtas enterprise committee, completed the first Oireachtas report on the all-island economy.”
“Difference is an accident of birth and it should therefore never be the source of hatred or conflict. The answer to difference is to respect it. Therein lies a most fundamental principle of peace — respect for diversity. Aontú believes fundamentally in a united Ireland.”
“It is important that those who oppose a united Ireland - who are now a minority on this island, and increasingly so - are treated as equals and with the respect they deserve in the discussions relating to a united Ireland. I have good friends from the Protestant tradition to whom I speak on a near daily basis.”
“The Tánaiste once said that he wanted to make Ireland the best country in the world in which to raise a child. He is failing in that regard. We have a situation where we have record homelessness among children, spinal surgery waiting lists and children with special needs or disabilities who are waiting for supports.”
“Rather than celebrating and respecting our differences and our right to be different politically or religiously, they wish to make us all the same. They want to make us all apolitical atheists who never speak on or campaign in respect of the issues.”
The complete record
Every one of 702 lines we hold for Paul Lawless, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 15.
“Fresh statistics released to me regarding primary care services in Mayo are very concerning. Last year only 31 out of 150 Mayo children under five years of age received psychology support. During Covid, when the Taoiseach was Taoiseach, speech and language therapists across the country were redeployed to vaccination centres and for contact tracing. As a result of this, in Mayo in 2021, only 400 children were seen in primary care for speech and language therapy supports. To put that in context, generally there are thousands of children seen in Mayo. Does the Taoiseach accept in hindsight that this was a mistake? Does he accept that many children suffered during those years? Does he accept that there is still immense pressure in relation to primary care, CDNTs and children waiting for crucial therapies across Mayo and many other counties?”
“I urge the Minister to listen to logic when he hears it, to move in the direction suggested and to protect future taxpayers. No one in this House wants to see people going through the devastation of watching a home crumble. The hardworking people who are paying taxes certainly do not want to see their hard-earned money going to rebuilding houses for a second time.”
“I urge the Minister to consider the collective wisdom of this House and protect those future taxpayers. Houses are being built today, but not enough. The number being built, approximately 30,000 is far below the 50,000 target. However, we know that these houses are being built without the necessary checks being carried out to ensure that they comply with standards. We need better, more robust regulations and testing. Having both would benefit everyone. I urge the Minister to recognise that this should be a lesson. This should be a watershed moment in the context of making sure that the substances in the blocks and concrete that are coming out of quarries will be tested in order to ensure that future taxpayers will be protected.”
“This problem was created as a result of either light-touch regulation or no regulation at all. It is clear that the Government was asleep at the wheel in terms of the substances that were coming out of quarries. The result of that is that the State is paying hundreds of millions of euro to rectify the problem. It is quite incredible to think that, with the benefit of hindsight, we have learnt nothing, because the testing done in respect of what is coming out of quarries is completely inadequate. I listened to Deputy Charles Ward make this point eloquently and articulately. It is incredible to think that the Government will not listen. If it did listen to some of the wisdom that is coming from this side of the House, we might protect the future taxpayers of this country.”
“The fact that there are delays regarding payments - this was particularly the case with the most recent phase of payments - is resulting in some builders having to increase their prices. That is causing major issues for families, and it must be rectified. The instalment payments should not be late. There should be no excuses in that regard. The idea that there is still no scheme for social housing is a matter of deep concern. There are social houses in Mayo that, as everyone knows, were built using defective concrete blocks. There is no scheme available in respect of those homes. That needs to be rectified. There needs to be a scheme. We need to ensure that local authorities can get on with the business of rectifying the problems with those houses.”
“I very much welcome the fact that the scheme has been extended to Wexford and Dublin. That is a step in the right direction. We in Aontú remain very much of the belief, however, that 100% redress is required. Unfortunately, the scheme does not offer 100% redress. The scheme has been changed many times since it was first discussed, which is creating a massive amount of confusion. I have heard of cases whereby, incredibly, one semi-detached house may qualify and the one next to it may not. What type of a mess is that? Likewise, I have heard of cases where it is obvious to everyone that half of a property will need to be rectified down the line. Many homeowners cannot afford to enter the scheme. They cannot afford to pay upfront for the building condition assessments that are required.”
“She was speaking under Dáil privilege at an Oireachtas committee last week and said she could not go into any detail about what happened to her because of the family law courts and the in camera rule. Not only this, but any evidence she herself gave in the family law courts could not be used in the criminal courts. This evidence would be disregarded, which is extraordinary. This woman’s own evidence which was used in the family law courts was precluded from being used in the criminal courts. She could use the evidence but would have to get permission, which is really quite incredible. Margaret Loftus has said the in camera rule needs to go, as it is having a devastating effect on survivors and victims of domestic abuse.”
“Margaret Loftus, a wonderful woman from Mayo, spoke to "Prime Time" earlier this year about the abuse she experienced at the hands of a member of An Garda Síochána. She spoke last week to the justice committee and asked how many gardaí have barring orders against them. The answer is we do not know, because of the in camera rule. That is a shocking revelation. She was asked about her experience of family law courts. The family law court outlined that she should be ashamed of herself and go home and apologise to her children. She was told that if the judge had jurisdiction over the Central Criminal Court, she would throw out the charges. This is a woman who endured sustained, brutal attack lasting an hour and a half, when she was put against a wall and kicked repeatedly, and left huddled with her children.”
“There is an entire attitude where people feel a significant fear around talking about their situation. There is also a situation where judges themselves are often scathing in their assessments, sometimes in relation to Tusla, and are not having their remarks publicly heard. It is a significant thing that in some cases judges are scathing of Tusla and those remarks and assessments go unheard. The problems in Tusla, which have been well-highlighted by my colleague, Deputy Tóibín, over many years, are extremely serious. The inside of courtrooms get much greater insight into these problems than we do, but the in camera rule prevents us as policy and law makers from getting a proper understanding of what is happening and how we can fix it. The secrecy around family law cases creates a breeding ground for corruption.”
“I welcome this motion from my colleague, Deputy Gogarty. I hope it receives cross-party support. There are many problems with the in camera rule in the family court. It is something we in Aontú have raised consistently for a long time. The cross-party group has formed in the Oireachtas seeking reforms. This is very welcome and indeed it is good to see Government backbenchers as part of that group as well. Deputy Gogarty cited the example of Britain and the pilot system it introduced to remove the in camera rule and how it is working. This is something we should look at seriously. We have a situation which not only prohibits journalists from reporting on the horrors unfolding in the courtrooms, it also leaves people feeling like they cannot talk to gardaí, or their solicitor in some cases.”
“This is a major issue for rural and coastal communities in Mayo. I am therefore asking for the Minister's intervention to make sure, in the midst of this wave of applications from large commercial seaweed harvesters, that we protect the native seaweed harvesters. The changes coming down the line for these harvesters and this industry will suit and favour the big players. From 2028, there will be an obligation on native seaweed harvesters to register and that will come with a fee of €2,000 and a litany of additional reports that will cost significant money.”
“Therefore, I urge the Minister to support small family-run businesses during this difficult time of energy cost increases because, if we do not, we will need more grants down the line for refurbishments of derelict commercial buildings. We need to keep the businesses in operation and protect them. The Minister's remit - rural development - is not exactly enterprise, but it is important that we protect businesses in regional towns. I attended the fisheries committee discussion of seaweed today and it is clear that any consideration of seaweed applications should be halted because native seaweed harvesters will potentially be trampled on. MARA and the wider State effectively do not know what is happening and do not have certainty about the rights in local areas in Mayo, Galway, Kerry and Donegal.”
“I have major concerns about small family businesses right across Mayo and the west. They are in massive difficulty. During the recent protests, I spoke to a number of people, not from the haulage, construction and farming sectors but from small family-run businesses that were really struggling. They are struggling with the cost of business. They are struggling with rates. They are struggling with insurance and with increases in terms of labour force and auto-enrolment. All of these things are really crippling businesses. If we lose businesses from the centre of a town, it will be extremely difficult to replace them. When one building becomes vacant and the next one becomes vacant, there is almost a contagion effect.”
“Spring is nearly over. Where are the guidelines? In 2024, the then Taoiseach, Deputy Harris, stated that wind turbine guidelines would be in place before the end of that year. Right across Ireland, companies are submitting applications for significant wind farms. The guidelines allow these companies to bypass local authorities and to build massive turbines very close to people's houses. The people in local and rural areas deserve guidelines. When will those guidelines be put in place?”
“Before Christmas, the Government voted against proposed wind turbine guidelines from the Opposition. It did so because it said that the Government's proposal and guidelines would be brought forward early this year.”
“Will the Tánaiste instruct An Garda Síochána to recognise the protest as peaceful, legitimate and driven by financial hardship? It is really important these people are protected.”
“Hauliers and farmers who took part in the fuel protests are now facing summonses. In some cases their registration plates were recorded at the time of the protests and now they are being pursued. These are people who have invested heavily, in some cases hundreds of thousands of euro, into their businesses, trucks and livelihoods. The additional penalty points will see many of them lose their licences and their insurance policies. There is a real risk, therefore, that some of these people will be put off the road and will lose their businesses. I hear that in some cases gardaí are patrolling certain areas where the protests originated and summonses are issuing in the aftermath. Is the Government engaging in reprisal action in relation to the protesters? Are people being penalised for exercising their democratic right to protest?”
“I want to raise my concerns about the retirement age for emergency personnel and particularly for the retained fire service. Every year, very valuable members with huge amounts of experience leave the force - the retained fire service. In one station alone, 100 years of experience will be lost over the next number of years. These are individuals who undergo medical examination every year after the age of 50. My view is that if a person wants to continue to work and if they are eligible and passing their medical examination, they should be allowed to do so. It is particularly in the context of the Workplace Relations Commission proposals in 2023. There was a major issue with recruitment in the retained fire service. I welcome the fact that has changed but there are a huge number who will have to leave.”
“Will the Minister of State outline on the floor of the Dáil what fines we are expected to face as a country as a result of these climate action targets?”
“This is a very important issue and there have been calls by the Native Irish Honey Bee Society to enact the Protection of the Native Irish Honey Bee Bill 2021. We had the association before the Oireachtas committee recently and we heard about the devastating effects of hybridisation. I am calling on the Minister of State to do something. The Bill passed Second Stage in the previous Dáil. It is really important that we see the passing of that Bill to protect our own bees, pollination and biodiversity in the country. I also want to raise the climate fines this country is facing. The climate advisory council and Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, IFAC, outlined and warned the Government that we could face up to €26 billion in climate fines as a result of the previous Government signing very ambitious targets.”
“Today, on Earth Day, I raise the very important issue of our pollinators. Our native Irish bees are in significant jeopardy as a result of the importation of foreign bees. The importation during the Covid-19 years increased by fivefold. Studies have shown that the rate of hybridisation in Irish colonies has increased by almost 300% over the past six years. That means our native Irish black honey bees are mating with other bees in the area. Beekeepers obviously cannot control that. They are mating and the result is a hybridisation effect. If we allow this importation to continue, particularly of yellow bees, there is a very significant risk that we are going to see the extinction of our native genetic strain of bees.”
“The speech and language disorder is one route to access this under the 2013 curricular, but to be assessed for a speech and language disorder a child must have an IQ of above 90. This child's IQ is in the region of the fifties. He is not going to meet that threshold but two therapists have said that it is essential for the child. Down Syndrome Ireland has confirmed to me that is not an outlier or unique case. I have submitted parliamentary questions to the Minister. She has stated that a review is under way. This is a review for a basic grant that is essential for a child to access the curriculum. What is going on? When will the review happen? When will this child be able to access assistive technology that he so desperately needs?”
“I ask for the attention of the Minister in this regard. The family and school of a young child who is in primary school have applied for assistive technology. His occupational therapist and language therapist have outlined that he needs it. The report clearly states that this is essential for this child to access the curriculum. It does not state that this is helpful. It does not state that this is preferable; it states that this is essential. However, the application was rejected and refused by the Department. The refusal ultimately cites two things: first, insufficient evidence of a specific language disorder, despite the fact that the child has such immense difficulties; and, second, it appears that it is necessary for a child to have an IQ above 90. Here is the catch.”
“I am asking the Minister to ensure that the circular is updated, that the invaluable contribution SNAs make is recognised and that there is a move away from this restrictive model dictated in the 2014 circular. I also ask the Minister to advance the SNA redeployment scheme. It is fundamentally important. It happens in a range of other professional sectors and for professionals across the country. It should also happen for SNA cohorts as well. SNAs are looking for increased continuing professional development, CPD. They want training as their role is expanding massively. They want to professionalise. They want job security and clear contracts. It is important the Minister ensures that happens. Finally, I will raise the important issue of assistive technology for children with special educational needs.”
“These are our most vulnerable children and if we cannot do that in this day and age, we should hang our heads in shame. I will speak about the SNA situation. The current circular is completely outdated, restrictive and cruel. It is incredible that it took people - SNAs and families with disabilities - protesting outside Leinster House to make this Government realise what was happening. A review was being undertaken which would have seen on-the-ground cuts, essentially, and it took families standing on Kildare Street and raising their voices for this Government to realise what was happening. The same happened with the protests last week. I urge the Government to listen to the people. The people of this country should not have to blockade infrastructure or spend hours outside Leinster House to get this Government to wake up and listen.”
“I urge the Minister to ensure that she has a workplace plan in place because, clearly, there has not been one in the Department. That is fundamental. The Department needs to get a grip of the data. It needs to ensure that it knows what is coming down the track for next year and the year after and plans and prepares accordingly. For the children entering school this September, it is quite clear that the Government up to now has no provision or plan in place. I urge the Minister to ensure that she gets a handle of the situation and the data. She must ensure there is a plan, rather than a scramble, in place for children this September, as well as those children starting in September 12 and 24 months from now. The Minister must be able to say to families that there is a place for them and that the Government will look after them.”
“First, I support the motion brought before us today by Sinn Féin. Every year there is a scramble for families of children with disabilities to access special educational places, which is their constitutional right. In Mayo, it is no different. Many families are panicking, chasing SENOs and ringing school principals and the NCSE. That is what it is happening. The level of anxiety is frightening. Such families attend my clinics, but what should I say to them? It is devastating. These are our most vulnerable children who are being forgotten about. It is so upsetting. The problem is not an information problem; the Minister and the Department have the data and statistics. The gaps are visible, yet every year there is a scramble. The most recent reports outline that up to 1,200 children could be without a place.”
“What are the policies that the Government is implementing today? I ask the Minister of State to give an update in relation to this.”
“A responsible Government would be able to answer basic questions on the fines that we are going to face and that Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael signed us up to. The Minister of State mentioned significant progress and stated that policies are in place. Policies should have been in place before the Government signed us up to these measures. We have been laggards in relation to this. In fact, when the Government signed us up to these targets in 2023, it accepted an increased target of 42%, when Ireland was already missing its original target of 30%. What was the basis for that decision? The Minister of State talks about responsibility. I am asking him basic questions. Can he outline the level of fines we will face? Is it going to be on the lower end, at €3 billion, or the higher end, at €26 billion? What are the factors that will determine that?”
“It is really important that the Government understands that the targets Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have signed the Irish taxpayer up to carry with them significant fines. According to the Climate Change Advisory Council, CCAC, and the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, IFAC, the fines involved range from €3 billion to €28 billion. The Minister of State has responsibility for this. I am asking him about the fines. What are the factors that will determine whether we face fines of €3 billion or €28 billion? The Government is accountable for this. It signed the Irish taxpayer up to these incredible fines. Where are we in relation to this? What are we likely to pay in fines? What cost-benefit analysis has been done? What are the Department's current projections in relation to these fines?”
“This Government has signed Ireland up to a number of binding carbon targets which carry enormous fines for the taxpayers of this country. Will the Minister and Ministers of State provide an update on where Ireland stands with regard to those targets and on the potential fines that this State will face in 2030?”
“Is it going to ensure that all citizens and communities are treated equally or is it going to try to continue this policy of running roughshod over communities? Is the Government going to make this planning exemption permanent? I refer to Government Deputies and backbenchers. Every time this has broken in local communities across the country, the Taoiseach has outlined that the Government wants to see community engagement and consultation with communities. This is the Taoiseach’s opportunity. What is the Taoiseach going to do? Is he going to make this permanent or will he allow communities to have a say in relation to what happens to them?”
“I could not believe my eyes when the Minister for justice outlined recently that it was his intention and the intention of the Government to introduce legislation to remove several proposed IPAS centres from the planning process entirely. I have raised this planning circumvention with the Taoiseach on a number of occasions. Both he and the Tánaiste have led the House to believe this was a temporary, emergency measure and would be removed imminently. Now we read it is the Government’s intention to make this planning exemption permanent. The IPAS system is the only accommodation system that currently avails of a planning exemption. I want the Taoiseach to be clear. What is the intention of this Government in relation to the IPAS planning exemption?”
“We should be focusing on incentivising small-scale renewable energy generation like solar and biodigestion, but there are significant issues in relation to that. Just the other week, I spoke to a farmer who had a biodigester. Even after several months, he still cannot get connected to the grid. Other farmers have applied for the targeted agricultural modernisation scheme, TAMS, grant for solar generation, but just 10% of applications have been successful. One arm of the Government does not know what the other arm is doing. The Government's policy is totally wrong. It has created this crisis and now it is complaining that the people are raising concerns. It is time that the policy of high energy costs is reviewed.”
“I have written to the Chair of the Oireachtas committee on media. The Minister should be hauled in to account for his comments. The truth is that the Government, and the previous Government of which Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael were a part, have pursued a policy of high energy costs. In fact, embedded in the carbon tax was the intention to increase fuel prices year on year. It was baked into legislation irrespective of the cost. That was the policy, and now it is starting to unravel. The Minister condemned the protesters for blocking fuel, but it was his Government that banned oil and gas exploration. It made us reliant on the international markets and now it is blaming those international markets for the cost of fuel even though it was the Government's policy to begin with.”
“I want to raise the comments in relation to the Minister with responsibility for the media. When the media covered the protests, they covered the ordinary men and women. The Minister responsible, who holds the purse strings for the media, called for an investigation into the media. What an abuse of ministerial power. This is the most authoritarian thing that we heard in recent days. The truth is that this Government introduced a rescue package in excess of €700 million last year for RTÉ to bail it out. Is this what he paid for - this level of control that he is trying to exert? The truth is that this Government tried to blacken the names of protesters. Then the Government looked to the media to try to support it and spread that propaganda. They were ordinary men and women. That was deeply wrong.”
“The vast majority of what we pay is on Government taxation. Over the past ten years, the Government has taken in €35 billion. In 2020 alone, it took in €4 billion and that tax take is rising, year on year. The Minister of State made an argument for carbon tax but he should know that reliable and regular public transport does not exist in Mayo. If you want to commute from Ballyhaunis or Ballinrobe to Castlebar or Westport on a daily basis, you cannot do so. The Minister of State knows that. Is it right and just that the farmers, hauliers and contractors are, in the main, paying the carbon tax that is going, in many cases, to retrofits, etc.?”
“If you are a farmer in Mayo who is seeking to spread slurry or fertiliser, or cut silage, you do not have an alternative. The Minister of State should know that. This escalation of prices has unravelled the Government's policy on carbon tax and its desire for high energy costs. That is the truth of the matter. It is the Minister of State's desire and that of his Government. It is time that they wake up, accept it and change that policy because it is hurting rural Ireland and the Irish economy. Who knows where the cost of fuel is going to go over the next number of months and years? I opposed and voted against that Bill. The reason I did so was because I will not vote for a carbon tax into the future. It is wrong to penalise our Irish citizens who have no alternative. The taxation of fuel is incredibly excessive.”
“It is time that this Government accepted accountability, not just for the mishandling of the crisis but also for the situation in which we find ourselves in terms of our energy reliance. The fact is that the infrastructure for renewable energy, as the Minister of State well knows, is not there at the moment. In relation to the escalating costs, it was the previous Government's policy to actually drive up costs. The Government introduced the carbon tax. It was designed to drive the cost of energy. The Government did it in such a way that it was legislated for and baked in several years ago irrespective of the costs in the future. That is why the Minister of State's comments about carbon tax last week were tone deaf. The carbon tax was designed to try to move people away from fossil fuels.”
“The people of County Mayo and the rest of the country are desperate in terms of the costs of fuel. This Government has acted with complete impunity when it comes to accountability. First, it blamed the protesters. Then it blamed the media for covering the protesters and threatened an investigation. Then it blamed Trump. Earlier, I heard Ministers blaming international markets, international pricing structures, etc., but who made us reliant on international markets? It was the Government in terms of its policy. The previous Government, of which the Minister of State was a member, banned oil and gas exploration. It stripped away any ability for us to be energy independent. It created this dependency and then, when prices escalated, it blamed the dependency that it created. That is a fact.”
“-----outlined to the Mayo media that he was going to increase carbon tax again on 1 May. "A modest increase", is what he said, when the people were struggling. He should be listening to the people, he should be engaging with the people and he should not be blackening their name.”
“It is absolutely astounding that the Government refused to meet the protestors yet was so quick to blacken their names. In fact, every single intervention this Government made over the past number of days has added fuel to the fire. It threatened the use of the Army and the public order unit, it threatened to revoke licences and it even accused a Minister of being far right. That is not leadership; that is provocation and it is deeply wrong. The Minister for justice even called in the Army without engaging with his Fine Gael colleague and now the Government is threatening an investigation in the media for daring to even cover this protest. Let me be very clear, this is the policy of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the ghost of the Green Party to drive up fuel. It is incremental increase after increase to the carbon tax.”
“The management team is incredibly successful and it has many more ambitions for capital infrastructure and to expand passenger numbers. My question to the Tánaiste is: what steps will he take to ensure Knock Airport is not penalised for growth? What steps will the Tánaiste take to ensure we continue to the investment in the west of Ireland? This airport is really important and I want to see it continue to be supported.”
“It is 40 years this year since Knock Airport opened in County Mayo. At the time, it was thought impossible to build an airport on a foggy, boggy hill but such was the determination and vision of Monsignor James Horan. Since then, it has been incredibly successful and a really key piece of infrastructure for Mayo and the west of Ireland. It is at somewhat of a crossroads at the minute. It is due to exceed 1 million passengers this year, having already handled 950,000 passengers last year. Under the regional airport support scheme, once an airport exceeds 1 million passengers, it triggers a tapering off of funding. However, this funding scheme is vitally important and has been critically important for the airport in previous years.”
“It protects the rights of people to lodge objections on behalf of residents within an area and it protects businesses whose interests may be affected. It is fair, reasonable, and proportionate and we would urge all Members of the House to support it.”
“As I mentioned, we have seen scandals in the past where environmental NGOs were objecting to developments and then offered to withdraw those objections if the developer paid them the fee. It was absolutely scandalous what was happening, with an NGO operating purely for profit with no genuine environmental concerns whatsoever. In one case, two brothers set up an NGO and objected to housing developments at the other end of the country claiming environmental grounds and then only withdrew those objections if the developer paid the so-called consultancy fee. Essentially, they are demanding to be to be paid off and situations like this make a mockery of our planning system. Our Bill protects the rights of communities to object to developments.”
“That is fundamentally important because in this country it has been the case where environmental NGOs have submitted planning objections to housing developments and other applications and they were doing so on the basis of making a quick buck and to hamstring contractors to ensure those developments were delayed. Those individuals were then essentially seeking ransom money through consultation fees. It is extraordinary what is happening in the State at the moment. We have put a great deal of work into this Bill. We have a major problem in relation to vexatious planning objections from people right across the country who have never seen or never set foot in some of these local areas. This Bill balances the right of people to object with the need to prevent abuse in the planning system.”
“Under this Bill, people will be barred from objecting if they live more than 10 km from the site, or indeed if they own land farther than 5 km away. This is about supporting local democracy and it is fundamentally important local communities and local people have the opportunity to build houses, sheds and infrastructure that is needed in local areas. The Bill does not extend to State agencies or public bodies. However, it is important to state that individuals or groups can still object as long as they are doing so with the support of, and in conjunction with, local individuals in the community.”
“However, we want to prevent a scenario where individuals or groups who have no connection to a local area and who are in some cases acting in bad faith can submit objections to critical infrastructure, housing, etc. At the moment it is quite extraordinary that objectors to developments can come from right across this country. For example, if a farmer is applying for a slatted shed in Donegal, it is currently the case that objections can be submitted by individuals from Kerry, Cork, Dublin and right across the country who have no interest, no awareness or no local material interest in that planning application. We believe this is wrong, and we want to ensure the planning process is speeded up, that efficiencies are introduced, and indeed that we prevent the bogus objections happening currently.”
“I move: That leave be granted to introduce a Bill entitled an Act to prevent certain objections to grants of planning permission by requiring, subject to exceptions, that an objector must have a material interest in the development to which the objection relates; and to provide for related matters. I am very glad of the opportunity here to introduce and move the Planning and Development (Material Interest) Bill. This is a very important piece of legislation and I hope it will speed up the planning process across the country. The objective of the Bill is to ensure that people with a genuine and local stake in a development can participate in the planning process and make observations and objections if they see fit.”