Paul Nicholas Gogarty
Dublin Mid-West · Independent · Ireland
“As I have mentioned in the House before, if a border poll passes by 52% to 48%, the legal threshold of the Good Friday Agreement is met but the social consensus is not and moving 800,000 citizens into a new state against their explicit, democratic will does risk causing civil unrest.”
“We also have other gaps that are much smaller, like a ten-year phased transition, reducing the net annual cost to between €2.5 billion and €3 billion. We then had the middle figure of about €11 billion. We actually do not know how much it is going to cost but we do know it is going to cost something.”
“For example, adopting a single currency, getting rid of the exchange rate volatility and the transaction costs for cross-Border businesses are all advantages.”
“I would be loath to call a border poll right now because of the risks associated with that, but if a border poll did occur, the State would have to be prepared for the huge structural disruptions that would follow, so we have to start working now - that is why this debate is welcome - without arrogantly presuming it is going to become a r…”
“I have been listening to this debate in my office since Deputy Currie started her contribution. I always follow these debates on Irish unity with interest as someone who wants to see a united Ireland by consent.”
“Some have been mentioned in this House, such as a devolved regional assembly in Stormont to preserve local governance for the unionist community, a shared bill of rights protecting the dual Irish-British citizenship, and re-evaluating our relationship with the Commonwealth.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,194 lines we hold for Paul Nicholas Gogarty, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 24.
“Some have been mentioned in this House, such as a devolved regional assembly in Stormont to preserve local governance for the unionist community, a shared bill of rights protecting the dual Irish-British citizenship, and re-evaluating our relationship with the Commonwealth. Also, our symbols like the flag and the national anthem are things we hold very dear here, but we are going to have to take those risks and be as accommodating as possible. I hope it comes as soon as it is feasibly possible.”
“As I have mentioned in the House before, if a border poll passes by 52% to 48%, the legal threshold of the Good Friday Agreement is met but the social consensus is not and moving 800,000 citizens into a new state against their explicit, democratic will does risk causing civil unrest. Civil war has been mentioned as an outlier risk but we are talking about localised political polarisation, most likely, stuff that would actually stop a united Ireland from being as viable as it could be. Data from the Analysing and Researching Ireland North and South project confirms fears that loyalist paramilitary violence and instability could remain a deterrent to people voting for a united Ireland. To mitigate those risks we need a lot of constitutional and institutional accommodation, necessary measures that people might have to swallow.”
“For example, adopting a single currency, getting rid of the exchange rate volatility and the transaction costs for cross-Border businesses are all advantages. Full re-entry into the EU Single Market for services and removing the jurisdictional barriers are all advantages and allow State bodies to plan for infrastructure, higher education and skills delivery on an all-Ireland basis. However, the non-financial obstacles are equally severe. There are two parallel administrative systems. There are the healthcare services that others have referenced. Obviously, people in Northern Ireland really like their National Health Service. Merging that with our health service in terms of Sláintecare will require a huge amount of money. The other angles would be the democratic implications of a vote.”
“We also have other gaps that are much smaller, like a ten-year phased transition, reducing the net annual cost to between €2.5 billion and €3 billion. We then had the middle figure of about €11 billion. We actually do not know how much it is going to cost but we do know it is going to cost something. The debate is really about whether one wants a united Ireland or not, and if we do want a united Ireland, we must be prepared to put up with the cost because there are going to be economic benefits as well as social ones down the line. The middle-ground figure of €11 billion quoted earlier is more likely a realistic figure, even allowing for the fact that things sometimes become a lot more expensive in this country. Any transition to a united Ireland will require a lot of structural mechanisms, as the Tánaiste said.”
“I would be loath to call a border poll right now because of the risks associated with that, but if a border poll did occur, the State would have to be prepared for the huge structural disruptions that would follow, so we have to start working now - that is why this debate is welcome - without arrogantly presuming it is going to become a reality any time soon, and especially without alienating those of a different background and viewpoint whom we need to bring on board. We have had discussions about the economic modelling showing the different scenarios and, in some cases, this has been weaponised, depending on one's political outlook. We had the ESRI's €20 billion figure mentioned as the worst-case scenario.”
“I have been listening to this debate in my office since Deputy Currie started her contribution. I always follow these debates on Irish unity with interest as someone who wants to see a united Ireland by consent. I note that this discussion is focusing on the fiscal elements required to help make it a reality, but these considerations can never be looked at in isolation. During my brief contribution, I will focus on some of the other elements as well. It is clear that the fiscal and social realities of a potential united Ireland require a lot of actual planning rather than political rhetoric.”
“There will be a lot of legal opposition to various aspects of this legislation in any event, so let us just throw the whole lot in - unless what the Minister is really saying is that there is resourcing issues in terms of the District Court's capacity. That is a valid concern as well, but at some stage we have to draw the line and say this is the sort of offence that is not acceptable in any civilised society. You are not allowed to violently attack your partner. We can have nuances and definitions but whacking your partner violently to me is the line we draw. If that is in the remit of the District Court, so be it. It needs to be put on the record to protect the partner and to protect future people.”
“At any stage, if they behave themselves, people will have their names taken off the register. However, the types of offences that should go onto the register in the first place should be violent assaults such as giving a partner a black eye. To me, that is sufficient to show that person cannot be trusted. If a relationship breaks up and there is a new partner, they have an absolute right to know about that because next time it could be a broken eye socket or the use of a weapon. We have to deal with it there and then rather than let someone get away with it. Another point is that in a lot of the convictions in the court people do not serve anywhere near the actual sentence they are given. They are out and about, with no real consequences and then they feel a sense of impunity. We have to nip it in the bud.”
“We are talking about individuals whose violence is not confined to a single relationship. They always blame their partner at the time but these are people with a propensity for violence and that violence is acted out not just on partners but on other people in society as well. If it is not dealt with it right from the outset it is going to create more problems. I see there are some issues in relation to, for example, starting with the District Court cases in that there might be a risk of retaliation because people know their name is going to be listed. I acknowledge this is a risk. We are having a different level of argument about the three-year process and the right to have their name removed from the register; that is a later discussion, and I believe five years would be more sufficient.”
“I am not a legal expert on this but I have been raising issues on the related in camera rule and the need to remove it, because that is going to act as a chilling effect on people reporting cases in the first place. However, anything that encourages reporting has to be welcomed. If we look at where violations of court orders happen, they happen in the District Courts above and beyond. Regarding the type of domestic violence incidences, the vast majority of them are within the District Court as well. We can move beyond that and say we will start off with the most serious cases but the most serious cases are arising because people go away with the less serious cases. These are often people with multiple, sometimes different, convictions in multiple relationships.”
“If I was a woman or if it was my daughter or any family member, and I found out that someone had a conviction of up to 12 months for violently assaulting someone, giving them a black eye or damaging their eye socket, I would want to know about it. These types of incidents start very incrementally. They start off with one thing. It gradually escalates. The violence becomes the norm. The coercive control is brought into it. It is not usually a situation where someone starts off in a controlling relationship as the essence of extreme violence. It works up to that situation. Therefore, you do have to nip it in the bud, so to speak.”
“Yesterday I thanked the Minister for using the Seanad route to get this legislation through so it could be passed before the summer recess. That confirms the Minister's own acknowledgement of the urgency of getting this legislation passed. There is a balance between the urgency of getting something passed, but also the urgency of getting something passed that is going to impact as well as it could. That is why I support amendment No. 1 and the other suite of amendments because we are not going far enough. In essence, we need to challenge and push things out. If something needs to be tweaked afterwards, that is the better option rather than being very conservative starting out. If we look at the District Court situation, for example in terms of summary convictions, we are talking about convictions of up to 12 months.”
“The vast majority, however, did not ask to come here. They did not ask to have to stay here so long. We do have this attitude that Ukrainians are basically skiving when they could go back to their own big country. This is what is on social media. Ukraine, however, has a war effort it is trying to sustain, and we need to show solidarity and continue to try to help them as best we can.”
“For a disability [related] person, shared toilets, shared corridors, noisy communal spaces and high-density accommodation are not minor inconveniences. They are ... real barriers to basic daily life, [like] using the toilet, washing, eating, sleeping, leaving the room, attending appointments or going to work or college. The letter also stated that, "Any relocation decision must therefore include an individual assessment of disability-related needs, employment, education, transport, medical care and service continuity." We bring people in and then we put them in a difficult position. This is not the right way to go about it. We could ask the average Ukrainian about this. I met a Ukrainian citizen who moved to Adamstown some years before the war. Some Ukrainians have been living and working in Ireland.”
“Many Ukrainians in Ireland are working, paying taxes, studying, raising children, supporting family members with disabilities, using local services and contributing to Irish society. For these families, [forced] relocation to another county is not just a change of address. It can mean losing access to work, schools, colleges, doctors, disability services, transport links and community support. The letter continued: We are not asking for indefinite hotel accommodation. We are asking for a fair, humane, disability-sensitive and employment-sensitive transition. The current approach risks causing disproportionate harm to working people, families with children in education, people with autism, PTSD, anxiety, disabilities or complex medical needs, and vulnerable adults already connected with HSE and disability services.”
“This is in a context where kids have been going to the local schools, people have built up links with local communities, learned the language and are making a contribution. I want to read some excerpts from a letter written by the Ukrainians in Citywest. It stated: Many Ukrainian people in Ireland are now facing a new and deeply worrying stage in their lives. After fleeing war, rebuilding their lives from nothing, finding work, placing children in schools, accessing medical care, and becoming part of local communities, they are now being told that State-provided accommodation is changing. This issue is not simply about hotels or accommodation centres. It is about whether people who have already integrated into Irish society will be allowed to keep the stability they have worked so hard to build.”
“On the one hand, we are inviting President Zelenskyy to Ireland for the European Presidency, with all the pomp and ceremony, and then we are trying to keep Aughinish Alumina on the sidelines. We are saying slava Ukraini and then basically treating them like dirt. We have an obligation and responsibility to help people, so let us live up to that. I do not think this motion is dealing with the particular circumstances. Ukraine is the first step. The next step will be the Baltics, and the step after that will be Poland. We have to show solidarity in that specific geographic context. I also mention a separate issue in my constituency. A lot of Ukrainians were staying at the Citywest location. A good portion of these people have disabilities. It now seems they are being sent to the four corners of Ireland.”
“We took in the Ukrainians as part of a Europe-wide collective effort. We might have been perceived as being more generous than some countries precisely because of our military neutrality. We are not giving weapons to Ukraine to defend itself against Russia, so we did have to go above and beyond. I think that is only right and fair. A lot of the Ukrainians who have come here have settled. Some of them have got jobs. I do take the point about means-testing in terms of increased contributions within the confines of the ARP payment, for example. There was the original €800. If people have a job and can contribute €200, I think it makes a lot of sense. I do not think cutting it, however, sends out the right message.”
“My constituency and others have seen a huge number of childcare providers leaving the core funding scheme because of the fee freeze, which is kind of a financial straitjacket, with staffing taking up 7% and a lot of huge costs. Meanwhile, the newer ones are able to set much higher fee baselines, although in areas like the Adamstown strategic development zone, SDZ, the rents are so high that we do not have as many places opening as there could be. Will this matter be revisited to look at ways of keeping providers and maybe encouraging some to come back into the scheme? Parents are worried about the massive increase in prices this coming autumn.”
“Performers should have explicit legal control over their voice, their face, their movement and their personal and artistic identity. I welcome the motion and hope that the Minister of State will take it on board.”
“IMRO, Recorded Artists Actors Performers, the Screen Composers Guild and their European counterparts can. The EU should establish a compulsory licensing framework such that if AI developers want to train on European creative content, then they should pay into a collective pot. That is how radio, television and streaming were made to pay dividends, even if we all argue that those dividends are too low. As already stated, getting rid of the AI liability directive was a mistake. Artists need a clear path to compensation when their work is misused, where their likenesses are impersonated and where their income is undermined by fraudulent AI content. We could show leadership here. Ireland should use its Presidency of the European Council to push for a more targeted and effective directive.”
“It does not need to be perfect on day one. It could start off with voluntary submissions, collective management organisations and the major publishers. It does need to start, and we should not listen to threats to the effect that companies will just pull their money and business out of Europe and move elsewhere. That does not wash. Europe is the sanctuary of basic rights. We should stand up for those rights. We also need any opt-outs to be technically enforceable. At the moment, artists can tell companies not to train AI on their work, but developers cannot reliably identify or remove that work from their datasets. The European Union should therefore require dataset tracking. We also need more powers in relation to collective licensing because individual artists do not have that power in the context of individual companies.”
“The motion before the House basically calls that out and asks for measures to improve the situation, so I support it. We need infrastructure at EU level to help artists. Even if every word was taken on board and we started from where we are, we will have to follow a process in respect of what is already a race against time. If we look at how the AI Act could be improved, for starters, there must be mandatory as opposed to voluntary transparency. That is in the code of practice. We need legally enforceable obligations requiring AI developers to disclose exactly what datasets they are using, what copyrighted works are included and how those works are processed. It is quite difficult, but it is technically possible. We need a European-wide registry of copyrighted works used in AI training. That would be the backbone of any licensing system.”
“It basically states that courts may presume a causal link between the system's output and the harm caused, unless the AI developer can prove otherwise. It is a presumption of artistic integrity, and the AI company has to prove it did not steal the work. The directive would also have required disclosure obligations, thereby allowing courts to compel AI developers to reveal things like training data logs and documentation, information that is currently hidden behind this corporate wall. In welcoming this legislation, I acknowledge that a lot of what we want to do is going to be difficult when it comes to enforceability. That is very common. The directive would have helped big time. The European Commission argues that the AI Act is enough in itself, but it does not offer any civil liability disclosure rights or anything else to win a case.”
“Transparency licensing, fair remuneration and accountability are the very least that artists are entitled to if those companies are going to trawl through their work in this way. It is slipping away, especially with the withdrawal of the AI liability directive. The latter would have given artists something we currently do not have, namely a proper mechanism to get compensation or redress when AI systems and the companies that own them essentially misuse our work or cause economic harm through reduced incomes. This directive would have introduced a rebuttable presumption of causality, meaning that if an AI system produced content clearly derived from an artist’s work, the artist would not have to prove every technical detail of how the system ingested, processed and reproduced that work.”
“The motion acknowledges the alarming findings of organisations such as the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers in relation to the explosion of AI-generated streaming fraud and the failure of existing EU mechanisms, particularly the digital Single Market copyright directive of 2019, to provide meaningful control for the artists. AI developers can legally scrape and analyse copyrighted content for training unless the creator has opted out. I will discuss the difficulties to which that gives rise in a moment. This was originally designed for search engines and data analysis tools, not generative AI, but AI companies now rely on it to justify the mass ingestion of original creative works.”
“It is always a work or a craft; even if the process of inspiration can strike like lightening sometimes, it is often honed and edited over a much longer period. We cannot automate this lived human experience or our imagination. I read somewhere recently that our innate evolution as a species was due to becoming storytellers around the fire. People have spent years honing skills that can never be replicated by a machine, yet today we face this challenge that we would not have anticipated years ago. Fundamentally, the economic foundation of our work as artists, including royalties, licensing commissions and performance fees, are being further eroded. This time, it is not the music industry or the publishing industry but AI and the big tech companies.”
“We have had a constant fight over decades to ensure creative work is valued as labour and not treated as a hobby or a free resource. Music artists, for example, had to put up with reduced mechanical and performance royalties from streaming services. Increasingly as Deputy Tóibín referred to, people have sought refuge in live performance. So far, it is the last retreat of human artistic endeavour, but for how long? It used to be that live music was to promote recorded works but now recorded works promote live music to a larger extent. If recorded works are being threatened by AI derivatives where will our future writers, singers, actors and film directors be? They will not exist. In light of that, I welcome the motion. We in Ireland have always understood that art in itself has value.”
“AI bottom trawls for free, pays nobody their due reward and then regenerates original ideas into a mishmash that sounds plausible, reads plausible and looks plausible, were it not for the fact that the AI output is input-output. It is only as good as what it trawls through. We have seen the rise of AI artists, AI music, AI authors and AI video generators. Admittedly, some of them are parodies but others are deliberate scams to outline the possibilities of the technology. Increasingly, things are being created for its own sake and the profits do not go to any original artists. Nobody can tell which aspect of a work is being used in the generative process, but it is guaranteed that the graft of artists is nowhere in it. What emerges are not the original ideas of AI, the programmers or the big multinationals that own these companies.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak on the motion, not only as a Teachta Dála but also as someone who trained and worked as a journalist for many years creating original output and as someone who has had stints as a singer-songwriter, writing and recording original works, and who hopes to do so again in the future. I do see genuine uses of AI as a tool to speed up your creative process and to generate ideas based on your own original human spark and ideas, but, to be clear, the dangers for artists vastly outweigh the benefits, and that needs to be redressed. What is happening brings the name of the band from the 1980s Pop Will Eat Itself to entirely new levels.”
“To really help survivors, we have to reform the in camera rule and bring transparency to family justice. Serious questions remain regarding the process of applying for removal from the register. As it stands and as others have mentioned, an offender can apply to be removed from the register three years after conviction or on completion of their sentence. That is too short. However, I welcome this legislation in general.”
“While I support the core principles of the legislation, we also have to listen to some of the constructive criticism raised across this House and beyond. If this law is truly to protect victims, we have to address some gaps before its final passage. For example, there is a deep structural conflict between the register and the family court system. I have raised the in camera rule separately. Under this Bill, an offender can only be placed on the public register with the express consent of the victim. However, as long as the family courts operate under the strict secrecy of the in camera rule, victims may well be too terrified to give that consent. They may fear that publicly naming and shaming an abuser will trigger retaliation in closed-door custody and access proceedings. Currently, the system cannot adequately police such retaliation.”
“Like others, I have called for this Bill, Jennie's law, and now welcome it. It came through the Seanad first in order to speed it up. I thank the Minister for doing that to get it through the process before the recess. It is a significant step forward in protecting victims of domestic abuse. For too long, the horrific realities of coercive control, assault, non-fatal strangulation, which others have mentioned, and other forms of abuse have been hidden in this system of silence. By establishing a public register of convictions, the Bill brings these crimes committed by dangerous people into the light of day. In theory, it empowers those with information to help to protect others, although they are often victims themselves or the relatives of victims.”
“We need to urgently reform the Commissions of Investigation Act 2004 to end what I believe is the forced silencing of survivors under section 11, which criminally gags them from speaking out about their own testimony.”
“It was a conscious, systematic cover up. Even now, we have to ask if we have learned everything we need to have learned. The Minister for Health mentioned, we have robust laws like the Children First Act now, but the system is still only as good as the culture and the resourcing. Deputy Tóibín just mentioned Tusla. It is an agency that lurches from crisis to crisis, leaving vulnerable children in unregulated and unsafe emergency hotels, bed and breakfast accommodation and so on. There have been recent reports in the news that there is movement on that, which I welcome, but there are thousands more on waiting lists without a proper social worker and there are a lot of kids who have come to this country through the asylum process who have gone missing.”
“I, too, welcome this belated apology after the final report of the investigation. I pay tribute to the survivors, whose immense personal bravery and persistence finally forced the truth out. It sounds like a platitude because successive Governments and we as a society have treated people with contempt. People were dealing with their own trauma and suffering. Complaints were made in the mid-to-late-eighties, yet the Garda, other agencies, the political elites and others chose to protect this well-connected predator over innocent children. The evidence was sat on for so long until another formal complaint was made in 2012. This is the modern era. We thought we were over this and that we had dealt with historic abuses in residential institutions and were getting on with stuff. It is shocking it took so long before and after.”
“If they are working, that might be deducting tax, or if they are on social welfare, it is deducting social welfare. Anything that will hit people will make them think twice about the way their kids are behaving. There is obviously deprivation-related issues and parents need support, so we have to take a holistic approach to this. However, as the Taoiseach said, as a society, we are not dealing with it.”
“I have given credit where it is due before with Government initiatives, and the body-worn cameras is one positive response. However, even with the addition of gardaí, the numbers per head of population are still at 2008 levels. People want an Operation Irene all year round, where they have that visible Garda deterrence but they are not actually seeing it. The juvenile resources work; there are many projects around the country doing fantastic work. However, it is about trying to stop kids getting to that stage in the first place. As I said, 13 or 14 offences before they are brought into the system is too many. I take the Taoiseach's point on the societal approach; there has to be something that will deter and get the parents involved.”
“Equally, going back to what I said last year, we need meaningful consequences. If you do X, Y and Z, it is dealt with locally and there are consequences for the children in terms of curfews and withdrawal of certain privileges and for the parents in terms of fines. That is what we need because, right now, the system is not working; it remains as broken as it was last year.”
“I am talking about the wider issue of kids who do not have adequate parental oversight and who are going out and attacking people. There is no law of reasonable defence in this country. A person who is retreating might be able to stop someone, but what if someone is throwing stones at them? A couple of constituents have reported to me of where three or four people have thrown stones at them, including at a mother with a buggy and a man with her. What is that man supposed to do in that case? If it is two women, how are they supposed to defend themselves in a situation like that? They cannot stop the people throwing stones because it has to be a criminal offence worthy of five years' imprisonment before you can get away with that defence argument. We need more tools to help people defend themselves when they are being attacked.”
“We do not want to criminalise young adults and bring them into that system. Where the juvenile liaison has been funded, it has been shown to work. However, there are no short, sharp, shock consequences to deter people from doing it. As I mentioned last year, people could have 13 or 14 offences before they are eventually caught up with. The interaction of the parents is not being looked at. Even with quad bikes and scooters, confiscation is the number one option at the moment and then the threat perhaps of a juvenile liaison officer, JLO, caution and maybe Tusla being involved with the family. That does not scare any parents who might have bought these items for their kids. We need to remember that it is parents buying the scooters and quad bikes, not the kids going out and getting them.”
“It is my firm belief now that we are lax on crime and lax on the causes of crime. A year ago this month before the recess, I raised the issue of my constituents being attacked willy-nilly by under-18s with no apparent consequences. I am talking about lads going around on scooters, intimidating people, bottles being thrown, stones being thrown, young lads and girls being beaten up. I raised it again in my Private Members' business in September. Although we had a good debate and the Government did not oppose the motion, we have not seen any meaningful actions or consequences. It is happening again. I have had reports again of teenagers and young children getting beaten up and left bloodied by random attacks from teenagers. Obviously, we have to take a two-pronged approach.”
“The HSE has rejigged the way it operates regionally and locally, but we still have issues with the recruitment of public health nurses, particularly in the Lucan, Clondalkin, Newcastle, Ballyfermot and Palmerstown CHN areas. I have previously raised issues like the Dublin allowance, pay restoration and other measures, such as building houses specifically for staff. We are told the HSE will not divvy out the limited resources equally. In my constituency, there are people suffering disproportionately when other areas are getting a much better service. What Government approach needs to be taken? Does the Taoiseach agree it is only fair that limited staffing resources for public health nurses should be divided out equally, if one area is suffering badly, as in my constituency of Dublin Mid-West?”
“This model has worked elsewhere. The LSS Act in Sweden, for example, ensures that people with an intellectual disability have a legal right to community living and the CLBC model in Canada's British Columbia reports that over 90% of adults with intellectual disabilities live in community settings rather than institutional settings. Ireland can follow this path with proper targeted resourcing and recruitment. Every adult with an intellectual disability deserves to be treated with dignity, autonomy and security, and every parent wants this for their child. Finally, I want to give a very special welcome to all of the visitors from Lucan Youth Fun today.”
“We need a live database integrating disability supports, housing and people living at home who are not counted among any figures. We need proper capacity planning because we are way behind as it stands. I believe that incremental progress is possible. Some ideas are to establish a single statutory community living pathway with one referral point, have annual regional targets as well as national targets to reduce emergency placements and out-of-area placements, expand public and not-for-profit provision through multi-annual funding while stabilising existing private placements to avoid forced moves - and as Deputy Coppinger has said, it is not ideal to have the private sector running the show - and publish annual data on distance from home emergency placements and progress on individual community living plans.”
“I support the motion because there are thousands of parents, many now in their 70s and 80s, who are worried about what will happen when they can no longer care for their child with an intellectual disability. This fear is real because, as referenced previously with regard to the HSE, there is no centrally maintained list for residential services. I know the disability capacity review estimates that Ireland needs at least 1,900 additional residential places by 2032 but this is potentially up to 4,000 if we look at restoring 2008 levels. At the moment more than 2,000 adults are living with parents aged over 70 and, as has been referenced, 500 are living with parents aged over 80. This is why upgrading the disability capacity review is urgent.”
“However, the framework is not sufficient, whether it relates to people being able to charge their EVs on their domestic tariff or having parking spaces because sometimes people need to be able to get from A to B in a car even if we are trying to encourage a modal shift by making it more difficult for those short journeys when people should be walking or cycling. In areas like Seven Mills, parts of Adamstown, Citywest and Kilcarbery, we do not have that infrastructure. When this legislation is passed, there will be no guarantees. We need to see a firm commitment to providing that; otherwise, we will be creating bad planning.”
“We have had references to the size of apartments and how the Bill allows existing apartment permissions to be updated without restarting the entire planning process. If we are putting people into boxes, and I call some of these apartments "boxes", we have to have something on the outside. What has happened is we have taken away parking spaces. We have provided insufficient playing pitches, gathering spaces, community halls and leisure facilities. There is no tie-in with public transport. I have said before that we are potentially creating what will be ghettoes in ten years' time. I say that having spoken to developers who are creating very high-quality housing in terms of the BER rating and the framework they were given.”
“I say "can be" because while the Bill mentions and strengthens the transition to a ten-year development plan cycle, which I am agnostic about, it sets the deadlines for regional spatial and economic strategies and allows the Minister of State and his colleagues to designate key towns, which I hope will include suburban areas like Lucan, Clondalkin and a joined-up Rathcoole, Saggart and Citywest so that the corridors between them can be planned in a coherent way, unlike the fragmented housing conurbations we see around these historic villages. However, there is no guarantee that all of these tie-ins will be provided. There is reference to accelerating infrastructure delivery and the Bill streamlines the process and implements recommendations of the accelerating infrastructure task force.”
“The Bill is another piece of omnibus legislation. It tidies up the 2024 Act and is designed to fast-track the judicial review changes, clarify and firm up the ten-year development plan timelines, look at the critical infrastructure and increase the Housing Finance Agency's borrowing capacity. There is a lot contained in the Bill, on one side, but nothing on the other, to be quite honest, because it is primarily enabling legislation, at least in the areas I would like to focus on, namely the critical infrastructure measures and the development plan process. On paper it is important to facilitate the planning system where development plans, regional strategies and infrastructure delivery can be aligned.”