Debate contribution: British-Irish Council: Planning and Places
Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on .
- MLA
- Mr John O'Dowd
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 10 December 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Ministerial Statements
- Heading
- British-Irish Council: Planning and Places
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4715361
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.
Before I formally introduce the statement, I add my sympathies to the friends and family of Jody Gormley. He is a great loss to them and to the entire community. With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle
and in compliance with section 52 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I wish to make the following statement to the Assembly about the British-Irish Council (BIC) planning and places ministerial meeting that I chaired on 8 November 2004 in Derry and at which junior Minister Cameron was also in attendance. Members will be aware that the British-Irish Council, established in 1999, is a forum for its members to discuss, consult and cooperate on matters of mutual interest that are within the competence of its member Administrations. The British-Irish Council planning and places work sector is chaired by my Department on behalf of the Executive. The group provides a constructive forum for sharing best practice on issues of common interest and promotes practical collaboration. The ministerial meeting held on 8 November 2024 in Derry focused on the work that the planning and places work sector had taken forward between 2021 and 2024 in key areas of planning, particularly around the revitalisation of towns and building better places in the context of the COVID recovery. Ministers commended the work that had been done and endorsed both the work sector report and a 'Placemaking in Practice' report, which was compiled following a symposium held in Cardiff in September 2023. Ministers agreed the forward work programme for 2025-27, which focuses on two themes: climate change and the biodiversity emergency; and skills and capacity for the public-sector planning profession. Member Administrations face the urgent challenge of addressing climate change and the impacts on biodiversity, with limited resources and within a context of continuing planning reforms. The planning and places work sector will identify key challenges and share and learn from examples of best practice. Among the focuses will be managing flood risk; the loss, promotion and enhancement of biodiversity; and delivery of greater carbon efficiency in new developments. Attracting and retaining planning staff in the public sector is also a growing challenge, at a time when many public-sector planners face ever-increasing workloads and continuously changing policy contexts, especially in relation to complex biodiversity and nature issues. The work sector will explore ways to attract people and build capacity in the planning profession, with an emphasis on the sharing of knowledge from Administrations that have developed successful approaches to those issues. At the meeting, Ministers also heard from Mark Hand of the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI), who gave a presentation on tackling the climate and nature emergencies: opportunities and challenges across the Administrations. As I said, the Executive were represented at the ministerial meeting by myself and junior Minister Cameron. The Government of Guernsey were represented by Deputy Victoria Oliver, President of the Development and Planning Authority. The Government of Ireland were represented by Mr Paul Hogan, assistant secretary for the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. The Isle of Man Government were represented by Diane Kelsey, Member of Legislative Council and political member on the Cabinet Office Board with delegated responsibility for planning policy. The Government of Jersey were represented by Deputy Steve Luce, Minister for the Environment. The Scottish Government were represented by Ivan McKee, Minister for Public Finance. The British Government were represented by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Lords Minister for Housing and Local Government. The Welsh Government were represented by Rebecca Evans, Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning. I place on record my thanks to those ministerial colleagues from across the BIC member Administrations who attended the ministerial meeting, and I look forward to seeing how the forward work plan develops. I am happy to take questions from Members.
As I said in my statement, the forward work programme was agreed. The meeting was interesting, both in the formal setting and at the bilaterals that took place. Although the challenges may be of different scales across the jurisdictions, there are many common themes to them, of which climate change is one. The forward work programme will look at climate change and at how we, as planning authorities, ensure that there is a more effective and efficient planning regime going forward. My officials will continue to engage with other jurisdictions on the matter to ensure that, in planning, which is often a contested space, each side of the debate has a fair hearing, that we are able to reach decisions in a more efficient and effective way and that we are able to meet the climate challenge that is coming at us.
That issue is a forward work stream for the British-Irish Council. It has been placed on the agenda because there is a recognition across the Administrations that recruiting planners to the public sector and retaining them is a challenge. There is a focus on planning, which, at times, is understandable, but everyone has to be encouraged to approach the issue in a respectful and courteous manner and ensure that those who work in the public sector are respected. They have roles to carry out, and, as politicians, we set the policies. It is not the civil servants or planners who set them. They have to administer those policies in a fair and equitable way. I look forward to learning from examples from other Administrations, and, yes, we will share best practice with councils.
Spatial planning and how we connect people forms part of that. There was no specific discussion about traffic congestion. We perhaps have to look at roads in a slightly different way than we did 10, 15 or 20 years ago. Roads are no longer simply for cars. Roads are for pedestrians, cyclists, taxis and public transport, and that brings with it its own challenges. As we move forward with our spatial planning strategies, all those matters will be integrated into them. In fact, they have already been integrated. Look at our transport plans. The eastern transport plan, for example, will cover the greater Belfast area. We also look towards Fermanagh and Omagh and towards Derry. We are therefore at an advanced stage with our transport plans. How we use our roads, who uses our roads and why we use our roads are crucial elements.
I found the engagement, both in the formal setting and at the bilaterals, very useful. It is interesting to note the common opportunities and the common challenges that exist, but, as I said earlier, the challenges are of different scales. Such gatherings are also vital for enabling our officials to get to know one another so that they can establish contact with officials from elsewhere. Those officials can then learn best practice from one another.
We looked at how we use our towns differently, not only by supporting retail in town centres but by opening them back up so that they can become areas where people live.
There are areas where there is not only a daytime economy through retail but a night-time economy through socialisation and so on. There are also living towns, where people live and where there are community facilities. People go into those towns late in the evening, not only to socialise but to use the community facilities. It has been an interesting conversation, and it is one that will continue.
The past number of inflationary increases in funding to the Planning Service have allowed it, particularly in councils, to recoup more of its costs so that it can invest in its planning system. I am looking at other ways in which I can support planning, and I have mentioned the transformation fund, which the Executive have made available, a number of times in the House. I have made a bid to that fund to recruit independent examiners for the planning system. That bid is at the final stage, and I am hopeful that it will be successful. If it is successful, it will allow us to address the backlog of planning applications that are before the Planning Appeals Commission.
I think that planning is crucial in that. Planning will set out how, where and why we live in certain locations and how we connect with each other, what type of buildings we live in, what the infrastructure is around those buildings and how we use our places around us to improve the environment and improve biodiversity. So, planning is a crucial part of tackling climate change. It is a crucial part of tackling the biodiversity crisis as well.
I thank the Member for his question. That is a useful suggestion. We have introduced apprenticeships for our engineers in the Department, which have proved to be quite successful in terms of recruitment. We have to look at all options to make planning an attractive career option to school-leavers and others. It is a very rewarding career. You are, quite literally, shaping the future. You will be involved in the drawing of plans and the approval of plans that will be with us for generations to come, so it is a very rewarding career in that way. It brings its own challenges and it is front facing with the public, but, as I said earlier, we all have to engage with our planning service, whether it is on a one-to-one basis or in public, in a more respectful way and in a way that acknowledges that planners have a very difficult role. They have to, and they do, adhere to the legislation that we, as legislators, put before them.
All jurisdictions face similar challenges to me on the financing of flood prevention matters. Interestingly, all areas are looking at how we work with nature on flood risk. There will continue to be a need for hard infrastructure, including concrete defences, albeit they will be put behind much more pleasant facades so you do not just have grey concrete looking at you. All areas are looking at how we work with and use nature to prevent flooding in the first place.
The Member may be aware that we have a planning improvement programme in place, on which there have been regular meetings since the publication of the PAC's report into planning. We are beginning to see improvements based on a number of the recommendations. Better resourcing of planning was a recommendation, and we have done that. Another was to introduce, through legislation, validation checklists when a planning application is submitted, and we have done that.
My officials are currently — now — out meeting council planners to discuss their experiences and our experiences of the planning process and how we can learn from and pass on best practice from one council to another and, indeed, my Department. There has been significant improvement in the planning process. A lot of work is still to be done, but we are on the right trajectory.
One thing that I picked up is that speedy solutions to flooding are not a good idea. Putting in defences or rushing at an issue is not a good idea. You could create a more significant problem not only for the people whom you wish to protect but for other residents who live further downstream or near the area. I am sure that that is frustrating — understandably — for businesses and residents, but we have to get the answers right when putting in physical defences for flooding. I note, however, that my officials were heavily engaged with businesses and residents in areas that were previously affected by flooding in the run-up to Storm Bert, and resilience groups were on standby in areas of south Down as well. They ensured that a supply of sandbags was in place in case flooding occurred. The measures taken thus far by my predecessors and others prevented thousands of homes and businesses from being flooded at the weekend and during other flooding events. Yes, there is a lot more work to do, but a lot has been done in that area.
I am finalising a policy that I hope to bring to the Executive before the end of this calendar year. I have worked closely with Executive colleagues, particularly the Economy Minister, on that green energy policy and how planning deals with it. When that policy is introduced, it will be of huge benefit to the green energy sector, but it will be balanced with the rights and entitlements of citizens who live in the area where structures may be constructed, because, at times, it is a contested issue. I believe that the work that we have done with Executive colleagues and the Minister for the Economy will pay benefits.
2,113 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.80).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.80 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.76 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.21 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.02 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:43 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.