*Cllr PJ Kelly. Photograph: Martin Connolly
CLARE’s most experienced councillor has questioned the legality of the County Development Plan.
At a special meeting in the past week, councillors voted to approve the Draft County Development Plan which will now go on public display for a period of four weeks after it is published in November. Elected representatives have thus far attended workshops totalling between thirty and forty hours in preparation of the statutory document. 105 valid submissions have been received to date for the County Development Plan.
Cllr PJ Kelly (FF) was the sole representative at the special meeting to raise concerns with the process. “I don’t wish to be divisive in any way, having indicated I’m taking a stand on amendments next April, I cannot formally support what is going ahead here today”.
Legal advice had been sought by the Lissycasey representative “on the presumed legality/constitutionality of the proposal in County Development Plan to control development by the imposition of an allocation of population process”.
He made that request at the September meeting of the Council but has been left without a reply from the County Solicitor. “I think it is wrong, it is definitely morally wrong, I’m not sure if it is legally wrong, Chief Executive said he would get the opinion but he didn’t get it, we may be passing a process which may be legally questioned. It is deeply regrettable that the County Solicitor couldn’t find his way here.
Mayor of Clare, Cllr Tony O’Brien (FF) explained, “It is regrettable that the legal information you’ve been looking for hasn’t been forthcoming. We endeavoured to have the County Solicitor here but unfortunately he wasn’t available”.
In October, Kelly proposed “that landowners who possess a Department of Agriculture herd number be recognised as and treated as farmers in the County Development Plan”. Cllr Pat Burke (FG) advised the meeting that it was not passed unanimously as suggested by his colleague.
Referring to this, Director of Economic Development, Liam Conneally said councillors had to be “careful not to conflate the statutory process involved in a County Development Plan and a notice of motion. It was set out clearly by the Chief Executive that you can’t pre-adopt questions at a separate statutory meeting. You have not fettered yourself with adoption”. He committed to sharing legal advice on population allocations with councillors “as soon as I get it”.
“We’ve been told we’ve to agree with the unknown,” Cllr Kelly responded. “The motion did not try to supplement the role of the County Development Plan, it was a declaration of policy, I stated my position at the last meeting, I’ve no reason to change it. I don’t remember the Chief Executive saying it was in conflict if it was going to happen, the only conflict was referenced by Mr Conneally, I’m disappointed he questioned the rights of members to question the resolution. We’re not poodles, we might be expected to do certain things but the days of woof woof and bow wow are gone”.
