Public Participation in the Development Plan Process: Effectiveness in Reaching the New Irish Population in Dublin

By Michael Blackwell

D05102932

B.Sc. Spatial Planning

Supervised by Lorcan McDermott

27th April 2009

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements............................................................................................................v

Abstract.............................................................................................................................vi

Chapter 1: Introduction......................................................................................................1

Chapter 2: Literature Review..............................................................................................4

Nature and Purpose of Public Participation..........................................................................4

Terminology.............................................................................................................................4

Levels of Participation and their effectiveness in engaging the community............................4

Participation in a multi-cultural environment..........................................................................6

Planning Theory..................................................................................................................... 10

Summary of key issues arising from the literature.................................................................11

Legislative Framework for Public Participation...................................................................12

Overview of the process of making a development plan in Ireland.......................................12

Legislative requirements for participation in the development plan process in Ireland.....17

International convention on public participation...................................................................17

Irish Domestic legislation.......................................................................................................18

DoEHLG Guidelines on participation in the Development Plan in Ireland..........................18

Preparation of an Issues Paper...............................................................................................18

Inclusion of the New Irish.......................................................................................................19

The guidelines contain a section called Making Development Plans and the New Irish, which

is set out below:.....................................................................................................................19

Statement of Community Involvement..................................................................................20

Commitments to public participation in other planning documents..................................20

Legislative framework in England and Wales......................................................................24

Planning Policy Statement 12.................................................................................................24

Statement of Community Involvement..................................................................................25

Benchmarking Irish legislation and guidelines against the nature and purpose of public participation and legislative standards in the UK................................................................26

Current Practice..................................................................................................................28

Introduction........................................................................................................................... 28

Current practice in Irish City Councils.....................................................................................29

i

Current practice elsewhere....................................................................................................32

Benchmarking of current practice against the nature and purpose of public participation............................................................................................................................................34

Comparison of involvement tools..........................................................................................34

Depth and inclusiveness of participatory processes...............................................................34

The New Irish – background and issues..............................................................................35

Statistical Profile of the Non-Irish Population........................................................................35

Emerging Issues for the New Irish..........................................................................................47

Summary: The New Irish and their needs..............................................................................50

Chapter 3: Methodology...................................................................................................51

Methodological Approach..................................................................................................51

Develop Concept Through Literature Review.........................................................................51

Research and Selection of Case Study Areas..........................................................................51

Conduct Desktop Research on Case Study Areas and International Practice.........................51

Conduct Field Research on Case Study Areas.........................................................................52

Analysis, Conclusions and Recommendations........................................................................52

Stakeholder Interviews.......................................................................................................53

The Planners...........................................................................................................................53

The Councillors.......................................................................................................................54

Community Representatives..................................................................................................55

Chapter 4: Results and Analysis........................................................................................56

Stakeholder Interviews.......................................................................................................56

The Planners...........................................................................................................................56

The Councillors.......................................................................................................................58

Community Representatives..................................................................................................60

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations................................................................62

Existing position regarding participation and the New Irish...............................................62

Depth of the participation process in practice.......................................................................62

Breadth of the participation process in practice....................................................................62

Adequacy of the legislative framework..................................................................................63

Adequacy of the guidelines....................................................................................................64

Budgetary constraints............................................................................................................64

ii

Satisfaction of the stakeholders.............................................................................................64

Required steps to ensure adequate inclusion of the New Irish in the Development Plan process................................................................................................................................66

Stronger legislation and guidelines........................................................................................66

More structured inclusion of Stakeholders............................................................................66

Housing strategy process.......................................................................................................67

Funding.................................................................................................................................. 67

Bibliography.....................................................................................................................69

Appendices......................................................................................................................72

List of Interviewees.............................................................................................................72

Interview Questions............................................................................................................73

Planners..................................................................................................................................73

Councillors..............................................................................................................................74

Community Representatives..................................................................................................75

List of Tables

Table 1: Public Participation: Irish Legislation and Guidelines................................................28Table 2: Comparison of Involvement Tools used in Participation Programmes.....................34Table 3 Change in Persons Usually Resident in the State 2002-2006, classified by Nationality............................................................................................................................................... 37

iii

List of Maps

Map 1: Percentage of Non-Irish Nationals in the Electoral Divisions of Dublin City Council. .39

Map 2: Percent of population accounted for by those outside the State year previously 40

Map 3: Percent of population accounted for by non-Irish.....................................................41

Map 4: Percent of population accounted for by non-EU citizens...........................................42

Map 5: Percent of population accounted for by new-EU citizens 43

Map 6: Percent of Irish in each ward......................................................................................44

Map 7: Absolute number of non-Irish in each ward...............................................................45

Map 8: Percent of dwellings privately rented, furnished........................................................46

List of Figures

Figure 1: Development Plan Timetable for Dublin City Council..............................................17

List of Charts

Chart 1: Immigrants and Emigrants - Ireland 1996-2007.......................................................35Chart 2: Immigration 2003-2008 by Nationality.....................................................................36

iv

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank all the Councillors and Community Representatives for their help

throughout the course of my research. I would especially like to thank the Planners in Dublin

City Council for taking time out of their busy schedules reviewing the Development Plan in

order to help me.

I would like to thank my parents, especially my Father, for his help and encouragement

along the way.

Most of all, I would like to thank my supervisor, Lorcan McDermott, for his invaluable

guidance throughout the process.

v

Abstract

Non-nationals in Ireland increased by 87.1 percent between 2002 and 2006, and in Dublin

City, they now account for fifteen percent of the population, concentrated in inner areas. A

disproportionate number occupy private rented, furnished accommodation. Their presence

gives a new dimension to the development plan consultation process.

Literature on participation includes work by Arnstein, who defines levels of participation on

a scale ranging from manipulation, at the lowest, to citizen control, at the highest;

Sandercock, who stresses cultural inclusiveness; and Thompson, who focuses on the role of

the planner as a culturally aware campaigner for social justice. Elements of all of these are

embraced by communicative planning theory, focused on the interaction between planners

and the public.

Irish legislation provides little detail on the breadth and depth of consultation to be carried

out by local authorities. Though development plan guidelines suggest how local authorities

could involve groups who might not normally engage in the process, there is little evidence

of a comprehensive approach to this task in the review of the Dublin City Development Plan

– the chosen case study for this work.

Councillors believe that ethnic minority groups do not participate largely because of a lack

of awareness; mechanisms are in place to provide citizen control, but are not used

effectively. Community representatives indicated that many members of ethnic minority

communities do not integrate effectively into their local communities, and therefore are not

vi

involved in the planning process. Both Councillors and community representatives, highlight

language barriers and housing needs as key issues for immigrants.

Ethnic minorities should be consulted on issues of particular relevance, including housing.

The framework for such consultation should be given a legislative basis, and this should

include a requirement to draw up a Statement of Community Involvement. Dublin City

Council should provide information on important processes in languages other than English.

vii

Chapter 1: Introduction

Brooke (2003) notes that:

Economic, cultural and social diversity make for a vibrant city. Cities dependent on

a single economic sector are always going to be vulnerable during an economic

downturn. Diversifying its economic base must, therefore, be a top priority for any

city. Moreover, cities that embrace diversity in all its forms - including cultural and

ethnic diversity- seem better equipped to generate the creativity that cities need,

making themselves attractive to the skilled migrants that have been so integral to

the economic success of cities around the world (Brooke, 2003).

In the last two decades, Ireland has gone from being a relatively mono-ethnic culture to a

very diverse culture indeed. The number of foreign citizens in Ireland increased by 87.1

percent between 2002 and 2006 (NCCRI, 2008 p.25). For many Eastern Europeans, the

promise of jobs in the construction sector was what first drew them to Ireland, and although

the downturn in the economy has meant that employment has not been as easy to find, a

large number of Poles, Lithuanians and Latvians have remained in the country. With

immigrants in Dublin accounting for around one person in every ten, it is clear that they

have played, and will continue to play, an important role in the growth of Dublin’s and

Ireland’s economy.

1

Because of Dublin’s new diversity, it is essential that provision is made for the proper

involvement of all members of society. If Dublin’s development is to be sustainable and lead

it to becoming a global city in the future, then the immigrant community needs to be

incorporated fully into all aspects of society.

If Ireland is to continue to attract people into the country, a culture of acceptance and

effective community participation will have to be built. This must be done to give people a

place where they feel comfortable living, and where they know that their opinion counts.

This dissertation will examine the effectiveness of the scope and depth of the process of

public consultation which takes place during development plan preparation, with a

particular focus on issues relating to ethnic minority groups. This will be done with the

following objectives in mind:

Examine the methods used by Dublin City Council (DCC) during the consultation

stage of the development plan;

Identify the issues relating to ethnic minority groups;

Analyse the extent to which DCC addresses such issues; and

Using experiences from elsewhere, make recommendations outlining more effective

means of incorporating ethnic minorities into the planning process.

To consult an individual or group of people is to ‘ask the advice or opinion of’ them

(Merriam-Webster, 2009). Simply consulting somebody does not guarantee that their

2

opinion will be taken into account, whereas if a member of the public is to participate in a

process, it implies that they ‘have a part or share in something’ (Merriam-Webster, 2009).

Although it is a minor detail, using the term ‘public participation’ instead of ‘public

consultation’ conveys more of a sense of shared decision making.

The paper will seek to identify the difference between consultation and participation. It will

call on international experience of plan making, as well as focusing on the Irish experience.

It will compare and contrast different systems and demonstrate how different methods of

engaging the public can enhance community involvement.

3

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Nature and Purpose of Public Participation

TERMINOLOGY

A number of different terms are used in academic literature, government legislation and

guidelines relating to the subject of public involvement in the planning process. These

include “consultation”, “participation”, “involvement” and “engagement”. In legislation in

Ireland, the term “public consultation” is used extensively. However, this word only

describes a process of opening up planning decisions to the public. It does not address the

issue of how effective this consultation is likely to be, or the processes that should be

followed. In contrast, writers on this subject, which are reviewed below, focus on the

effectiveness of the consultation process in terms of participation, engagement,

involvement and ultimately, citizen control.

LEVELS OF PARTICIPATION AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS IN ENGAGING THE COMMUNITY

Arnstein (1969) discusses the idea of ‘citizen control’ with reference to process of public

consultation and participation. One of the main points Arnstein is trying to get across is the

shallowness of many forms of public participation.

There is a critical difference between going through the empty ritual of

participation and having the real power needed to affect the outcome of the

process (Arnstein, 1969 p.246).

4

The point that Arnstein is trying to make is that a lot of participation is undertaken for the

sole purpose of being able to say that it has in fact happened. She uses the illustration of a

ladder to convey different levels of public participation:

Citizen Control

Delegated Power

Partnership

Placation

Consultation

Informing

Therapy

Manipulation

The two lowest rungs on the ladder, manipulation and therapy, represent nonparticipation.

The fourth rung on the ladder represents the act of consultation as part of the participation

process. While Arnstein (1969) believes that consultation, or ‘inviting citizens’ opinions’, can

be ‘…a legitimate step toward their full participation’ (1969 p.220), she makes the point that

if it is not combined with other forms of participation then there is no guarantee that their

opinions will be taken into account, and this is why the author refers to this level of

participation as ‘a sham’ (1969 p.220). According to Arnstein (1969), the only true forms of

public participation are the top three rungs on the ladder: Partnership, Delegated Power

and Citizen Control. These three levels of participation give power back to the citizens.

5

PARTICIPATION IN A MULTI-CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT

Whilst Arnstein is principally concerned with the depth of participation, Leonie Sandercock

(2003) tackles the issue of the breadth of the process, or cultural inclusiveness. Sandercock

explores the subject of multicultural cities in the 21st century, a century that will be a ‘…

struggle for equality and diversity’ (2003).

Sandercock (2003) states in Chapter 8 that planning is performed through story (2003

p.183). The section explaining ‘how stories work’ gives us an example of a story that can be

seen in planning:

The conflict between settlers and indigenous peoples in New World countries over

land uses and land rights. For indigenous people there is a core story that is about

paradise lost, or an expulsion from paradise. For the settlers, the core story is the

pioneer’s tale of bravery and persistence in the face of adversity (Sandercock, 2003

p.184).

Although not all of this illustration is applicable to the planning process and the extent to

which ethnic minorities are consulted with, and provided for, during the making and

delivery of plans, the final point can certainly ring true in this case. The pioneer’s ‘adversity’

could easily be a lack of understanding of the planning system, or indeed it could simply be a

fight to be heard.

Sandercock explains that there are two types of stories in planning; the first being ‘story as

process’, and the second being ‘story being used to facilitate process’(2003 p.186). The

6

public consultation process allows as many people as possible to tell their own story. If the

public consultation serves as a means of beginning a process, then it is likely that the stories

told will be used to establish common interests within the given community. If, however,

there is a problem that needs solving, the parties consulted will be those raising the issue,

and those with whom the issue has been raised. In this case, the common denominator has

already been established and the consultation is merely acting as a means of resolving the

issue. Sandercock goes on to explain the importance of allowing everyone the opportunity

to tell their own story (2003, p.186). Sandercock refers to Sarkissian, who undertook a very

thorough consultation process, not necessarily to hear about the issues in the community,

but to ensure that each member of the community felt like they had been listened to and

heard (Forester, 2000, cited in Sandercock, 2003 p.187).

In telling stories, parties tell who they are, what they care about, and what deeper

concerns they may have that underlie the issues at hand (Forester, 2000 p.166).

Sandercock (2003) also refers to a story that Forester tells about a mediator, Shirley

Solomon (p.187). It was Solomon’s job to bring together Native Americans with non-Natives

to discuss land disputes. In order to do this, Solomon had to find a ‘safe space’ where both

parties would feel comfortable telling their stories. Forester talks about how finding this

‘safe space’ was key to the process, because it gave people the confidence to speak about

how they really felt (2003 p.187).

Looking at Sandercock’s views on participation in the context of Arnstein’s ladder, it appears

that she does not actually examine the conditions necessary for true participation.

7

Sandercock has created an axis of diversity which allows every social class and minority

group to share their stories and negotiate solutions to conflict. It is possible to move across

this horizontal axis, but the axis is also free to move up and down the ladder, removing any

guarantee that true participation has occurred.

Susan Thompson (2003) finds more of a balance between the two. She makes the point that

it is not just about what the public opinions are, but it is also down to the planner and his

interpretation of them, as well as his role as a ‘campaigner for social justice’ (Thompson,

2003 p.290). Thompson (2003) explores the response of some Australian planners to

cultural diversity. Her paper demonstrates some of the ways that cultural diversity is

addressed by what Thompson refers to as a ‘culturally inclusive planner’ (2003 p.276). A

‘culturally inclusive planner’ is ‘…one who positively and equitably responds to cultural

diversity’ (Thompson, 2003 p.276).

Thompson begins by explaining five of the main issues that have become points of

discussion in Australia:

There is an exploration of the ways in which the voices of marginalized groups

have been, until recently, subjugated and ignored.

There is an ongoing discussion about the need to incorporate a broader view

of socio-cultural processes in planning theory and practice.

It is argued that modernist planning approaches fail to adequately deal with

the landscape of difference and that “culturally diverse cities and regions are a

8

challenge to planning systems, policies and practices…[and consequently]

difference comes to be seen as a problem” (Sandercock, 2000, p. 15).

There is a growing body of literature which focuses on the diverse nature of

contemporary stakeholders, advocating that their ‘difference’ must be

acknowledged, understood and accommodated in the planning process.

The demands of cultural diversity for planning are filtering into the academy

forcing educators to engage with the challenge that this poses for them and

their students. (Thompson, 2003 p.276-277)

Thompson then goes on to describe how the local government has reacted to these issues,

and the overall issue of cultural diversity. The author suggests that local government has not

been overly enthusiastic about dealing with these issues. Instead, they have often remained

focused on ‘…the basic service delivery of ‘roads, rates and rubbish’’ (Dollery and Marshall

1997, cited in Thompson 2003 p.278). Australian local authorities are relatively underfunded

in comparison to those in the UK and the USA. They also have less power which makes it

more difficult to carry out a thorough public participation process. The paper reports

surveys that Thompson and colleagues carried out in local authorities around Australia. Case

studies were undertaken in the cities of Canterbury and Fairfield. These cities are among the

most ethnically diverse in the country. The study showed that it was possible to apply

policies and principles that ‘…address cultural diversity as part of mainstream planning

activity’ (Thompson, 2003 p.289).

Finally, the paper outlines the attributes required of a planner to be ‘culturally inclusive’:

A reflective practitioner;

9

A culturally aware practitioner;

An informed problem solver; and

A campaigner for social justice (Thompson, 2003 p.289-291).

Thus the planner must not only be culturally aware (the horizontal axis), but also a

‘campaigner for social justice’ (Arnstein’s ladder).

Thompson concludes by stating:

The reality of the profound diversity that is contemporary Australia demands a

culturally aware and inclusive planning practice, as well as practitioners with the

capabilities above…This planner is able to support citizens in their struggle to

contribute to their local communities, partnering the professional in creating a

meaningful sense of belonging in spaces of difference and diversity (Thompson,

2003 p.291).

PLANNING THEORY

Communicative planning theory has a role to play in the consultation process. In essence,

this theory justifies a thorough consultation process. Planners spend much of their time

talking and interacting, and the communicative theory is focused on the interaction

between planners and the public. The aim of communicative planning is to provide

democratic participation and decision making. Contrasting this, advocates of the Foucauldan

10

theory will claim that a more strategic approach will provide more effective planning.

Alexander (2001), however, believes that a compromise needs to be found between the two

theories. ‘The recognition of interdependence reconciles these conflicting prescriptions,

showing why planning situations, involving interdependent actors, demand both’

(Alexander, 2001 p.311).

SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES ARISING FROM THE LITERATURE

The literature reviewed above raises a number of issues which can be put under the

categories of the process and the planner. The structure of the process of public

participation is one of two vital ingredients that must be right for the participation to be

effective. As has been outlined already, there needs to be a certain breadth and depth to

the process. It needs not only to offer effective citizen control, where the consultation is not

simply undertaken to fulfill requirements (tokenism); it also needs to include every section

of the community. Public participation cannot be deemed to be a voice for the community if

there are sections of the community which have been left out.

The second key ingredient is the planner. It is the job of the planner to work with the

process and ensure that it is implemented in the most effective way possible. This means

that planners must be aware of the diversity around them. The planner needs to gain

insights into all sections of the community, and arrive at innovative ideas to inform and

encourage the public to become involved.

11

Legislative Framework for Public Participation

OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS OF MAKING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN IRELAND

The Planning and Development Act, 2000, consolidates The Local Government Planning and

Development Acts, 1963 to 1999, by repealing them and re-enacting them with

amendments. The 2000 Act is the backbone of planning in Ireland today. The Act sets out all

the legislative requirements of local authorities, from the obligation to make a development

plan, to such areas as general obligations with regard to safety at events.

Part II, chapter 1, of the 2000 Act, sets out the legislation concerning development plans.

Sections 9 and 10 deal with the obligation to make a development plan and the content of a

plan, as summarised below.

Section 9 – Obligation to make development plan.

This section requires planning authorities to make a development plan every six years.

Planning authorities must have regard to the development plans of adjoining authorities,

and in some cases may be required by the Minister to co-ordinate their respective plans.

9(6) – A development plan shall in so far as is practicable be consistent with such

national plans, policies or strategies as the Minister determines relate to proper

planning and sustainable development (Planning and Development Act, 2000).

12

Section 10 – Content of development plans.

10(1) – A development plan shall set out an overall strategy for the proper planning

and sustainable development of the area of the development plan and shall consist

of a written statement and a plan or plans indicating the development objectives

for the area in question (Planning and Development Act, 2000).

A development plan must make objectives for the following areas:

The zoning of land;

The provision of infrastructure including transport, energy, communication facilities,

water supplies, waste recovery and disposal facilities;

The conservation and protection of the environment;

The integration of the planning and sustainable development with the social,

community and cultural requirements of the area and its population;

The preservation of the character of the landscape and of architectural conservation

areas;

The protection of structures of special architectural, historical, archaeological,

artistic, cultural, scientific, social or technical interest;

The preservation of the character of Architectural Conservation Areas;

The development and renewal of areas in need of regeneration;

The provision of accommodation for travellers;

The preservation, improvement and extension of recreational amenities;

The control of establishments under the E.U. Major Accidents Directive; and

The provision of community services including schools, crèches and other education

and childcare facilities (Planning and Development Act, 2000).

13

Section 11 deals with the process of preparing a draft development plan, and Section 12

with making a development plan. These processes incorporate a specified programme of

consultation at a number of stages.

Section 11 – Preparation of draft development plan.

11(1) – Not later than 4 years after the making of a development plan, a planning

authority shall give notice of its intention to review its existing development plan

and to prepare a new development plan for its area (Planning and Development

Act, 2000).

Section 94 of the Act requires a housing strategy to be included in the development plan ‘…

for the purpose of ensuring that the proper planning and sustainable development of the

area of the development plan provides for the housing of the existing and future population

of the area in the manner set out in the strategy’.

According to section 94(3), a housing strategy must take into account:

The existing need and the likely future need for housing to which subsection (4)(a)

applies;

The need to ensure that housing is available for persons who have different levels of

income;

The need to ensure that a mixture of house types and sizes is developed to

reasonably match the requirements of the different categories of households, as

14

may be determined by the planning authority, and including the special

requirements of elderly persons and persons with disabilities; and

The need to counteract undue segregation in housing between persons of different

social backgrounds (Planning and Development Act, 2000).

Section 94(4)(a)(ii) states that a housing strategy must include an estimate of the amount of

affordable housing required in the area for the development plan period.

Regarding elements of the Act (2000) that relate to public participation, it is the

responsibility of the planning authority to publish a notice in ‘…one or more newspapers

circulating in the area to which the development plan relates’ stating the following:

a) ‘…the planning authority intends to review the existing development plan and to

prepare a new development plan.’

b) ‘submissions or observations…may be made in writing to the planning authority

within a specified period (which shall not be less than 8 weeks).’

c) ‘…the time during which and the place or places where any background papers or

draft proposals (if any) regarding the review of the existing plan and the preparation

of the new development plan may be inspected.’ (Planning and Development Act,

2000)

The Act (2000) then stipulates that as soon as is possible after giving the aforementioned

notice, ‘…a planning authority shall take whatever additional measures it considers

necessary to consult with the general public and other interested bodies’ (11(3)(a)). Section

11(3)(b) states that ‘…a planning authority shall hold public meetings and seek written

15

submissions regarding all or any aspect of the proposed development plan and may invite

oral submissions to the made to the planning authority regarding the plan’ (italics added).

Section 11(4)(a) indicates that not later than sixteen weeks after giving notice of intention to

review the plan, a manager of a planning authority shall prepare a report on any

submissions or observations. The Elected Members then have ten weeks to issue directions

to a manager regarding the development plan. Following this, the manager then has twelve

weeks to complete the draft plan and submit it to the members. The Elected Members then

have eight weeks to amend the draft plan, if desired.

The draft plan goes on public display for ten weeks, and members of the public are again

permitted to make submissions regarding the plan during this period. The Manager again

writes a report on submissions made during this period, and circulates it to the Elected

Members.

At this stage, the Elected Members may accept or amend the draft plan and make the

Development Plan. If, however, the amendment is a material alteration of the draft, then

the proposed amendment must go on public display for a minimum of four weeks. The

Manager must circulate a report on any submissions to the Elected Members, who must

then, by resolution, make the development plan.

An example of this timetable in practice is set out overleaf in relation to Dublin City Council.

16

Figure 1: Development Plan Timetable for Dublin City Council

Legislative requirements for participation in the development plan process in

Ireland

INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

In 1998, the UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) Convention on

Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in

Environmental Matters (AARHUS Convention) was signed.

Article 7 of the convention states:

Each Party shall make the appropriate practical and/or other provisions for the

public to participate during the preparation of plans and programmes relating to

the environment, within a transparent and fair framework, having provided the

necessary information to the public (UNECE, 1998 p.11).

17

Ireland is a signatory to this convention. However, it is the only signatory yet to ratify the

convention, and as a result, has yet to include the principles set out in the convention in

national legislation.

IRISH DOMESTIC LEGISLATION

The elements of public participation within the development plan process have already

been summarised above. The opportunities for public participation may be summarised

thus:

A minimum of eight weeks at the beginning of the review process;

Ten weeks during the display of the draft plan; and

A further four weeks if the draft plan is amended.

DoEHLG Guidelines on participation in the Development Plan in Ireland

PREPARATION OF AN ISSUES PAPER

Section 5 of the Development Plan Guidelines (2007) deals with the ‘Process and

Presentation’ of development plans. Early on in the section, an emphasis is put on involving

citizens in the plan making process who ‘…may not normally contribute or engage in the

process’ (DoEHLG, p.56). The guidelines encourage councils to ‘…consider innovative

methods to encourage as wide a public consultation as possible’ (p.56). The elected

members are urged to formulate an ‘Issues and Options Paper’ early on in the consultation

process, in order that focus can be put on specific issues (DoEHLG, 2007 p.56). Legislation

does not require the preparation of an ‘Issues Paper’ prior to the pre-draft public

18

consultation, however the guidelines strongly recommend it at this stage ‘…as a means of

presenting key information on strategic planning and heritage issues and inviting public

submissions on differing policy approaches’ (p.56).

INCLUSION OF THE NEW IRISH

THE GUIDELINES CONTAIN A SECTION CALLED MAKING DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND THE NEW IRISH, WHICH IS

SET OUT BELOW:

Ireland has experienced significant in-migration over the past decade and will

experience significant further in-migration into the future. Many cities and towns

across Ireland now contain significant migrant communities. The process of

consultation and engagement with local communities in the preparation of a

development plan should, at an early stage, identify any special arrangements

necessary to facilitate interaction with migrant communities including;

Identification of immigrant community organisations from for example the list of

contacts in the register of the Immigrant Council of Ireland (www.immigrantcouncil.ie);

Assessment of any special needs regarding translation of issues papers; and

Holding special information evenings using interpreters. (DoEHLG, 2007 p.56)

STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

The guidelines point out that the Planning and Development Act 2000 gives ‘…considerable

discretion to planning authorities in selecting the type of public consultation most

appropriate to the circumstances of their area’ (DoEHLG, 2007 p.57). However, it states that

19

the inclusion of a ‘statement of community and stakeholder involvement’ in the

development plans would be helpful (p.57). The inclusion of this document would be a

good indication of the level of consultation that was undertaken.

Commitments to public participation in other planning documents

Examination of other relevant planning documents shows that there is an emerging

commitment to the process of public consultation across a wide range of plan-making

processes.

The National Action Plan Against Racism (NPAR) (2005) came about as a result of the

commitments made by the Irish government at the United Nations World Conference

Against Racism in Durban, South Africa, in 2001. The impetus to develop the plan was later

reaffirmed in the Social Partnership Agreement 2003-2005. The whole concept of the plan

was to build a foundation on which a more inclusive and intercultural society might be built.

This means that the needs of every person should be taken into account during the design

stage, and not as an afterthought. The NPAR (2005) talks about how the concept of ‘one size

fits all’ is not applicable at all in these circumstances, and that in fact ‘one size does not fit

all’ (p.38).

The overall aim of the Plan is to provide strategic direction to combat racism and to

develop a more inclusive, intercultural society in Ireland based on a commitment to

inclusion by design, not as an add-on or afterthought and based on policies that

20

promote interaction, equality of opportunity, understanding and respect (NPAR,

2005 p.27).

Objective 5 of the plan (2005) is ‘…concerned with full participation in Irish society including

a focus on the political level, the policy level and the community level’ (p.35).

It was hoped that the outcomes of the plan (2005) would ‘…enhance the participation of

cultural and ethnic minorities in political processes’, including ‘policy consultative forums

and research’ and ‘community and local development’ (p.35). It was also anticipated that an

‘Intercultural Forum’ would be developed ‘…to give further consideration of issues related

to cultural diversity in Ireland’ (p.148).

Following on from the NPAR, the Dublin City Development Board published Towards

Integration – A City Framework, in order to:

promote and strengthen understanding and implementation of the principles of the

National Action Plan Against Racism on a citywide basis;

increase awareness of the value of diversity in a changing city; and

progress the development of integration measures and enhance social cohesion

(DCDB, 2008 p.19).

The project set out five objectives:

consult and liaise with the relevant actors regarding barriers, challenges and

approaches to promoting integration;

21

facilitate a Steering Group on Integration that would address among other things,

antiracism and diversity strategies for the city;

conduct research into city wide anti-racism and diversity actions in other

jurisdictions;

draft an Integration Strategy; and

embed the objectives contained in the Strategy in the service provision of relevant

stakeholders (DCDB, 2008, p.19).

Section four deals with consultation with members of new communities, describing focus

groups that were set up for the purpose of identifying ‘challenges to integration in Dublin

City’ (DCDB, 2008 p.37). Five focus groups, totaling around sixty people in all, were

organized through:

Migrant Right Centre Ireland,

Immigrant Council of Ireland,

New Communities Partnership,

Pavee Point; and

Dublin City Council Office for Integration (p.15).

The groups were asked to discuss the following questions:

What are the challenges to integration in Dublin and how they could be addressed?

What are their experiences regarding access and participation related to any public

services, social and political life of the city, safety and security?

22

What in their view are the essential elements of good practice in organizations?

How can barriers in access and participation be addressed by Dublin City

Development Board?

How should information on their experiences be gathered? (p.15)

In terms of participation in social and political life, it emerged that many immigrants ‘…

experienced difficulty in engaging and understanding the political system’ (p.41). The focus

groups laid emphasis on the steps needing to be taken in order for the integration

framework to be a success. They felt that it was important to ‘develop inclusive decision-

making systems, train staff, develop integration policies and plans and review progress’

(p.42). If integration is to be attained, it cannot be done without the ‘…involvement of

people from new communities’ (p.42). Facilities such as meeting rooms need to be

accessible to all members of the community. Non-English speakers need to be provided with

information in a range of languages. The aim of the framework is to provide equal

opportunities for all to be involved in all aspects of their own community.

Local Agenda 21 (DoELG, 1995) also addresses the public consultation process. It

recommends that local authorities ‘…enter into a dialogue with its citizens, local

organizations and private enterprises and adopt a local ‘Agenda 21’’ (p.16 italics added).

Agenda 21 suggests using existing community organizations as a basis for consultation. A

variety of ways of including the public are also suggested, including setting up a forum to

allow discussion to take place between all groups (p.17), echoing the work of Sandercock.

23

Making Ireland’s Development Sustainable (DoELG, 2002) acknowledges that it is not

possible for the government to achieve its goals unaided. In order for objectives to be

achieved, all members of society must be fully informed and accepting of the measures

which will need to be put in place.

When the National Anti-Poverty Strategy was established, a committee was put in place to

meet twice a year to assess the effectiveness of the strategies plan for social inclusiveness.

This idea carried over to the National Action Plan for Social Inclusion 2007-2016. The plan

acknowledges that in order for it to be a success, it needs to be a flexible plan, open to an

ever changing customer base, and with constant updating of forms of public consultation.

Legislative framework in England and Wales

PLANNING POLICY STATEMENT 12

The UK government signed up to the 1998 UNECE Convention on access to information,

public participation and decision making and access to justice in environmental matters, and

so committed itself to the declaration set out earlier in this chapter. In Planning Policy

Statement 12 (PPS12), issued in June 2008, the UK Government sets out a number of

principles which it expects planning authorities to adhere to during the preparation of ‘core

strategies’.

Involvement should be:

appropriate to the level of planning;

leading from the outset to a sense of ownership of local policy decisions;

24

continuous – part of ongoing programme, not a one-off event, with clearly

articulated opportunities for continuing involvement;

transparent and accessible – using methods appropriate to the communities

concerned; and

planned – as an integral part of the process for making plans

(Communities and Local Govt, 2008 p.11).

STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

It is the responsibility of the Council to produce a Statement of Community Involvement

(SCI). The SCI should follow the principles above. PPS12 encourages councils to be very

strategic in their public participation, suggesting that they incorporate the community

consultation on planning issues with other community activities that might be taking place

(2008 p.11).

An SCI should:

• Explain clearly the process and methods for community involvement for different

types of local development documents and for the different stages of plan

preparation. This needs to include details of how the diverse sections of the

community are engaged, in particular those groups which have been

underrepresented in previous consultation exercises.

• Identify which umbrella organisations and community groups need be involved at

different stages of the planning process, with special consideration given to those

groups not normally involved.

25

• Explain the process and appropriate methods for effective community involvement

in the determination of planning applications and, where appropriate, refer to

Planning Performance Agreements.

• Include details of the LPAs approach to pre-application discussions.

• Include the LPAs approach to community involvement in planning obligations (S106

agreements).

• Include information on how the SCI will be monitored, evaluated and scrutinized at

the local level.

• Include details of where community groups can get more information on the

planning process, for example, from Planning Aid and other voluntary organisations.

• Identify how landowner and developer interests will be engaged.

(Communities and Local Govt, 2008 p.12)

Benchmarking Irish legislation and guidelines against the nature and purpose of

public participation and legislative standards in the UK

The work by Arnstein, Sandercock and Thompson, examined at the beginning of this

chapter, demonstrates the great depth and breadth that is necessary in order to achieve full

and meaningful public participation.

Irish legislation, however, allows authorities an almost free rein when it comes to involving

the public, and certainly does not give any precise indication as to how a local authority is to

26

go about it. DoEHLG guidelines do offer suggestions to councils as to how they might

become more inclusive, but as these guidelines are not mandatory, there is limited pressure

on the councils to undertake this important task with any vigour or innovation.

Requirements of Irish legislation and the recommendations of the guidelines are

summarized in Table 1 overleaf.

In short, there is in Ireland no guidance, still less compulsion, in terms of either Arnstein’s

vertical ladder of meaningful participation, or the horizontal axis defining inclusion of a

diversity of social groups, including ethnic minorities.

Compared to the legislative requirements of the UK system, therefore the Irish system is

seen to be lacking. Since the completion of an SCI became mandatory in the UK in 2004, the

requirements facing UK local authorities provide a much more thorough participation

process than those of the Irish system. Whilst the Irish guidelines do recommend the

completion of an SCI, the UK guidelines set out in PPS12 on SCIs provide the authorities with

a much more solid structure to work from.

27

Table 1: Public Participation: Irish Legislation and Guidelines

Irish Legislation Irish Guidelines

Written submissions Consider innovative methods to encourage as

wide a public consultation as possible

No provision for languages other than English

or Irish

Issues Paper

Must hold public meetings and seek written

submissions

Cater for special language needs / Interpreter

May invite oral submissions Statement of Community Involvement

Must place notice in newspaper – only one

required

Identify a list of Immigrant community

organisations

Current Practice

INTRODUCTION

Because the 2000 Act leaves much to the discretion of the local authorities, it is inevitable

that public consultation processes will differ not only to those in other countries, but also

within Ireland itself. The minimum requirements of all councils in Ireland are the same, but

because the demographic profile will vary greatly even within cities, some councils feel the

need to take different steps during their own consultation period, based on the

circumstances at hand. In the following sections, the current practice of DCC, Galway City

Council and Haringey Borough Council are reviewed.

28

CURRENT PRACTICE IN IRISH CITY COUNCILS

Dublin City Council

As noted already, during the public consultation stage of a development plan, the planning

authority has certain legislative obligations. These obligations include giving notice to the

Minister, any prescribed authorities, any adjoining planning authorities, the Board, and any

other relevant regional authorities, commissioners, and development boards. The notice

must state that the planning authority plans to review the development plan, indicate

where and when the public can make submissions or observations, and where and when

any background papers may be inspected. Planning authorities are also required to hold

public meetings. They must invite written, and may invite oral, submissions regarding the

plan.

Aside from these obligations, the Act leaves much of the public consultation to the

discretion of the planning authorities, challenging them to ‘take whatever additional

measures it considers necessary to consult with the general public and other interested

bodies’ (Planning and Development Act, 2000 p.35).

At the beginning of the current review process (see Figure 1), DCC invited prescribed bodies,

community bodies, voluntary bodies and any major stakeholders to make submissions

outlining what they felt were the big issues which needed to be dealt with in the new

development plan. The planning authority then published an ‘Issues Paper’. DCC contacted

the appropriate community and voluntary bodies through the Community Forum

organisation. Around seven hundred groups are registered with the Community Forum. The

29

Council consider that it is up to the groups themselves to register with the Forum to ensure

they are informed.

The purpose of an ‘Issues Paper’ is to ‘…kick-start public debate on what broad planning and

development matters should be included in the new Plan’ (DCC, 2009 p.5). The ‘Issues

Paper’ contains what Dublin City Council feels are the main development issues that Dublin

is facing. The issues set out in the paper were simply a guide, and the Council welcomed any

input from the public on any particular ‘big picture’ issues they think are significant.

The ‘Issues Paper’ was on public display for eight weeks and the Council stressed that during

this period, only ‘big picture’ issues were to be discussed (p.5). Much of the discussion of

these issues took place at the public meetings organised by DCC. The public meetings took

the form of Public Information Workshops, ten of which were held around the city. These

workshops gave the public a platform to discuss their feelings about the ‘big picture’ issues.

The meetings began with a presentation from DCC staff, after which the members of the

public were split up into smaller discussion groups. The groups then came back together and

had an opportunity to discuss the issues with the planners.

Regarding the inclusion of the New Irish, Chapter 4 of the ‘Issues Paper’ addresses

population and the housing strategy. The section on housing acknowledges the need for

DCC to improve the quality of housing and management in the City. It anticipates the

number of houses that need to be built each year of the development plan. It also states

30

that in order to encourage diversity in the City, new housing developments should be

designed to cater for all sectors, including ethnic groups (p.12).

Chapter 7 deals with community development. At the outset, this chapter indicates what is

necessary to achieve successful, sustainable neighbourhoods. The paper states that the

provision of key facilities such as schools, community centres and cultural spaces in strategic

locations can ‘…have significant positive impacts on social inclusion’ (p.18). The final part of

the chapter addresses integration. It points out that there has been a significant change in

the profile of the population since the last development plan was implemented. The

increase in ethnic populations has been rapid and they now account for 15 percent of the

City’s population.

Galway City Council

Galway City Council are also currently in the process of reviewing their development plan.

The public consultation undertaken by Galway City Council is more in depth than that of

Dublin. As in Dublin, prior to publishing the ‘Issues Paper’, letters were sent to the

appropriate groups - over two hundred in the case of Galway - inviting these groups to make

submissions. The Council does this with the help of the Community and Enterprise group,

who play a significant role in social inclusion in the city. Two notices are placed in locally

circulated newspapers. Radio advertisements are also used to inform the public about the

development plan, and how they can get involved. After publishing the ‘Issues Paper’,

information leaflets were distributed in English and Irish explaining how members of the

public can make observations and submissions. One day of each week of the consultation

31

period, there is a half day to give members of the public the opportunity to go into the

council offices and make verbal submissions. They dictate to a planner, who in turn reads it

back to them. GCC have yet to receive any submissions from ethnic minority groups.

However, during the pre-Issues Paper consultation, the need to encourage ethnic diversity

in sports was raised.

CURRENT PRACTICE ELSEWHERE

London Borough of Haringey

The backbone of public consultation in the UK is the Statement of Community Involvement.

Planning Authorities are required to produce an SCI as part of the development plan. ‘The

SCI is intended to help the Council ensure that community involvement and consultation is

an integral part of planning activities.’ (Haringey Council, 2008 p.1)

The London Borough of Haringey has a larger percentage of immigrants than any other

borough in London. Around 55% of Haringey’s population are from ethnic minority

communities. There are over 160 languages and dialects in the borough. Around 50% of the

population do not have access to the internet (Haringey Council, 2008 p.9).

.

Prior to consultation, the Council undertakes an awareness campaign. This simply lets

people know about the planning process and how they can become involved. It includes

open days, exhibitions at local events, visiting schools and colleges, and presentations to

groups at a neighbourhood level (p.11).

32

The Council recognises that there are groups that find it difficult to get involved in the

planning process and so will attempt to cater for them by:

Producing clear, concise documents in plain English;

Ensuring documents are available in different languages, Braille, audio-format and

large print;

Ensuring meetings are held at times and places convenient to all;

Working with agencies such as Youth Service as a means of involving children and

young people;

Working with the council’s older people groups in the borough;

Making a Portable Hearing Loop available at particular involvement events; and

Making translators available for public meetings

(Haringey Council, 2008 p.12).

The SCI for Haringey sets out principles and methods for community involvement, including

involving the community at the earliest stage possible. For example, the Council plan to use

local Turkish and Greek radio stations to explain the planning process to the public, and

appeal for them to get involved. The Council also has plans to place advertisements on

billboards, buses and on the Tube. Planners in Haringey Council have observed a noticeable

improvement in public involvement since the SCI has been introduced.

33

Benchmarking of current practice against the nature and purpose of public

participation

COMPARISON OF INVOLVEMENT TOOLS

Table 2: Comparison of Involvement Tools used in Participation Programmes

Public Participation Tools

Dublin City Council

Galway City Haringey Council

Newspaper Notice y y yPublic Meetings y y yRadio n y yWeb Notice y y yNotices in Public Libraries

y y y

Translator at Meetings

On request On request y

Newspaper Notice (Non-English newspapers)

n n n

Web Discussion Forum

y y y

Billboards n n yBraille n n yAudio Book n n ySubmissions in language other than English

y y y

Oral Submissions On request y On requestDocuments in Plain English

n n y

SCI n n y

DEPTH AND INCLUSIVENESS OF PARTICIPATORY PROCESSES

As can be seen in Table 2, the depth of DCC’s consultation process is lacking somewhat in

comparison to that Haringey’s. It is inevitable, given the extraordinarily high percentage of

ethnic minorities in the borough of Haringey, that their consultation process will be wider

than most. However, it also demonstrates greater citizen control, particularly I relation to

the use of an SCI. The levels of public participation undertaken by Dublin and Galway are

34

less extensive than that of Haringey. This is a problem in and of itself, but especially so for

Dublin with its areas with high levels of ethnic minorities.

The completion of an SCI appears to have a big impact on the depth and breadth of a public

participation process. Because stakeholders are consulted before an SCI is published, it

allows them to have an input and give suggestions as to the best means of inviting

participation from all sections of the community. The completion of an SCI makes the

process very transparent, and allows the public to have more faith in the process.

The New Irish – background and issues

STATISTICAL PROFILE OF THE NON-IRISH POPULATION

Recent Patterns of immigration

Chart 1 shows the rapid rise in Immigration since 1997. Although emigration has remained

somewhat stable since 1991 at around 30,000, the number of immigrants climbed steeply to

reach a peak of in excess of 100,000 per annum in the last two years.

Chart 1: Immigrants and Emigrants - Ireland 1996-2007

19871989

19911993

19951997

19992001

20032005

20070.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

ImmigrantsEmigrants

Year

Thou

sand

s of P

erso

ns

Source: CSO Population and Migration Estimates April 2008

35

Chart 2 below shows the composition of Immigrants by nationality. Of the total of 504,000

immigrants over the six year period, one third were from the EU 12 category – the 10

accession countries who joined the EU on 1 May 2004 (Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia,

Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia), and the two who joined on 1

January 2007 (Bulgaria and Romania). A further 20 per cent were from the rest of the world

excluding the EU and the USA.

Chart 2: Immigration 2003-2008 by Nationality

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 20080.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

IrishUKRest of EU 15EU 12 USARest of world

Year

Thou

sand

s of P

erso

ns

Source: CSO Population and Migration Estimates April 2008

Volume and composition of the non-Irish population in 2006

In 2006, there were 414,512 persons in Ireland of non-Irish citizenship. Of this total, some

112,548 had UK citizenship and may be excluded. Of the remaining 301,964, some 76,329

live in Dublin City – some 25.3% of the total. These account for 15.5 percent of the

population of the city – more than one person in seven. Indeed, excluding the USA element,

it means that for 1 in 8 of the Dublin City population, English is not their mother tongue 1. In

1 Assuming that South Asians do not have English as a mother tongue. Also, 7,768 persons speak Irish daily. Assuming that only half regard Irish as their mother tongue, this suggests that there are 20 times as many persons in Dublin City who have a mother tongue other than English, than those who have Irish as their mother tongue, yet there is no legislative provision for these residents.

36

2006, there were a total of nearly 70,000 residents of Black, Asian or mixed ethnic

background. In the period 2005-2006, the gross inward flow into Dublin from outside the

State was 121,739 persons. We do not know how many of these were non-Irish, but we can

examine the net changes by nationality for Dublin City and County between 2002 and 2006,

as set in Table 3.

Table 3 Change in Persons Usually Resident in the State 2002-2006, classified by Nationality

Coun

ty o

f Usu

al

Resid

ence

Tota

l

Tota

l Iris

h

Irish

Irish

-Oth

er

UK

EU15

exc

ludi

ng

Irela

nd a

nd U

K

EU15

to E

U25

ac

cess

ion

stat

es

Oth

er E

urop

ean

Nati

onal

ity

Amer

ica

(Uni

ted

Stat

es)

Afric

a

Asia

Oth

er

Nati

onal

ities

Muft

i Nati

onal

ity

No

Nati

onal

ity

Not

Sta

ted

2002 1,105,134

1,004,958 990,077 14,881 21,978 14,174 10,803 3,211 9,427 13,412 5,156 1,073 221 20,721

2006 1,162,831 994,015 981,760 12,255 20,932 20,831 38,161 13,007 3,674 17,105 28,084 8,102 1,037 454 17,429

Change 57,697 -10,943 -8,317 -2,626 -1,046 6,657 40,365 463 7,678 14,672 2,946 -36 233 -3,292

% Change 5.2 -1.1 -0.8 -17.6 -4.8 47.0 373.6 14.4 81.4 109.4 57.1 -3.4 105.4 -15.9

Sources: COP 2002 Vol 4, Table 36a, COP 2006 Vol 4 Table 35a

The percentage of the population of Dublin City and County accounted for by nationalities

other than Irish or UK, rose from 5.8% in 2002 to 10.9% in 2006 – increasing from 78,000 to

148,000, or by an average of some 17,500 per annum, at a time when the Irish and UK

nationalities were declining by some 3,000 per annum. This trend is likely to have been

more marked within the City of Dublin, though no data are available on this trend. We may

infer something from the fact that 23,865 persons resident in the City were living outside

the State a year earlier. This suggests that the City was taking a large share of the gross in-

migrants. Further, these in-migrant figures are concentrated in the wards with the highest

levels of non-nationals, with high correlation coefficient between them (r2 = 0.95).

37

Outlook

The outlook for the growth of these persons living in Dublin City is that the number would

grow from 76,329 in 2006 to 91,451 in 2016 and 96,269 in 2021 based on natural increase

alone and assuming fertility rates and mortality relates reflect that of the population as a

whole 2. The extent to which this will be added to by in-migration can only be speculated

upon.

Distribution of Non-Irish in Dublin City Wards

This section will use maps to illustrate the distribution of the immigrant population around

Dublin City.

Map 1 summarises the percentage of non-Irish nationals in the wards of Dublin City Council.

Maps 2 – 8 provide more detail of this pattern. Map 2 shows the percentage of population

in each ward, resident outside of Ireland a year previously. Many of the wards with the

highest of these percentages are also the wards with the highest percentages of non-Irish

nationalities (Map 3). The wards containing the highest percentages of non-EU nationals are

all close to the city centre (Map 4), whereas citizens of recent accession EU states are

slightly more dispersed (Map 5). In stark contrast to non-Irish nationals, the wards with the

highest percentage of Irish in them are on the outskirts of Dublin City, with the city centre

home to some of the lowest levels of Irish (Map 6). Map 7 illustrates the absolute numbers

of non-Irish nationals living in each ward. Once again, the highest numbers are in and

around the city centre. Map 8 shows the distribution of the private rented, furnished

accommodation in the city, with highest concentration almost exactly mirroring the

distribution of the non-Irish population.2 Source: Adapted from CSO Regional Population and Labour Force Projections 2011-2026 Published: Dec 2008

38

Map 1: Percentage of non-Irish nationals in the Wards of Dublin City Council

Source: NCCRI, 2008 p.85

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

EMERGING ISSUES FOR THE NEW IRISH

As the numbers of the New Irish increase, and their clustering in particular areas of Dublin

becomes evident, a number of policy issues are emerging, not the least of which relates to

housing, and which therefore is of particular relevance to the planning process.

In Dublin today, economic factors play a leading role in the formation of ghettos. As

opposed to many earlier ghettos in the USA, modern day ghettos in Ireland are usually not

made up exclusively of one ethnic group. Housing is probably the biggest factor affecting the

settlement of ethnic minorities in Dublin. The National Consultative Committee on Racism

and Interculturalism (NCCRI, 2008) published a report on Ireland’s diverse culture and how

housing policy deals with it.

Between 2002 and 2006, the number of foreign citizens resident in the country increased by

87.1 percent (NCCRI, 2008 p.25). This has brought the number of non-nationals in Ireland up

to about the same level as most other European countries, but the change in Ireland has

happened in a much shorter timeframe. The NCCRI document explores both national and

international experience in terms of housing policies and practices pertaining to ethnic

minorities.

Research has shown that the housing experiences of ethnic minorities have generally been

worse than those of natives. These experiences were measured in terms of housing choice,

quality, affordability and location. This research has shown that these experiences are more

prevalent in the cases of newly arrived immigrants. Because housing is such an important

47

factor in Ireland’s culture, both socially and economically, ‘…inadequate housing impedes

their successful integration into the host community’ (NCCRI, 2008 p.32).

The paper (NCCRI, 2008) sets out some of the problems that minority groups face in terms

of housing. One of the main problems is the poor condition of much of the housing. In

Canada, Toronto specifically, ‘…24 percent of immigrants are in core need compared to 17

percent of non immigrants’ (p.32). Core housing need represents over-crowded housing, or

housing that is in poor condition. The number of immigrants in core need rises to 42 percent

for recently arrived immigrants (p.32). The problem is further accentuated by the fact that

much of the poorer quality housing is clustered together, and that quite often members of

minority groups like to live close to each other. The forming of these ghettos makes it very

difficult for successful integration into the host city.

In terms of the quality of accommodation, housing in Ireland is generally considered to be of

high quality. An ESRI report on the subject showed that those purchasing housing are the

most likely to be most satisfied with their accommodation, with the percentage of those

satisfied at 96 percent, whereas those occupying private rented and local authority rented

are the least likely to be satisfied, with percentages at 83 and 74, respectively (NCCRI, 2008

p.57).

The document (NCCRI, 2008) goes on to give a statistical profile of ethnic minorities and

housing in Ireland. Much of the information in this section is taken from the census. Some

significant figures on type of accommodation and quality of accommodation are included in

this section. For example, in Ireland, only thirteen percent of Asians, and 16 percent of

48

Africans live in detached houses, as opposed to forty-eight percent of Irish, UK and US

nationals. When it comes to living in flats, only 6 percent of the total population of the State

is represented, but the percentages among Asians and Africans are as high as 38 percent

and 35 percent respectively. In terms of private rented accommodation, which is where

much of the poor management occurs, figures rise to 56.1 percent for Africans in this

category, as opposed to 7.2 percent for the Irish. Property being bought from a local

authority is highest among the Irish at 3.7 percent. This figure falls to 1.6 percent for UK

nationals, and below 1 percent for all other non-Irish nationals. However, when it comes to

renting local authority housing the levels are fairly similar, with the Africans and the Asians

at 7.4 and 9.2 percent, respectively. (p.62)

In Dublin, the city centre has the highest percentage of non-Irish. The high number of

immigrants in Ireland, in particular Dublin, leads to number of challenges for local

authorities. The NCCRI (2008) document addresses these issues and offers some

recommendations which they feel need to be put in place to aid in the successful integration

of minority communities. Some of the recommendations for central government are:

Develop an intercultural approach to integration and housing policy in Ireland,

which means avoiding a ‘one cap fits all approach’;

Develop a comprehensive proactive intercultural policy to maximize the potential

housing and neighbourhood policy to contribute to the integration process; and

49

Build an intercultural dimension into housing strategy, including the following

elements:

o Ensuring immigrants have access to affordable home ownership schemes and

social housing schemes and are not overly concentrated in the private rented

sector;

o Housing should form a key part of an overall local integration strategy;

o Effective monitoring and enforcement of regulation in the private rented

sector;

o Housing integration policies should be focused on the main urban areas with

the most minority communities;

o Housing Forum should consider the inclusion of the NCCRI; and

o Asylum seeker specific accommodation should be included in an overall

intercultural approach to housing and neighbourhood planning.

(NCCRI, 2008)

SUMMARY: THE NEW IRISH AND THEIR NEEDS

Maps 2-8 demonstrate that most of the New Irish are clustered in the City Centre. A large

number of the New Irish are living in private rented accommodation, and this is an issue

which clearly needs to be addressed. It is evident that a more thorough consultation

process, which specifically addresses housing, needs to be developed. This consultation

should have a definite focus on the New Irish, ensuring that there is not such heavy reliance

on the private rented sector. This needs to take place on a city wide basis, but also at local

plan level.

50

Chapter 3: Methodology

Methodological Approach

DEVELOP CONCEPT THROUGH LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review portion of this dissertation has been dealt with earlier in the paper.

The importance of the literature review was to gather information on what research had

already been done on the topic area. A thorough literature review can be helpful in

pinpointing certain topics in the area which are of great significance.

RESEARCH AND SELECTION OF CASE STUDY AREAS

A case study is ‘an intensive analysis of an individual unit (as a person or community)

stressing developmental factors in relation to environment.’ (Merriam-Webster)

‘The essence of a case study, the central tendency among all types of case study, is

that it tries to illuminate a decision or set of decisions: why they were taken, how

they were implemented, and with what result’ (Yin, 2002).

Case studies are a very thorough research strategy, and provide more of an insight into a

topic area than perhaps a survey might. A case study was very appropriate for this

dissertation because of the nature of the research. Dublin City Council and the current

review of the development plan was chosen.

CONDUCT DESKTOP RESEARCH ON CASE STUDY AREAS AND INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE

Before conducting field research on the study areas, it is necessary to gather basic

information about the areas in order to allow the field research to be efficient and effective

51

as possible. The desktop research for this dissertation was mainly concerned with gathering

statistical data relating to the case study areas. The Central Statistics Office was the main

source of this information. The desktop research also consisted of contacting planners from

around Ireland, and also London.

CONDUCT FIELD RESEARCH ON CASE STUDY AREAS

The field research accounted for the majority of the research on the case study areas. For

this dissertation the research took the form of interviews. The advantage of an interview is

that the interviewee has the opportunity to elaborate on their answers, and offer an

individual opinion. Interviews are a more personal form of information gathering than

questionnaires, and this was important for some of the more social aspects of this paper.

For this reason, it was necessary to gather information from multiple sources, using

different stakeholders in the community. Community leaders, councillors, and planners

were interviewed.

ANALYSIS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This section will break down the results of the research that has been undertaken. After

analysis of the desktop and field research has been completed, it will be possible to draw

conclusions about the effectiveness of planning policies operating in different locations. The

desktop and field research will make it possible to compare the tools which are employed by

different authorities in trying to achieve their goal of meaningful public participation. It will

then be possible to make recommendations to local authorities about how they might be

52

able to improve their levels of public participation by adopting methods used by authorities

elsewhere.

Stakeholder Interviews

A total of seventeen semi-structured interviews were undertaken, including six planners, six

councillors and five community representatives.

THE PLANNERS

The following Planners were interviewed:

Fidelma Fahey – Dublin City Council

Shane Dineen – Assistant Planner for the Development Plan, Dublin City Council

Ruari Mahoney – Dublin City Council

Ann Bogan – Cork City Council

Caroline Phelan – Galway City Council

Clodagh O’Donnell – Borough of Haringey Council, London

The interviews held with the planners were not as in depth as those held with other

stakeholders, because the much of the information being sought was readily available in

published documents.

The matters raised with the Planners were as follows:

The steps the local authority takes during the public consultation process;

The preparation of a Statement of Community Involvement;

53

The extent of the contribution from ethnic minority groups; and

The facilities in place to accommodate ethnic minority groups.

THE COUNCILLORS

The following Councillors were interviewed:

Councillor Aodhan O Rhiordain

Councillor Mary O’Shea

Councillor Mary Freehill

Councillor Mary Fitzpatrick

Councillor Oisin Quinn

Councillor Michael Donnelly

Some of the topics raised with the councillors were:

Whether certain groups were targeted more so than others during the public

consultation process;

Whether DCC does enough to try and include all sectors of the community in the

development plan process;

If the planning process provides effective citizen control; and

Whether ethnic minority groups in their respective constituencies have a good

understanding of the planning process.

54

COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVES

The following community representatives were interviewed:

Slawek Norberczack – Irish Polish Society

Vasile Ros – Former President of the Romanian Society of Ireland

Pastor Thywill Bankole – The Redeemed Christian Church of God

Rev. Dr. Cedric Chau – Chinese Gospel Church of Dublin

Sr. Breege Keenan – Vincentian Refugee Centre

The list includes representatives from the Polish, Romanian, African and Chinese

communities.

Some of the topics raised with the representatives were:

Whether their organisation had ever been invited by DCC to contribute to the

Development Plan;

Whether members of their communities are aware of the Development Plan

process, and the opportunity to contribute;

The extent to which members of their communities are integrated into their

communities; and

If there are any specific issues relating to ethnic minorities which need to be

addressed in both the Development Plan process and the Development Plan itself.

55

Chapter 4: Results and Analysis

Stakeholder Interviews

THE PLANNERS

The Planners were asked about the steps that their local authority takes during the

consultation stages of a development plan. These steps have been set out earlier in the

paper.

In terms of including ethnic minorities at the public consultation stage, there were a number

of bodies which DCC contacted, including The Immigrant Council of Ireland. They were

informed that the plan was being reviewed, and were provided with all the relevant

information.

DCC set up a blog on boards.ie and invited discussion from the public regarding the matters

raised in the ‘Issues Paper’. DCC is only required to publish material in English and Irish, and

there was no material printed in any other language. Translators do not attend the public

meetings, but a DCC planner indicated that if there were a need for translation, a separate

meeting would be arranged with this facility. The same situation would apply for an illiterate

person. In the case of a written submission in a language other than English, a translator

would be arranged.

56

A Statement of Community Involvement in the same form as the UK SCIs is not envisaged.

However, the Manager’s report will summarise all the issues raised and offer an opinion on

them. This report will be made available to the public on dublincity.ie when it is published.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to tell whether or not there have been any written

submissions from non-Irish, because respondents are not required to divulge their

nationality in the submission. However, to date, there have been no written submissions

from organisations representing an ethnic minority group. Nor have there been any

submissions in languages other than English.

One difference between the Irish planners’ experiences and the London planner’s

experience relates to finance. Local authorities in Ireland often struggle to find the finances

to fund projects, and this limits the steps that are able to be taken during the process. This

becomes clear on examination of the lengths to which Councils like Haringey are prepared

to go. Most Irish local authorities do not have the means to spend money on billboards, for

example.

At the same time, money may not be spent on advertisements of this type simply because

the local authority feels that it will not have a significant impact on the levels of

participation. There is a feeling among some of the planners that many members of society,

not just ethnic minorities, are not interested in getting involved, and that even if they were

made aware of it, very few would bother to attend meetings or make submissions. The Irish

planners believe that it is a very select group of people who choose to participate, and that

57

quite often this group is made up of people who have lived in the area for most of their

lives. All of the planners noted that at many of the public meetings, the number of people in

attendance was small - sometimes as low as four persons.

THE COUNCILLORS

Three of the Councillors work in the North of the city, and three of them work in the South

of the city.

The fist issue that was raised with the Councillors was whether or not DCC targeted some

groups more than others during the consultation process. All of the councillors felt that DCC

did not favour one group over another, but rather just contacted established groups and

organisations in the communities.

When asked whether DCC did enough to inform the public about the development plan and

how they could get involved, four of the councillors said that they did not do enough. One

councillor believed that they did do enough. The sixth councillor stated that he believed

much of the responsibility for making the public aware of the plans and processes falls on

the shoulders of the councillors. “Councillors are the stepping stone between planners and

the public.” The four who believed that DCC did not do enough said that it was simply a

matter of more effective advertisement.

58

All six of the councillors believe that the majority of residents in ethnic minority groups are

not aware of the Dublin City Development Plan, or that it is being reviewed. This, in turn,

means that the same people will also not be aware that they have the opportunity to get

involved in the planning process. However, the councillors all agreed that the problem is not

limited to ethnic minority groups. Many Irish people are not aware of the Development Plan

and how to get involved.

The councillors were then asked if they believe that the public consultation in place provides

any effective citizen control, or is simply complying with the minimal legal requirements.

Five of the councillors agreed that the mechanisms in place provide effective citizen control.

The fact that immigrants are allowed to vote in local elections after six months in the

country gives them a good opportunity to elect a candidate who they feel will represent

their needs. They also feel that the public are given ample time to inspect the plan and

make submissions. The sixth councillor believes that the planners ultimately have too much

power, and so there cannot be effective citizen control in the development plan process.

The final matter raised with the councillors was whether they were aware of any issues in

their constituency that relate directly to ethnic minorities. Four of the six felt that the

biggest issue was housing. New immigrants are most at risk when it comes to housing. High

prices force immigrants into what are often overcrowded and rundown flats. Although no

councillor saw it as a major issue, all six agreed that language could provide a potential

barrier to becoming more involved in the community.

59

In general, the councillors believed that the biggest problem facing DCC in trying to engage

the community in the development plan process was actually making them aware of such

plans. They acknowledged that although complete involvement would not be possible, an

increase in the awareness and understanding of the planning process would encourage

better participation.

COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVES

First, the community representatives were asked whether they had ever been contacted by

DCC in relation to a development plan. Four of the five had not been contacted at any stage

of a development plan. The Vincentian Refugee Centre had been invited to attend public

meetings during the initial public consultation period.

Secondly they were asked whether they felt their clients or members of their congregation

were aware that there is a development plan for Dublin City, and that it was being reviewed.

Again, four out of five said that they believed the majority of the communities they

represent are not aware of the development plan, or that it is being reviewed at this time.

Pastor Thywill Bankole believed that many of the members of his congregation, which is

made up mostly of Africans, are aware of the planning process and development plans, but

that they are not aware of the opportunity to contribute.

They were then asked the extent to which their clients and congregation were integrated

into their local communities. Slawek Norberczack believes that the Polish in Dublin are very

well integrated into their communities. According to Pastor Chau, the Chinese in Dublin tend

60

not to make the effort to become involved with the community, because many do not

consider Ireland to be their home. Vasile Ros believes that the Romanians in Dublin are also

well integrated into their communities, although they do have a tendency to cluster. Sr.

Breenan believes that many of the clients she comes in contact with at her centre are more

concerned with finding a job and place to live than the social and political efforts of

becoming an active member of a community. Pastor Bankole stated that the members of his

congregation have found it difficult to integrate themselves into their local communities. A

major reason for this is because of the questionable legality of many of the congregations’

status in the country. They do not feel safe in the country, and believe that getting involved

in the community is futile because of the uncertainty of their length of stay here.

All five interviewees said that there is widespread knowledge of the fact that voting in local

elections is possible. They said that this was down to canvassing by councillors, and the

promotional posters in multiple languages. Mr. Norberczack, Pastor Bankole, and Sr.

Breenan all ran campaigns within their organisations raising awareness of voting rights.

The final issue raised with the representatives was the nature of problems facing newly

arriving immigrants. The two biggest problems are the language barrier and housing. Many

of those arriving do not qualify for local authority housing, and those who do, face a long

waiting list. As a result of this, many end up clustered in areas of poorly managed,

dilapidated accommodation.

61

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations

Existing position regarding participation and the New Irish

Depth of the participation process in practice

It is clear that despite the recommendations of the DoEHLG guidelines, Dublin still lacks

some of the tools for consultation that are in place elsewhere, including an SCI and non-

English literature. Using the medium of radio to spread awareness of the development plan

process, as is done in both Haringey and Galway, is an ideal way to reach large sections of

the community. DCC does use the internet as a means of consultation, but the example of

Haringey shows us that there are large sections of communities who do not have access to

the internet, and even if it was accessible, in order for the user to deliberately navigate to

the appropriate site, prior knowledge of such a site would have to have been gained

through some other medium. It seems that the consultation process has skipped a level.

Having facilities such as translators is of little value if the general consultation process does

not reach that level of involvement. The first level of the process is missing, and that level is

simply increasing public awareness that development plans even exist. If the public do not

know that a plan exists, then how are they supposed to know about the existence of a

platform to participate?

BREADTH OF THE PARTICIPATION PROCESS IN PRACTICE

The breadth of participation becomes more complicated when immigrants are involved. For

some immigrants, the legality of their status in the country is questionable. For this reason,

they may try to avoid identification. For other immigrants, the idea of becoming actively

62

involved in a community seems pointless. For these reasons, DCC finds it hard to contact

certain groups. An invitation for contributions from community and voluntary groups

excludes those with no organised representation. Having said this, there are some groups,

such as the Vincentian Refugee Centre, who appear to be an ideal candidate for

consultation based on their work with immigrants - and yet they were not contacted. The

Immigrant Council of Ireland is consulted, but an ideal way of widening the scope would be

to take advantage of organisations closer to the people, such as ethnic churches for

example.

ADEQUACY OF THE LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

It is evident that Irish legislation leaves too much to the discretion of the local authorities.

There is little evidence that the recommendations of the NCCRI, and of the DoEHLG

guidelines, form a central plank of the consultation procedures being adopted for

development plan review in Dublin. If proper integration of the New Irish is a policy aim of

government, then steps to ensure targeted participation of these groups must include

requirements based on legislation. The legislative requirements do give the public the

opportunity to have their say, but once again it comes down to getting to the stage of public

meetings. The requirement to simply place a notice in a newspaper is clearly not an effective

enough method of informing the public. To ensure that local authorities go to further

lengths than this to make it known to the public, the requirement to do so must be

compulsory.

63

ADEQUACY OF THE GUIDELINES

The guidelines set out a good template for local authorities to follow for the development

plan process. They are, however, lacking in some areas. They provide some examples of the

ways in which local authorities can attempt to gain input from the public, but a more

detailed set of ideas would make it easier for local authorities, and encourage them to go

the extra mile to include a hard to reach groups. Recommendations in this regard are set

out later in this chapter.

BUDGETARY CONSTRAINTS

The current position in DCC is that no specific financial provision is made for the following

areas of the consultation process:

Translation of Issues Paper into languages other than English and Irish.

Translators at public meetings.

Radio advertisements languages other than English.

SATISFACTION OF THE STAKEHOLDERS

The general consensus of the councillors was that DCC could do more to make the public

aware of the development plan, but that at the same time much of the responsibility lies on

the shoulders of the councillors themselves. All but one of the councillors believe that the

public meetings and opportunities to submit are an adequate means to allow for effective

citizen control. However, the fact that there is little knowledge among the public about

these processes, and the low numbers of in attendance at these meetings, mean that this

system has never really been tested.

64

In terms of the satisfaction of the ethnic minority groups themselves, Rev. Chau believes

that although most of the Chinese community do not get involved, they do not feel

aggrieved about it, and most of the time they choose not to get involved. This is probably

true of other ethnic groups. Many non-Irish hold no opinion of the consultation process,

either because they are not aware of it, or because they have more pressing issues on their

minds.

The matter that planners find most frustrating is the level of attendance at many public

meetings. This often leads to the belief that doing more to try to involve the public would be

a waste of time and effort, because of the lack of enthusiasm from the public to become

involved. For the local authorities, the belief is that the mechanisms are in place, but they

can only do so much to involve the public, after which the onus is on the public to involve

themselves. The experience of Haringey, however, where a noticeable increase in the level

of public participation was observed, following the adoption of an SCI, and concerted efforts

to communicate in languages other than English, again suggests that the public’s willingness

to participate in Dublin has not yet been adequately tested.

65

Required steps to ensure adequate inclusion of the New Irish in the Development

Plan process

STRONGER LEGISLATION AND GUIDELINES

In order for the consultation process in Ireland to become more effective, there is a need to

add to the legislation that is already in place. Rather than simply requiring that the local

authority take whatever measures it feels necessary, there needs to be detailed legislation,

in the form of regulations, outlining exactly steps that need to be taken to involve the public

in the development plan process. The development plan guidelines also need to become

more detailed. A mandatory SCI, similar to that in the UK, would allow the public the

opportunity to decide how they would like to be consulted in the future, and this in turn

would provide a good template for future public participation.

MORE STRUCTURED INCLUSION OF STAKEHOLDERS

Full public participation will not be possible without an effective means of including every

section of the community. Meetings which are attended by planners, councillors and the

public are ideal. Having a planner present allows questions to be answered there and then.

The difficulty is organising these meetings to suit all of the stakeholders. The biggest change

that is needed is in relation to the initial informing of the public. A thorough awareness

campaign explaining how the planning process works, and how and why the public should

become involved, would be a big step in increasing the levels of public participation in

general. When focused on ethnic minorities through appropriate use of languages other

than English, and channelled through community networks such as nationality associations

and churches, such awareness campaigns will serve to empower groups currently left on the

66

margin of city planning. This has particular relevance to the issue of housing, set out below.

An awareness campaign for voter registration was run, with posters in multiple languages,

but to date there has been no equivalent campaign for the Development Plan review. The

ethnic minority community was a driving force in Ireland’s economy during the boom years,

and it is imperative that their needs are taken in account, because they are in effect a new

generation of Irish, the New Irish.

HOUSING STRATEGY PROCESS

Preparation of a new housing strategy under section 94 of the Planning and Development

Act 2000 is now an intrinsic element of the Development Plan review process. Housing

issues are of particular relevance to the immigrant community, and most especially policies

relating to the private rented housing sector, as well as the provision of social and

affordable housing. Section 94(3)(d) requires that the housing strategy shall take into

account the need to counteract undue segregation (Planning and Development Act, 2000).

The reliance of the immigrant community on private rented housing, and their

concentration in particular wards underscores the need for a focused process of

participation of such groups in these areas during the preparation of the housing strategy as

part of the Development Plan review.

FUNDING

The scale of the overall effort required for the Development Plan review in a city the size of

Dublin, means that the necessary resources to give voice to sections of society normally not

heard may often be overlooked. If monies are ring-fenced for these tasks, there is a greater

67

likelihood of success. Funding is specifically required for the provision of written material at

all stages of the review process in languages other than English (including Polish, Latvian,

Lithuanian, Chinese, Romanian and Tagalog). These languages alone represent the mother

tongue of 45,000 residents of Dublin City and Suburbs (CSO, 2008).3 Resources will also be

required for the translation of submissions made by these groups in languages other than

English. The ethnic groups themselves should be able to provide interpretation at public

meetings called for their benefit, at no additional cost to Dublin City Council.

3 This figure relates to non-Irish, thus excluding Irish citizens with these mother tongues.

68

Bibliography

Alexander, E R. 2001. The Planner-Prince: Interdependence, Rationalities and Post-

communicative Practice. Planning Theory and Practice. 2(3), pp311-324.

Arnstein, Sherry R. 1969. A Ladder of Citizen Participation. JAIP. 35(4), pp216-224.

Brooke, N. 2003. Focus of global issues: what makes for a successful city. Real Estate

Issues [online]. [Accessed 24 April 2009]. Available from World Wide Web:

http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/116735272.html.

Central Statistics Office. [online]. [Accessed April 2009]. Available from World Wide Web:

http://www.cso.ie/

Central Statistics Office. 2008. Census 2006 – Non-Irish Nationals Living in Ireland. Dublin:

The Stationery Office.

Communities and Local Government. 2008. Planning Policy Statement 12. London: The

Stationery Office.

DoEHLG. 2007. Development Plans: Guidelines for Planning Authorities. Dublin: The

Stationery Office.

DoELG. 1995. Local Authorities and Sustainable Development: Guidelines on Local

Agenda 21. Dublin: The Stationery Office.

DoELG. 2002. Making Ireland’s Development Sustainable: Review, Assessment and Future

Action. Dublin: The Stationery Office.

DoJELR. 2005. The National Action Plan Against Racism. Dublin: The Stationery Office.

Dublin City Council. 2009. Issues Paper. Dublin: The Stationery Office.

69

Dublin City Development Board. 2008. Towards Integration – A City Framework. Dublin:

The Stationery Office.

Forester, J. 1991. On Critical Practice: The Politics of Storytelling and the Priority of

Practical Judgement, in Sandercock – Cosmopolis II

Forester, J. 2000. Multicultural Planning in Deed: Lessons from the Mediation Practice of

Shirley Solomon and Larry Sherman, in Sandercock – Cosmopolis II

Haringey Council. 2008. Statement of Community Involvement. London: The Stationery

Office.

Merriam-Webster. 2009. Dictionary [online]. [Accessed 20 April 2009]. Available from

World Wide Web: http://www.merriam-webster.com/.

National Consultative Committee on Racism and Interculturalism (NCCRI). 2008. Building

Integrated Neighbourhoods. Dublin: NCCRI.

Office for Social Inclusion. 1997. National Anti-Poverty Strategy. Dublin: The Stationery

Office.

Office for Social Inclusion (Social). 2007. National Action Plan for Social Inclusion 2007-

2016. Dublin: The Stationery Office.

Government of Ireland. 2000. Planning and Development Act, 2000. Dublin: The

Stationery Office.

Sandercock, L. 2003. Cosmopolis II: Mongrel Cities in the 21st Century. Cornwall: MPG

Books Ltd.

Thompson, S. 2003. Planning and Multiculturalism: A Reflection on Australian Local

Practice. Planning Theory and Practice. 4(3), pp275-293.

70

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Aarhus Convention of 25 June

1998 on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice

in environmental matters.

Yin, R K. 2002. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage Publications.

71

Appendices

List of Interviewees

Slawek Norberczack – Irish Polish Society

Vasile Ros – Former President of the Romanian Society of Ireland

Pastor Thywill Bankole – The Redeemed Christian Church of God

Sr. Breege Keenan – Vincentian Refugee Centre

Rev. Dr. Cedric Chau – Chinese Gospel Church of Dublin

Fidelma Fahey – Dublin City Council

Shane Dineen – Assistant Planner for the Development Plan, Dublin City Council

Ruari Mahoney – Dublin City Council

Ann Bogan – Cork City Council

Caroline Phelan – Galway City Council

Clodagh O’Donnell – Borough of Haringey Council

Councillor Aodhan O Rhiordain

Councillor Mary O’Shea

Councillor Mary Freehill

Councillor Mary Fitzpatrick

Councillor Oisin Quinn

Councillor Michael Donnelly

72

Interview Questions

PLANNERS

What steps are you taking to involve the community during the public consultation process?

Published notices?

Public meetings?

Published information in languages other than English?

Contacting community groups?

Contacting community leaders?

Discussion forums?

Radio ads?

Other?

Was a Statement of Community Involvement put together for the public consultation

process?

How many of these responses have been from non-Irish?

What do you intend to do with the information you have gathered through public

consultation?

Are you willing to accept public participation in a language other than English?

Are there facilities which accommodate the following groups:

Non-English speakers?

Illiterate?

73

COUNCILLORS

Do you feel that certain groups were targeted more so than others during the public

consultation stage? If so, which ones?

Do you feel that DCC does enough to try and involve every section of the community,

including minority and ethnic groups, in the planning process?

Are there specific issues in your constituency, in relation to ethnic and minority groups, that

DCC has failed to address?

Do you believe that public participation in the planning process provides any effective

citizen control, or is it simply complying with the minimal legal requirements? If the latter,

what changes would you like to see to the public participation process to give more citizen

control?

In your view, are ethnic minorities in your constituency aware of the planning process, and

do they understand it?

Are they aware of the fact that they have the opportunity to contribute?

Are ethnic minority groups in your area aware that they can vote in local elections after

being in the country for six months?

As a councillor, what planning related problems have you encountered in relation to ethnic

minorities, which lead you to believe that there are problems of communication or

inclusion?

74

COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVES

Are you aware that the Dublin City Plan is being reviewed at the moment?

Have you ever been contacted by a Dublin City Planner in regards to the revision of the

development plan for Dublin City?

In your opinion, to what extent are members of your congregation integrated into their local

communities?

Are members of your congregation aware of the planning process and how they can get

involved?

Do members of the community feel included in the planning process?

Do they feel they are able to contribute to what happens in their community?

Do they feel planners understand the issues that are important to them? Education,

Commercial Activity, Other.

Are members of your community aware that they can vote in local elections after being in

the country for six months?

Based on your experience, what do you feel would be the most effective mechanisms for

involving members of the community in these processes?

75