An Bord Pleanála probe could see staff censured over mast file allocation

By law, case files at An Bord Pleanala are supposed to be randomly distributed among board members by the chair of the board. File photo: Gareth Chaney/Collins

An external investigation into An Bord Pleanála could see employees, including board members, censured or disciplined over the inappropriate allocation of case files relating to telecommunications masts.

The newly-published terms of reference of the ongoing investigation say senior counsel Lorna Lynch should consider six aspects of roughly 300 case files to determine whether anything meriting disciplinary action took place, and whether any lessons can be gleaned from them.

Her probe is to consider matters in the context of: conflicts of interest and objective or actual bias; statutory declarations of interests on the part of board employees; the allocation of case files to the board and inspectors; the use of two-person boards; amendments to An Bord Pleanála reports; and communications with external parties via informal channels.

The files being considered are the same ones reviewed by a three-person senior team in the planning board last year on foot of media reports concerning potential conflicts of interest and improper practices at board level.

That report was delivered last October but never officially published. Its contents corroborated the media reports about events at An Bord Pleanála, and made a series of draft recommendations. However, no sanctions were suggested in its conclusions.

Earlier this week, the planning board's interim chair Oonagh Buckley said she had engaged Ms Lynch in January as she did not wish it to be said “you had a report and you did nothing with it”. She said if Ms Lynch concludes that "that further action should be taken”, such as disciplinary action, “then I’ll have to do that”.

According to the terms of reference, while Ms Lynch is to be given “all material that was considered by the internal review team”, she may also “request further information and/or carry out whatever interviews with current and former staff and board members as they consider necessary in order to conclude this scoping investigation”.

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here

She has also been instructed to consider a series of reform recommendations made by the Office of the Planning Regulator in late 2022, in the context of the matters under investigation, to see whether any further recommendations might be required in order to “mitigate” the risk of the issues under review “affecting the integrity and fairness of the Board's future decision-making processes”.

The initial report, compiled by three of the most senior non-board employees in the organisation, had concluded that “unprecedented harm” had been caused to the “reputation and standing” of the planning authority by “serious nature” of the matters under investigation.

It noted in terms of the granting of telecommunications mast permissions and licences that a “very significant statistical irregularity” had presented itself with regard to two board members – former deputy chair Paul Hyde and former board member Michelle Fagan - having departed from their inspectors’ recommendations in terms of granting or refusing those licences in more than two thirds of such cases.

By law, case files at ABP are supposed to be randomly distributed among board members by the chair of the board.

Six separate judicial reviews have to date been taken against the decision to grant permission to build such telecommunications masts on foot of the conclusions of the original report and the original reporting of same in the Irish Examiner from May 2022.