Mr. Brian McKeon:

Regarding Part V, having delivered units to several local authorities over the years as well as having paid levies in lieu of it, as agreed with local authorities, I found myself on more than one occasion going to my local representatives to ask why the local authorities were not using the units I delivered. Why are they locked up? Why do they have security? Why do they have maintenance? In some cases for 18 months houses have been lying there completely locked up and unused. This was in the height when they could have been sold in a heartbeat.

When it is not one's own money, one is not inclined to worry about it. That was plain to see for me and several of my colleagues in the industry. That was the reality. When paying for something that comes from one's own pocket, one will put it to use. However, if one is a representative and it is in one's charge, and one has too much work on, then it is in the workload and one gets to it when one gets to it.

Regarding Part V, I think the levy is a no-brainer, but there needs to be a body there. I am not sure that the local authorities are capable of looking at it. I have experience of Dublin local authorities and a local authority down the country. They failed dismally when I gave them units to use as social housing and to sell affordable units to people on the open market. There was no excuse for it and it was frustrating for a taxpayer. I got paid for it as a developer. It was my taxpayer's money that was there and was paid to me through the local authority. However, as I have said, the same local authority was paying security companies to go in. They were having their own people come down to collect the post, clean the windows and cut the grass. It is farcical and this story is replicated around the country. That needs to change.