Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

On reference page 51 of the action plan for housing, action item No. 2.7 covers the land aggregation scheme in some detail. There is enormous potential for that. The Minister will know that his predecessors rejected a number of applications for the land aggregation scheme from local authorities. They were considered huge investments for local authorities and not sustainable in many cases, certainly with regard to debt. I know of some local authorities that are only paying the interest on these vast amounts of money that were used to incur these expenses. To return to the plan, I want to say that I believe it is a very brave and courageous plan. Dare I say it, the Minister's reputation and that of the Government hinges on all of this. It is about the delivery of it and I am really only interested in that. What I like about the 84 key action points is that they keep the Minister, the committee and the Oireachtas focused.

To return to the land aggregation scheme, some of the applications were rejected by the Department. However, there are many that were accepted into the scheme. There is potential for that in the roll-out of social housing and how it is going to be progressed. Clearly, it has to be a priority. It is an acquisition that is available to local authorities. The Minister might talk about that and about how he is interacting with the local authorities. Has the Minister, at this stage, completed a schedule of the local authority lands in regard to the scheme? The Minister's Department should have a comprehensive map and schedule of each of the 31 local authorities. We need to feed that into the process at some level within the Minister's Department. I would like to hear about that at some point and see constant monitoring of it because there is a huge potential investment there.

The next item is on page 51. The Minister mentions in the document that he envisages a partnership with religious congregations. Can the Minister please set out what he has in mind? I understand that he has had some contact and I am led to believe that he has had a meeting. The Minister might confirm whether he has met with a number of representatives of religious organisations personally. I understand that he has set out his concerns and they have set out some possibilities and ideas. The Minister might be in a position to share that if that is the case.

Has the Minister looked at the schedule of lands that were entered into as part of the institutional redress scheme in which the Conference of Religious of Ireland, CORI, represented a bloc of religious superiors who signed a very substantial indemnity scheme with the State during the term of the Government before last? It was questionable in the view of some parties but we have to deal with it. There was a major indemnity scheme which indemnified a substantial amount of religious orders from the competition claims as a result of the national redress scheme. That is a horrific story and this is only a contribution. I believe there is a moral obligation on these religious orders and I call on them to deliver. I also believe there is a moral obligation on the State to deliver the lands that it promised and the possibility of two aspects, namely, the delivery of social housing and, more importantly, the delivery of accommodation through buildings that they are not using. The humanitarian response that the Irish Government has made by committing to 4,000 refugees coming into this country will add another dynamic. The Minister might touch upon his contacts with the religious orders and how he is going to pursue their assets to alleviate this national housing crisis.

My next point is about action 2.12 on page 52, which is the legislation to streamline the Part 8 process. Clearly, there is another day's work for this committee to look at the Part 8 process. There is a democratic deficit in the process and it needs to be reviewed anyway outside of this context. Within this context, there is no appeal process for Part 8. This part of the process - I am sure it could be called a planning process - is a consultation process with the local authority and the county manager. I wish to ask the Minister two questions.

Will the Minister consider reviewing the Part VIII process?

I had an opportunity to engage with the Minister about a particular local authority. His officials came back to me and said he had no power and function in the matter. I accept that, but the letter caused me to revisit a number of pieces of legislation related to the Planning and Development Act. The Act states that under section 179 the Minister cannot interfere with the Part VIII process. However, if we are to give real effect to this policy document, we have to have local authorities on message to deliver on key Government policy. We cannot have local government and councillors continuously opposing the message. They are entitled to their views, but at the end of the day the process is meaningless if the Minister has no function.

Would the Minister consider being a statutory consultee? He is not currently a statutory consultee for the Part VIII process; this fact has been confirmed by his Department. Any Part VIII process should be referred to him because it has to be consistent and in line with policy. This is the rebuilding Ireland policy and I would like to think the Minister's officials would consider that option.

I refer to page 55, action 2.24 - refugee protection programme. It states the objective of the plan is to provide a range of supports at local level, including housing assistance payments, a scheme with which the Minister is familiar, to ensure the integration of individuals into their new communities. The timeline is the fourth quarter of 2016. This matter is covered in The Irish Timestoday, as it was yesterday, and two of the Minister's ministerial colleagues talked about their disappointment, the lack of progress and their frustration, which I accept and respect.

I welcome Ireland's humanitarian response, which is good. However, there are sensitivities. There are communication issues, as well as the priming of local authorities in terms of the provision of resources to deal with the issue. I am opposed to the system of direct provision. What co-ordination plans has the Minister put in place to provide homes for those who are due to travel to the country in the next number of weeks and months? If I understood him correctly at our last meeting, he was referring to the first tranche of 2,000 people who were due to come to Ireland, which is great. Has an operational subgroup, under the auspices of the Irish refugee protection programme task force, been established? I know that the Minister is committed to doing this, but what is the timeframe for its establishment?

On modular pillar 2, what role will local authorities play in housing refugees and the associated integration policies? Where is the relevant funding? We need to hear about it because, after all, it is a clear objective for the Minister in the last quarter of 2016. It must be one of the most challenging policies.

I know that things have slowed down a little but not intentionally. Many objectives were to be delivered on in the third quarter. I will not read them to the committee, but I marked every objective to be met in the third quarter. There are genuine reasons things have slipped, but that is the tightness of the ambitions of the Minister's plan.

Pillar 3 involves building more homes. Action 33.4 in the Minister's plan is that they will identify and prioritise key pathfinder sites, with the capability to deliver new homes, for which the timeframe is the third quarter. Will the Minister, please, report on progress in meeting that objective, which is important? Does he have specific sites in mind? Is he referring to strategic development zone sites? It is interesting that the document refers to a proven record, but there is no such record in this matter. What sites does the Minister envisaged being included?

An Bord Pleanála is mentioned on page 62. The Minister has wide-ranging powers which, believe it or not, are perhaps the most controversial aspect of the plan. I have spoken to councillors from all parties and none and this is a challenging issue. The document states that, under action 3.6, the Minister proposes to legislate to enable planning applications for 100 units or more to be referred directly to An Bord Pleanála. It is failing in meeting the statutory 18-week rule in the case of a number of what are called strategic critical infrastructure projects. They are projects the previous Government set out as meeting key strategic objectives, but An Bord Pleanála is continuing to fail. How will the Minister put in resources and money in place and provide for reform of An Bord Pleanála to deliver on that key objective? He hopes to minimise the delays in the case of large-scale housing developments, but as I said, the 18-week rule is not being adhered to and in some cases the process is not completed within 32 weeks.

Action 3.9 refers to online planning and the accelerated roll-out of e-planning systems. That is excellent. The use of technology is positive and exciting and it is the direction in which we should be moving, but it will require money and, more importantly, training at local level. Local councils are in great difficulty; they cannot even provide coloured photocopies of plans because they do not know how to use some of the technology available. Councils in Dublin are not even scanning planning applications in colour because they state they do not have the resources to do so. They are minimising the size of copies of plans, which means that they cannot be read. It is ridiculous. I do not want people from the Minister's constituency to have to take a train or a bus at a cost of €50 to come to Marlborough Street in Dublin to look at planning applications. Before An Bord Pleanála can do anything, councils and the public library service must have the technology they need to deliver on that commitment.

I refer to construction capacity skills. To his credit, the Minister has identified this as an issue in terms of how we can develop SOLAS. If it is successful, there will be major growth in the construction industry, which is all very positive as it feeds into the economy and is marvellous. However, there is a need for resources to build capacity to provide training in the ETBs. We do not necessarily need everyone to have a university degree in engineering. Rather, we need practical people to come through apprenticeship programmes. Many people who left school at the age of 15 or 16 years and are signing on to social welfare payments would love to enter into apprenticeships and receive training or attend night classes to improve their literacy and numeracy skills. I want to hear about the provision of resources that it will be necessary to provide in that regard.

Again, I have concerns about the Minister's Part VIII proposals to provide student accommodation. Will he clarify what he means about joint ventures? Under no circumstances should a private joint venture be allowed to avail of what is a planning consultation process. If a local authority is fully managing a development on its land and property, that is somewhat acceptable. However, in section 4.13 of the Minister's document there is a suggestion there be synergy in the development of student accommodation and that private developers could come in under the wire as part of a very loose Part VIII process. That is questionable and I would like to see the matter revisited.

I am sorry to hit the Minister with many questions, but I have made reference to the points listed in the document which I hope has been helpful.