Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am conscious that we are here to read a report on actions due to be taken by the last quarter of 2016. There were 13 items under Pillar 2. According to the report, eight were on schedule and five had been completed. One of the great features of Rebuilding Ireland, as I said to the Minister, is that it is a brave Minister who sets out his plan, vision, timeframes, actions and deliveries. They can then be challenged and questioned. This is a very focused response. The first target to be met is the provision of 47,000 houses. I hope we will see a hell of a lot more provided and have a good feeling in that regard. There many more houses that will come on stream, as everyone here hopes.

I want to focus first on the reporting process, paragraph 2.3 and the housing assistance payment, HAP, scheme, under which the objective was to have counties Cavan, Kerry, Laois, Leitrim, Longford, Roscommon, Westmeath, Wexford and Wicklow included by the end of 2016. They were brought on board when the scheme was rolled out on 1 December. I am not sure that would have happened if there had not been this focus. I was a councillor for many years and this is an issue. Two local authorities sent me some documents which mirrored Pillars 1 and 2. I will send them to the delegates because I was highly impressed by them. They show how they perceive the objectives for their local authorities and how they were delivering on them, including in part. I would like to think that was happening in 31 local authorities. There has to be a sense of ownership at local level.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin made some points about councillors feeling left out of many aspects of the process. This should be taken on board. They are advocates too for the delivery of social housing, regardless of their political dogma or agenda. Everyone wants to see the delivery of social and affordable housing. The Department should consider how each local authority is playing its part in the bigger plan of Rebuilding Ireland and meeting the great objective of providing 47,000 new homes. Of the 13 included in the list, I only question the last for refugees, but in their status report the delegates say it is complete. Will they, please, tease that out? I am referring to paragraph 2.24. It is not enough to get to where they want to be and drop it, stating they have concluded their business. I am not suggesting they are doing that, but they might tease out the matter.

I am referring to rapid build housing, which come under Pillar 1 but are referenced in Pillar 2 also. We have not seen any rapid build taking place in the constituency in which I live, and there was great excitement about it. I have looked at the number of rapid build projects in the 31 local authorities and there are not that many of them. I am not sure if it the best use of sites. I do not consider two storey, rapid build houses on a site zoned for a major town centre to be good use of land. It is an appalling use of land which is served by great public transport. The suggestion that there will be two storey rapid builds is a scandal when across the road there are five storey private residential houses that one could not buy as they are all sold. There is a demand. It is possible to build that level of higher density housing in a major town centre. I would be appalled to think that the Department, and the Minister, would not be alerted about this situation or that if he was alerted, he would not take immediate action because that is a terrible waste of a resource within a local authority. However, I acknowledge, based on the delivery of the actions for quarter 4 in 2016, that this is progress and that it is very positive.