Pat Casey (Wicklow, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their contributions. The more we go through the Bill, the more holes we find in it and the more questions are raised about it. How we manage land now and into the future is how we will develop affordability, so we are considering critical legislation. Something is needed to try to control and manage land but I do not know if this legislation is the vehicle to do that.

Over and again I have addressed my concerns on over-marketisation and privatisation, as mentioned by Professor Kitchin. Ms Hegarty also mentioned commercial viability and profit. This is referenced throughout the heads of the Bill. If we keep using that terminology and keep looking for that return, we can never deliver affordability. This is because we are not just looking at land costs; we are looking at the market value of land costs. It does not work as a starting point.

We all have concerns regarding oversight. Deputy O'Brien had negotiated a €6 million cap for local authorities to spend, up to stage 4, before they had to go to the Department for approval. Clearly, the Minister is now saying that this will not happen and that we do not have faith or trust in the way local authorities do their work to give them this sanction, yet, the Government will hand €2.5 billion over to an organisation with what we believe are significant issues in respect of transparency and oversight.

Perhaps we might get the delegates' views on that matter.

Ms Hegarty has mentioned that the policy will change because of the circle of Governments. We have discussed on a number of occasions whether the legislation should include a minimum number of affordable or social houses that need to be delivered, rather than depending on what Government will be in power tomorrow. It all comes down to delivery.

On the issue of land use and how we control same, Ms Hegarty mentioned something that I was following, namely, a State-led process of drawing up master plans for infrastructure. The other issue is whether infrastructure is more critical than sites. If all of the land zoned in Ireland was of tomorrow morning to have infrastructure, would it help significantly in delivering affordability? If so, tools such as site taxes and vacant site levies could be used to trigger it. Perhaps I am wrong, but Ms Hegarty seemed to suggest the State would draw up master plans for towns with a lot more detail. Perhaps she might expand on what she said. We could lay out clearly how every town would be developed, provide the infrastructure and then unbundle it, as Ms Hegarty said, before phasing it and delivering it in sections. I had not thought of unbundling until Ms Hegarty mentioned it this morning because it is quite apparent that the construction industry is relying on a number of key contractors to deliver. We have lost the small and medium-sized builders that were able to build schools or 20 houses. They have been nearly wiped out completely. That is not good for the market because we are seeing that because of the margins large construction firms are beginning to demand more and more. This is adding to the challenge in delivering affordability.

We cannot proceed with the Bill. I cannot see us supporting it under the current policy under which 60% of homes are private, 30% are affordable and 10% are social. It is not a model I can support in moving forward. It goes back to whether it should be included in the legislation.

As I have lost my train of thought, I might come back in later.