Mr. James Benson:

On the two specific questions, we concur with what was said about the standardisation of the vacant site levy. There is an ad hocapproach to its implementation by the local authorities in some cases. There is a simultaneous need for housing and a demand for housing but there are subtle, yet stark, differences between the two. If that was addressed in the legislation, it would greatly benefit the standardisation approach and give the ability to the local authorities to roll it out further.

I commend Home Building Finance Ireland, HBFI's, initial set-up and outreach to our association and its members. In many of the regional pockets within Ireland where it has not been viable in the past, in recent years it has been a source of funds, where the traditional institutes and lenders have not been available in many cases. It could do a great deal more if it also examined the possible alternative of lending to those sites that are not ready to go and do not yet have planning permission. It could enable sites by connecting infrastructure and utility - the services passport - to a site. Similar to what the LDA will do in respect of bringing State lands to the fore for development, if the fund through the HBFI could enable developers or home builders to bring other locked lands, or lands that could be brought to development but are inhibited through a lack of services or infrastructure, could be examined, it would be a great benefit to the wider society and economy. While I will allow the HBFI report on its own figures, outreach and so on, I know from our own figures that it accompanied us at nine locations on a regional workshop that identified challenges and options. It directly addressed a cohort of approximately 400 of our members on its provisions. It has carried out a significant campaign but some subtle reforms might have an even greater outreach and benefit.