Mr. John Coleman:

I thank Senator Boyhan for his insightful comments and questions. I will start with the first point he made concerning what I might most appropriately talk about, namely, the financial commitments made and the need for legislation in advance. The funding source of the LDA is to be a transfer of funds from the ISIF which will be taken by the Minister for Finance and then invested in the LDA. The NTMA Act requires an amendment to facilitate this which will follow on the back of this Bill. That is the turning point for the LDA in accessing finance. On how it will co-ordinate with our on-the-ground activity, as the sites to which we have access and of which we have control come on stream with the granting of planning permission, we are constantly looking to take time out of the process for an obvious reason, namely, to have homes provided. One of the things at which we have started to look is direct delivery, similar to what is anticipated in Shanganagh, whereby we will have to procure a contractor.

To do that, we cannot enter contractual arrangements with a contractor until we have visibility on our funding to honour the financial commitments that will arise. That is where my point was focused. As the projects come on stream, they will need money or funding sources triggered by the Bill being enacted.

On how the LDA acquires land and how it is paid for, the way I think about it is that there are, broadly, three ways we can gain access to land, namely, through centrally controlled Government bodies, commercial semi-State bodies and local authorities. I distinguish between the three categories because they have individual governance requirements and infrastructure. Naturally, the Government controls centrally controlled Government bodies. For the local authorities, as was outlined, it is a reserved matter as to what is done in the sale or transfer of land in section 183 decisions. Commercial semi-State bodies are independent bodies with independent boards that have to make decisions as opposed to being centrally controlled, for plenty of good reasons.

We might acquire land from local authorities through negotiation with the local authority, subject to the approval of its elected members. How the land will transfer will depend on the commercial arrangements. As for the payment for the land, typically, local authorities are not necessarily as interested in making money from the land, given that they will often have their own financial constraints. Rather, the provision of affordable housing tends to be their primary concern. It is perhaps less of a material issue for local authorities.

We have to deal with commercial semi-State bodies as if we were dealing with any private market player. A commercial semi-State body, which has a company to run, services to finance and obligations as board members, will typically seek the best deal and, therefore, it will be as if we were dealing with any other party.

In the case of centrally controlled Government bodies, the thinking is that the lands will transfer from the relevant Ministers as an equity investment, or an in specieconsideration for shares, in the LDA in order that the agency would not necessarily have to transfer money out. That makes sense given that, otherwise, our funding would just be distributed to various State bodies from the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, which was not the intention. The intention was for the money to be used to fund the agency's activities. The consequence of that would be that land from centrally controlled Government bodies would sit on the agency's balance sheet at the correct market value. That would ensure we would have to preserve, maintain and deal with the asset in the most efficient and financially sustainable way, which would take account of the affordability requirement, namely, a valuation of 30%.