Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

As I am coming in so late in the debate, many of my questions have been answered. In some ways, that gives me an opportunity to reflect on some of the suggestions being made, in particular members of the committee who are in opposition. Effectively, what the affordable housing Bill and the Land Development Agency Bill are doing is giving tools to local authorities to develop mixed-income and mixed-tenure estates for the first time in a long time. Significant amounts of public money have been put in to allow land owned by local authorities to be developed. Where that is not possible, the LDA has been given the opportunity to develop other public lands.

Part of the issue is that it is a significant departure to allow public lands be developed for public housing. Part of the reason some Opposition members are focusing on the shared equity purchase loan, which forms a very small part of the Bill, is that it is a significant departure and a substantial attempt by the State to provide affordability. The shared equity loan scheme accounts for 2% of the total housing budget for next year. On the affordability element, the elements not related to that scheme account for 84% of the total spending to provide affordability. In reality, the shared equity scheme is a short-term measure with a review clause and regional price caps, which is limited to first-time buyers and is not comparable to the UK scheme, yet much of the debate on the Bill has focused on that rather than on the 84% of spending that provides affordability.

My questions are on managing delivery because local authorities now have no excuses to fail to develop lands in their control. They cannot now argue that mixed-income or mixed-tenure is not provided for, that the financial models are not there or that it is not on a statutory footing. What will the Department do in terms of managing its expectation for local authorities to deliver using all of these schemes?