Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 25 May 2021

Select Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government

Land Development Agency Bill 2021: Committee Stage

Photo of Darragh O'BrienDarragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

This goes to the heart of what the differences are between the Government and the main Opposition party. Our public deserve better and they want to see the lands we have developed and put to productive use for homes, affordable, social and cost-rental, for our people.

Amendment No. 13, and the other two related amendments tabled by Sinn Féin, would fundamentally change what this agency is meant to do. The Deputy said that clearly and that is fair. It would, however, put this process back significantly and add further delays with regard to the delivery of public homes on public land, which is something I, as Minister, and most Deputies, could not really stand over.

Let us just understand what the agency will do. This will deliver homes in addition to what our local authorities and approved housing bodies will do. Deputy Ó Broin mentioned supporting and resourcing those agencies. I will remind the Deputy that in this year's budget, we have the largest single housing budget in the history of the State to deliver 9,500 new builds and social homes through our local authorities and approved housing bodies. We need to build up their capacity too. Let us not fool ourselves that the capacity to deliver homes is there in every local authority. It is not; we must work to build up those resources. Second to that, however, is actually looking at the other land banks that the State and other State agencies have. A good example are the sites the LDA has already.

Take the Shanganagh Castle development, which the Deputy's party delayed a number of times. We hope to break ground on that this year. That will be done in partnership between the local authority and the LDA. In many instances, however, the LDA will be developing and delivering lands that are not local authority lands. They will predominantly be State agency lands.

This amendment actually seeks to delete all references to development and regeneration by the agency, which I find pretty remarkable. The agency should be able to develop and regenerate relevant public land. What Sinn Féin is seeking to do, however, is replace this with a provision to make such land available to local authorities, approved housing bodies, community housing trusts and other not-for-profit bodies. I am tasking our local authorities to deliver and develop on their own lands.

I was in the Deputy's constituency in Clondalkin last week, where 12,000 homes are going to be delivered, both affordable cost rental and private homes, between the local authority and approved housing bodies. That is a good thing. The Deputy is saying now with this amendment that the LDA would effectively manage the land bank and hand it over. I see it actually putting real homes on the ground for people in a short space of time. Passing this amendment would, therefore, fundamentally change what we are trying to do here. It would change the direction of the agency completely and delay the provision of homes for an inordinate length of time. I would like to think that is not the reason for this amendment.

I will move on to the other two amendments within the grouping. Amendment No. 33 seeks to amend section 2, which would provide that relevant public land would be used by local authorities, approved housing bodies, community housing trusts and others. Amendment No. 77 would do the same thing.

All those amendments will actually remove the building aspect that we want the LDA to do in partnership with smaller builders and local authorities to deliver homes for people. These are fundamental to how we go forward. If people look at them with any degree of detail, they will see that passing these amendments, which have been tabled by Sinn Féin, will actually stymie the agency and delay the delivery of homes in the middle of a housing crisis. That is not something I or this Government will stand over. I am, therefore, opposing these amendments.

To be frank, it should really be clear to people that the development and regeneration of relevant public lands is one of the most important purposes of this Bill. The LDA has been tasked with enabling such developments. To remove a reference like that from the Bill serves absolutely no purpose other than trying to fundamentally change what the agency is about. It is basically going back to square one and losing all the time that has been worked on in establishing this agency.

I will go back to Deputy Ó Broin's very first point about giving the agency a budget and capitalising it. If this were to happen, it would not really be developing anything. What, therefore, would it need? Would it just be an administrative body? I do not believe that is really what people want. It is certainly not what I want.

Furthermore, one of the primary purposes of the legislation is that where relevant public land is underutilised, the LDA will be able to acquire it for the purposes of development for housing. I cannot see why anyone would disagree with that. The LDA will not be replacing the role of local authorities in any way, shape or form. Indeed, under section 14 of the Bill, the LDA will work with and assist them in the development of larger-scale sites.

I will repeat again, however, that local authorities will be the prime deliverer of social homes and direct build affordable homes on their own land. Of course, it has to be and is open to the LDA to also work with other housing bodies as they develop sites. It is not appropriate, however, that the housing development functions of the LDA be removed or reduced as that will honestly play a real and vital role in delivering much needed homes.

Why would one set up an agency and then tie one of its hands behind its back? It does not make any sense, frankly. This may point to the fundamental difference in delivery versus dogmatism. I have tried to outline that having a land development agency that cannot develop or build is an oxymoron. For those reasons, I must oppose these amendments. They are fundamental. I see them as a potential mechanism to stymie the agency and that is not something we can countenance in Government.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.