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

I will respond to a couple of the queries and try to address the amendments in the interests of moving this along. Deputy Gould spoke about cost rental and how it is framed. I will welcome his party's support for the Affordable Housing Bill because cost rental will basically cover the cost of the development and maintenance of those properties, with rent set accordingly. The Deputy continues to mention a discount on market value but that related to setting a guide for the first eight schemes being delivered within a year of the Government being established. We are going to deliver eight cost rental schemes across the country, including in his own county of Cork. That is something one would expect Deputies to welcome but obviously not in this instance.

Deputy Ó Broin referred to land management and assembly and the report of NESC and the national planning framework. The Land Development Agency does exactly that and it will manage, assemble and develop. It is quite a startling admission by Deputy Ó Broin that he does not want the LDA involved in residential development. In itself that is a very stark comment and people can now see that we will effectively have a State land development agency that would not be able to build if the Opposition got its way. I speak specifically about Sinn Féin because these are Sinn Féin amendments. That can be put in the context of the very same Deputy saying he wants to deliver 20,000 public homes per annum, although he never says how, where or how long it would take.

Getting back to the reality, it is about how we deliver and get to the stage of building homes on public land. It is intended that the Shanganagh Castle development will break ground this year and it will be very significant. It is one of the nine significant sites that this agency has and I intend it to have many more while working in partnerships.

To respond to Deputy Cian O'Callaghan's comments, the LDA at this stage has appropriate CPO powers for what it needs to do. That is an important change from the last LDA draft Bill in the previous Oireachtas. There are a number of changes in that regard that we will get to as we go through the Bill.

I will address amendments Nos. 44 and 46, which are tabled by Deputies Ó Broin and Gould, along with amendment No. 45, which has been tabled by Deputy Boyd Barrett and his colleagues, Deputies Gino Kenny, Paul Murphy, Bríd Smith and Mick Barry. I oppose the amendments as amendment No. 44 seeks to remove section 2(r), which enables the LDA to engage in commercial activities consistent with the parameters of the Bill. Amendment No. 45 seeks to limit its commercial activities to the provision of social, affordable and cost rental housing.

The LDA has been set up as a commercial State body and its primary function is to develop but also to manage relevant public land, and where applicable, other lands for the provision of housing for the public good. I see it expanding into that space. It is wholly appropriate for the body to do that. I reassure Deputies that any returns made by the LDA, as referred to by Deputies, will be reinvested in operations or returned to the Exchequer. The legislation further provides that the only shareholders will be the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. I oppose this amendment as by enabling the LDA to engage in commercial activities, it will have access to wider funding streams that will allow greater investment to achieve its aims and expand its functions.

That is something we should be seeking to do. Should this legislation be passed by the Oireachtas, we will be able to capitalise the LDA through the ISIF to the tune of €1.25 billion and further borrowing to an equivalent amount. That is something I thought all Deputies would welcome because it allows the agency to get on with it.

Amendment No. 46 seeks to delete section 2(s). This section provides that one of the purposes of the Bill shall be to achieve the best possible social and economic return from the use of relevant public land. I oppose the amendment as the LDA is being entrusted with public land and it is appropriate that it should be required to achieve the best possible social and economic return on behalf of the people, with the focus being on the social return, that is, delivering both social and affordable homes on public land. I said this on Second Stage as well. I envisage the absolute predominance of the developments, particularly in urban centres, being up to 90% affordable and, indeed, a 100% mix of social and affordable. That will happen, but it will only happen when we establish the agency with a primary legislative footing. Development of much-needed affordable housing would be a beneficial social return, as would be the development of enabling infrastructure. The LDA will be established as a commercial semi-State body and as such will be required to achieve a return on the investment made in it by its shareholders, the Ministers for Housing, Local Government and Heritage and Public Expenditure and Reform. As a commercial semi-State body, under the code of practice for the governance of State bodies, the LDA will be in receipt of a shareholder letter of expectation which will detail the return both Ministers will expect from their investment.

The agency will be governed by the public spending code, as members know, and will be fully subject to public procurement. Any suggestion that it is exempt or beyond that is wholly incorrect. Members also know that. I oppose those amendments.