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

We have had some discussion on this group of amendments. I have given a commitment to Deputy Boyd Barrett that I will take another look at the word "undue" and I will do that and revert to him, although it is a matter for the Deputy as to how he proposes to proceed with the amendment.

Amendments Nos. 9 and 38, are jointly tabled by Deputies Ó Broin and Gould and amendments Nos. 10, 11 and 85, are jointly tabled by Deputies Boyd Barrett, Gino Kenny, Paul Murphy, Bríd Smith and Barry. Amendment No. 9 seeks to delete an existing part of section 2 and to substitute it with "to ensure delivery of vibrant and sustainable mixed income communities". That is what we want and what the agency will do. It is inherent in the Bill as drafted that fundamentally we want the Land Development Agency, LDA, to deliver sustainable communities for people, particularly in the areas of affordable and social housing. We have already had that discussion already, so I do not propose to rehash that argument.

As currently drafted section 2(c) provides that one of the purposes of the Act is to counteract undue segregation in housing between persons of different social background. Section 2(n) provides that the purpose of the Act is to facilitate measures designed to achieve socially integrated housing. It is important to say that rather than picking out one element of the purposes of the Act - I have given a commitment to take another look at the phrase "undue segregation" because I can see how that could be construed as what we do not want it to mean - members need to look at all of the purposes listed from section 2(a) to section 2(s). They should not be seeking to have one of them deleted or to highlight a particular line. They need to be read in context and together. Section 2(a) provides that the purposes of the Act is to enable urgent measures to be taken to increase supply of housing in the State and in particular affordable and social housing. I imagine everyone would agree with that. Section 2(b) reads "to ensure that public land which is not being utilised or is under-utilised, is made available for housing in the State." That is just example of the purposes of the Act. All of the main purposes are listed in subsections (a) to (s). I am opposing this amendment as I believe what is sought is already adequately covered by the two provisions I referenced, that is, section 2(c) and 2(n).

Amendment No. 10 seeks to delete the word "undue" and amendment No. 11 seeks to replace the words "social background" with "incomes". I get that argument and I have undertaken to take another look at amendment No. 10. However, I will be opposing it on Committee Stage but I give a commitment to members that I will look at that piece again. These amendments do not change the intent of the provision, which is to ensure that this legislation seeks to provide and promote greater integration in housing across all of society. Again, we all want to do that. As I said, I will be opposing these amendments.

Amendments Nos. 37 and 38 seek to amend the section by removing any reference to socially integrated housing and replacing with either "make public housing available to people on a broad range of incomes" or "vibrant, sustainable and mixed income communities". There is nothing wrong with that wording but we have to ensure that the wording in this Bill when enacted is consistent with other related Acts. I understand where the Deputies are coming from. My contention is that these areas are already adequately covered in the context of the purposes of the Act. Again, I am opposing these amendments as I do not consider they add anything to the provision, which is to provide that this legislation facilitates measures designed to achieve exactly what we all want, that is, socially integrated housing.

All of us recognise the importance of greater integration in housing. As Minister, I want to see the delivery of mixed tenure and affordable housing on State lands, as, I am sure, do all members of the committee. I said last week, when we met on a number of occasions, that the predominance of the sites, in particular in our urban areas, would be 100% social and affordable, which is an issue we will come to as to move to later sections in the Bill. It is vital that the State uses its land to provide affordable homes for purchase and rent, as well as social homes. We need to use all means at our disposal to do that.

I will come back on Report Stage in regard to the wording "undue segregation". I take the point raised by Deputy Boyd Barrett.

Amendment No. 86 in the name of Deputy Cian O'Callaghan seeks to amend section 13(1)(g) by including a reference to communities. Section 2(d) in regard to the purposes of the Act refers to the development of communities. This is a sensible amendment. I am prepared to accept amendment No. 83 to add "and communities", which will take into account Deputy O'Callaghan's amendment. I will make that change further down in section 2(d).