Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 1 June 2021

Select Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government

Land Development Agency Bill 2021: Committee Stage (Resumed)

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

I thank Deputy Boyd Barrett and the other Deputies for tabling these amendments. To put all this in context, the Government is the biggest builder and the biggest investor in housing in the State. We passed the largest housing budget in the history of the State in budget 2021, bringing forward affordability measures that I hope Deputies opposite will support when the relevant Bill comes before the Dáil because those are real measures and this is the most comprehensive and significant affordable housing Bill ever.

We also believe in home ownership, however, and I will tell the Deputies one thing that excludes people. Deputy Ó Broin talked about excluding people just as Deputy Cian O'Callaghan talked about locking people out. The greatest mechanism for doing that is to object continually to schemes that have been brought forward by local authorities for real homes for real people that they need. We are in the middle of a housing crisis, as everyone knows, and I know everyone is earnest in trying to bring about its resolution. Fundamentally, however, we will not resolve a housing crisis with the public sector on its own. We will need the private sector. That is the reality of the matter. Fundamentally, the Land Development Agency is about putting our State lands to active use. As all members of the committee will be aware, there are far too many State lands lying idle which have been idle for years and have been subject to back-and-forth discussion and debate on ideological grounds. Our people want to see delivery. I reiterate that I envisage we will have 100% social and affordable housing on many of the sites in our urban areas. Will this require us partnering in some areas? Absolutely it will. There is no question about that. There are nine sites the Land Development Agency has at the moment and I want to see the agency develop them out. That is the importance of passing this Bill.

There is no silver bullet to the housing crisis. I put it to the committee that if some members are arguing that it is possible to tackle the housing crisis with one arm tied one's back then that is nonsense. It cannot be done. We need to tool up the State. I am very aware of that. That is why I have been to the fore in getting our local authorities building again. What the LDA will be doing will be in addition to what the local authorities are doing. The purpose of the LDA is to supplement the delivery of housing by local authorities, not to supplant them. I am opposing these amendments as these provisions are needed to ensure that all avenues can be used to ensure delivery of much-needed housing in the State.

We need to be delivering 33,000 homes per annum. We are way off that at the moment. The continued procrastination and blocking of measures that the Government is trying to bring forward will not help anyone. It certainly will not help working people to be able to own or rent a home at an affordable rate. We are trying to meet that need. These provisions are necessary and are wholly appropriate for the LDA. It is being established on a commercial basis and, in line with other commercial States bodies, will be able to enter into commercial arrangements. It needs to be able to do that. The main Opposition spokesperson has already said in previous hearings that the LDA should not be involved in building homes. It is also appropriate that the LDA in its role as a development agency would work with other public and private sector land holders, as it is with our local authorities, to develop large areas for the provision of housing and the regeneration of communities. These provisions are appropriate and I remind Deputies that the LDA will remain in the ownership of the State, with the Ministers for Housing, Local Government and Heritage and Public Expenditure and Reform as the shareholders. There is no provision for any other shareholders. In addition, all dividends will be returned for the benefit of the Exchequer. Ministerial consent will be required where the LDA seeks to establish subsidiaries or to enter into significant capital commitments. This will ensure that there will be a significant oversight of the LDA's operations, including its commercial activities. There is also provision for ministerial direction to the LDA in relation to its strategic priorities.

On amendment No. 93 in the name of Deputy Pringle, I am opposing this amendment as I propose to bring in an amendment No. 134 to section 55, which will effectively do the same thing. This is about the disposal of land by the agency. Section 55 already provides that ministerial consent is required where the LDA or a subsidiary designated activity company, DAC, is seeking to dispose of land but that this consent is not required where it is disposing of a single house for rent or purchase. I am bringing an amendment to provide that the LDA will need to seek ministerial approval where more than one house is being sold as part of a linked transaction. In other words, it will not be able to dispose of more than one house to a single purchaser without seeking ministerial consent. On the question of why ministerial consent would in some instances be required, there may be occasions where it would be appropriate for the LDA to sell multiple units to a local authority or an approved housing body. I will bring forward that amendment.

The planning legislation that I am bringing forward, in respect of which a circular has issued already, prohibits the sale of more than one property in new planning applications to a single purchaser. There are exceptions to that with which I believe all Deputies are in agreement, that is, approved housing bodies and local authorities for which it would be appropriate in some instances, but that would require ministerial approval under the LDA Bill. As I said, I will bring forward another amendment, amendment No. 134, to address what Deputy Pringle is getting at in amendment No. 93. For that reason, I will not be accepting his amendment. I also will not be accepting the amendments tabled by Deputies Ó Broin and Gould, Deputy Boyd Barrett and his colleagues and Deputy Cian O'Callaghan.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.