Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 198:

In page 45, to delete lines 21 to 32.

The Minister has requested that amendments are withdrawn based on what he is going to introduce on Report Stage and that we would reserve the right to reintroduce them. Will the Minister commit that the Report Stage debate will not be guillotined by the Government? That is very important. If the Government seeks to introduce a guillotine at the Business Committee, given its Dáil majority, we will not have time to discuss and vote on amendments on Report Stage. It would be helpful if the Minister could clarify that. It would also be helpful if he could give us a commitment that the Government will not guillotine the Report Stage debate.

The Minister spoke about the importance of the need to maximise the use of State lands for housing, with which I agree. The amendment seeks to remove the substantial exemptions for commercial and other reasons. If we are to maximise the potential of appropriate State lands for housing, it is very important the exemptions in the Bill are removed in order that we maximise what we can do in terms of affordable housing, cost rental housing and social housing.

The other amendments in the group that are in my name are amendments Nos. 201, 202, 207 and 212. They relate to social housing. I am very concerned about this section. I note the Minister's commitment here and in the media that he is going to address the issue on Report Stage. I am very concerned about these sections do not mention social housing. They refer correctly to cost rental and affordable purchase but social housing is not mentioned at all. The effect of that would be to limit social housing to just 10% on LDA land and public land, as specified under Part V. That is a very concerning part of the Bill. It is welcome that the Minister has committed to addressing it, but we are not sure how it will play out. To be frank, 20% is not enough. I agree with Deputy Ó Broin that this must be done on the basis of housing needs assessment. That is the logical way of assessing the needs in an area. Currently, we have more than 8,000 people living in emergency accommodation and 120,000 households on housing waiting lists or in insecure HAP tenancies. The idea that social housing on these State lands would be limited to 10% or even 20% of the mix is unacceptable. Until recently, 100% of public land was used for social housing. I agree there needs to be cost rental and affordable purchase as well. I have no issue with that, but these sections do not even mention social housing, and would have the effect of social housing only being delivered at 10%. That is serious. It is positive that the Minister is going to address this, but the indication that it is only going to be up to 20% in certain areas is deeply insufficient.

The effect of amendments Nos. 202 and 207 would be to change the 50% baseline of the mix of affordable and social housing and cost rental in the Act to 100%, but if my amendments are accepted it still allows for some degree of flexibility. I want to hear what the Minister says about Report Stage and if he will commit to the Bill not being guillotined so that we will have time to reintroduce the amendments if we are not happy with the way he has dealt with them. We must have time on Report Stage to move, discuss and vote on these amendments.