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

If land was agriculture in 2019 and was rezoned as residential in 2020, it is within scope. However, previous development plans are not within scope.

I am interested in the whole area of active land management because there are massive benefits to it, not only in the timely delivery of housing but also in the timely delivery of infrastructure. Done well, it can also have an impact on affordability. If we look back at how active land management was done in this country and city, the Wide Streets Commission was doing it hundreds of years ago. George's Street Arcade was the result of active land management through an Act of Parliament 200 years ago. There were the compulsory purchase order, CPO, powers in place to buy up and develop the buildings. In my constituency, Coolock, Edenmore, Artane, Harmonstown and Kilmore were subject to CPOs and active land management. The Northside Shopping Centre was put in as part of those plans. The entire thing was subject to CPOs. It was all done directly. This, as active land management, is a far more indirect way of doing things. We used to use very extensive CPOs. Now with UDZs, we are only talking about CPOs in respect of critical infrastructure or critical pieces of land. As a country, we used to use CPOs extensively to do active land management and that approach has been successful in countries such as The Netherlands. Strong CPOs do not have to be used but they are a strong negotiating tool. They allow for the ability to take in the whole land bank, put in the infrastructure and parcel it back out, often to the original landowners, for development. Why has that far more direct model been ruled out? Why is it not being consider and why is this more complex and indirect approach being examined? I have a fear that the more complex, indirect models of doing things are less effective.