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

This is an excellent Bill. Great work has been done on it. It is good that it covers the different aspects. I would love to see this Bill progressed and done in this Oireachtas term, if we can, with us working together to get it through the system or progress it as far as we possibly can. On section 6, if we do a report - which we should soon - we could then make our recommendations on the section.

In terms of keeping track on how different local authorities are performing on dereliction and stuff, NOAC, for example, could be doing that role and could be doing the data. The key thing is how to get the local authority doing something here and applying CPOs. About 20 years ago, long before I was an elected representative, together with another group of people we got the list of all the buildings on the derelict sites register in Dublin City Council. The practice in Dublin City Council was quite different from now. There was obviously a different culture then.

We visited about 20 different buildings in Senator Fitzpatrick's area. Obviously, the list we had got from Dublin City Council was a bit out of date. When turning up at these various sites, it was fascinating to find that the city council had imposed CPOs on a number of them. Some of them had been renovated and turned into housing. Because the city council was deadly serious about imposing CPOs, it had the effect of some of the owners, who had been hands-off and forgotten about their buildings or whatever, becoming quite activated and coming back on board. There was a very hands-on effective approach at the time. The Bill is looking around the settlements, so compelling action here would be in areas where there is housing need. That is an area we could look at.

I agree with the online register provisions of the Bill.

I have one question on the proposed section 3(1)(d) which states: "the site has been disconnected from electricity or water services for a period of 2 years or more." In most instances, that would mean the building is derelict or is at risk of being derelict. There are instances where people can be living in a habitable building but be disconnected from water and electricity services. I think there is some onus on them to be connected to water services and wastewater services. There are reasons, including ecological reasons for people to be disconnected from these services. Did the Cathaoirleach consider that with his wording? We obviously would not want somebody who was living in a house, generating their own electricity, collecting water from a spring rainwater and so forth as some people do-----