Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour)

I can understand the logic that is applied in terms of using the five regional development centres, as defined under the terms of the national planning framework, but there may very well be scope to expand this initiative to towns - for example, as I explained in the proposed amendment that was ruled out of order, towns of over 20,000 - because of the extent of vacancy and dereliction in order to prompt redevelopment. There may be a time when that can happen. Of course, this will be open to review, I have no doubt, on a very frequent basis.

When it was originally put forward that the scheme would be open to developers, I was maybe not as concerne as most because my experience of this scheme, understanding how it works and understanding some of its deficiencies, was that individuals who wanted to take on a property in certain parts of Dublin, for example, found it very difficult themselves to resource that renovation project because of the nature of the renovation works. My own area of Drogheda has dozens of architectural conservation areas so buildings can be tricky to renovate, such as old Georgian homes and so on that are vacant, and we do need to be mindful of that. It is often the case that only small-scale local developers have the resources and know-how to be able to turn around some of these properties and ensure that they do provide high-standard accommodation. We are often dealing here with tricky buildings. They may have been derelict or vacant for some time but may be architecturally important and preserved structures, so we need to be careful about how we proceed on that basis. There is also a degree of protection in terms of the two-year period for undertakings and the €300,000 cap, which would, I hope, mean that this would not in any way be open to any form of abuse, for want of a better term, by undertakings because the whole objective is to turn around buildings and make urban centres liveable and viable 24-7 communities where people live.