Mr. Michael Layde:

In relation to NAMA units specifically, a long-standing policy of successive Governments has been to promote sustainable communities. It is generally accepted that a sustainable community has a mixture of tenure types, whether owner-occupied, privately rented, social tenancies and so on. The motivation on the other side of the coin in the context of Part 5 was in part to provide social housing units but also to ensure commercial developments included social housing. In the same way, in applying that rationale to large concentrations of units becoming available through NAMA, there was a concern not to replicate the mistakes of the past when very large social housing estates were built on greenfield sites in isolation from other communities and services. Local authorities and NAMA are looking at this issue and certainly in the context of the social housing strategy we will look at it again. We will try to maintain the principle; it is of no benefit to people in social housing or the wider community if there is a process of concentration, of which the 500 units in Tallaght are an example. With the local authority, NAMA and the housing agency we are looking at ways in which we might be able to use these units creatively. There have been a number of initiatives. For example, one of the approved housing bodies has a scheme whereby it lets both on a social and commercial basis. In other words, it took a block of units from NAMA, some of which were let commercially and some as social housing such that there is a mix of tenures. This is the type of initiative at which we are looking. It is not a one-size-fits-all approach. We are reviewing the initial rejection of some of the NAMA units, but ultimately it is about having a balance.