Ciara Conway (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On question 3 regarding the imposition of conditionality in relation to asset sales, at the height of the boom construction accounted for approximately 20% of economic activity. Currently, dependent on what data one is looking at, the percentage in that regard is 5% or 6%. I think everybody will agree that the optimum level is around 10% or 12%. Reference was made earlier to maximising the return on acquired assets and to this not being possible by the imposition of conditionality because that would somehow reduce the value. As stated earlier by Deputy McGrath, the sale and stripping of assets will restrict builders being able to get back into business. I am speaking not about developers but builders-construction work. In terms of the need for a 10%-12% level of construction activity in the economy, the concern is that we do not have the ability to achieve this because of a lack of available finance for builders and so on. Again, I am speaking about builders rather than developers. If we are to obtain the optimal return for the public, it is important and in our best interests that we know what the purchaser of an asset proposes to do with it. If an asset is put out of the reach of construction, we will be losing out in terms of a return of activity in the economy. Currently the construction sector is running at 5%. What can NAMA do to help increase that to 10% or 12%, which has implications for everybody throughout the country?

On local authority housing units and the breakdown provided in terms of the number of units delivered regionally by NAMA, it was stated earlier that NAMA is confident it can deliver 1,000 social housing homes by end 2014. How far along is that process and how many units remain outstanding? What are the issues, if any, holding up that process? It was stated that NAMA will deliver the remaining houses as soon as the local authority approved housing bodies contract to buy or lease them. What is happening and why is that not progressing? Where are the blockages in that regard? Also, 1,000 houses is modest in the context of where we are in relation to social housing. It has been stated by NAMA previously that some of the houses at its disposal are deemed not suitable for social housing. Perhaps the witnesses would elaborate on whether the problem in that regard is one of geography or the manner in which the properties are constructed. Also, could money be made available to make the housing concerned good quality housing for allocation to people on the housing waiting list?