Michelle Mulherin (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome this amendment. I spoke on this on Second Stage and I outlined my reasons but for the benefit of the committee, I will reiterate my views. It is assumed that the vacant site levy will get at developers hoarding land. That is all very well where there is a housing need, as we know there is. However, this will impact on ordinary people who may have a site that is under-utilised. In some cases, they may not be able to get a loan to do it up, or there may not be a market for the particular property, because a shortage of housing is not a problem in every part of the country. In my constituency, the local authority has long-term voids that are almost derelict.

I agree with one sentiment expressed by previous speakers. In some cases, the local authorities do not have money but equally there are ordinary individuals, private property owners, who have inherited properties. It might be an old family home belonging to parents in the centre of town. They might not have money to do it up and the market that prevails may mean they cannot sell it. Why should they be penalised when the local authority will not be penalised?

The one great benefit of this will be that it will bring a certain sobriety to an overzealous county manager who has plans for housing or regeneration and might decide to slap vacant site levies on private property owners without the same measure applying to the local authority itself. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. There must be more sympathy for the ordinary individual who might be put in an unforeseen and unintentional predicament. The sentiment of providing more housing and developing under-utilised land is good but there are people who could be caught out by this.

This measure will bring more sobriety to any deliberations by a council which might think it can shove a major responsibility onto private property owners without considering the ramifications for that property owner. It will consider it if it has to face the same ramifications. The issue of local authorities not having the means to develop sites is an issue but it is also one which a private person might face, so this measure is welcome. My only question is about who will levy the council. The council has its own budget, so to whom will it pay the levy and how will that be implemented?