Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for the positive interaction we are having. They are right to engage strongly because there is an opportunity to get this right. I agree that we must learn from what happened in the past when there was potential but it was not delivered on for various reasons.

As for the Part V provisions on social housing, commitments might have been given, but they were either not delivered on or were delivered on almost like an afterthought, which is unacceptable. There is now an opportunity to get this right. The Urban Regeneration and Housing Act 2015 passed by the Oireachtas last July, on which there was good engagement at this committee, contains provisions to ensure housing units and homes will be delivered as part of the planning process. A number of provisions are included in that legislation that protect the interests Deputy Joe Costello is quite rightly outlining. First, through this Act, the Government has removed the cash-in-lieu provision which essentially gave developers the power to buy their way out of their social housing obligations. I am told that if that cash-in-lieu provision had never been included from the outset, we would have approximately 10,000 more social housing units than is the case today, which is an interesting statistic. While it is sad to a degree that a huge opportunity was lost, I am glad to state that in the aforementioned recently enacted legislation I have acted to remove the cash-in- lieu provision and indicated that units must be delivered.

On top of this, rather than having social housing being delivered as an afterthought or a lesser priority, as part of the planning process builders and developers or the proposers of projects will now be required to engage with the local authority and its housing section to agree on the type of housing to be provided. This addresses the concerns of Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan who is correct, in that if there is a need for family units, that need must be addressed or if there is a need for single units, that need must be addressed. The local authority is best placed to understand this because it is the housing authority. There is an opportunity for the local authority for the first time in that in combining the housing and planning sections supply will be matched with demand. Powers have been given to local authorities in the planning process before commencement to strengthen their negotiating hand. This is a highly positive step forward which the Government will monitor closely to see how effectively it is working. While it expects it to work, if it needs to be tweaked or strengthened in any way, I would be prepared to consider this. However, the new system should be allowed to bed in and there is no doubt but that it will deliver more social housing units than has been the case heretofore.

In response to the good points made about employment opportunities for local workforces, I am not someone who believes in reinventing the wheel. We must learn from past experiences and two Deputies present, namely, Deputies Joe Costello and Maureen O'Sullivan, have spoken about their experience of the Grangegorman strategic development zone, SDZ. The Government should consider emulating the model operating in Grangegorman which, from what I hear, appears to be relatively successful. It should ascertain how that experience can be emulated with the docklands authority and how some of its successful elements pertaining to local employment opportunities can be transferred into the new arrangements within Dublin City Council. This is a possibility that should be considered and I certainly would be open to doing so. That said, I do not believe there is a place in primary legislation for setting a 20% local employment requirement because, constitutionally or legally, it would be extremely hard to comply with it. Nevertheless, my officials will take up the suggestion and ascertain how the positive experience in Grangegorman can be emulated in the Dublin docklands.

As for the consultative forum, I again take on board the Deputies' concerns. It is important to have a level of transparency and oversight to ensure delivery. I believe Deputy Joe Costello is concerned to ensure there will be adequate delivery on the social dividend and social provision side. I am prepared to consider an amendment on Report Stage to ascertain how that transparency can be strengthened. Perhaps there might be an obligation to submit the forum's annual report to the Minister who, in turn, would lay it before both Houses of the Oireachtas. That could ensure a level of transparency and scrutiny by Oireachtas Members. As the Vice Chairman is aware, when such a report was laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas, it would quite open to this committee, if its members wished to do so, to have it brought before it. Moreover, it could invite to appear before it the officials and those responsible for report, as well as the Dublin docklands unit within Dublin City Council, as I can see no reason these officials could not be invited before the committee to scrutinise their work and progress in delivery. That is an improvement I am willing to consider to take on board the concerns the Deputies have raised. I believe I have addressed most of the concerns raised, but to be fair, the official response I gave from the scripted version was detailed, comprehensive and addressed the main concerns.

With regard to amendment No. 2, I believe Deputy Brian Stanley indicated his intention to press the amendment. I wish to try to address the issue to some degree for him, if possible. He proposes that, following the dissolution of the authority and after all its liabilities have been met and subject to there being a surplus remaining, the council establish a central fund to be used for social gain for the benefit of the local community. I believe I have already answered this suggestion to a degree. While the wind-down is taking place - as all members are aware, there are ongoing liabilities - I cannot put a prescriptive figure on it. However, I reiterate the point already made on Second Stage that it is expected there will be a substantial dividend. The Government has stated quite clearly that it will go to the trust for the benefit of many of the projects and engagements from which people have benefited in the Dublin docklands area. I cannot give a stronger commitment than that, except to state it has been given and that by using the mechanisms about which members of spoken, through the forum and the Dublin docklands unit, this dividend can be delivered successfully in order that it will reach those who require to benefit from it most and assist them in the most efficient way possible.