Pat Casey (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a few quick questions.

My interaction the last day was about the infrastructural fund and the logic around rolling that out over a four-year period instead of advance-funding it all at one time. Do fiscal rules prevent that €200 million from being rolled out? As I pointed out the last time, if we are not rolling the last €50 million out for another four years, it could be four or five years before that will have an effect, and we could have a time lag of eight years.

The fast-track planning process was due for around 21 May and I saw newspaper articles this morning indicating that it is in place.

I have a point of clarification on rent pressure zones, and I spoke to the Chairman before I came in. We were meant to commence a review of that in June and I believe that will happen shortly. I raised a point a while ago about how rent pressure zones are calculated. My concern was that if one met the two criteria when the Minister brought it in - one was the rent was above average, and the other was that in four out of the previous six quarters, rent inflation was above 7% - that was fine, and the whole of Dublin, Cork and a number of other areas came in automatically after that Bill was passed. We do a continuing review of that, and more local areas come in, with the possibility of some falling out. I asked a question, because we are doing a continuing review, about the areas that came in initially, which will not meet the criterion for inflation in four out of the last six quarters in the next quarter when it comes to an end. Those areas should, if it is being reviewed, actually fall out, because there will be three quarters now where there has been a less than 7% increase. I am not sure who came back with the answer, but I did not fully understand it today. Is there a second criterion which is being applied to rent pressure zones to make sure that these areas continue to stay in the rent pressure zones? Otherwise, they will automatically fall out at the end of this quarter because of the three quarters in which there was a less than 7% increase.

I spoke briefly on vacant properties. I think we should be doing much more with them. I do not think the target that we have of 800 is sufficient. Maybe there is a policy document coming, but one thing I have found in my local area is that the policy of commercial properties on the ground floor in towns is preventing them from being converted to residential properties. People are putting in planning applications to convert both upstairs and the street level into residential properties, but they are all being refused because it does not meet the local area plan. Is there any way we can get around that apart from doing material alterations to the town plan or a review of the town plan? It is preventing a number of properties from coming back in that could be used. I am not talking about cities, but about towns throughout the country where there are significant vacant properties at street level that could be converted to residential properties, and if the demand is there in time, they could be converted back to commercial properties. It would revitalise the towns. Those are just a few points. I think we have an opportunity with vacant properties and I have said it over and over again.