Mr. Paul Hogan:

Parallel work is happening on foot of the heads of a Bill we published before Christmas and we are now carrying out economic evaluation of that with consultants to examine the impact it might have. It is the land value sharing and urban development zones proposal, which is really a modern incarnation of the Kenny report and how that might be applied to the system as it exists. That work is happening in parallel with the review and they are very much overlapping. I expect that by the time we get to the end of that stage, it will be incorporated into the published Bill. The idea is that there will be potential for a greater level of State intervention in the land assembly process and investment in areas that are identified for development in a comprehensive, planned way. The starting point was an extension of the Part V model, but it is seeking to extend further the extent of a landholding the State could acquire at existing use value. As an evolution of that in response to the feedback and analysis the economic consultants have been tasked with, we are open to further evolution or change in that regard and that is something we will have to work through on a policy basis.

The issue of development levies is often raised in regard to viability and that is very much part of the Planning and Development Act. Development levies generally fund infrastructure and facilities that benefit existing communities and are set by existing councils. How we can better address development levies through a more comprehensive system that also looks at land and future development is part of the consideration of the land value sharing proposal, and it has a resonance or knock-on into the Act. The question is whether we should have a two-tier scenario whereby there are levies in some areas and a more comprehensive approach in others, or whether we should try to merge the two in a better way throughout local authority areas for all development.

A great deal of complex work is happening in parallel but this is a core issue for development. In regard to the sort of development we need to see more of, in our urban areas in particular, the question of viability is key. We are certainly open to greater consideration of it, but we do not think it should be overriding because it would then start to become a question of profitability rather than viability.