Dáil debates

Tuesday, 31 March 2009

Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

5:00 pm

Photo of Mary UptonMary Upton (Dublin South Central, Labour)

I was addressing the matter of homelessness and the reason this important issue is not adequately addressed in the Bill. I would like to see it addressed in a holistic way rather than in the current piecemeal fashion. While the issue deserves much more time, there is a number of other matters to which I want to move on.

I refer to what I call the explosion of apartment blocks throughout the city of Dublin but in particular in my constituency where there has been an inordinate level of that type of development. When people told me these apartments would become the tenements of the future I wanted to disagree with them but it was more in hope than in confidence and, unfortunately, they are beginning to be proved correct. We have a very large number of apartments and there is planning permission for further development of apartment blocks on what are derelict sites with little possibility of any development taking place on them in the foreseeable future. There is also a large number of empty apartment blocks.

There is scope for much improvement in this area. The problem I fear is that a great deal of damage will be done to the local communities, and to the environment, if these developments do not go ahead. Very little consideration has been given to the requirement for infrastructure around these apartment blocks in many cases. I refer again to my constituency. There is little reference to, or acknowledgement of, the need for transport infrastructure, traffic management or schools, and little consideration given to the growth of new populations in the area. The developments, with a few notable exceptions, were born out of greed, where the defining principle was to squash as many apartments as possible into the smallest possible space, with no storage facilities and tiny bedrooms in predominantly single bedroom apartments. The outcome of this short-sighted approach is that a transient population has developed, living spaces are cramped, there is no encouragement for families to stay put and management companies are dysfunctional. This approach to housing reflects the now well-established cosy relationships between builders, bankers and this Government.

Many of the apartments and houses in new developments remain unoccupied. This presents an opportunity for local authorities to buy some of them to address the housing needs of the communities. This approach must be teased out. Apart from considering the investment involved, there must be careful planning to ensure a social mix is achieved and that the quality of housing on offer is good. We must not walk into the trap of buying out and propping up the failed developers. Any decisions taken to alleviate the housing shortage must be addressed from the viewpoint of the tenant or owner and not from the rescue package for a developer. The situation has now developed where affordable housing costs more in some cases than houses available on the open market and, therefore, the entire affordable housing scheme must be revisited.

Section 22 provides for an element of standardisation in defining how houses should be allocated by housing authorities. While it may be desirable to have a degree of flexibility at local level, it is most important that there is a transparent system in place to ensure the criteria that define one's entitlement to housing are rigidly adhered to. There also must be transparency when refusal of housing occurs. I have encountered many people who feel aggrieved because they have been refused a house or a flat and cannot establish a reason for that refusal.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.