Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the fact that the Minister of State is open to changing section 180. I had sought that in a provision in legislation that was not opposed and I had hoped to see it included in the planning and development (No. 2) Bill. For a person who lives in a housing estate who wants to petition to have the estate taken in charge, the extension of duration means that it cannot happen before 17 years have expired. That includes the period of seven years after the planning permission has expired plus another five years. There is where the 17 years is arrived at, which is outrageous. That is where there has been an extension of duration. I can give the Minister of State some examples of that.

It is one of the areas where there is a legacy issue. It is not only a legacy issue of this crash, but a legacy issue from the previous crash. It was one of the dominant issues I deal with right through the 1990s when there was more consumer protection for a bag of crisps than there was for a person purchasing a house where a developer had not complied with the planning permission. Now that we are at the point of recommencing development and particularly now that the property tax has been introduced, people ask what are they getting for it if their estate cannot be taken in charge when the developer has not completed the road or the landscaping and other related issues. If there is a management company involved, it adds to the individual costs for householders. It is important that we address the issues from the home owner's perspective. There is plenty of protection for the developer. The local authority is assumed to be the guardian of the home owner, but I can tell the Minister of State that is not how I have found it to be. Some of it has to do with the resourcing of local authorities.

See this speech in context