Michelle Mulherin (Mayo, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 6, line 14, after “let” to insert the following:

", and in the case of land under the de facto care and control of the National Asset Management Agency the latter shall be deemed to be the owner for the purposes of this Act".

I thank the Minister of State for accepting a suggestion I made on Second Stage that an amendment be made to ensure local authorities are also subject to the rigours of the legislation and, where necessary, required to endure the pain, so to speak, of paying a vacant site levy. I propose this amendment in the same spirit. The purpose of the amendment is to extend the definition of the term "owner" to include property which is in the de factocare and control of the National Asset Management Agency, NAMA.

One of the main objectives of the Bill is to assist in addressing the housing shortage by tackling the hoarding of property. The National Asset Management Agency is the largest property company in the world and controls massive land banks in this country by virtue of its dealings with property developers. When NAMA was established in 2009, the Department of Finance projected that 30,000 new houses would be required annually in the medium term. Considering the reach of the agency and given its control of a large number of development sites as a result of acquiring the assets of developers, it is reasonable to expect it to play a key role in delivering this housing. Regrettably, however, NAMA has failed in this regard.

The National Asset Management Agency blows its own trumpet because it has a target of completing 4,500 new housing units in Dublin by 2016 and 20,000 housing units in the greater Dublin area in the next five years. These figures will be only a drop in the ocean given the extent of the housing shortage and house building requirements. Given its control of many development sites, NAMA should have played a significant role in addressing the housing shortage by funding and working with developers to this end. Its failure to do so is a key reason for the housing shortage. If the agency had done what it should have been doing, we would have more houses.

A large of amount of land is being hoarded and remains undeveloped. NAMA is not working with developers, many of whom will tell stories about the difficulties they have experienced in dealing with the agency. Many matters of concern have been aired in public without any answers being provided by NAMA. Mr. Justice Cregan, for example, seriously chastised NAMA in the High Court on the basis of its dealings with the developer, Mr. John Flynn, while the portfolio of another developer, Mr. Michael O'Flynn, was not sold to the highest bidder.

The objective of the amendment is to bring some accountability in respect to the National Asset Management Agency by ensuring it is not above the law that applies to ordinary private property owners who may find themselves obliged to pay a vacant site levy.

In view of that, I ask the Minister of State to give the matter serious consideration. I understand that the definition of "owner" is the ordinary one, but the position for these developers and property owners is that NAMA has all the say in relation to what happens to their properties. As such, NAMA should be brought in as part of the solution to address our housing shortage.

See this speech in context