Dáil debates

Wednesday, 8 July 2015

Urban Regeneration and Housing Bill 2015: Report Stage (Resumed)

 

11:30 am

Photo of Paudie CoffeyPaudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

On Deputy Boyd Barrett's point about the potential to seize houses that are not being utilised, the Constitution provides for property rights and we must be careful not to impinge on them. The Bill provides for due process and identifies clear criteria for designating a site as vacant. The statutory responsibility for this process lies with local authorities, which, as Deputy Wallace noted, are best placed to understand their respective local areas, development plans and housing needs. A number of factors must be taken into account in determining housing need, the first of which is the local housing list. While Deputy Boyd Barrett is correct that there is a demand for housing throughout the country, demand varies and is much stronger in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford than in smaller towns and villages. We do not want to use a sledgehammer to crack a nut. For this reason, we are providing flexibility and setting out clear criteria for allowing the designation of sites in areas where strong demand exists. I want to avoid circumstances in which small towns and villages with vacant sites and weak housing demand are excessively burdened with levies. These areas need to regenerate themselves and demand needs to be allowed to build.

The legislation provides local authorities with the flexibility to prioritise areas where they wish to designate sites and apply the levy to focus minds on regenerating these sites. Without these criteria and the clarity provided, this legislation and the powers of local authorities would not be as effective as they should be. I will oppose the amendments on that basis.

With regard to site size, I listened to the arguments made by Deputy Wallace and other Deputies on this issue on Second and Committee Stages. Deputies have generally welcomed the decision to decrease the size at which a site may be designated as vacant from the previous threshold of 0.1 ha to allow smaller vacant sites in urban areas which are unsightly or a blight on the streetscape to be designated, subject to due process. I will oppose the amendments for the reasons I have outlined.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.