Alan Kelly (Tipperary, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I challenge those Deputies who believe they have all the answers to take the opportunity to step up to the mark, enter government and continue the work of solving the housing problem. This is an incredibly difficult and complex challenge, one from which, based on their utterances, many parties in the 32nd Dáil have effectively walked away because they refuse to countenance entering government and instead shout from the sidelines all the time.

I have seen at first hand the upset, strain and stress that problems with housing cause for people and their families, particularly the most vulnerable. Our homes should be places where we feel safe and secure, rather than a cause of stress and worry. For this reason, when I took office in the summer of 2014, I made housing my number one priority. I was under no illusions that this was one of the biggest challenges facing the country as we emerged from the deep economic crisis. By 2014, local authorities no longer had either the skill set or finances to kick-start major house building programmes. This issue was rectified through the sanctioning of more than 450 new housing staff for local authorities and providing €4 billion in social housing funding.

With regard to protecting those renting privately, we were determined to significantly strengthen the rights of tenants and that is what we did. The changes to the Residential Tenancies Act passed in December will be of significant help to 320,000 people in private rented accommodation. One of the best policy options in the short term to support families who find themselves in emergency accommodation owing to a lack of housing options is the rapid build housing programme I initiated. The houses in question are not prefabricated buildings but high quality, A-rated homes which, if delivered on a sufficient scale, offer the best hope for people in the short term. I urge all Deputies to reflect on this point and visit the units in Poppintree. I hope everyone with an interest in housing will visit the site and perhaps we might discuss the issue again in a couple of weeks when they have all done so.

I do not claim that we fixed everything in housing in the past year and a half. That was never a possibility as a true fix will take many years. Nevertheless, it is important to note that much has been done and further steps are planned to deal with what remains to do be done. Increased supply across all forms of housing is required. The construction sector appears to be struggling to make large-scale residential developments work. The 11,000 and 12,500 homes completed in 2014 and 2015, respectively, amounted to less than half the estimated requirement of 25,000 units per year. We needed 50,000 homes in the past two years, yet the private market delivered less than half of this figure. To tackle these problems my Department, in addition to implementing the social housing strategy, deployed a large range of measures to increase the supply of private houses being built by bringing the costs of constructing homes more within reach of what ordinary people and families could afford to pay. Reductions in local authority development contributions, a streamlining of the Part V social housing requirements, more consistent application of apartment standards and, recently, a targeted development contribution rebate scheme have together reduced input costs by between €20,000 and €40,000, depending on whether apartments or houses are being constructed. It is clear, however, that we need to do more.

Some parties believe the reversal of the new Central Bank rules is the answer. While these rules need to be tweaked, their whole-scale reversal would simply clear the way to start repeating the mistakes of the past when families ended up paying €500,000 for a family home and faced the worry of having to pay for it for 30 years. If we, as parliamentarians, would like more and more people to get the keys to the homes they need and deserve at prices they can afford and in locations they desire, we will have to go further and address the following questions. What is a fair price for a home? How do we reduce input costs, including the tax take which accounts for more than one third of the cost of delivering a new home? How do we guarantee reductions in input costs by the State will be passed on to households? From where will the money come to invest in the infrastructure needed to prepare land for housing development? How will we provide better legal protections for those renting privately? How will we keep a lid on land prices? Addressing these questions raises politically and socially important issues which will have to be debated in this Dáil term.

When it came to the introduction of legislation that sought to secure a tenancy in the event of the sale of a home, the introduction of a vacant site levy to tackle land hoarding or legislating for the introduction of a "use it or lose it" system of planning, it was the Constitution and the way in which it was being interpreted by the courts that restricted us most in our attempts to deal with these problems. I want to be frank and honest to move the debate on. I originally proposed a vacant site levy which would have been applied at a higher rate than had been subsequently proposed and would have been in place next year to tax unused development land. I also proposed that tenancies would be protected in the event of a property sale such as the current sale in Tyrrelstown. In that regard, I welcome some of the residents of the area to this debate. I also proposed that certain models of rent controls be implemented.

Insurmountable obstacles to the implementation of these measures arose due, in the main, to constitutional constraints. As a parliament we must collectively face up to this fact: if we truly believe people's incomes, rather than the demands of developers or landowners, should determine housing costs, then the following points must be considered: first, targets for reductions in housing construction costs will have to be set and delivered by all stakeholders, including developers, suppliers and, most importantly, the State; and, second - this is also extremely important - there needs to be a public debate on Article 43 of the Constitution to examine whether we have the right balance between the protected and legitimate rights of individuals, as property owners, and the wider needs of society, including housing needs. The latter point is crucial. I have a strong belief in the importance of property rights for our society - including the right of people to enjoy their property - and our economy. However, our Constitution was framed in 1937 when colonial land theft remained in the memory. In the light of the examples I have outlined, I am of the view that an imbalance exists between ownership rights and the public good to such an extent as to warrant an in-depth constitutional review to examine the appropriate balance between the public good and the property rights of individuals. It is incumbent on all of us to at least discuss this issue in some depth. I say as much to be constructive rather than defensive and to generate debate and demonstrate that efforts on the part of officials in my Department have been made in recent years. However, some obstacles are even beyond the control of Ministers.

We have worked hard since 2014 to turn around the disastrous housing situation that was left to us. It will take determined action by the Thirty-second Dáil and its successors to build on what we have started and the great deal of work done to ensure that we have an affordable supply of housing coming forward. It is now incumbent on everyone in the House to offer solutions. In particular, it is incumbent on those who have the capacity, and many do, to offer such solutions. Instead of simply talking, they should come to the House, take this seat, if they so wish, and deliver on those promises. Now, in this Dáil, a number of Deputies have the opportunity to do so. They should put up, or else.

See this speech in context