Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I also intend to be constructive on this legislation. I recognise the Minister's intentions to ensure we have construction of houses and supply as quickly as we can and that we take away obstacles to the achievement of that aim. He is right when he says that supply is the major problem, although those of us on this side of the House would argue that in the meantime we have to protect people who are not able to buy homes and are, therefore, stuck in the rental sector. We debated that matter yesterday and I will not revisit it now. I welcome elements of the Bill and I understand its intention but I also have concerns, particularly around the fast-tracking proposal to go straight to An Bord Pleanála with developments of 100 units or more.

I will first of all refer to the sections of the Bill that are positive. The proposals on Part 8 developments are in that category. Other Deputies have referred to the issue around clarification on whether environmental impact statements are necessary. That is helpful. It will give greater clarity and avoid undue delay and expense where there is sometimes a doubt as to whether they are necessary or not. That is positive.

The issue to which Deputy Ó Broin just referred in the context of the lending for the purposes of student housing from the Housing Finance Agency is a positive. In my previous role I was very familiar with the difficulty of student housing, the shortage and the fact that students very often have to compete with other renters in the private rented sector. We want to see higher education institutions providing student housing that is affordable.

Deputy Cowen referred to the assessment the Housing Finance Agency is carrying out in respect of the cost of building. That is a positive. I have heard a representative of the Housing Finance Agency speaking before about the fact that it could be lending more widely than it is at present. It has often made the argument that it should have the power to lend to local authorities. That matter should be examined.

When he commented on Part 4, the Minister referred to the initiative in Rebuilding Ireland whereby the Housing Agency would be provided with capital funding of €70 million to acquire properties from financial institutions for social housing. That is positive and could be expanded. I have made a proposal before that local authorities should also be allowed to purchase properties, do them up and rent them to their tenants. There is an element in Rebuilding Ireland that deals with that issue. We have all referred to the fact that there are nearly 200,000 empty houses in the country. The census broke some of those figures down. In 17 of our larger towns, there are significant numbers of empty houses.

Let us suppose a local authority could buy a derelict house in a town - they could do so cheaply in many of our towns. It could do up the house or have it done up by a local builder and then allocate it to local authority tenants. The Minister would solve a number of problems, including taking away the problem of empty buildings in our towns as well as providing housing for people on the housing waiting lists. Perhaps this is not the place to say it, but the Minister referred to the point in his speech. I believe there is more potential to get rid of the blight of empty properties in our towns and to put more vibrancy and life into those towns as well as providing homes for people on the social housing waiting lists by going in that direction.

I will come to the element to which I wish to give most of my time presently. It relates to the amendments to the Residential Tenancies Act. Most of the amendments are welcome, but I wish to focus in particular on the proposals relating to developments of 20 dwellings and the proposal to reduce to five the number from which vacant possession would not be allowed by the owner of the properties. I am keen to see the figure reduced to one. The idea that a landlord could get rid of a tenant who still has a lease because a property is being sold is a fundamental cause of homelessness and represents a balancing against the tenant and in favour of the landlord. I believe the balance needs to be put more in favour of the tenant, especially in light of the rising cost of rents. We get figures every day of the week relating to the rising cost of rent, especially in our cities. The Minister indicated that the reduction from 20 to five came from a Report Stage amendment in the Seanad. Obviously, five is better than 20, but I am somewhat alarmed at what the Minister has said today that he is in the process of taking advice on this change and may need to come back to it at a later stage. I can only understand that to mean it may go back up from five, and I would be rather concerned if that is the intention. Perhaps the Minister cannot clarify the point today but I imagine it will come up in later stages. Certainly, I am concerned that there might be some legal issue around that.

Since we are discussing legal issues, I would be interested in the legal advice relating to the Aarhus Convention. I understand the Minister is taking advice on the matter and I would welcome any clarification.

The area I am especially keen to speak relates to the plans to fast-track planning of developments of 100 or more units, establish a strategic housing division in An Bord Pleanála, albeit for a restricted period, and to effectively take out the planning layer in local government in respect of those developments.

The Irish Planning Institute has expressed grave concern in this regard and has described the move as being damaging to democracy and misconceived. The institute has a strong point in that regard. Various people have referred to councillors who are also concerned. The Association of Local Government in Ireland, which represents councillors, has sent a detailed submission - I think everyone received it. The association made the point that all local planning authorities have statutory planning timelines of 16 weeks and that these must be adhered to in all cases. The timelines include an eight week period for a decision on an application following validation and a further four week period if a request for further information is made. Then a final four week period applies for granting of permission if no appeal is made. I concur with what has been said already. The pre-planning area is really where significant delays are experienced.

See this speech in context