Pat Casey (Wicklow, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

This is the first major Bill to give effect to the Dáil's response to the housing crisis. As such, it must be welcomed even though its provisions will have to be monitored closely as to its overall purpose, which is to reduce radically the timescales involved in the planning of housing developments. The ultimate solution to the housing crisis is obvious but difficult to achieve; a significant increase in the supply of housing units. A significant barrier to rolling out the massive increase in builds is the unnecessary and bureaucratic delay caused by the current planning framework. A national emergency like the housing crisis demands that we remove the barriers that delay the construction of housing units.

These are emergency measures and I welcome that this is reflected in the time-limited structure of many of the provisions, with 2019 being the current expiration date. This sunset clause is subject to extension by the Minister and Government of the day until 2021 should the need arise. However, any such extension must be based on hard evidence. The Fianna Fáil amendment enshrines that the extension of emergency measures will be contingent on a comprehensive review of the policy and the involvement of Parliament in its scrutiny.

The Fianna Fáil amendments on residential tenancies contain a constructive yet impactful suite of measures designed to give greater certainty and protection to tenants, while recognising that more than 90% of Irish landlords own three properties or fewer and are, in many cases, involuntary landlords. They are not professional landlords and are, in many cases, under massive pressure themselves.

9 o’clock

The most effective system of tenancies worldwide is one that involves larger and more institutional investments in the rental sector. We need to transition to that model in a controlled way to protect tenants and the vast majority of landlords, who are also fellow citizens and who never intended to be in this position.

Fianna Fáil will not demonise any sector or pitch one vulnerable group against another. In that context, the reduction of the so-called Tyrrelstown amendment from 20 units to five will offer secure occupancy for more tenants, and this is only right.

We have to remember that for the tenant, the property in question is his or her home for which he or she is paying. The retention of a tenant's deposit where landlords are in receivership is also addressed by our amendment. Further amendments will be introduced by Fianna Fáil which will further enable tenants to remain in their homes with confidence about their future development. The core of our amendments and support for the Bill lie in learning from the lessons of the past, and we will provide practical and measurable yet impactful policies to aid the Government in tackling the housing crisis.

As a member of the Joint Committee on Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, I know we will deal with the Bill and amendments next week, but I would like to take this opportunity, if the Minister of State will allow me, to be somewhat technical about a number of items I would like to bring to his attention in advance. I wish to assure that this is done with a view to helping him and his Department to provide answers and allow the Bill to pass all Stages next week, if possible.

I note a preplanning stage with the board includes the local authority and is a nine-week process. Section 5 seems to suggest that a separate preplanning process has to take place with a local authority before the next step. I am not 100% sure about this section, but that is how I have read it. If that is the case, even though it is clearly stated in the Bill that there must be a meeting within four weeks, the outcome will not be time bound and there is no end date to the process, if I am reading the section correctly.

Section 6(5) refers to a four week process. I may be conflicted about the meaning, but I do not think I am. If that is the case, there is a problem because the first date of public consultation with a local authority involves what I understand to be the board and the local authority planning process, but section 5(4) refers to the details of the preplanning process with the local authority. I am not sure what the process will be. I have been told it is a nine-week process, but my reading of the Bill seems to suggest that there will be two preplanning processes, one with a local authority and a second with the board and local authority, prior to the submission of an application to the board.

I refer to material contravention and the strategic housing development in regard to material contravention. I have reservations about this, as do most people. We all know material contravention contravenes a local area plan or a county development plan which has gone through a statutory process and statutory public consultation process. Does the amendment clearly state that a development of 100 houses or more that materially contravenes a plan can get planning permission? That is what I understand, from my reading of the Bill. I have some reservations and concerns about that.

I refer to the environmental impact statement or the appropriate assessment for a European site. Having gone through a nine-week process, additional information will then be requested in terms of whether reports or impact statements need to be carried out. Each county development plan has done some appropriate assessment on the environmental and Natura sites within the document. It should have been clear from the start whether this is required. We should not have to wait until this section to find out whether it is needed. Another 16 -week process has to be gone through to arrive at a solution.

Having gone through a nine-week process, I am not sure whether there will be written confirmation that an application is suitable to be submitted to the board directly for planning permission. There is a clause that states if the application is not up to standard, it will be back to square one. I hope that someone will not have gone through a nine-week process only to be told that he or she will have to go back to the start again.

As I said, I am a member of the Joint Committee on Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, which met today. If the debate is not finished today, I ask the Minister of State to give us an extra 24 hours to submit amendments, as was requested at the committee meeting. I do not know whether the Minister of State will facilitate that request.

See this speech in context