Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

In 2015 there were 985 residential housing appeals to An Bord Pleanála with 75% of determinations confirming, with or without variation, the decision made by the local authority. In 2015 also 82% of all priority appeals made to An Bord Pleanála were disposed of within their targeted timeline of 18 weeks. I disagree with the Government's decision to bypass the planning section at local authority level and go straight to An Bord Pleanála. I heard the Minister argue on Committee Stage that there would be consultation here, there and everywhere but in fact there is no obligation. We are back to the legal argument between "shall" and "may". There is a lot of may and very little shall in this area.

It is a very strange position to take. I did most of my building in Dublin. I had pre-planning application meetings with planners and I found them very helpful and good. They knew what they wanted in terms of how the city would develop. There are many different aspects to a building and it is more complex in a city centre than elsewhere. I found them to be of very high calibre and they brought a lot that was positive to the industry. God knows the industry had a lot of problems.

I still have contact with a few of them and have spoken to them in recent weeks. They are a bit taken aback at the Government's approach. They do not agree with it, surprisingly. They reckon that there is a false economy regarding time. They find it anti-democratic, and call it a power grab. They say it will add uncertainty. The new process risks judicial reviews. It is a bit of jump into the unknown. Why did the Government not consider increasing staff levels at local planning level or in An Bord Pleanála? The Minister made the point a few days ago that the pre-application times were too flexible in the past. Why not make them statutory? Let us fix a time for them in order to increase the time. The notion of taking the experienced planners, who care about the integrity of the city which they take responsibility for in the development game, out of the equation to the degree the Government is now doing is not a good one. It will not lead to better planning. In fact it will lead to the opposite. It is being done for developments of over 100 units.

It is hardly rocket science that the bigger the unit, the closer the scrutiny needs to be. From my experience, the smaller builder is far less inclined to cheat than the bigger builder. I have many years of experience of that. At this stage, it looks as if the 4% rent inflation rule seems based on the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, ISIF, required dividend. I find it amusing to see whether Fianna Fáil is happy with that as well. It all seems to be more about yield now than anything else.

Things are being made easier for people to get large development applications run through the mill much quicker and easier. I cannot help thinking that that suits some people more than others. I am reminded of Kennedy Wilson when it was down in Clancy Barracks. I think it built 160 apartments there eventually. It had a bit of a fight on its hands to try to get the local authority to allow it not to have any social units on the developments because it thought they would not be suitable. Sadly, it eventually got its way. There is probably even less arguing to do in the new process.

I wonder if groups likes Hines have been doing some lobbying in this area because their plans out in Cherrywood will certainly enjoy the new measures that the Government is bringing in. I have been looking at Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown, of which Cherrywood is a part. It is stark that right now in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown, there is enough land zoned for 34,000 units. Does the Government realise that 18,000 of those are serviced and 7,700 are partly serviced? What are we doing and what is the Government going to do? Is it going to make sure that these lands are built on and developed in the short term? No. What it is going to do is spend €100 million servicing Cherrywood. That is what the Government is going to do. I wonder who would like that done quickly? It is not rocket science.

Why does the Government not move on the 34,000 units that are zoned in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown, do something about them and get those developments off the ground? If the people sitting on those sites do not want to do it, I believe the State should consider introducing compulsory purchase orders. If the people holding the sites cannot afford to do it because they are just regular builders and not large developers, I suggest the State should help them to get on their feet and arrange finance for them. The Government might think that is a mad idea, but I do not. The banks are closed to the regular builder. The developer that the Government is tripping over to please is not depending on our banks. It has different access to money. More often than not, it is not even from this country. It has no problem getting money.

There is an obligation on the State to help the builder who wants to build and who is not looking to make a small fortune out of every unit that it builds, unlike the developer. I make the point that I am not giving out about developers, because they are just an investor. If they do not feel like building, there is no reason why they should. They have got better things to be doing with their money. That is fair enough. That is how they operate. However, there are builders who would like to build and who do not need to make a fortune on every development that they carry out. They need help. The need access to money but they do not have it.

I was speaking to a guy lately who told me that he has stuck his neck out. He has loaned money and it is very expensive. He is paying interest of 14%. He had to pay a 2% set-up fee and if he misses his repayments, his penalty is 4%. That is 20% in total. This Government can borrow money at less than 1%. Am I missing something? Where is the rationale behind the State not engaging in the investment of the supply of housing itself? That does not just mean social housing, but also affordable housing. It is doable and possible to achieve through the local planning process. There would not be local authority workers building them. Builders would be gotten to price the developments as normal. It would be a keen process. Unless a fella is keen, he will not get the job. He would not be looking to make an absolute fortune.

I wonder where the Government is getting its advice from. That is what I would love to know. Is it getting it from the Construction Industry Federation, CIF?

See this speech in context