Eoghan Murphy (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

It is important we recognise that local authorities often acquire additional homes in a new development beyond the 10% stipulated under the Part V obligation. Home aspiration is incredibly important, but we must also recognise that in the future more people in this country will rent. It will become more of the mix of housing, and we need it to be more mixed. In doing so, we must provide greater protections for renters: longer-term leases, cost rental, stronger tenant laws and a stronger RTB to protect not only tenants' rights but also landlords' rights. All these things are needed as we move to a mature housing sector. It is also important we ask ourselves what is the right number of social housing homes to be built each year at present as we ramp up supply. Is it one in four, one in five? That is where we are. I accept that when we get to an output of 35,000 homes a year, which we will get to in two or three years' time, it might be time to revisit this, when the Land Development Agency has been in operation for a number of years and when other things might be happening in the wider economy. We must always revisit our policies to ensure they are working and are current, and that unintended consequences that were not thought of at the time have not developed in the meantime.

While there are some potential risks in the one-stage cap, it is worthy of consideration, and Deputy Darragh O'Brien knows from our engagement at the time of the budget that we are considering it, provided we can do it in line with the public spending code. That work continues and will come to a conclusion very soon.

I would urge caution when it comes to progressing a Bill such as this. First, we do not want to increase the cost of building houses at this time. We have done a number of things to try to decrease the cost of building and now we want to get those homes built. We do not want to build in further uncertainty or further costs for builders up and down the country at this crucial time. We do not want to make homes more unaffordable for the vast majority of people. As it stands, 80,000 people qualify for social housing; therefore, there are more people who do not qualify for social housing. We do not want to make their aspirations for home ownership or a secure place to live less tangible, less achievable, because of the unintended consequences of the provisions in this Bill. What we really do not want to do is to fall back once again on the private sector for the provision of social housing-----

See this speech in context