Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

It was unfortunate that Deputy Thomas Byrne was not informed that there were speakers listed to make contributions this afternoon.

This is a debate on housing solutions. It is important to say that the Government does not have a monopoly on good ideas in relation to housing. We do not claim to have the monopoly on good ideas in relation to housing. Indeed, it certainly is not an ideological one, despite the best efforts of some in mentioning repeatedly that my party has some sort of difficulty with the provision of housing of any type. That is completely inaccurate. The record of the Government speaks volumes as to our concerted efforts to ensure that everybody has a home and that as many people as possible are taken off the housing lists and put into homes.

Homelessness is a significant issue and the Committee on Children and Youth Affairs which I chair wrote a report, particularly as it applies to children, in conjunction with the Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government, and published it a number of weeks back. The report is now being considered by Government.

It is important to mention some of the solutions to this housing crisis. We have changed planning law. As the Members will be perfectly aware, this has been referenced and lauded by a couple of Members in the context of it being picked up. It is important to note that. We have introduced fast-tracking of planning applications. We have to a certain extent pushed quite hard the master plan concept in local authorities which some local authorities have been good at pushing.

In my constituency, a master plan is currently on display and for public consultation and it is picking up a significant amount of objection on such grounds as density. These are the issues that we have been debating in this House for a number of years. If one looks at Dublin city, every opportunity to build up is thwarted by the planners. I will give the obvious example of Tara Street. On Tara Street, the local authority members passed the local development plan with a height cap. An application was submitted for a building of similar height to the cap and the planners refused it on the basis that it was too tall. There is the irony in the Irish planning system. We will continue to be fixated with ensuring that we provide as many homes as possible, get as many people out of unsuitable accommodation and deliver upon commitments that not only the Government but this House has given to the public to do all it can to improve upon the lot of those 10,000 and, indeed, the 67,000 or 68,000 people on housing lists across the State.

The other matter that I wanted to touch upon was the culture in this House of blaming Government, stating that it is all Fine Gael's fault and that approaching our ninth year in government we should have resolved this housing crisis, we should have done all the rest of it and we should wave our magic wand and resolve the housing crisis in the morning. Of course, the reason we have this housing crisis is because our economy was collapsed by the Members opposite. It is ironic that they criticise us for not prioritising housing. I am sure the Members opposite are aware that we had no money to prioritise anything up until probably 2015 or 2016. It is important to note that having not built houses for quite a number of years, there is a hangover of approximately 200,000 properties that are not in the housing stock of the State and that should be. However, I go back to the title of this debate, which is "Housing Solutions", and thus have no particular interest in dwelling too long on the mistakes that politics has made in the past.

I repeat what I said at the start, that no Government and no party has a monopoly on good ideas when it comes to housing. There have been some good solutions put forward by Members, including Members opposite. It is appreciated because it resolves the problem. Even if it is only for a person or two, that is a solution to an individual or a group of individuals and that is what we are here for. It was Deputy Lahart who referenced that we are here to deliver for our constituents. We are here to improve the lot for our constituents and across the country.

I will finish with a comment on density. We must stop building out. Not being critical of Deputy Lahart, we must stop looking at a site as large as the site he is referencing in his constituency that happened to be owned by a former member of Fine Gael and criticising a planner or, indeed, a construction company for identifying such a considerable site and saying that it is a good site for the development of housing. Where I agree with the Deputy though is on the issue of unfettered access to purchasing large volumes of apartments and houses for rental only. There are, of course, all sorts of reasons that rental is a necessity in any market but when the purpose of the development is for rental only, Deputy Lahart is correct that there is an issue with building a community where that will not promote family life in general terms. We still have not resolved the issue of long-term leases in the residential market. We still have short-term leases that can only be reviewed every year or so, and put up by 4% or thereabouts, depending on where they are in the country. The difficulty is we are fixated on home ownership. Given our history, that is understandable. However, it is not sustainable for us to continue with such a considerable percentage of home ownership. The State must acknowledge that there is a large number of people in society who cannot afford to buy a property and who, depending their circumstances, may not be eligible for social housing, and it is something that we must facilitate. It is the same across the world in every state that I can think of.

I am not suggesting for a moment that it should not be an ambition to support home ownership. That said, there also must be an acknowledgement that there is a percentage of Irish society that will not be able to afford to buy a home. That is where the State must come in and assist them. That includes the likes of long-term leases and long-term rental agreements such as are done all over the world. We do not seem to do them very well here.

I wanted to reference density and ensure that we acknowledge that we need to build up. In Dublin city, within 5 km or 10 km of the city centre we are still sprawling. We are still filling in the north county of Fingal with two-storey properties with a front garden and a back garden. Maybe that is fine. That is fine, of course, for a huge portion of Irish society. In Dublin city centre, however, we are still objecting to apartments and high-rise development. In one constituency not too far from here, a Member of the other House has objected cumulatively to more than 1,000 properties in his given community. This sort of stuff has to stop. We have to recognise that we have to go up in the city centre so that we can justify spending billions of euro of taxpayers' money on mass transport systems. It is absolutely essential that we provide the throughput. Dublin city centre is no longer where people come to shop. It is no longer where people come solely to work. There are many reasons people go to the outskirts of the city but the justification for spending billions of euro in taxpayers' money on transport systems where there is a density problem such as in certain parts of south Dublin is that the density is not there and the throughput is not there. That has to be acknowledged. I thank the Acting Chairman for facilitating my contribution.

See this speech in context