Matt Shanahan (Waterford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Housing for All strategy has outlined four main aims: "[to] support home ownership and increase affordability; [to] eradicate homelessness, increase social housing delivery and support social inclusion; [to] increase new housing supply; [and to] address vacancy and make efficient use of existing stock." The aspirations within the plan include "over 90,000 social homes by the end of 2030, including an average new-build component of over 9,500 social homes" during that time; some "54,000 affordable homes between now and 2030 with yearly targets for the provision of affordable Housing" and a "focus on new builds to provide social homes, with the ending of long-term social housing leasing arrangements through the phasing out of new entrants." Beyond these targets, what are the headwinds to this policy? I believe affordability is now the main issue and the main danger to the aspirations of the Minister and the Department.

There are the increasing supply chain costs, which may not recede. I do not believe they will ever go back to pre-pandemic levels. There is the lack of skilled labour and new entrants to the labour market, which is causing a consequent rise in wages and overheads. There are significant developer water and electricity connection fees. Other build costs have escalated quickly, including professional services, insurance finance, interest charges and embedded Irish building supply costs, particularly the cost of materials such as timber, concrete and insulated panels. The Minister of State might not be aware of this, but if he were to go to get a container of building materials comprising largely of those three items in Poland, he would pay up to 30% less than in Ireland today. What about the Government's take of fees and taxes in the build costs? The figure includes VAT, developer levies and other fees, which can be up to 25% of a new build cost. Perhaps the Department might devise a mechanism whereby a tax credit is retrospectively awarded to first-time buyers to assist purchase but in a timeframe that would not lead to developer price escalation.

I refer to the town and rural regeneration schemes. Getting existing property into habitable use should be a primary goal of the policy. However, how are planning applications and requirements to be fast-tracked? How will objections be dealt with? How should listed buildings be dealt with while still incentivising owners to develop or is the plan to CPO these properties? If so, in what timeframe will that deliver new home opportunities? In addition, rural planning and minimum density guidelines have not been confirmed in respect of the new plan, and local authorities are now drafting their development plans in these areas. We need to see certainty in respect of preferential planning to continue for families to be able to build on their own lands. This should be extended to nieces and nephews. Many rural villages cannot avail of minimum density requirements, and if discretion is not offered in this area, erosion of rural communities will continue. Areas in my constituency such as Ballyduff Upper, Ballysaggart, Dunhill and Clonea-Power will not have new builds. If we cannot have a certain amount of one-off housing in those villages, they will die on their feet, as they are dying at present.

The local authority purchase scheme, whereby the local authority proposes to take an equity share, is be supported by a Government affordable housing scheme. I understand that the Department is using a rolling 12-month average build cost to estimate the support it will provide to each local authority. Given the rapid change in building supply costs, I ask the Minister of State's officials to take a second look at this analysis; otherwise, local authorities such as mine in Waterford will struggle to deliver on this policy, given the recent rapid price movements in the construction sector in the south east.

See this speech in context