Rory Hearne (Dublin North-West, Social Democrats)

I am not sure if the Minister of State was baiting me in order to try to get me to go further, but I will try to remain on my best behaviour. Seriously, though, I am very disappointed with the Government's opposition to the Bill. What is particularly disappointing is the lack of serious engagement on the legislation. As my colleague outlined, we have put forward solutions. While the Government might not completely agree with the Bill, the core idea and proposal it contains is that there would be transparency in the housing market where the State is intervening and subsidising directly using taxpayers' money. That is a very reasonable proposal, which is why it is deeply disappointing to see the immediate opposition to the legislation.

The Minister of State said that the Government opposes the principle of mandating new financial reporting requirements for developers who are drawing on an array of State supports. Why is the Government opposing that principle? The Minister of State set out different reasons but they do not really stand up. Why would it be significant red tape for developers and investors who are receiving State supports, regardless of whether the money is going to the home purchase or themselves, and benefiting from them? Why is would there be an issue as to transparency around their accounts? The Government opposing such a minor request for transparency is deeply disappointing.

When we look at the scale of the housing crisis, one of the big issues is the profits that are being extracted and the scale at which they are being extracted. It is the latter that is contributing to higher house prices. Why should we not at least have transparency around it? Why does transparency have to be a barrier? It does not have to be a barrier. Surely it is reasonable to request that developers and investors who are making tens if not hundreds of millions of euro in profits provide open-book accounts. In fact, one developer has said that he is willing to provide such accounts. What is the problem here? What is the issue? What is the Government afraid of? What is wrong with requiring private sector developers to provide open-book accounts when they are in receipt of State subsidies? It seems a very reasonable request.

The Minister of State said that home ownership is positioned at the heart of the Housing for All policy, but what is the reality? A total of 3,300 new houses were built in Dublin city last year but only 155 were bought by households. In Cork, the situation is similar. Last year, nine out of the 313 new apartments that were built in Cork city were sold to households. Of 856 new houses built under the various schemes, just 44 were bought by households. Investor funds and the State are buying up a lot, if not the majority, of the new homes being built in our cities. There is a fundamental problem with or dysfunction in our housing market in the context of how it is operating and the role of the State within it. If we are going to solve this crisis, surely we need to know what is going on. It was my understanding that a commitment to transparency was something that Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael were behind. Unfortunately, it seems that is not the case.

I want to draw attention to one of the schemes that was mentioned. The aim behind croí cónaithe city scheme is to activate the 80,000 planning permissions that have not proceeded to construction. To date, there have been 11 developments under the scheme and 1,100 apartments approved. This low take-up really calls into question the viability-gap narrative, particularly in light of what is available under the scheme.

Developers can get €120,000 per apartment or €144,000 in certain cases. The developer gets €120,000 or €144,000 per apartment with no requirement for affordability. Rather, there is just this statement of a fair market price, whatever that means. We know there are no fair market prices in the housing market at the moment. There are real questions here that are not being answered by the Government. If the croí cónaithe scheme is not working, which it is clearly not, then why are we pumping more money into it? Why are we talking about tax breaks? Why should there not be, at a minimum, accountability and transparency over how much money our developers and investors are making when the State is giving them €120,000 per apartment? It seems to me a very reasonable request.

The Government’s housing plan, with these demand-side subsidies for developers being implemented, is utterly failing to get to grips with the housing crisis, which is now a social catastrophe. The cases we hear that come to both mine and my colleagues’ office, as well as to the Minister of State’s office, are absolutely heartbreaking. We are absolutely failing to give our young people in this country a future in Ireland. Many of those who would be involved in building homes, teaching our children and working in our hospitals are leaving the country. It is absolutely unacceptable and we do not accept it.

There is still a lack of ambition and correct policies within the Government to solve this crisis. We have put forward solutions. The Social Democrats' homes for Ireland State savings scheme would provide additional funding for both builders and the private sector by leveraging the billions of euro that are in savings accounts and channelling them into an affordable housing fund. In our alternative budget, we set out a State construction company that would directly hire the builders and all the trades we need to build homes. We would set up modular factories around the country to accelerate the delivery of homes. These are ideas and solutions we could implement to add capacity.

In the context of active land management, we could use the Land Development Agency to compulsory purchase. All this land the Government is going to zone will be flipped and speculated upon. Why do we not do what the Netherlands does? The state buys that land, develops and masterplans it, puts in the infrastructure and then allows builders to come in and contract. It would radically reduce the cost and prices of housing.

These are radical ideas we need to actually solve the housing crisis and build affordable housing, which is still missing in the housing plan. The Government talks about 15,000 starter homes as being its key affordable housing measure. What is a starter home? Surely, we should be looking for genuinely affordable housing. This is why we need transparency. It is deeply disappointing that the Government is opposing this Bill, but we will continue to push this and other solutions to get transparency and affordable housing.

See this speech in context