Barry Cowen (Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

This Bill creates a one-stop shop, which we would like to see, for approving refurbishment projects in local authorities, which will remove many of the existing administrative hurdles to redeveloping vacant commercial and residential dwellings. It seeks to establish a planning and building control approval process in each local authority, which will enable the faster development of upper floors of older and-or commercial structures that require a change of use in town and city centres for housing, which are frequently vacant.

With this Bill safety standards and the necessity of full compliance with building regulations remains unchanged. Our belief is that setting up a one-stop shop will increase the number of refurbishments in vacant structures which are fully compliant with building regulations. At present, refurbishment projects in older buildings or upper floors above commercial units in towns and city centres are frequently not fully compliant with building regulations or building control regulations. That is one reason for the higher number of retrospective retention applications currently in our planning system. Our Bill aims to change this.

As has been well documented, Census 2016 reveals that almost 260,000 thousand homes - 15% of the housing stock - are vacant across the country. That is shamefully wasteful. This figure also significantly under-counts vacant property throughout the country, as it does not count vacant spaces in commercial or derelict properties that are currently not suitable for residential habitation. There are thousands of square feet of liveable space in above-the-shop units which, as anyone who walks around a city or town in Ireland can testify and clearly see, unfortunately exist in very large numbers.

Various financial incentive schemes over the years have not been successful in reducing vacancy and underutilisation of such spaces in city and town centres. Dublin City Council, for example, recently undertook a visual inspection which estimated there are 4,000 vacant spaces above commercial units in the city with potential for use as residential dwellings. A vacant building study completed last year by planners in University College Cork, UCC, estimated that in a typical city centre street in Cork, conversion of vacant sites and vacant upper floors could increase residential populations in urban areas by more than 260%.

This Bill represents a genuine attempt to overcome many of the existing administrative faults in our planning and building control processes that have been identified as holding back urban regeneration. We are open to taking suggestions or amendments that will improve the Bill and we respect the fact that the Government has indicated it will not oppose the Bill and that it will facilitate it to Committee Stage. We are seeking all-party agreement for it to move to Committee Stage and allow improvements to be made to it through amendments and so forth.

We have worked on this Bill in conjunction with a number of practitioners and experts in their fields and consulted widely with other stakeholders, including officials working in housing and planning in local authorities, including the Dublin City Council, multiple housing bodies working on the ground, such as the Peter McVerry Trust, the Simon Community, builders and architects. All have given their support to the thrust of the Bill.

The one-stop shop is a relatively simple and easy-to-implement proposal, which was originally made in theDublin City Council South Georgian Core report. The idea is to get all regulatory sections such as building control, conservation, disability access, fire certification and planning together to agree on a solution in the case of a refurbishment or conversion of an older structure or commercial premises to residential use. Essentially, it means that an applicant could have one meeting with all the required officials such as a planner and those in the regulatory sections I mentioned rather than having to undertake several separate applications simultaneously, which is currently the case and which can have a prolonged effect in such an application process.

In terms of the new application process, while a building owner will not have to submit their application via the new one-stop shop procedure but if they do, they will get an expedited process. There will be an optional pre-application consultation, which advises on whether an application meets the requirements to be processed via the one-stop shop solution. This will be in person and a decision will be processed either on the same day or no later than two weeks after such a meeting. The application will take place in person in front of a group of experts who will sign off on the full application thereafter. This will involve the arranging of an on-site inspection checklist and schedule. The one-stop shop will issue a works permit that replaces a fire safety certificate and a disability certificate and verifies compliance with other parts of the building regulations, allowing construction to begin immediately. Approved inspectors will inspect the checklist on-site to ensure that there is compliance.

The one-stop shop planning application procedure pertains to three categories of development, which most frequently require a section 5 exemption, or a dispensation from building regulations and-or a conservation order. In the Bill these developments are listed in three categories. Category (m), as described in the Bill, is a "’development consisting of the change of use or partial change of use of any existing building where the height of the top storey is no more than 10 metres above ground level from any use other than residential to residential use and the works ancillary to such change of use, subject to conditions and limitations to be determined by the Minister, including a section 5 declaration from the planning authority via a one-stop shop application procedure." Category (n) is a "development consisting of the carrying out of works for the maintenance, improvement or other alteration and provision of escape windows and doors of any structure for the purposes of residential use of any older structure, subject to conditions and limitations to be determined by the Minister and including a section 5 declaration from the planning authority via a one-stop shop application procedure." Category (o) is a "development consisting of the sub-division of any existing dwelling to provide two or more new dwellings, subject to conditions and limitations to be determined by the Minister and including a section 5 declaration from the planning authority via a one-stop shop application procedure."

The Department will draft and publish revised technical guidance documents to accompany each part of the building regulations for use by the one-stop shop on these type of refurbishments. The objective here is in no way to dilute the building regulations or standards in regard to the refurbishment of older buildings or upper floors. Rather it is to give more standardised guidance to officials in deciding on applications and their inspection on-site. It does not in any way reduce regulatory requirements. In fact, its central objective is to increase compliance with building regulations. It will do so by creating a more standardised approach to section 5 exemptions in each local authority. Exemptions or dispensations from some technical standards in the building regulations are commonplace on most refurbishment projects in older buildings, as it currently stands. However, a common complaint from building inspectors is that the technical guidance documents relating to each building regulation give little in the way of substantive guidance for projects that most frequently require such dispensations such as those in upper floors of commercial buildings.

As such, there are varying standards and approaches adopted across, and even within, local authorities. In theory, building regulations enable fire officers and disability access officers to take a common-sense view in regard to dispensations from building regulations. However, in reality, this is hugely variable and there is not much practical guidance on what dispensations are allowed. Fire officers have little help in technical guidance documents as they mostly detail the application of building regulations in new developments rather than refurbishments in more complicated structures in urban centres. It is thought necessary to simplify and standardise technical guidance in regard to building regulation compliance in older buildings and above-the-shop units.

Moreover, while most refurbishment projects require a section 5 exemption and-or dispensations under the building regulations, these are rarely applied for, but mostly assumed, by builders or architects. This is one reason for the large number of unauthorised developments that currently exist. The one-stop-shop application procedure simply aims to standardise processes for applications for such exemptions or dispensations. While making it easier for building owners to convert such spaces, it requires local authorities to take a more hands-on approach to inspecting the plans for such developments and ensuring these design plans are carried out, as stated, via site inspections. It is envisaged that this will also create synergies as building inspectors will work together and work mostly on the same type of refurbishment projects. This will create a pool of experts in local authorities with specific expertise and experience in refurbishment projects of this nature.

The Bill provides that local authorities shall establish a one-stop-shop application procedure in their planning area for any development in the prescribed categories. However, it enables local authorities whose executives do not believe there is a need or demand for an expedited planning procedure for refurbishments to opt out with the approval of the Minister. It is envisaged that local authorities with cities or large urban areas requiring regeneration are most likely to benefit from this new procedure. However, it is acknowledged that all local authorities may not require an expedited planning procedure for this category of refurbishment or conversions.

It may be perceived that the main contribution of this Bill is to establish a panel of approved inspectors in each planning authority for refurbishment-conversion projects, which will be given powers of an "authorised person". "Authorised person" has the meaning given to it by section 11 of the Building Control Act 1990. An authorised person is generally an inspector who has powers of enforcement, rights to enter the site and inspect records, and duties to report to the local authority. Approved inspectors will be independent of the building owner and their agents, unlike assigned certifiers under the current building control regime. While these inspectors will not be employed directly by the State, they will be paid standardised fees and be accountable to local authorities via a three year framework agreement. Vitally, this removes the financial link between certifiers and builders-developers that currently exists.

Being on an approved list will also help certifiers get professional indemnity insurance and latent defects insurance, which is currently virtually unheard of in the Irish market. While this new approved inspector system will be initially for refurbishments, once in place it can be tasked with ramping up inspections and enhancing retrospective compliance with building regulations in existing rental units. In this way, the Bill also attempts to deal with the issue of non-compliance with fire safety and other building regulations in multi-unit developments in town and city centres.

In recent years there has been a proliferation of illegal sub-divisions of rental units in Dublin city which are non-compliant and often do not have valid fire certification. Yet, under the current inspection system there is very little that can be done with such properties due to the lack of personnel and resources being supplied to local authorities. I am led to believe that at the moment, there is one person inspecting the Dublin city area for fire safety in rental accommodation and the inspection rate is estimated to be less than 10%. Moreover, responsibility for inspecting rental properties for fire safety also falls between three public bodies, namely, the Residential Tenancies Board, local authorities and the HSE. It is thought none of them has enough staff or enforcement powers to enter a building it thinks may be non-compliant. This Bill aims to clamp down on illegal sub-divisions, over-occupancy and non-compliance with building control regulations.

While the Bill is not a finished product, it represents a genuine attempt to overcome many of the existing administrative faults in our planning and building control processes that have been identified as holding back urban regeneration. We hope those of all parties and none will offer us their support for the Bill. As I stated, I am glad the Minister will not oppose the Bill and will allow it to proceed to the next Stage. I hope there will be full participation by those of all parties and none to ensure that where it can be improved it will be improved so that it can have the desired effect of bringing about the potential to bring these vacant units into use in the short term rather than the medium and long term in order to address the horrible crisis and emergency in terms of the provision of accommodation for those who need it most.

Pat Casey (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This Bill is a practical, common sense and constructive measure that forms part of Fianna Fáil's determined focus to provide workable solutions to the housing crisis. The radical increase in the supply of homes for the thousands of families who require them needs constant crisis management by Government. Fianna Fáil's approach to this national crisis is to be proactive and the Bill is reflective of our analysis that the housing crisis can be fixed if political capital and policy formulation is relentless in its application. I ask any Member of this House to walk down the main street of any city, town or village in their constituency and to look above the shop fronts. How many are occupied? How many lie vacant and dark while outside, on our streets, people are sleeping in the doorways of those shop fronts and working families are putting their children to beds in hotel rooms?

Dublin City Council, which is the ground zero of the housing and homelessness crisis, has identified 4,000 vacant units over commercial properties. Nationally, we estimate that more than 20,000 additional homes for families could be provided reasonably quickly if the Bill is adopted. One of the key reasons so many vacant units exist is the bureaucratic nightmare that owners of such properties face when they attempt to refurbish these spaces into homes. It takes up to five months to get the various permissions, certifications and applications approved, if not longer. Planning, disabled access, fire certification, building control, commencement notices and monitoring are all necessary to ensure basic standards of accommodation. However, for each of these items to be handled separately is nonsense. In the context of a national housing crisis, it is simply a failure of public service that cannot be allowed to continue.

The Bill will essentially allow a one-stop-shop to be established. It will process all these applications in a timely and co-ordinated manner. We can reduce a planning application system that lasts months, and which can drain the money, energy and determination needed to get on top of this crisis, to one that concludes within a two week period. The incentive to property owners is obvious, but within two weeks each property owner or the builder or architect will have secured all the permissions needed to convert these units into homes. This is a real incentive to those property owners to be proactive in realising the full potential of their properties, particularly those in urban areas but also those in towns and villages. In my constituency of Wicklow, there are many properties in Arklow, Wicklow town and Bray that can avail of the these legislative changes and opportunities. They are also in smaller towns such as Blessington, Baltinglass and Rathdrum and villages such as Aughrim, Carnew and Shillelagh.

The only possible opposition that anyone could have to the Bill is the argument that somehow accommodation standards would be compromised. The Bill addresses that argument head on and puts in place vital and independent improvements to the maintenance of accommodation standards. Let me be clear: the Bill enshrines the requirement not only that standards are maintained but that properties are independently inspected. This is an improvement to the building and safety standards that exist today. The independent inspectorate, which will be accountable to the local authority, will remove the problematic financial link that exists currently between developer and certifier. This has resulted in substandard accommodation being certified, with disastrous results for all involved when discovered. This independent inspectorate will not only ensure that safety, planning and building standards are maintained but will provide a level of expertise in the provision of this type of above-shop accommodation that is welcome and needed.

It is my view that the Bill is a substantial step in the urban renewal of every city, town and village in Ireland. Our urban centres have far too long been simply seen as commercial and recreational spaces.

The ideal model for urban spaces globally, both large and small, is mixed-use urban centres. Main streets should encompass commercial and recreational use but, crucially, also have living spaces in which people can make a home. The Bill will go some way towards helping Ireland to achieve that goal.

Frank O'Rourke (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I take the opportunity in the short time available to me to commend Deputies Barry Cowen and Pat Casey for bringing forward this Bill. It is very important that we use a collaborative and partnership approach to deliver the units needed for the many who are homeless and in a bad way. In my constituency of Kildare North the housing crisis is at a significantly bad level, with up to 8,000 people on housing lists and many sleeping in temporary accommodation. As my colleagues stated, the current problem in many villages and towns is that the units over commercial buildings remain empty. The business and property owners who come to me in my constituency on a regular basis say it is too difficult to transform the buildings into living accommodation, something they would be more than willing to do. The proposed process would definitely fast-track such action, as the current planning process can take up to five or six months to complete, which is way too long. We need to be proactive if we are serious about delivering on this issue and making a meaningful change. We must stop talking and start to deliver, particularly for the families which need accommodation so badly.

A partnership and collaborative approach, taken in a meaningful way that would not compromise planning guidelines, best practice or specifications and standards, must be commended. This should be positively supported and needs to be proactively put in place. It would make a massive difference not alone to those who need to access these homes and properties but also to the main streets of towns and villages, on which the vacant units are evident. I support the Bill and acknowledge the good work done by my colleagues.

Eoghan Murphy (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Barry Cowen for bringing forward the Bill which is timely. I welcome the opportunity to discuss and outline a number of important initiatives in the area. We can all broadly agree with and support the intention and objectives behind the measures proposed in the Bill which aims to facilitate and streamline the bringing back into use of existing vacant buildings for residential purposes. This type of constructive engagement which is solutions-driven is what citizens expect from us, as legislators, in tackling this crisis.

We all know that town and city centres contain a large amount of under-used building stock, with largely unused or under-used floors above many ground floor retail premises. There would be obvious benefits in returning these for residential use at a time of an acute supply shortage. With some upgrading and modification, they can be made ready for immediate use. Wider benefits include supporting the revitalisation of local town centres and making more efficient use of accommodation in serviced areas with existing amenities. We simply must make better use of the existing housing stock. We have to make better use of vacant buildings in urban areas, particularly empty upstairs units over ground floor premises such as shops and vacant offices that could be converted or used for residential purposes. Many of these properties remain under-used because restoring them to use can be complex and may come with a significant degree of uncertainty. Costs can be higher than expected for many reasons such as compliance with planning and building control standards, construction on difficult to access urban sites, engagement with adjoining owners, licences, permits and so on. Funding for such refurbishment can also be difficult to source owing to lender concerns with uncertainty and the possible unforeseen costs and risks involved in developing existing older buildings. We have identified the potential barriers to such re-use, particularly in the area of regulatory approvals and processes, such as planning and building control. In that context, I will discuss the specifics of the Bill before us and also highlight how the Government is already addressing and intends to address some of its key provisions. I will also take the opportunity to respond to some other elements of the Bill which need very careful consideration and about which I must indicate some reservations at this stage.

Section 2 of the Bill proposes amendments to the Building Control Act 1990 and provides that details of proposed works to existing buildings to convert them to residential units should be submitted to the local authority to decide if it can be considered under a new one-stop-shop application procedure. If considered suitable, it is then proposed that the works would be automatically exempted from statutory requirements for a fire safety certificate, a disability access certificate and a certificate of compliance on completion and from being recorded on the building register. In lieu of this, the local authority would issue a works permit verifying compliance with the building regulations, including a requirement for one or more site visits by an authorised person. It also recommends amendment of certain building regulations relating to structure, fire, sound, ventilation, stairs, energy efficiency and accessibility. I support the broad intention, but it is equally prudent that I raise some concerns about the proposals to alter the performance requirements of building regulations in respect of fire safety, structural safety and ventilation.

These are fundamental issues that protect the health and safety of people in and around buildings which is the primary purpose of building regulations. Any proposal to dilute the relevant standards for a particular subset of buildings must be weighed carefully against any potential risk to people's health and well-being. As I am sure the Deputy is fully aware, many incidents of building failures and severe non-compliance with building regulations have come to light in the past decade. The economic and personal consequences of these situations have been very significant. In response, new building control requirements were introduced by my Department in 2014 to address what were seen as the key deficits in the system by empowering competence and professionalism in construction projects and establishing a clear chain of responsibility that began with the owner. The new regulations require the owner to assign competent persons to design, build, inspect and certify the building works and the competent persons concerned, in turn, must account for their contribution through the lodgment of compliance documentation, inspection plans and statutory certificates. These measures have brought a new order and discipline to bear on construction projects. Therefore, I have reservations about the proposal to exempt works to develop existing buildings for residential use from these requirements without appropriate alternative arrangements that would maintain the integrity of the standards and process. The proposal could have an unintended impact on the quality and compliance of often complex works to existing buildings such as their conversion into multi-unit apartment type buildings. As we consider the proposals made in the Bill as the legislation is progressed, it is crucial that we ensure the appropriate balance is struck in seeking to facilitate the speedy redevelopment of vacant properties while ensuring quality and compliance with building regulations. I am confident that the appropriate balance can be found during the next stage in dealing with this legislation.

Certain works to existing buildings need to comply with the building regulations such as works that address fire safety, structural stability and so forth. My Department publishes technical guidance on compliance with the building regulations, but they are geared largely towards new buildings and, therefore, are unduly restrictive or impracticable to be applied to existing or historic buildings. Alternative approaches based on the principles set out in the technical guidance may be more relevant and proportionate and I have asked my officials to consider these matters.

A multi-disciplinary working group has been established by my Department which includes expertise in building regulations, fire safety in buildings, planning, design and heritage. The working group has been tasked with developing new guidance in order to provide clarity on what regulatory requirements should apply in these circumstances and to provide advice for both the construction industry and local authorities on how best to facilitate the re-use or development of under-used older buildings in the context of the regulatory requirements. I will fully consider recommendations made by the working group and should a need for flexibility through a relaxation of or dispensation from certain parts of the building regulations be identified, I will ensure there will be a facility to do this within the framework of the existing building control legislation. In addition, an online application system for fire safety certificates, disability access certificates and dispensation and relaxation is also being developed which will help to further streamline and speed up the certification process.

Sections 3 and 4 of the Bill propose amendments to the Planning and Development Act 2000. Section 3 relates to the exempted development provisions and proposes three new classes of exemptions, for works relating to the change of use of a building above ground floor level for residential use; the maintenance, improvement or alteration of an older structure for residential use; and the sub-division of any existing dwelling to provide two or more dwellings. The section proposes that these new exemptions would be subject to certain restrictions to be determined by me, as Minister, and the need, on a mandatory basis, to obtain a section 5 declaration from the relevant planning authority. A section 5 declaration confirms if certain works are exempted development or if they require planning permission.

Section 4 provides that the new one-stop-shop application procedure mentioned earlier in the Bill be used to expedite requests for section 5 declarations and that it be determined by a panel of "authorised persons". In the context of the proposed exemptions, it is worth noting that the Government has already committed in Rebuilding Ireland to reviewing planning legislation to allow the change of use of vacant commercial units into residential units without the need for planning permission. To give effect to this action, my Department has been redrafting proposed amending regulations that I propose to bring forward for Oireachtas approval by the end of October. Acknowledging that exempted development proposals can be provided for in regulations, as opposed to through primary legislative amendment, a positive resolution from both Houses of the Oireachtas is required before the proposed regulatory amendments can come into effect. Whereas the Oireachtas will have a chance to review and consider the proposed exempted development regulations shortly, it is worth pointing out at this stage that my proposals differ somewhat from those proposed in the Bill, particularly in the requirement that a section 5 declaration must be obtained. I will be proposing a more streamlined arrangement where a developer will immediately be able to avail of the exemption without the need to engage with and get confirmation from the planning authority. This will be ensured by providing clarity in the regulations on when and how the change of use exemption applies. Notwithstanding this approach, I have asked my officials to examine the proposals made in the Bill relating to change of use exemptions so as to inform, as appropriate, the finalisation of my own proposals later this month.

Another concern I must raise relates to the proposed exemption for the sub-division of one dwelling into two or more dwellings. This is particularly problematic as, in the first instance, it conflicts with existing provisions of the Planning Act.

The Act states that such development is a material change of use which requires appropriate consideration by a planning authority – through the planning application process – on the basis of protecting residential amenity and other critical planning considerations.

Similar to points I raised on the building control proposals, we must be careful of any unintended consequences, where removing appropriate and necessary planning controls could have a negative impact on the quality of the resulting housing, or undermine the proper planning and sustainability of a community. These provisions need to be carefully thought through.

In conclusion, I think we can all see the benefits of tapping into the potential of using the buildings and homes that lie vacant or under-used to add to the supply of housing much more quickly than building new units. We need to make good on that potential but in a balanced way, by removing unnecessary regulatory barriers and streamlining processes as much as possible, while still ensuring that we maintain and enforce important standards and provide good quality housing for people who will be living there.

Those are some of my initial comments on the Bill and I look forward to the discussions this evening. The Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government, Deputy English, will contribute later in the debate, as will Deputy Bailey, who is chair of the Joint Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputies Cowen and Casey for bringing this important Bill to the House today. Sinn Féin fully supports the intention behind the Bill. Whenever we have conversations about vacant properties many of us express a certain degree of frustration. We have somewhere between 90,000 and 189,000 vacant residential units across the State and, as Deputy Cowen rightly pointed out, that does not include the very significant potential that is there to convert retail units to residential. It is almost one and a half years since this Government was formed and we do not have a vacant homes strategy. There are a number of initiatives, but the targets in terms of bringing units back into social or affordable use are very low, and the funding resources allocated to those schemes is nowhere near what is required. Walking through urban centres in the cities, or indeed in parts of rural Ireland, the huge opportunities that are being lost on a daily basis to provide homes for families is obvious.

We have all been speaking about the length of time it takes to get a new building back on track. The most frustrating thing is that while we are waiting for that new building to come on stream, these units provide huge opportunities to provide homes for families in the short term at far lower cost. On that basis the Bill before us today is very welcome and, as Deputy Cowen said, it has been strongly advocated by the Simon Community, the Peter McVerry Trust, by academics who presented at the Oireachtas housing committee, and others.

I also welcome Deputy Cowen's commitment to engaging on Committee Stage to tease out some of the issues that I am going to raise, and indeed which were raised by the Minister. I am raising them not because I believe that they are issues which Deputy Cowen is not attuned to, but if we are to seriously work this piece of legislation through committee we need to make sure that it deals with these things in the most robust manner possible. Without going back over all the ground the Minister outlined I want to put on record those issues which we would welcome more detailed scrutiny on at the pre-legislative stage and formal Committee Stage.

I welcome the fact there is a stronger level of local authority involvement through the amendment to the building control amendment regulations, BCAR, system that is proposed here. That is a good thing, but we have to tease through the implications of that for the certification process very carefully . We need to ensure that not only is there a greater degree of local authority control but also that the inspections are not just limited to registered professionals but could also be carried out by, for example, local authority staff if such a thing was appropriate in the given cases.

We all share a concern that anything we do in terms of fire safety meets the highest possible standards. The Minister made the point well. That is something that needs particular scrutiny at the pre-legislative stage and Committee Stage to ensure that whatever we agree ensures the absolute gold standard in fire safety certification.

I emphasise that there should be no drop in standards. That is particularly important when we talk about sub-division, and we need to ensure that whatever is proposed does not lead to a drop in standards and that the highest possible standards are maintained.

Some consideration should be given not only to an ongoing review of this process but also the possibility of a sunset clause. The reason we are having this discussion is because of the urgency of bringing a potentially large number of vacant units in parts of the country back into use. If these were ordinary circumstances and we had no supply problem we probably would not be discussing such a Bill. Not unlike the fast-track planning process for the strategic housing developments, some kind of an in-built sunset clause would be worth considering on Committee Stage.

Sinn Féin fully supports the intention behind the Bill. I hope that we can bring this to Committee Stage quickly and that there is no foot-dragging. One of the common difficulties with Bills that the Government does not object to is that we never actually get to deal with the substance of them. Given what Deputies have said, if we were to bring this to Committee Stage in a relatively speedy time, go through all the processes and come out with a much more robust piece of legislation, we would do both ourselves and the people we are representing a great service, and people would see that cross-party politics is finally working in the interests of those people who most need houses as opposed to party political interest.

Dessie Ellis (Dublin North West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The figures released during the census of 2015 showed that 183,000 vacant homes throughout the country. Some 35,293 were in Dublin. This does not reflect the true figure of vacant homes, because local authorities just do not have the resources to deal with this and to ascertain what the true figure is. To properly identify them and determine the true figures vacant home officers must be employed and a State-wide vacant home register established. It is very important that we get the actual figures and that we have a proper register.

It is also clear that it is important to have an accurate figure for vacant shops throughout the country. We also need a register to deal with that. During the so-called Celtic tiger period thousands of shops were built, along with houses and apartments. To this day, ten or more yers later, they are still unoccupied throughout the country. They can be seen across the country, from Ballymun, Kildare, Limerick, Galway and Sligo, in urban and rural areas. There are 29,000 vacant commercial spaces throughout the country. Edenderry in County Offaly has the highest vacancy rate for commercial properties, with 31% left vacant in the fourth quarter of 2016. That is an awful shame. These places could be utilised. We need to look at the different sections in the planning Acts and what can be done to ensure that these properties are brought back on stream.

Dublin City Council uses very few compulsory purchase orders, CPOs. There have been between 20 and 26 CPOs which have been brought on stream by Dublin City Council which have not been completed. In other areas across the country, such as Louth and Rathdown, they are used on a far greater scale. The largest local authority in the country is not using CPOs as much as it should be. We need to look at that. Dublin City Council uses derelict sites first and then CPOs the buildings. We need to look at the idea of CPOs, and we need to identify the best way to use them quickly. There are various reasons properties are left vacant. There may be disputes between banks or owners or there might be probate issues. We must find out whether we can speed up these processes. Is there any mechanism we can use or introduce so that we can use these properties?

I welcome Deputy Cowen's Bill. There is a lot in it, and a look at this whole process is long overdue.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are 5,000 vacant houses in County Meath. One in nine commercial properties in my county is still vacant ten years after the crash. In towns such as Navan and Ashbourne the level of commercial vacancy is as high as one in seven properties. The current level of house vacancy in the State is twice what it should be in a normal housing market. Towns such as Clonmellon, Delvin, Athboy and Oldcastle have been literally gutted by vacancy. As Deputy Ellis mentioned, there are a number of reasons for these vacancies. My view is that speculators are sitting on vacant, derelict houses waiting for prices to go up before they put them back on the market. According to the census, there are more vacant houses in County Meath than there are people on the housing waiting list. It is an incredible figure.

A constituent contacted me recently to say that in the main street in Enfield, 50 people could be housed in the boarded-up houses.

Last year I tabled several parliamentary questions and found out that there were 570 vacant State-owned buildings throughout the country. The State heats, looks after and pays for the security of these buildings but refuses to permit people to live in them or to use them as a resource. Many of them are in commuter towns that are resource hungry. That this would exist in a housing crisis is shocking. That the Government cannot link a resource with a humanitarian need is an example of its sheer and utter uselessness. That such vacancy sits side by side with such need shows the inept, rudderless spatial planning that exists in this State. The outcome of this State inaction is massive. There are 8,000 people homeless and 100,000 on the waiting list and the vibrancy of town centres across the country is greatly diminished. Boarded-up houses and shops are blighting communities. Anti-social behaviour in these vacant houses is rife.

There is a series of streets in my town, Navan, which is completely derelict. Every now and then one of the houses there is set on fire which imposes a massive cost on the fire service and also threatens human life. The Government plans to resolve this issue have been paltry. The repair and lease scheme, which aimed to bring vacant and damaged properties back into circulation around the country, has had very little take up. In County Meath at the end of summer only two properties had availed of this scheme. Meath County Council, which began setting up a vacant sites register since the start of the year, had registered no sites by summer. We support this Bill and wish it luck in its passage through the Dáil. We urge the Minister to get serious, not to think of all the reasons it cannot happen but to come up with solutions for it to happen.

Carol Nolan (Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim mo bhuíochas leis an gCeann Comhairle as ucht an deis chun labhairt ar an topaic fíorthábhachtach anseo anocht.

I commend my constituency colleague, Deputy Cowen, on bringing forward a Bill on this very important issue. I am happy to say my party will support the Bill's passage to Committee Stage and will table some amendments.

It comes as no surprise to me that this Bill was brought forward by a public representative from my home county, Offaly, where the growing number of vacant buildings is of great concern to many people. Time and again, I have raised the need to address the issue of vacant buildings. Edenderry, a town with untapped potential, has one of the highest numbers of vacant commercial buildings in this State. That is unacceptable. The town is being held back by the lack of political will and action.

Tullamore and Birr have commercial vacancy rates of 16% and 15%, respectively. Towns and villages across rural Ireland are losing vital services. Some are dying on their feet. These towns need a population to thrive, to retain services and to become vibrant and bustling. One way to do this is to encourage people back into towns, living on the main street over local shops. Approximately 2,500 people are still languishing on the social housing waiting list in Offaly while 3,000 buildings in the county are vacant. There is no reason for that to be the case. Urgent action needs to be taken on this. It cannot continue. It needs to be tackled with action, not words, or promises.

The action plan on rural development states that current planning legislation would be reviewed in order to allow the use of vacant commercial units as residential units. Little or no action has been taken to implement this relatively simple and cost-effective proposal. It is another example of this Government paying lipservice to the important issues affecting people but doing very little to address them. The Government's delay on this issue is inexcusable and unacceptable. It is letting people down and is holding back investment in our towns. I hope the Government will support this Bill going to Committee Stage so there can be progress on this matter and it can be addressed once and for all to the good of our communities.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will not be opposing this Bill on Second Stage. We all want to work constructively on the under use of existing buildings when we have a housing crisis. The conciliatory and carefully scripted response of the Minister might not have been the same had the Bill come from any other party or group within the House. Confidence and supply can be a useful thing at times.

Pat Casey (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is very cynical.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The concept of a one-stop-shop is very positive. We need it in other areas apart from this one of living over the shop which this Bill deals with because many would say that one of the delays in regard to planning is in the pre-planning meetings. There has to be a meeting with the different parts of the council such as transport, roads, water, etc. and it would be better to bring the various areas of the planning and decision-making process together and avoid delays.

We need to ensure there is proper compliance and that there are no loopholes with regard to access for people with disabilities and areas such as ventilation, safety and so on, which the Minister also referred to. There is a shortage of trained and appropriate personnel to deal with issues generally around inspection and so on. There is a proposal for a panel of approved inspectors but I am not sure whether they would be within or outside the local authority system. Presumably, however, they would have to be somehow linked into the local authority. I am not sure where that capacity is coming from. As an Opposition Bill it should not have a charge on the State. Where will the resources come from?

I agree there is a need for a vacant home strategy. It is extraordinary that the vacant properties pillar of Rebuilding Ireland is the one that is left to last because it is the quickest win. However one disputes the figures, there are between 100,000 and 200,000 vacant homes around the country that should be available for people to live in. Even a fraction of those would make a huge dent. Deputy Tóibín referred to his home county but the same is true of all the areas we represent. Even a fraction of those empty properties could provide homes much more quickly than the construction process at the moment.

I know the Minister has said he will publish the strategy soon, and maybe he is waiting for the budget but I urge him to do this. I agree that we need vacant homes officers in our local authorities and to have the register speeded up so that we can use the vacant homes around the country. A register is being drawn up and the local authorities are required to address vacant sites, if not vacant homes.

I know that the nursing homes support scheme, the fair deal scheme, has been somewhat controversial and I do not think there should be any attempt push people or force people to dispose of, or rent out, their properties if they are in nursing homes but there should be incentives. Something similar to the rent a room scheme for students would be appropriate but it should not be offset against the income and qualification for the fair deal scheme. Discussions were to be held between Departments on this and I hope they are going on because there is scope for that.

We have seen a living over the shop scheme and the living cities initiative but the current repair and lease scheme does not appear to be gaining much traction in terms of take up.

The living over the shop scheme did not seem to have much traction either. Incentivising people with commercial properties to have residential units over them seemed like a good concept. Clearly, we need a scheme that will work and will bring these places back to use for living in.

I have experience of the Living City Initiative in Limerick city, which is in my constituency. We are beginning to see a take up of that but a number of issues remain. I do not know if it will be reconsidered in the budget but I know the Minister will not tell me if that is the case this evening.

Some years ago, I visited a particularly good scheme run by the Midlands Simon Community. I cannot recall which midlands town it was in but it had been a commercial premises and the Simon Community had adapted the upstairs part of it for a number of tenants to live in. It was a difficult building to adapt but it had succeeded in doing that. There is potential here and maybe this is a good area for the voluntary housing sector to get involved in. There is much to be developed in relation to the Bill. I have questions, particularly around the N, M and O developments. Deputy Cowen outlined the categories covered under that.

I refer to the works permit that would replace the fire safety certificate and the disability certificate and verify compliance with parts of the building regulation. The Bill states that before signing the works permit the authorised person shall take reasonable care in forming their opinion that the construction of the dwelling, common area and route to place of safety conform to the approved plans and with the checklist under this section. That is fine but it concerns me that taking reasonable care is quite loose. The Bill contains an exemption for any responsibility and it states that the authority shall take reasonable skill and care in forming its opinion that the design of the dwelling, the related common area and the route to a place or places of safety comply with the requirements of the Second Schedule to the building regulations, including the amendments to the building regulations made by the Schedule 1 of the Act of 2017 but that the authority shall not be liable to any person in respect of any non-compliance which is subsequently found or alleged. That raises alarm bells with me because I am unsure who is responsible if the authorised person has signed off on the construction in question. The Schedule 1 reads, "Part M (Accessibility) - No lift or ambulant accessible stairway is required". That is of particular concern to me and there are also issues regarding fire safety, ventilation, sound, stairways, ramps and guards and thermal insulation.

The Minister has raised alarm bells around ensuring that we do not have substandard developments, particularly in those areas which are very important to whoever lives in the accommodation. I also have concerns about that and would need to be assured that there are no loopholes. That exemption for the person who signs off on it worries me.

In the previous building regulations - the Joint Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government looked at aspects of this earlier - there was a requirement for professionals to sign off on work. We all know that during the boom building period, many substandard buildings were put up quickly and the consequences were very serious. All of us could list them, from Priory Hall and so on. I am concerned that there would be any dilution of the safeguards which are absolutely needed for public safety and protection.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill and I commend Deputy Cowen on bringing it forward. Like the Deputy, I am from a rural area and in many towns, there are many vacant properties that might be put to use at our time of need when there is a housing shortage. The biggest problem that is stalling many people from doing this type of work is the rigmarole they must go through in the planning process for change of use. I have seen the exact opposite of this proposal where the owners of a house wanted to turn into a small restaurant. They had to go to hell and back with the council to sort it out and it took a long time. That type of thing puts people off.

We have an opportunity here and it is welcome that the Minister is not objecting to the Bill and, from what I hear, there seems to be unanimity in the House that this needs to be done. There must be a quick system. The one thing I worry about was mentioned earlier. I know we need a fire officer who will sign off on the relevant parts but will people make these decisions quickly or will they pass the buck and say its a decision for someone else? We need to make sure that it is done quickly. There are many towns across the country where at one time there might have been 20 or 30 pubs but now there are only three or four. Many of those buildings are empty. Some of them are in an average condition but it would be a good thing if there was an incentive so people knew they would not have to go through the rigours of the expensive planning process. It does not matter what a person is building, it is an expensive process. It would be one thing to help people in certain parts of the country to put a badly needed roof over their head.

I welcome Deputy Cowen's Bill. When it goes to committee, we should progress it as quickly as possible so that it is up and running and those in planning offices are scratching their heads wondering when it might be enacted.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The fact that, through the CSO, we have identified 180,000 empty residential units as well as perhaps over 25,000 above shop units, which could potentially be available for residential property, indicates the chronic failure of public policy in the face of an enormous housing and homelessness emergency. In so far as this Bill attempts to address one aspect of that, I welcome it and commend Fianna Fáil, which is a rare enough thing for me to do, but it is right to identify it and seek to address it. However, the issue is whether the Bill actually address the problem. The proposers of the Bill have rightly and humbly acknowledged that it will have to be examined in detail. We need to look at many aspects of it and I would underline those points. We cannot have anything that leads us back to tenement style living, overcrowding, bedsits, shoddy quality, unsafe, hazardous or low quality accommodation which exploits the housing and homelessness emergency to degrade standards of accommodation for the people who need it. I do not suggest that is what the Bill intends to do - I know it is not - but we must be extremely careful that is not the consequence. We must also be extremely careful that the consequence is not profiteering in the other direction.

Even if we free up these units as we must, if there are not conditions around it or if we do not have the right type of regime to do it, there is nothing to stop the private owners of those properties charging extortionate rents and contributing absolutely nothing to dealing with the housing and homelessness emergency. We could just facilitate them making a lot of extra money out of their property and not really helping in any way with the crisis. That does not help anything. While the target of this legislation is correct in stating we have to free up these units for people who desperately need housing or accommodation, and I agree and it is right that we should progress the Bill and discuss it very seriously, we need to remember that there are two aspects to our failure to do this to date. One is a failure in public policy and a failure of the State to intervene in the housing market, and the other is the fact the majority of vacant units of all sorts are in private hands, and the private market has shown no interest in making them available to people who need them because its primary interest is the value of the asset or the money that can be made off it. We need to bear that in mind when we are trying to come up with a regime that will free these up, that it should make them available and that it should not degrade the standards.

Absolutely, fire safety cannot be sacrificed in this. This is absolutely critical. Even if Deputy Cowen says this will not degrade the current controls, let us remember the current controls are not actually being enforced anywhere. It is one thing to have legislation, but if we do not have people to enforce the legislation it is meaningless, and this could potentially become a licence for people to build substandard accommodation. This cannot be allowed to happen.

Even if this does pass with all of these checks, there is no guarantee that the owners of those properties would still consider it viable from their point of view to make these properties available, and we need to consider local authorities getting hold of these vacant properties and putting the money in themselves to refurbish them rather than simply waiting for private owners to do so.

Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The housing crisis exposes the reality of capitalism today. There is an urgent need to build thousands of new homes. The Government has presided over a 25% rise in homelessness from August 2016 to August 2017 according to Focus Ireland. There were 1,442 homeless families in August, and 3,048 homeless people are children. These are shameful facts and are an indictment of capitalism, but also of the Government that happily implements policies that deliver this homelessness. The cause of the housing crisis is running the economy on the basis of profit. We have an economy based on capitalist greed and not human need. It is not totally accurate to call the housing crisis a crisis. It is a crisis for the majority of the population, those who struggle with rent and mortgages, those in overcrowding and those still living with parents, but it is not a crisis for property developers, banks and landlords. It is actually a very profitable time for them.

While we have 130,000 families on the council waiting lists we also have vacant homes. We have an irrational unplanned capitalist economy that is not able to match resources with the needs of society. According to the 2016 census, there are more than 180,000 vacant homes. Approximately 16.5% of them were vacant on census night for reasons such as renovation, being for sale, a death or the usual resident being in hospital or a nursing home. This still leaves us with 153,000 vacant units.

It is worth looking at where these vacant units are. Another aspect of capitalism is the inability to make balanced regional economic development. This results in housing been vacant in some parts of the State while there is an acute crisis in Cork, Dublin and surrounding areas. Fingal, South Dublin and Kildare local authority areas have lower vacancy rates than areas in the west. For instance, Leitrim has the highest level of vacancy. Many regions are neglected when it comes to economic development. We see the areas with the highest level of vacancy being long-neglected towns and villages. Blacklion in Cavan has 46% vacancy as does Keshcarrigan in Leitrim. Towns with the highest vacancy are Ballaghaderreen with 33%, Castlerea with 28% and Bundoran in Donegal with 30%. Of larger towns, Letterkenny, Longford and Ballina have the highest vacancy levels.

Between 2011 and 2016, in Dublin county and city and Cork city we saw more than 60% of vacant houses become occupied. Action needs to be taken to open up vacant housing in all parts of the country. Solidarity believes this can be done through economic development in all regions and the proactive role of local authorities. An audit needs to be done of vacant housing and real action taken to make these units available. Tackling the issue of vacancy could bring as many as 50,000 units into the local authority housing stock. This does not take away from the need for local authorities to build thousands of new homes.

Solidarity supports potential residential units above shops or other such locations being opened up for residential use. Many of these units may be vacant and require refurbishment to be made available, and many units may have another purpose and need refurbishment to make them fit for residential use. A benefit to such refurbishment is not only more units being available sooner but it can also be very good for our towns and cities to have people living in them and not have a situation where after working hours areas of our towns and cities are without people and without a community. In saying this, we do have a number of concerns about the Bill. We are concerned that the fast-track process outlined in the Bill would end up with lower standards. If the Bill progresses, the housing committee should examine these issues in detail. Building regulations are important. We only have to look at the recent scandals of apartments in Sandyford and Priory Hall having serious problems with non-compliance with fire safety regulations. All new units should be of high quality and fit to live in, and not low quality units that were fast-tracked through the usual planning process resulting in benefit only to landlords. The Bill should also not allow a Trojan horse, whereby bedsits or unsuitably small accommodation can be brought in by landlords.

Joan Collins (Dublin South Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Vacant Housing Refurbishment Bill 2017. It would deal with a very small niche section of our housing crisis and would probably play an important part, but I too am concerned about watering down any regulation that is there for a reason. We have building regulations for specific reasons. As has been said, in many cases they are not being adhered to. Enforcement and having the bodies to be able to respond and check on these premises while they are being built and occupied will be absolutely crucial. We cannot bring in changes unless we have this in place.

Today, Dublin City Council went to court because it obtained an enforcement order to close down the premises at Nos. 12 to 14 Old County Road, next door to my constituency office. Last November and December, we noticed there was a change of use regarding the part of the premises above two shop units. We asked an enforcement officer from Dublin City Council to check the premises. The enforcement officer did so, and perhaps at the time it was not clear what was going on inside the premises, but it transpired last Thursday, when the fire officer went in, that the building was holding 62 people and charging €250 per person per month. Work out the maths on that. A slum landlord has been abusing people in that form and making approximately €15,000 a month out of these people. It is absolutely scandalous. They had subdivided all the rooms, and four bunk beds were put in to have as many people in there as possible. These were mainly Brazilian people. We saw people coming and going. There is no way one would have thought there were 62 people in there. My office is open from 9.30 a.m. to 5.30 p.m. and we saw a certain number of people going in and out. This sort of thing has to stop. It is only through enforcement and inspection all the time in this regard that we can check these things out. We know there are more premises around Dublin in the same situation. It is very similar to the case in Dún Laoghaire, which happened not so long ago, where units were being abused. Unless we have enforcement and the bodies and fire officers to be able to check these premises, no legislation will change the outcome of what could happen. One thing we do not want is to build substandard premises for people to live in.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have serious concerns about the Bill, although I understand where it is coming from. I have serious concerns about what might be the unintended consequences leading to substandard accommodation. I also have concerns that the Bill is being put forward as a solution to the housing crisis, a crisis which has been driven by Government policy.

Successive Governments have utterly relied on the private market and have failed to build houses to the standard we require and in sufficient numbers.

Just a few days ago, COPE in Galway city launched its annual report. It confirmed in that report that it worked with 702 homeless adults in 2016, and that the children numbered 512, which number had increased substantially from between 400 and 500. If the Minister could listen to my point on the homeless children on the streets of Galway, who are there directly as a result of Government policy, I would appreciate it. The Hope Foundation resorts to fundraising and to statements at mass on Sundays asking us to contribute to it as a charity. The county manager in Galway has resorted to sleeping on the streets to feel and see what homelessness is like rather than doing something about the housing crisis. There is no way out of this crisis without a commitment to a public housing construction programme. We have adequate land zoned as residential in Galway and we need to build houses. We also need to know from the Minister, who has just left, what has happened to the national vacant housing reuse strategy. Has the relevant committee met? If so, what report has it come up with? We need to know the result of the buy-and-renew scheme and the uptake thereof. The same applies to the repair-and-leasing scheme. What is the position on the vacant site levy? There is no update on any of these schemes.

We are proceeding as if this were a jigsaw rather than a policy from a Government stating we are going to provide homes for our people because a house is not an asset or something to be traded but a home where people can have security so they can concentrate on what matters. What we are left with is this Vacant Housing Refurbishment Bill. I will give guarded support to it, and I look forward to its being teased out on Committee Stage but I have the most serious concerns about unintended consequences. I see special units being set up as one-stop facilities and no mention of an appeals system, of how local authorities have been deprived of essential staff or of how councils are not in a position to deal with the volume coming before them. I would have thought we would have had basic statistics on these matters so we could formulate policy.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Bill. While it is not going to fix our housing crisis, it is certainly a start. Rome was not built in a day but it was started. There are some interesting ideas in the Bill. I can understand that people have concerns. Sometimes people believe that if one reduces bureaucracy, one actually threatens regulation but bureaucracy does not equal good regulation. It is not necessarily the case. Sometimes it can help but sometimes it does not.

Ms Orla Hegarty and Mr. Mel Reynolds have had an input into this. Both have a good idea about what they are talking about. Currently there are not many people availing of the change-of-use provision, and there is a good reason for that, namely because it is too expensive and does not pay. That is a fact. There are too many unnecessary costs involved. This Bill would potentially address some of them.

There are so many issues related to local authorities and our failure to restructure them and make them fit for purpose so they can actually play a serious role in the supply of housing. They are not being allowed to do so at present. I understand that under this legalisation, there would be an independent panel of inspectors. They should be employed by the local authority. As far as I know, there are only four building control officers in Dublin. They could have 15 or 20 people working for them. I refer to people with experience, who have been on site and who actually know how things work. There would be an inspection halfway through the work and another at the end in respect of all the change-of-use contracts. Thus, we would have something we do not have at present. As Deputy Cowen already pointed out, the current inspection rate is lower than 10%. It has been that way for many years, which is outrageous.

By introducing this Bill, Deputy Cowen has done us a favour. Good things could come from it, even though it is only a drop in the ocean towards challenging all the problems we have regarding the supply of housing.

Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am very happy to be able to speak on this important issue. I commend my colleagues in the Fianna Fáil party for bringing this legislation forward.

The housing crisis is one of the major challenges facing the current Government and to have faced its predecessor. Recent figures show there are 1,442 families homeless in the State at present. This represents an increase of 25% since this time last year. It is very clear, in light of the current housing crisis, that there is an urgent need to provide more social housing and other affordable houses.

While it is clear that the long-term solution to the housing dilemma can be achieved only through building more houses in areas where people want to live, there are short-term ways of resolving this problem. According to the 2016 census, 260,000 houses throughout the country are vacant. Common sense dictates that they could go a long way towards solving the immediate housing crisis. In order to achieve this, or fast-track the utilisation of these vacant or derelict buildings, the building control and regulation process must be changed. It is estimated that there are 4,000 vacant spaces above commercial units in Dublin city alone. These could be refurbished to provide much-needed residential dwellings. The pattern of vacant units above shops is replicated in every city, town and village.

During the discussion on housing in the talks on the formation of the Government in 2016, I raised awareness of this issue and gave the example of my home town, Schull in west Cork, where I said there are very few families who have lived over commercial premises. This trend, which has been evident over the past 20 years, has affected our towns and villages very negatively. I propose that we encourage families to take up residence over shops and commercial units by offering refurbishment grants. The refurbishment of the existing vacant residential and commercial units would serve a number of purposes. It will provide much-needed homes for families. It would enhance the appearance of the street, town or village and improve overall cohesion. It would give the residents a greater sense of ownership of the street, town or village and a greater sense of community, which invariably promotes a degree of responsibility and commitment. In rural areas, in particular, it would result in much-needed additions to the populations of small towns and villages, which in turn would boost local services. As the larger retail stores continue to locate outside our towns and cities, we need to ensure the heart does not go out of the town centres.

This Bill will accelerate the progress on the refurbishment of vacant houses nationwide, and I am fully supportive of it.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I, too, compliment Deputy Cowen on bringing forward this Bill. He has shown through his freedom of information requests to each local authority that there were over 2,600 vacant units in the country in council ownership. That they were in council ownership is very important to note. The information provided to the Deputy also shows that, in 2014 and 2015, there was a reduction of €6.1 million in refurbishment funding. The Minister of State opposite is writing. An bhfuil sé ag éisteacht? Despite all the talk by Ministers and announcements and despite Rebuilding Ireland, the Government should show me the money. It should give the money to the councils and they will do the work. It is not being done.

I agree there is an emergency, yet there are only talk, reports and paper. We could build houses. We will be flooded or smothered with reports but it is all poppycock. I said this to the former Minister responsible for housing, Deputy Coveney, and now I say it to the current Minister. I said it to the five or six Ministers for housing we had in recent years. I referred to it during the talks on the programme for Government last year.

The change-of-use policy should be changed. I refer to rigorous planning. Towns in County Tipperary, such as Carrick-on-Suir, Clonmel, Cahir, Tipperary town and Cashel, have streetscapes littered with buildings or shop units that have been closed for years. I propose that where a premises is closed for five years, or definitely ten years, people should be allowed to turn it back into a residential unit without a change-of-use application.

They will not reopen shops because there are so few people.

As Deputy Collins said, a number of things could be done. We could bring back a living town, reduce the numbers on the housing list and provide housing for the homeless. We would remove dereliction from street scapes and enhance towns. I do not know where the blockages are. I have told the Minister of State umpteen times to telephone county managers and get the relevant fixes in the Department.

We need to cut out half of the red tape and let people make changes. I know a man who wanted to build a shower because he was frail and could not go up and down the stairs. His shop had been closed for ten years, but he was not allowed to make changes and had to apply for a change of use for the corner of a large shop. That is the kind of nonsense that is going on in county councils.

Deputy Cowen referred to VAT a number of weeks ago. People said he was in the pockets of the builders. Never mind the builders. We should reduce VAT for people who are doing work, buying equipment and paying builders and tradesmen. That would give work to local businesses and tradesmen and support local hardware shops which are barely surviving following the recession. It is nothing short of common sense.

We need to cut out the red tape, reports and visits to various places. I am on the housing committee and am invited to go on visits, but I do not go because I know it is all poppycock and balderdash. We need to allow people to convert units, rejuvenate our towns and get people off the streets. It is not rocket science. It is basic common sense.

Some 53% of the cost of the change of use of a premises in Clonmel town goes on VAT, planning fees and development charges. We should cut out such things and we would then have a living town and people would be off the streets. Some of the consultants and spin doctors would be out of a job, but people would be in comfortable homes and we would not be in this crisis.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy McGrath is in fine fettle.

Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I too wish to support the Bill and thank Deputy Cowen for giving us the opportunity to highlight some of the blockages in the system and the things that need to be addressed. While I am in support of the Bill, we have to adhere to fire regulations. They cannot be relaxed and people's lives cannot be put in danger. We have to ensure that regulations are in place and builders comply with standards in Ireland. Local authorities will have to ensure that those standards are in place. I am sure Deputy Cowen is not suggesting otherwise.

I would be in favour of whatever would speed up the planning process. Incentives need to be put in place for the owners of properties. I do not agree with Deputies Barry and Boyd Barrett when they say they do not believe that anyone should make a profit. The truth is that if people do not have money they cannot refurbish, renew or make living quarters out of properties. There needs to be some incentive put in place, as is the case for those building private housing.

We need private builders to build houses, but they cannot do so because VAT and levies do not allow them to do so. If they build a house at a cost of €219,000, they make a profit of only €4,000 or €5,000. Given all of the rules and regulations, we cannot entice property developers or small builders to work for such low levels of profit. Instead, they are sitting back and waiting and will not play their part when there are no incentives to build.

NAMA and the banks own many vacant properties and should be tackled and compelled to release them. They should play their part. The Department should interact with local authorities and give them funding to buy and reopen units.

I have to praise the local authority in our county which has done great work in the past 12 months. Some rural cottages are lying idle and an evaluation of them needs to be carried out. People have asked me why houses are not being opened up and made available. We need to compel local authorities to evaluate all such properties and bring them into the market. People will live in them, but cannot do so until they are refurbished.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to share time with Deputy Seamus Healy.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

While I am grateful to have the opportunity to speak again on the housing issue, we have to ask ourselves how many more times we have to do this before the Government accepts that for all its fancy words and promises there has simply not been enough action. The problems are well known at this stage. We have a problem with affordability, land hoarding, vacant units and security of tenure.

However, despite all those problems, one trap we cannot allow ourselves to fall into is that of a lapse in standards and quality control measures in order to expedite supply. The measures in this Bill regarding safety standards and inspections are most welcome. While we are in favour of removing administrative burdens, we must be careful that their removal does not lead to a lapse in standards.

I note a report in the Dublin Inquirertoday about an issue raised here a number of months ago in respect of emergency accommodation in Lynam's Hotel on O'Connell Street. Some of us raised concerns about the fire safety procedures in the building which has been used to accommodate families and young children. We saw pictures of fire escapes padlocked shut and exposed wiring on the premises. In response, the Minister, Deputy Murphy, stood in this Chamber and told me that the concerns were unfounded and that all fire regulations were in place. The information obtained by a number of city councillors and reported in the Dublin Inquirertoday now shows that was not in fact the case. The Minister should correct the record.

Once again, we see Government spin and bluster being used to cover the reality of the housing situation instead of being open and honestly acknowledging the problems. Surely everybody accepts that the first step in any problem is to acknowledge its full extent. Only by doing that will the Government provide the opportunity to engage fruitfully with all of us in this House across the political spectrum who want an end to children in emergency accommodation and people sleeping rough on the streets.

For our part, the Social Democrats has proposed a Bill on vacant site levies, with progressively higher levies the longer the land remains vacant, a new land hoarding levy on zoned serviceable land and more land to be taken from developers as part of a reintroduced affordable housing scheme. It is imperative that all of the solutions on the table are judged on their merits rather than on who is proposing them. We charge the Government to accept our urban regeneration Bill, just as we will support this Bill.

The number of voids is an absolute disgrace which has not been resolved. We should re-examine the source of our construction figures. It is very clear that the BER rating which the Commission for Energy Regulation produced is a far more accurate reflection of the numbers than the number of electricity connections.

Séamus Healy (Tipperary, Workers and Unemployed Action Group)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I support the intention behind the Bill. Deputy Cowen has requested that the Bill be allowed to pass Second Stage and go to Committee Stage. I have no problem with that. The Bill needs detailed scrutiny on Committee Stage.

The proposal for a one-stop shop is attractive. As many other speakers have said, we cannot compromise on standards dealing with fire safety, health and safety and disabled access. They are absolutely vital and it is essential that the highest standards are adhered to.

The Bill contains a reference to independent authorised persons. I certainly hope this means an authorised person from the local planning authority because we cannot have any suggestion of self-regulation or light touch regulation. We have seen what these forms of regulation meant in the past, particularly in the case of fire safety where there was either no regulation, self-regulation or light touch regulation. Standards simply cannot be compromised and must be dealt with by the local planning authority. Where there are standards laid down, they must be enforced. As another Deputy said, standards on paper are all very good, but if they are not enforced, they are simply not worth the paper on which they are written.

Protected structures, heritage and the need for public consultation cannot be overlooked in dealing with this legislation. That is why I believe detailed scrutiny at committee level is necessary. I am not sure whether the proposals made in the Bill will be successful. I certainly hope they will be, but urban renewal schemes have appeared previously, as have repair and leasing and buy and renew schemes, and they certainly did not seem to be successful. If this Bill was even to be mildly successful, it might help to bring life back linto the centres of towns, particularly larger towns. We all know that the main shopping centres, the main street and high street of towns are dead after 6 p.m. There are significant vacancies on the main streets of my town of Clonmel, County Tipperary. There are also significant vacancies in Carrick-on-Suir, Tipperary town, Cashel, Cahir, Thurles, Nenagh and Roscrea, all of which are main towns. If this legislation was to be successful, it would certainly help in bringing life back to the centre of towns.

One of the difficulties with vacant properties concerns ownership. Frequently there are defects in title that affect the making available of buildings for housing. I make no apology for again raising the proposal I have made consistently for quite some time. While this legislation is welcome, it will certainly not resolve the housing crisis. To do that we need a number of measures. We need a declaration of a housing emergency by the Oireachtas. We need to ensure the banks we own will stop demanding voluntary surrender, repossessing homes and evicting people from their homes. We need to ensure that when properties are sold, tenants can remain in situ. All of these measures could be achieved by this Dáil if we had the political will. I support the intention behind the Bill and would like to see it proceed to Committee Stage to allow us to engage in its proper and detailed scrutiny.

Shane Cassells (Meath West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I pay tribute to Deputy Barry Cowen for bringing forward the Bill because this is the one issue on which people want to see real progress. In fairness, there is genuine goodwill in the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government towards the work of Ministers and hope people will all pull together. The Minister's comments were fair, constructive and very helpful, even when he was probing the clauses on sub-division and trying to make sure any proposal would not have undesired consequences. I have seen poor examples of where loopholes were exposed. Therefore, probing the Bill to get the right result and have the Government pull with us is positive.

On the objectives of the Bill, I spoke last week to the motion on housing and about the targets the Taoiseach had set out earlier that day in the Chamber. Central to them is the core issue of deliverability and whether what is planned and envisaged can realistically be achieved. Using everything at our disposal, as envisaged in the Bill, is key. The number of vacant units above commercial properties in urban centres across the country is pronounced, but it is important to say many local authorities have conducted extensive work in researching the square footage available in order that they can demonstrate to statutory bodies the office space available when pitching on the opportunities available. Of course, the open plan office space required by major modern companies working with IDA Ireland or others makes the units in old urban centres redundant as they do not meet what companies want today. That is the reason we have the available opportunities, as envisaged. There are many aspects to consider when it comes to the suitability of buildings for use as residential dwellings. In that regard, fire safety standards will have to be met. However, we all should recognise that town centre living is actually an implicit objective of many development plans across the country. In our own development plan in County Meath and specifically Navan going back over 20 years the main objective, when we were young councillors, was to see town centre living actively promoted as something that was vibrant. What I learned during that period was that the policy conceived in forward looking planning sections of councils and its implementation on the ground were often solar systems apart for one very simple reason. An idea is always just an idea unless someone picks up the ball and runs with it. Listening to the Simon Community earlier this week I could see that what we needed to see to tackle the housing emergency were ideas such as this that utilised existing stock to tackle the needs of people in the here and now. We have an opportunity, if done correctly, to work in tandem with the broad objectives of city and town development plans and actually achieve the lofty aims that are often spoken about but that never come to life. It would involve people living in town centres and replicating some of the success stories elsewhere. Here in the midst of the crisis is perhaps the focus needed to accomplish this objective.

Deputy Barry Cowen mentioned the statistic of 15% of vacant properties nationwide. I look at the position in my county. During an Oireachtas briefing we learned that there were 1,583 vacant residential properties in County Meath, of which 600 were to be found in half a dozen towns. This figure does not take account of the vacant commercial space on upper floors referred to by Deputy Barry Cowen. Therefore, if we can make advancements on this and the commercial front, it will be a good day's work. I implore the Government to work constructively to achieve that end. The towns in my county fought bravely through the dark years of recession. In case anyone who listened to earlier proceedings when Deputy Peadar Tóibín spoke about burned out streets in Navan thinks An Uaimh is crumbling, I pay tribute to the brave new businesses that opened in the past month on Metges Lane, Bridge Street, Brews Hill and Kennedy Road. Perhaps when Deputy Peadar Tóibín is painting a picture of our home town in the future, he might show the full picture, with all of its colours, the bright colours, as well as the greys and blacks with which he and his colleagues in Sinn Féin like to paint.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Barry Cowen for bringing this Bill before the House.

It would be remiss of me not to acknowledge that significant work went into this in the form of consultation with stakeholders and experts in a range of fields related to this area. We have gone through the outline of the Bill in considerable detail and the idea of bringing together a one-stop shop to facilitate refurbishment works at these properties is a welcome development.

I am taken by the fact that, over the years, there have been various schemes to try to advance refurbishment, whether the living city initiative or living over the shop or so on. In particular, there was the repair and leasing scheme recently. Unfortunately, those schemes did not yield the results we might have expected. The repair and leasing scheme really has to be re-evaluated. I am not opposed to the scheme but it simply is not working and there is no point in letting something run on. The latest figures that I received were that there were no offers of properties in the South Dublin County Council area, Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown or Fingal and eight properties were offered in the Dublin City Council area of which I understand that seven were deemed to be suitable and have not gone beyond that. The scheme was ambitious and intended to provide 800 units this year. It seems to be way off target. I am not opposing and am not giving out to the Minister of State but pleading with him to find out why it is not working-----

Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree with the Deputy.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----and why those offers are not coming because we need to revisit that.

I listened to Deputy Barry Cowen and the Minister, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, about the Bill proposed here this evening. Deputy Cowen set out clearly the advantages of the Bill in trying to fast-track and support people who want to redevelop projects. He acknowledged and made the point that current building regulations are much more applicable to new buildings than refurbishments. The Minister, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, in his response to Deputy Cowen, identified particular areas that may have been of concern to him. That was fine as part of Second Stage. The concern I have, on which all sides of the House need to work together, is that a substantial number of Private Members' Bills have been brought forward that make no progress. If we are to be serious about this Bill and it is to have the impact that we want it to, then we need to find a mechanism to advance this Bill and address the concerns that the Minister, Deputy Eoghan Murphy had, between Government, Opposition and all Members of this House. I acknowledge that the Government side of the House has far better expertise available to it to assist in amending this Bill.

I am strongly of the view that, in the midst of a housing crisis, our progress in bringing vacant properties back into use is not what it should be. There is probably a range of factors. Many people underestimate the scale but things have changed and we need to look at it differently. I was recently in the city centre and walked from the big tree at the top of Dorset Street, coming back from Croke Park, all the way down past Bolton Street and Capel Street. As I had time on my hands, I was looking around and people are actually living upstairs in some of the properties while adjacent properties are vacant. One can see where opportunities exist. Our challenge is to turn those opportunities into realities.

In my own constituency, I was recently driving by the Coldcut Road at the back of Liffey Valley Shopping Centre. There was a fabulous big glass building that used to be a gym. That type of gym is no longer what it was and the demand is not there for it. I noticed, and checked about this, that it is being converted into residential units. The outer exterior with the glass front is retained and it is that type of imaginative use of properties that we should attempt. When I look around our suburbs, particularly in Dublin - others will refer to rural Ireland - because of the development of large, out-of-town shopping centres, whether Liffey Valley, Blanchardstown, Dundrum or whatever, properties exist in many of our towns and villages that afford us an opportunity and we need to address them urgently. My concern is that in both the report we did as a Committee on Housing and Homelessness and in Rebuilding Ireland, it was recognised that vacant properties had a role to play and the vacant properties strategy was to be developed, and now that we are a long way on from those reports the detail of those strategies should be published.

While complimenting Deputy Cowen for bringing the Bill forward, it needs the support of Members, not just to pass Second Stage. If people believe that this Bill has a meaningful role to play and understand and buy in to the concept of the one-stop shop with regard to the administrative role and refurbishment, then this Bill needs to reach Committee Stage and to be dealt with. That requires a change in how we do our business.

Maria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Like Deputy Cassells, I will be speaking to the Bill and not going off on a tangent like speakers earlier in the debate. This Bill seeks to fast-track the planning and building control process in each local authority so that properties currently requiring a change of use from commercial or industrial purposes to residential can be fast-tracked to allow, for example, for use of space over a shop, where it is currently vacant, for housing purposes. I welcome this Bill as it unlocks another source of currently untapped accommodation that can be brought into use and will not only provide additional housing but will also benefit towns around the country by putting people back into town centres and giving life and vitality back to those deserted towns. The one-stop shop application procedure referred to in this Bill is a way to try to deal with this change of use issue but, at the same time, we have to be conscious that we safeguard the security of future tenants in these buildings and that they comply in totality with the fire safety and building control regulations that we all have to adhere to.

The concept of living over a shop or "the lots", as we used to call it, has existed in planning policy in practice for some time and in my own county of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown, a living over the shop policy is contained within the current county development plan. It allows for such change of use in the county's towns of Dún-Laoghaire, Glasthule, Dalkey, Sandycove, Blackrock, Monkstown and Dundrum, and planning applications under this policy allow for the development and management standards for offsetting private open space, parking, unit size, etc., to be left at the discretion of the planning authority. Data from Dún Laoghaire show that from 2013 to 2016, only eight applications were received and Deputy Curran alluded to this earlier with regard to different localities. Under that policy, only 75% were granted planning permission and in the late 1990s to the early 2000s, a national scheme targeted at Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford and Galway sought, via tax incentive, to encourage owners of buildings that had vacant upper floors to bring them into residential use. A review of the scheme by Goodbody Economic Consultants in 2005 found that the take-up of the scheme was limited to only 132 projects in the five included cities.

Rebuilding Ireland also recognised the need to examine regulatory controls for planning and building and removed the potential barriers to such reuse. The Government is advancing a number of initiatives in this regard including one about setting up a working group. A dedicated Department with a multi-disciplinary working group will prepare additional guidance in a regulatory context. Guidance will advise local authorities and the industry about how to better facilitate the use of alternative approaches to reuse or redevelop underused other buildings in the context of regulatory requirements. The development of a new online application process for a building control management system will streamline the certification process. Such certificates are for fire, safety, disability access, etc.

There are planning exemptions in the Rebuilding Ireland commitment to review the planning legislation. The Minister is proposing amendments to the exempted development in planning regulations to allow for the change of use of vacant commercial units in urban areas to residential use without the need to obtain planning permission. It is unfortunate that Deputy Mattie McGrath has left the House, as he left the joint Oireachtas committee earlier. He said that they are talking shops about balderdash and poppycock, which is really unfortunate because, this morning, by coincidence, the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government was attended by witnesses from the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland, Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland and Engineers Ireland to deal with the construction industry regulation bill, which is about the standards of workmanship. It also requires that builders and subcontractors register or be currently registered as part of that process so that we know the workmanship is of the required standard.

They have to produce certificates or show experience in this field, and show where they have delivered good building in order to qualify, so that the consumer is protected and knows that the builder he or she employs is of the appropriate standard and that we expect, and not have the problems we had of the past of substandard building controls. If Deputy Mattie McGrath wants to call that balderdash and poppycock, he was at a very different meeting than the one attended this morning by Deputy Casey, Deputy Cowen and myself. We heard valuable qualified contributions. It definitely was not a talking shop for any of those attending.

While I welcome the intention of the Bill, I will be putting down some amendments. We need flexibility around the Part M regulations and others. I look forward to the Bill progressing to Committee Stage and to working with the other committee members to seek a solution in this.

Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will add some comments to those of my colleague in the time that is left.

I welcome this opportunity to speak on the Bill as it gives us a chance to bring a focus to this area. I thank Deputy Cowen and his colleagues for bringing it forward. As most speakers have said, it addresses an important area.

I reiterate what Deputy Cassells has said. Using vacant properties and over-the-shop properties is an essential way to restore life to our streets and to deal with some of the dereliction that is on some of them. It is also a good use of resources. We ourselves say this, with Rebuilding Ireland and all the discussions we have had here. We want to bring vacant units back into use. I refer to empty houses, previous shops on the high streets that are now empty and properties over the shop that are lying empty. We want them back in use. It is common sense. This Bill will help bring a focus to that.

How we can make this happen is something we ourselves have been discussing for months at the working group I chair as well. The working group, which involves all the different aspects of this to drive this on, met again today. This Bill will help that and we will tease through the matter on Committee Stage.

As Deputy Curran said, we have to achieve the intention of this Bill, one way or the other, either through this Bill or through other ways, but certainly through focusing the resources. That is why it is right that the Government supports this, and that we drive that on as well.

We talk a lot about the different schemes that are there to help this. We recognise at the start that a big issue with this is the financing of these works. We put in place the repair and lease-back initiative and other schemes to provide the cash to those who have not got it, but who might own these properties, to bring them back into use. I am disappointed - I agree with Deputy Curran - that the scheme has not worked for the numbers we want but I recognise these properties are in private ownership and we cannot force them to bring their properties back into use.

That was a good scheme. We are looking at it and we are prepared to make changes to make it more attractive. Probably, much of what is outlined in this Bill will help make it more attractive because there is the fear, if one goes to bring a vacant property back into use or to change the use of property, that one gets into all of these complications and red tape, and hassles with planning. The one-stop shop is probably a good way to do this and that is why I agree with the intention of the Bill, and to focus people's minds.

I had this discussion with the Heritage Council as well. It wants to be part of this too. We all agree we want these buildings back in use and if we do not get them back into use soon, they will fall away and it will be too hard to work on them. Ideally, these are for housing, but certainly, there are many other options they could be used for on the high streets as well. I accept many companies do not want to locate in these office types, but other enterprises, such as social enterprises, are ideally suited to operate some of these buildings on the high streets, along with housing accommodation. I am attending an event tonight and many of those present will be social entrepreneurs. They have a role. They could bring life back into a lot of the streets as well.

In the repair and lease-back scheme, the target was 800 this year. There are 500 or 600 applicants who are interested in that throughout the country. The majority of them are outside of the greater Dublin region, outside of where the pressure zones are. They are beyond Dublin, Meath, Louth, Wicklow, etc. I wish that we could see in our own counties a lot more interest in that scheme or a revamp of it because this Bill rightly addresses the issue of rules and regulations. There are also other ways of funding the changes. Together, the two options should be able to achieve what we want here.

The properties in question are generally private properties. There has been a lot effort made, supported by this House in spending over €100 million on bringing back into use voids belonging to the local authorities. Over 7,000 houses that were lying empty for years have been brought back into use, and rightly so. There are still some continuing voids. There is money to be spent this year to bring most of them back into use, but as far as I am concerned, this year, and certainly early next year, should see the end of publicly-owned voids. Let us at least lead the charge here. I am glad that was supported by Fianna Fáil. We will drive that on over the next couple of months as well.

I agree with Deputy Cassells. We have had Deputy Tóibín in here trying to blacken our town. We all will be aware in all our towns there are areas we want to improve. There are areas we want to bring back into use and we have to focus on that but one does not ruin a whole town in that conversation. Navan town is an example. As our town, it is open for business. It is a vibrant town. It is full of people who want to contribute, who want to drive a town and want to grow with it, with new businesses and existing businesses expanding as well. We want to encourage and reward that, and neither talk it down nor run it down. I want to be clear that we are open for business. It is an active town with a lot of opportunity and options.

The same Deputy has is self-appointed chair of the housing group of Meath and yet he has never contacted me, as the housing Minister in the county, to discuss housing problems. Here we are again. Sinn Féin likes spreading misery. That is what they do best. They do not really want solutions. If one was a chairperson of a housing committee and if one really was interested in solutions, one's first act would be to contact the Minister in the area who might be able to help.

I am glad that this Bill is being brought forward by Fianna Fáil. We will have to discuss changes to it through the committee, but it is solution focused. That is what Fianna Fáil is trying to do. That is what we are in this House for, to bring solutions and not always try to spread misery.

I thank the Acting Chairman, Deputy Durkan, for the time. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this Bill as it passes through the Houses.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Deputies Mary Butler, Lahart and Cowen in that order.

Mary Butler (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this much needed Bill to fast track procedures for vacant housing refurbishment. A new planning procedure is needed in Ireland and this Bill can achieve this. I congratulate Deputies Cowen and Casey on their work on this Bill.

Vacant spaces which would be suitable for residential purposes are found all over the country. Census 2016 revealed that almost 260,000 homes are vacant across the country. Whether these figures are completely accurate remains to be seen in regard to the availability of these properties for refurbishment. There are thousands of square feet of liveable space in over-the-shop units available. We all have rural towns and villages in our constituencies that have seen the main streets decimated with emigration, recession and relocation to larger towns and cities. The Bill will help to refurbish thousands of vacant units in older and commercial buildings in cities and towns. Other initiatives provided, including financial incentives, have not been effective and there are also many administrative hurdles which stand in the way of the refurbishment of such dwellings into residential spaces.

The Bill creates a one-stop shop for the approval of refurbishment projects in local authorities. This will remove the existing administrative hurdles which stand in the way of development and will enable the development of upper floors of older or commercial buildings in towns and cities. Essentially, it means that an applicant seeking to refurbish a building could have one meeting with all of the required officials, such as the planner, fire officer, disability access and, if necessary, conservation, rather than having to undertake several separate applications to get the refurbishment project off the ground. This should fast-track and simplify the whole process to encourage people to utilise these empty spaces.

It is predicted that local authorities within cities and large urban areas are most likely to benefit from this new procedure. However, it is acknowledged that not all local authorities may require an expedited planning procedure for this category of development. The Bill will also set in place a new inspection system where 100% of vacant buildings undergoing refurbishment will be directly inspected by approved inspectors. These will be private sector inspectors but they will be hired directly through the local authorities as opposed to the current procedure whereby the assigned certifiers are employed directly by the developer.

All parties can agree that we are in the midst of a housing crisis in this country. The Bill strives to overcome the existing administrative faults and hurdles in the planning and building process which is holding back urban regeneration and development. We hope that Deputies can offer us their support in pushing this Bill forward. As the Minister will be well aware, the housing and homeless situation is at crisis point and any measure that will see vacant or derelict houses put to new use which can be used as homes has to be welcome.

I also welcome that the Minister, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, and his colleagues are supporting this initiative.

John Lahart (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I commend my two colleagues, Deputies Cowen and Casey, for bringing this forward.

I am a great believer that in a crisis - we are in the midst of a crisis - one exercises control of what one can exercise control of. There have been a lot of solutions put forward by the Government over the past year and a half. The summer saw a lot of kites being flown, acting as a screen for some of the things that were not working. A classic example was when the Minister, Deputy Eoghan Murphy declared that we have to build higher, particularly in Dublin city, as though this decision had not been taken. The decision has been taken. The challenge that the Minister has to face is why there is not a queue of planning applications for development on the locations where high rise has been allowed by Dublin City Council.

There are no easy answers to the housing crisis, but there are two key principles. The first, on which there is consensus, is that we should build houses, while the second is that we should make maximise use of the existing stock. That is the theme that has come through consistently. On building houses - despite what the Government states - I look at my local authority which, after Dublin City Council, is the largest housing authority in the country and the area of which includes two of the most challenged areas in the country, Tallaght and Clondalkin, and see that it will complete ten social homes this year. That is an indication of the lack of progress being made. I indicated on the Order of Business this morning that in 2014 when I was still a member of the council, a Part 8 process was initiated in Rathfarnam in my constituency for the construction of 38 social homes. Deputy Alan Kelly was Minister when we were discussing the initiation of the process; Deputy Simon Coveney was the Minister in charge when the Part 8 application was approved by the council and lodged with the Department, while Deputy Eoghan Murphy is now the Minister in charge, but three years on, not one sod has been turned on the site. There are processes that need to be managed and the fault in this case does not lie with the local authority.

In his closing remarks the Minister made reference to the fact that this was a solution-focused attempt to deal with the issue of maximising the use of the existing housing stock, particularly commercial units with empty space above them. The Government needs to work hard on the vacancy issue. Having spoken to senior council officials, I know that 600 vacant properties were identified in Dublin 24, but on a drive-by basis, the local authority has actually suggested there are probably only 30 or 40 vacant residential units. In terms of over-shop developments, all of the utilities required are already in place, including public lighting, water, sewerage and so forth. No new utilities are required, but obviously such units would have to be developed sensitively. As the Minister said, this is a solution-focused attempt by my party to contribute to efforts to deal with the housing emergency facing us.

Barry Cowen (Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In summing up the debate on the Bill we have put before the House, I thank all of the contributors to it. I acknowledge the support voiced by members of all parties, as well as independent Deputies, for the thrust of the Bill and the sentiments contained within it and the willingness on everybody's part to ensure this process can lead to a solution in the short term. I also acknowledge the contributions of Government speakers and the Minister to the debate. I welcome their support for the Bill and their indication that they are willing to work with us on the Bill in order to ensure progress is made in dealing with the matter.

I am not precious about the Bill or what is contained therein. I am not precious about any idea that I bring forward. I am merely reflecting the will of my party and its members in bringing forward credible and constructive solutions to address the terrible housing crisis and acknowledge the contribution of this aspect of housing policy and the positive effect it can have in dealing with the situation we face.

Reflecting on some of the contributions made by various speakers, a common thread throughout the debate was compliance, certification and ensuring standards were not compromised. The Bill and the proposals contained therein will in no way dilute standards or safety precautions in terms of fire certificates and so forth. It will, in fact, enhance standards. What we have, as several other Deputies have confirmed, is a less than 10% level of inspections of properties being used for rental purposes. What we have is self-certification. If people say they are worried about what is contained in the Bill, does that mean that they are happy with thestatus quo? I doubt it. Only today the High Court ordered the closure of what it termed a "fire trap" hostel in Dublin. The attention of the fire officer in Dublin was brought to the hostel in an "RTE Investigates" programme last week. That is the current system and what we are trying to address. I hope people will read the Bill in its entirety, but I reiterate that they can be sure and safe in their own mind that there will be no dilution of standards but their enhancement. I welcome the commitment of the Government to address that issue. It is something that needs to be done as soon as is practicably possible because the last thing we want to see is a repetition on any scale of the terrible incident we witnessed in London in recent months.

I acknowledge the contribution of the Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government, Deputy Eoghan Murphy. He mentioned that a working group in his Department was looking at the technical guidelines and regulations from his Department to local authorities for the refurbishment of existing buildings. I welcome his acknowledgement and that of his Department that the slant is more towards new buildings. It is also welcome that he is seeking to address that issue. He has acknowledged that what is contained within the Bill can help in that regard. It is welcome that there is a willingness on his part to ensure the process will improve the guidelines and regulations in order to ensure there will be standardisation across local authorities in dealing with this issue.

We have heard speakers from various parts of the country and various parties in the past couple of hours, including from counties Offaly, Wicklow, Kildare, Dublin, Meath, Limerick, Galway, Roscommon, Cork, Tipperary and Kerry, and the common thread, to which I also alluded in my own opening remarks, is that this problem is prevalent throughout the country. There is no town or village not scarred by it. The inhabitants of towns, villages and constituencies throughout the country are infuriated, frustrated and more than anxious to see progress. If this can be the start of a new momentum in the workings of this Dáil, it will have been a worthwhile project. The issue has to be addressed.

The day began with the Taoiseach alluding to the announcement by the Minister, Deputy Michael Ring, of the town and village renewal scheme awards throughout the country. Of course, we welcome them as it represents an investment of €26 million. However, despite the fanfare and the plaudits that will be attributed by Government Deputies in the coming days, to be fair and honest, much of the work that will ensue because of the funding being made available is work that local authorities did in their sleep in the past. It will help to improve the aesthetics of various towns. In my constituency last year there was approval for work to be undertaken in Clara, Shannonbridge and Edenderry and that work is about to commence, despite the lateness of the process in ensuring the work would be done. Today we heard about work to be undertaken in Shinrone, Banagher and Geashill, but there are similar towns and villages throughout the country where people are lauding the prospect of enhancement work being undertaken and the provision of money that will help and assist in that regard. It will, of course, improve the aesthetics, but it will not revitalise, regenerate, reinvigorate or repopulate those towns and villages. I was reared in a town centre where I had a hugely enjoyable childhood. There was great vitality and engagement on the streets because people lived at their place of work, but that is no longer the case, including on the street where I grew up. It is initiatives, the provision of assistance and help to streamline the administration process and reduce the costs associated with the revitalisation of buildings that will make a difference in getting people back living in these areas. It is they who will give them new energy, revitalise them and improve the retail trade in them. It is imperative that Government do everything it can in addition to this.

If, for example, it is in the provision of finance to the building sector or to those property owners who wish to undertake this and take advantage of the opportunities that may result of this, then they have to be offered competitive rates that are a lot better than those currently being offered by the banks.

As I said earlier, I hope that a new emphasis and momentum can come out of the budgetary process this year so as to address this. The way the Government has dealt with this issue is the most damning indictment of its performance in recent years. A new momentum and emphasis will have Fianna Fáil's support, however, and that can be realised by making funds available for what is contained in this to work.

I thank everybody for their contributions. I look forward to seeing the Government being true to its word with this Bill, in a way that it has not been recently with other Bills that had the support of this Chamber, by ensuring that it reaches the relevant committee as soon as is practically possible; that the relevant scrutiny then take place; and that there is a willingness from all parties and none to ensure that it gets to Committee Stage thereafter. We can then move along a path where the public can see that this momentum will produce results and action in the end.