Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)

The commencement date will be the date of signing of the Bill by the President, which I hope will take place before Christmas. These amendments would delete the options of providing land, houses or sites at another location or providing a payment instead. This would effectively remove the flexibility at the heart of the Bill. I, therefore, cannot accept them.

The purpose of changing this section of the 2000 Act is to set out certain additional ways in which an applicant for permission for development may comply with the requirements of Part V in relation to the provision of social and affordable housing instead of reserving land in their proposed development for the local authority or providing houses or sites within the development. In addition to these existing options, the applicant for permission will be able to reach an agreement to reserve land or provide houses or sites at another location, or to make a payment to the local authority which will be used for the provision of social and affordable housing, or to agree to a combination of any of these options.

As I have explained, the existing arrangements are too rigid and bureaucratic. Planning authorities and developers had difficulty in drawing up agreements and the rigidity was holding up housing supply. The complicated arrangements that have ensued are probably the reason the delivery of social and affordable housing to date is less than was hoped for. In the review I undertook, as promised in An Agreed Programme for Government, there was a consensus among those consulted that the system required more flexibility. Everybody said this, no matter what their perspective.