Anthony Lawlor (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

This is a welcome Bill, which was first announced in budget 2018. Building more houses is the answer to the housing crisis. Anyone who has been trying to work to get builders and developers, those who have been pilloried over the years, off the ground knows that in the past couple of years these people were finding it extremely difficult to get finance. Banks were not lending to them and are still not lending.As mentioned, banks require at least 40% to 50% equity or capital before they will lend the balance. Some builders were getting finance from vulture funds of up to 15% to 17% which was making it unviable for them to commence building. They would sites not only in Dublin but also in various parts of the country.

We need to have an overall strategy for building houses. We need all parts of the industry to be functioning, including the small builder who builds ten or 20 houses a year. They need to be able to access finance, but they have not been able to do so heretofore.

When we look at the type of loan being made available, I ask the Minister of State to look at a couple of issues. I refer to the overall package of €750 million. He says no one builder will have more than 5% of the pot. If there were 20 builders each getting 5%, the chances of the small builder getting anything would be reduced. There should be priority given to small builders because in the future they will be building in the areas into which the big builders and vulture funds will not go such as small towns and villages. A certain percentage of the fund should be set aside for those with the capacity to build ten to 20 houses a year, not those who are building 200 to 300 houses.

I am also worried about the Minister of State's reference to a figure of 5%. Five per cent of the pot amounts to €37.5 million, which is a lot of money. That means that the fund is only geared towards the builders who can provide an asset base. The Minister of State might look at that issue and reduce the figure from 5% to 2% or 1%. That would make more sense because it would give the small builder a chance, which I know was the intention behind the Bill.

NAMA is mentioned in the Bill, but this is a role it could have carried out. The problem was that it only looked after the clients who were in it. It did not provide funding for small builders who still had outstanding loans with various banks but who were not big enough to be in NAMA. It should have provided the State funding that was in place to help in that regard. It could have been done four or five years ago, but, sadly, that opportunity was missed.

The Bill has passed through the Dáil and is now going through the Seanad. How quickly does the Minister of State expect it to pass through this House? He can see that there is very little interest in it, but it is an important cog in the overall process of building houses. When does he expect the fund to be up and running in order that small builders can receive loans? A couple of them have been in contact with me to ask me about the Bill because they would love to see the fund up and running as quickly as possible. From a funding perspective, there will be a total budget of €750 million, with €20 million in the pot from the beginning. Will that be the limit on how much can be loaned at the start or will the €750 million be in it from the get-go?

I refer to the local property tax. I know that next November we will again have a discussion on the serious increase in the valuations of properties. Years back, this role was carried out by local government. Councillors made decisions at the annual budget meeting as to whether they would increase rates. The calculation of the local property tax involves the use of a multiplier. The Minister of State can correct me if I am wrong in that regard. Perhaps it is the only thing that should be changed, rather than the valuation of a property. The multiplier could be decided on by the local authorities. I am fairly certain that a multiplier is used in the calculation of the local property tax. It could be used by the local authorities and council members in deciding what the charges should be on the properties within their functional areas.

I again thank the Minister of State for coming into the House. I am very much in favour of the Bill and surprised that it is not gaining more traction because it is a cog in moving forward with a view to generating more house builds. As a result we will have fewer issues with affordability and homelessness and other such concerns.