Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I wish to state that I support the amendment. It is immensely sensible. We had previous debates on the issue. One of the first Bills brought forward by the Civil Engagement Group and a Green Party Member at the time concerned the issue of vacant sites. We sought to increase the vacant site levy at the time. We were told that it was not possible on the advice of the Attorney General, but two years later, exactly what we had suggested was implemented. It is always good to remember that the advice of the Attorney General can change and can be wrong. That is always worth noting.

However, the key issue is that the levy is not being effectively implemented. I agree that things need to be aligned in respect of wider policy, but we also need to begin by implementing it as it is currently in place. There are huge questions in respect of the local authorities and their resources, but in respect of the measure suggested by Senator Mullen to make it a requirement to register a vacant site, I think it is reasonable to place some of that administrative burden and obligation on the owners of the vacant sites for them to register it. That is a very good starting point. The Senator is not speaking to new sites and the question of what areas and land will be opened up for particular purposes. The amendment speaks to land in respect of which planning permission has been granted. Planning permission is both an asset - and land is treated as such in the case of land hoarding - and it is a responsibility. If planning permission is granted and an applicant has, through the planning permission process, effectively auditioned to be part of a town, city or a county, the permission has been granted because the applicant has made the case that he or she wants to be part of that planning. That comes with the responsibility to follow through and build ideally. It also comes with a very reasonable compromise responsibility, that is, the responsibility to register the planning permission and to set out the relevant period of time. It is completely reasonable.

I wish to add briefly that one large cohort of planning permission has been granted in respect of strategic housing developments. Sometimes there is a narrative that it is the wait for planning permission that stops things from happening. We must remember that there are strategic housing developments, many of which have not only been given planning permission, but have been able to skip the local authority stage and have been given fast-track planning permission because, as we were told, they were so keen and ready to deliver. Over 50% of those strategic housing developments that have received full planning permission have not commenced. It is vital that they pay the vacant site levy. I also ask that they be required to meet the new first-time buyer purchase requirements under the approved changes that are coming through.