Rebecca Moynihan (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senator Warfield for allowing me to go ahead. I apologise to the Minister that I have a compulsory purchase order, CPO, meeting at 5 p.m., so I will have to go by then, but I will look back at this debate

I am cautiously in favour of this Bill. I hope that it will not be beset by the same problems that plagued the strategic housing development, SHD, process. These were the granting of entirely inappropriate planning permissions, a huge number of build-to-rent planning permissions and, most of all, developers sitting on permissions granted under the SHD process for years without actually building any homes. Most of all, I welcome the return of local authorities to the planning process when it comes to large-scale residential developments. Local authorities and the constituents that they represent are a vital part of our democracy and our planning system. Excluding them from the SHD process was unjustifiable and did far more harm than good. I am glad to see the Minister following through on the programme for Government commitment that he was going to replace the system.

The SHD review identified issues relating to the activisation of planning permissions in 2019. It noted that the rate was less than might be reasonably expected, taking into account the benefits of saving time, increased certainty for developers, and the resources invested by the State in upgrading the SHD process. The whole purpose of the SHD process, and now the large-scale residential development process, is to fast track the building of homes. If like with the SHD process, it does not achieve that, then it will be a failure. We must ensure that these planning permissions are not treated simply as a way to increase the value of land, but a way to actually provide homes to people across the country. Even if these developments are built, we must ensure that developers are not leaving them lying empty to keep rents artificially high, as we have seen in a number of build-to-rent units within Dublin city. These units have the plastic still on them. People can see them and identify them.

It is also vital that we back up the movements in the planning process with strong use-it-or-lose-it provisions, a vacant sites levy and a vacant homes tax. All of these measures are needed to work together to make something like a large-scale residential development process work as it should do, to provide homes and buildings, and not just enhance the value of land that continues to lie empty.

The site value tax, which has been introduced in the Finance Bill, has so many get-out clauses in how it has been implemented. I worry that it will not cover the majority of people who are using these sites to lay empty. It would be somewhat like the land value tax in its operation. Many of the applications that went through the SHD process were build-to-rent, or were being bought up by investors in their entirety. Good planning requires a balance of accommodation throughout the country. We need density and good apartments provided in urban centres also. However, people do not only want to rent those apartments. They want to own them too.

The Government’s core build-to-rent policy is depriving young and old people, such as in the Minister’s own constituency in Malahide, from accessing decent apartments to make their homes in. People are experiencing huge rents, as seen by the daft.ie report today, which are entirely unaffordable. Build-to-rent, particularly in Dublin city, is dominating our planning permission system. We continue to see large tracks through Dublin city being taken up by recent developments, such as on Clonliffe Road and at Player Wills. People want to buy apartments too.

Studio and one-bed apartments are not exclusively what people call "transient" accommodation. Single people are entitled to stable, secure homes that they own. I am quite concerned that this approach will continue through the LRD system. I am calling on the Minister to ensure that a portion of large developments, even in build-to-rent, are available to owner-occupiers, and also that build-to-rent standards are harmonised with our apartment standards. Some people may be long-term renters. However, if they are living in a highly-dense apartment network they also deserve a balcony and open space. They deserve to be able to open a window and to be able to sit out on the balcony. It is important that we take a look at build-to-rent standards again. The ways in which they are built act against long-term apartment living and long-term homes for renters. We need a holistic approach to planning in order to ensure that the LRD system achieves its goal of providing people with homes and that communities are both mixed tenure and mixed income.

A significant number of SHD permissions were also student accommodation. They had a greater activation rate than apartments. The student accommodation units have also been consistently made up of a large part of commencement notices that are lodged. I hope that the return of local authorities to the planning process for large-scale developments will help end the dominance of inappropriate housing through these fast-track processes. I hope also that we properly engage local communities in the housing that they need, because they are rightfully worried about the long-term impact that this type of housing will have on communities.