Darragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

All of us want to ensure that where good permissions are granted they are activated. There are 80,000 planning permissions across the country that are yet to be activated. All have various different timeframes, but they have been granted permission. One of the jobs we have to do is to ensure they are activated where we can, particularly in the cities. In Dublin there are about 40,000 planning permissions that have yet to be effected and moved on. A serious objective in Housing for All is the introduction of a new tax to activate vacant land. We need to do that, and that is the zoned land tax which is being introduced in the Finance Bill. Senators will have a role in that. It is a very significant change as a land activation measure. There is also the croí cónaithe cities fund, which will assist with viability for owner-occupier developments over four storeys and get those permissions moving. There are also other measures such as the urban development zones and the land value sharing, which is a long-standing Kenny-style report measure which we are introducing for future zoned lands in respect of how the State will capture the uplift in the value there.

I am genuinely not sure how amendment No. 42 will actually work. It is something we will have to examine. The use-it-or-lose-it principle is something I understand at a personal level because we want to see things moving. We also have to see viable permissions get to breaking ground and delivering the homes we need. The measures that I and the Minister for Finance, Deputy Donohoe, are bringing forward both on the planning side, including owner-occupier guarantees and the other measures I have mentioned, and the zoned land tax piece, in particular, from the Minister for Finance will operate as use-it-or-lose-it measures for residential development land which remains vacant and unactivated. We need to do that. I will keep that under review also with regard to whether there are any other measures we can take on the planning side by way of our planning review.

I do not believe the amendment is appropriate in this legislation because this is about replacing SHDs for new applications that are going to come in with a new streamlined process for large-scale residential developments of over 100 units. For the first time, owner-occupiers will be taken into account. This is a forward-looking legislative measure. While I understand where the Senator is coming from with the use-it-or-lose-it piece and the frustration with some of those and wanting to get applications that are viable activated, I do not believe this legislation is the right place for it. I am not sure how we could even start to make amendment No. 42 work because it refers to permissions granted under the 2016 Act and tries to put a provision in this Bill that would flow into this legislation. This legislation is forward looking for new applications, not for existing permissions that have been granted.