Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. He is very welcome to the House this evening to discuss this important Bill proposed by the Cross-Party Group of the Labour Party, the Social Democrats and the Green Party. I am sure the Minister of State will be aware, from his own part of the country, that vacancy and dereliction is a blight on our villages, towns and cities. We estimate, and they are conservative estimates, that there are as many as 80,000 properties that could be renovated and put back into productive use. These are not just the properties facing our streets; the potential to backfill these properties for multiple occupancies is immense.

Earlier today, we had a presentation from Valerie Mulvin of McCullough Mulvin Architects, which has done a huge amount of work, including a touring exhibition, "The Reason of Towns", which looks to a resource to which we have turned our backs for far too long. We also heard from Steve Wall, lead singer of The Stunning, who has family experience with a property that was in his family's ownership. It was a family business - a shoe shop - for many years that they tried to renovate and ran into huge difficulties with the fire officer. These are the experiences that many people are facing as they look to try to regenerate and restore properties. This Bill seeks to address some of that to make it easier. It is enabling legislation, but it is also legislation that tries to unlock sites that have been derelict for a long time, where the owners of them are sitting on them. We have a not-fit-for-purpose Derelict Sites Act 1990, which is not really addressing the problem we are trying to deal with here.

I will generally outline the purpose of the Bill and what we are seeking to do. The main element of it is the amendment of the Derelict Sites Act 1990. The Bill seeks to expand the definition of "derelict" buildings for the purpose of placing buildings on the derelict sites register to include buildings that are "damaged", "neglected" and are not habitable without remedial works, buildings that have entrances and windows boarded up and buildings that have been disconnected from electricity or water services for a period of two years. It will require local authorities to publish a derelict sites register online. It will require local authorities to use modern methods of serving notice to owners of derelict properties, including site notices, local media and social media. It will also require local authorities to commence acquiring sites once they are on the derelict sites register for a period of two years.

The Bill would repeal the derelict sites levy and a derelict sites tax would be introduced. We know that there has been a really low collection rate of the derelict sites levy. The derelict sites tax would be introduced at 7% of the market value of the property. The responsibility of collection would be with Revenue. All moneys collected would be returned to local authorities to achieve the objective of the Affordable Housing Act 2021. The Bill would also expand the definition of "urban" land to cover all land in towns, villages and cities and remove the requirement for the Minister to have to make regulation to define "urban".

Part 3 amends the Finance (Local Property Tax) Act 2012 and the proposed amendment introduces a new tax category for vacant homes and a tax on vacant homes at a rate of 3% of the market value of the property to be collected by Revenue. This includes a new definition for "relevant residential property" as a property that has been vacant for at least 180 days in the preceding year. A number of exemptions apply to the tax, for example if the owner is in care, has moved temporarily for work purposes or if the property is a holiday home undergoing major renovations.

Part 4 relates to the Planning and Development Act 2000 and the Building Control Act 1990, and seeks to improve and expedite the process for bringing vacant units within existing properties back into use. This is something that has been sought for a long time, particularly by the conversation and architect profession. The amendments propose to establish a new planning and building control approval process - namely, a town centre first application process - to enable the expedited development of certain classes of residential development in order to bring vacant stock back into use and implement the town centre first policy. This includes those requiring change of use from commercial or industrial to residential and residential refurbishment in upper floors and in other structures. The Bill expands a limited category of exempted development, and requires direct inspection by independent, qualified and authorised persons before construction may commence. The town centre first application process will reduce the administrative delay and expense, simplify existing administrative systems for planning and building control and ensure compliance in the conversion or refurbishment of existing structures in areas to residential use.

The Bill will require the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage to draft and publish associated technical guidance documents for each section of the building regulations relevant to the refurbishment, regeneration and upgrading of existing buildings. The proposal specifically addresses challenges associated with fire safety, which is something we heard about today from the owners of properties, with disabled access in old buildings and with change of use to residential property. The Bill also provides for a national town centre first partnership office to oversee this new process and assist and provide guidance to all local authorities on the reuse, refurbishment and retrofit of existing buildings.This very far-reaching Bill has immense potential. The Minister of State knows from his own beautiful town of Clonakilty, which I visit very regularly, the potential in these places throughout the country. I looked at a Heritage Council proposal from 2012. Martin Colreavy, then principal adviser for built heritage policy, stated:

Given the concentration of historic and older structures in the urban core of our cities and towns, this focus [on heritage-led urban regeneration] supports the Government’s sustainable development policy ‘Our Sustainable Future’ launched by the Taoiseach in June 2012. It incentivises jobs-rich investment in existing assets and protects the value of those assets. Over the longer term it will encourage the maintenance and expansion of populations in urban cores and reduce pressure for unsustainable expansion into greenfield areas, maximising the use of other infrastructure such as schools, retail, recreation and public transport facilities. It is particularly consistent with the objectives of a low carbon economy.

That was in 2012. Here we are in 2025 and my understanding is that the Government will put a timed amendment on this Bill, which is disappointing to say the least. We listened to the housing Minister in recent days say he wanted to accelerate all activity. I will allow my colleagues to speak but I urge Members to support this Bill.

Imelda Goldsboro (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We will suspend the House as a vote has been called in the Dáil and the Minister of State has to leave. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Seán Kyne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Senator Noonan has two minutes remaining. He is sharing time with Senators Cosgrove and Stephenson. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will pass to one of my colleagues.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State for coming in. The wind was slightly taken from my sails by the vote, so I hope I can find my place and what I was thinking about saying.

I welcome Senator Noonan and the Green Party bringing forward this Bill. It existed in a previous iteration during the previous government, which is why it is particularly disappointing that the Government has tabled an amendment to postpone it for 12 months, given that the former variation of this Bill was already in place. I disagree with the rationale that it needs to be looked into more, and certainly not for 12 months, when we have reports of up to 100,000 homes lying vacant throughout Ireland, including countless buildings standing in complete neglect in our towns and cities. That is in the context of the worst housing and homelessness emergency the country has ever faced. We hear consistent rhetoric from the Government that it really wants to tackle this housing emergency, yet a Bill that would contribute to tackling that emergency is being delayed by 12 months.

The rates of vacancy and dereliction are appalling when we consider the number of people in this country who do not have a home, the hundreds of hidden homeless and the people who have been forced to emigrate because they do not have any hope of being able to buy a home in this country. In the face of this housing emergency, every vacant and derelict property represents not just housing potential but also an opportunity to reinvigorate our communities. As we all know, town centres are the lifeblood of our local communities, particularly in rural areas. Our town tempters include local shops that have been around for generations, or perhaps new entrepreneurs with local businesses opening cafes, which, again, are important community hubs.

A major element of our town centres is also about above-the-shop living and residential properties, many of which now stand vacant. The impact of this is twofold. First, as I mentioned, people are not able to live in those homes although we have high homelessness figures. Second, it has an impact on the vibrancy, liveliness and safety of our towns. We have talked about community safety in the Chamber previously. Having people living in town centres and city centres contributes to safety.

I very much welcome and support the objectives of this Bill, which aims to robustly address vacancy and dereliction by transforming the derelict sites levy into a robust derelict sites tax, collected by Revenue as opposed to local authorities, thus ensuring the taxes are systematically collected, which will ensure efficiency and reinvestment into affordable housing. For far too long, the vacant property tax in Ireland has been totally ineffective. The Bill also has provisions to modernise the derelict sites register with the aim of accountability and transparency regarding who owns those sites. This transparency is also critical for tackling the issue of vacancy.Some local authorities across this country have successfully and effectively used compulsory purchase orders to address vacancy, but the Bill will compel them to purchase derelict homes that have been on the register for two years. There are local authorities that have not been as effective or as successful at this and, therefore, the homes lie vacant.

The Bill proposes a new vacant home tax at 3% of the market value. My colleagues in the Social Democrats would seek a 10% tax to truly disincentivise it, but I support any actions, including this Bill, that bring in more credible action on vacant homes, which, quite frankly, are a scourge on our society during a housing crisis.

Beyond this Bill, we need to push for more bolder action to tackle the crisis. I particularly support the town centres policy of this Bill, which brings a specific planning process for dealing with the over-the-shop units and older structures to ensure they can be brought back into residential use. This approach recognises the unique challenges posed by older buildings, particularly around the issues of fire safety and disabled access, and it proposes nuanced, practical solutions to address them.

The Government has introduced some measures to tackle vacancy, such as the vacant homes grant, but the implementation of this scheme has been deeply ineffective. There are challenges around fire certificates, building standards and accessibility. The lack of support and resources for those looking to refurbish vacant above-the-shop units is currently limiting the potential to bring these units back into residential use. There were roughly 11,000 applications for the vacant property refurbishment grant last year and yet only 1,349 were paid out. I recognise there is a drawdown period within that. I was actually a recipient of the vacant property grant. I am deeply familiar with its operation. I am grateful I got it but there are so many challenges with it that it makes it deeply inaccessible for many people. The fact that very few applications have been paid out points to a major issue in how these grants are being implemented and puts into question how seriously the Government is tackling the issue of vacancy and dereliction as one method of increasing the housing stock and bringing back the towns and villages.

This legislation, coupled with targeted infrastructure and investment in local businesses and public spaces, offers a good blueprint for reversing urban decline, as Senator Noonan previously said in his intervention. It is important for breathing life back into our towns and cities. It is about creating vibrant, inclusive, sustainable communities where people can afford to live and thrive.

Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I follow my colleagues in saying that the Government’s continued lack of urgency in dealing with the housing disaster - our most serious and seemingly intractable challenge - has been exposed again by the introduction by Fine Gael of this amendment. This Bill, which addresses dereliction and vacancy, should not be allowed to be delayed any longer. Dereliction and vacancy are twin scourges that blight our cities, towns and villages and, without exaggeration, are leading to the deaths of communities.

Vacancy and dereliction hollow out our towns and villages. They cause particular issues where there are not sufficient new houses being built to replace them. In towns and villages, including in the Gaeltacht, people are crying out for housing while landowners are hoarding sites suitable for development and owners of derelict buildings are getting away scot-free. Derelict buildings not only deface our landscapes and streetscapes and undermine communities and counties such as Sligo, Leitrim and Donegal, but they also contribute to the homeless crisis and the chronic and systematic housing shortages we endure and will continue to endure as long as Government parties continue to block efforts, such as this Bill, that could address this crisis.

The 2024 crisis showed that there were 163,433 homes vacant or derelict and that 48,000 had been vacant since 2016. We all welcome, of course, advancements made under the vacant and derelict refurbishment grant schemes in recent years, but the numbers show that more needs to be done. In April, the Minister, Deputy Browne, announced that 2,000 have been brought back into use since the scheme was launched in 2022 and we are delighted. Well done on those 2,000 homes. Now there are only another 161,000 to go. To bring back home the scale of the problem, this is about 8% of national housing stock. The vacant and derelict grants work well for a certain portion of people and a certain portion of properties. They are not perfect – no scheme is – so let us see what we can do to bring the other 161,000 back into use and what we can do to bring hoarded land into play for development. I refer to developments such as the Mill apartments in Ballisodare, just ten minutes from Sligo town, where 60 to 80 apartments were abandoned unfinished when the Celtic tiger's roars turned into a death rattle. Substantial premises on the main street in Bundoran and on the approaches into Ballyshannon are abandoned and derelict, not just for years but for decades. This story is repeated in every town and every village right across the country.

Regarding the development of empty spaces within urban centres, the layout of many of our towns and villages evolved or was planned more than 100 or 150 years ago. They met the needs of a population that no longer exists and their layout, which may have made sense at the time, no longer serves a functioning purpose. They are, as we could see today in the briefing Senator Noonan organised, often hidden from the eyes of the public. Large parts of the towns are often redundant. For instance, in Sligo town, behind one of our main streets is High Street, a street itself that no longer fulfils the function usually associated with that name and features substantial portions of abandoned and derelict and abandoned properties. In fact, the dereliction became so bad that a large section consisting of five substantial terraced properties had to be demolished with urgency last June when it began to collapse. These buildings have been unoccupied and a blight for many years. Behind this building on High Street, there is a vast area of 1.9 ha, which goes to meet Old Market Street, forming a rough triangle with Castle Street and Teeling Street. Presumably, this would have previously contained large yards necessary to the trades that went on at the time and are no longer required. This is just one of 14 regeneration sites proposed for Sligo town in the 2024 to 2030 county development plan, which in total takes in 32.3 ha.

I could go on and on about Sligo, but I would love to see exclusions from development. There is one part of the Bill I want to talk about. I would love to see exclusions from development of land that is being actively farmed within towns and village boundaries or which is being used for leisure and community activities. When we see brownfield sites such as 80 ha available within Sligo town, we see that we do not need to go further on our precious green spaces.

I will quickly address the vacant homes tax. I would like to see the Department of housing and local government account for the failure of local authorities, like what has been said here before, to collect the vacant homes charge. I question whether the vacant homes charge, which is supposed to be levelled at five times the rate of the property tax, is actually being collected at all currently, and I urge the Department to address this. If we could have another discussion on this, I would also like to question whether there is a need to exclude holiday homes.

I would welcome a discussion on those two aspects of the Bill, but other than that, I am delighted to be supporting and seconding it.

Shane Curley (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after “That” and substitute the following: - “Seanad Éireann resolves that the Dereliction and Building Regeneration Bill 2025 be read a second time on this day 12 months, to allow for further consideration of issues arising in the Bill.”

PJ Murphy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I second the amendment. As Fine Gael’s spokesperson on housing in the Seanad and as the owner of a construction business that specialises in the conservation and restoration of historic buildings, having read the Bill, I believe it is a well-considered Bill. I am very supportive of the vast majority of this Bill. Given the extent of dereliction in our towns and villages around the country, this is a Bill we are very much in need of implementing, as soon as we can get it right. I agree with the Senator that the Derelict Sites Act 1990 is not fit for purpose.

The Bill’s ambition to expedite planning applications and permits of derelict buildings has great merit. Creating an online register of sites and the process behind the sites becoming derelict, which can be viewed online, would also be most helpful. Creating a system for informing owners of a property’s potential and streamlining the system around planning applications in what would effectively be a one-stop shop is fantastic idea that I am supportive of. It is very much needed.

The Bill also sets out steps whereby local authorities may acquire derelict sites, which is also much needed. It adds that the Minister must be notified when a site has been on the register for more than two years. That is all very positive.

That being said, I have a number of concerns about the Bill as well. My colleague, Senator Curley, has proposed an amendment that it be delayed for a year while some concerns are considered. The Bill proposes the establishment of a planning authority with its own body of staff. This group of staff will administer the application process, to be known as a town centre first application. Certain things relating to the costs and the funding and staffing of that need to be looked at. I am supportive of the idea behind it but certain details need to be figured out.The proposal to do away with certain requirements of the building control regulations is another concern I have. The exemption from obtaining a fire safety certificate is an important aspect in the context of many old multistorey buildings like this. I agree that there are a lot of inconsistencies and flaws in the systems through which these fire certificates are given out in each county. However, we cannot throw the baby out with the bathwater and do away with them completely. We have to figure what is wrong with the system, as opposed to doing away with it completely.

The proposal to do away with certification of the design and construction of the building works by a registered construction professional and a competent builder might be a backward step in the enforcement of building standards. We may need to look at why there is a problem with getting these certifications as opposed to doing away with them completely. While I am very supportive of the vast majority of this Bill and think it needs to be implemented in the long term, I will support the amendment to push back its Second Reading.

Aubrey McCarthy (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have spoken before about being involved in housing and homelessness for many years. I have campaigned for housing wherever we could get it. Back in 2016, I was asked to address the Oireachtas joint housing and homelessness committee, as it was called at the time. I was told by the then Minister, Simon Coveney, that homelessness would be eradicated by 2020. Since then, the numbers have tripled. Any measure that is going to improve housing in Ireland is greatly welcome. The Dereliction and Building Regeneration Bill 2025 is a crucial step. It is a success that I want to see happen but it is dependent on realistic timelines, adequate funding and the capacity within Departments to make it happen at local authority level also.

If the Government listens to those on the ground, in local towns, etc., and sets fair, workable standards for people to reach, the kind of urban renewal that my colleagues are putting forward in this Bill is realistic and communities will benefit. A friend of mine recently bought a house in north Dublin, in East Wall. He emailed the vacant property grant section in October 2023 to check that the derelict house he bought would be eligible for the dereliction grant. He received an email reply six days later which stated that, unfortunately, the section cannot deal with specifics and asked him to please have a look at the website. It took nine months and it was passed by five different people within the Department. Each time, those five officials asked for the same documents. It seems that there is no joined-up thinking in this regard. The grant was finally given in July 2024 but, by then, the builder my friend had secured had moved on, the costs of doing the building had gone up and the project therefore became more expensive or perhaps unworkable. I do not think he was unlucky. It is more that he collided with a system that is not working. The press release for the derelict and vacant homes grant is fantastic but the plumbing behind it is not intact. By the end of 2023, the vacant property grant boasted 6,300 applications. Of those, almost 50% were approved, yet at the end of 2023 only 127 payments had been made. That equates to one drawdown for every 50 applications. This means the local authorities were given €30 million but only released €6 million of that. Now, I will say that, as of 28 April 2025, the figures had improved, with 12,400 applications and 8,600 approvals. However, there had only been 2,096 payments. It seems that the system is working but it is not working fast enough. Three quarters of the approved projects are still waiting for the money. Every stalled file is a roof over the heads of, let us say, two people. That is approximately 13,000 people who are still without their home because this grant is not being administered properly.

Another issue with this grant is that it is only paid after the work is done. Not only do the individuals have to buy the house, they then have to frontload the expenditure. My issue here relates to the staffing of the local authority units that deal with vacant properties. It seems to be a single engineer and an administrator and it is just not enough to get the grants through. As I mentioned, someone having to go through five officials means that there is poor communication and the system, in that case, is just not working.

The cost for this grant is not just measured in delays, but also in extra rent and a loss of public trust. Therefore, when I hear of a new Bill, I welcome it. When I hear of new housing initiatives, I welcome them but all I can hear in the back of my head is, "One in 50 is getting paid". We need to improve on getting the grants over the line. Let us turn this into a good news story.

Seán Kyne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The next speaking slot is for Sinn Féin. I understand Senators Andrews and McCormack are sharing time. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Chris Andrews (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome this important Bill. If enacted, it would make a huge difference throughout the country. It is disappointing that it will be kicked down the road for 12 months. Any issues I have heard being raised here could be addressed on Committee Stage. Why not let it go through the process and iron out the creases? That is what we are supposed to be doing. Instead, the Government is again short-changing the Seanad. The Bill is important because it is about dereliction and regeneration. We do not have to look too far from here to see dereliction and the need for regeneration. Over on Kevin Street there was a site owned by the State. In the middle of a housing crisis, it was sold to a private developer. The private developer overpaid, paying €140 million for the old DIT site on Kevin Street. In the middle of a housing crisis, why in the name of God was that site not used for housing? Wrapped around that site are developments like Iveagh Trust Kevin Street, Bishop Street and York Street. All of these areas are in desperate need of housing. What did the State do? It sold off the site when it is most needed. Now it is lying there. It has been developed to just above ground level. It can just about be seen above the hoarding. It is just rotting. For more that a year and a half, the developer could not get refinancing for it and so it is lying there. There are desperate families in Kevin Street, right in the inner city, looking for housing and the site is being allowed to lie idle. The State has made a shambles of it. The State now has an opportunity to buy that site. Why does it not do so? The Land Development Agency could buy the site, apply for a new planning permission and put housing on it so that local families can get housing in the community.

Another example of dereliction is Baggot Street Hospital, a ten-minute walk from here. Everyone knows the site. It is lying there, derelict and rotten. It now appears the HSE is going to sell it off. This is another example of the State selling off its properties in the middle of a housing crisis when communities across the inner city and across the country desperately need housing. What does the State do? It sells it off to a private developer who will, again, probably pay too much for it, will have to refinance it and will leave it lying idle for another few years. In the middle of a housing crisis when local families are looking for homes, this is scandalous. You could not make it up. There have been so many proposals for Baggot Street Hospital but the State ignored them all. The HSE has an iron grip on that site and will not let it be used. It will probably become a hotel, which is of no use to anybody other than tourists. At at time of a housing crisis, why does the State not use that site for housing? Alternatively, it could give it to Senator McCarthy to develop along the line of the fantastic buildings run by Tiglin. Why not let him use the site for that purpose instead of building another hotel?

Maria McCormack (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State for coming in. I am glad to speak to this Bill today. Having so many vacant or derelict homes rotting away in our towns, cities and villages while families are living out of tiny hotel rooms in homelessness is absolutely shameful. Definitely having boarded up homes at a time like this is like hoarding food in a famine. For far too long the Government has been failing to properly resource local authorities to bring empty social homes back into use quickly and efficiently. Figures received in response to a recent parliamentary question from Deputy Thomas Gould show that over 50% of council homes in the country will remain boarded up for 2025. Seriously. We have been in the height of a housing crisis for nearly a decade and these basics cannot even be got right to make sure councils are funded properly to get social housing voids returned to stock as quickly as possible. This is absolutely baffling.

The latest data on derelict site levies for 2023 show that 1,913 sites were on the register but only one in three was levied. Of the €5.6 million levied, only €600,000 was collected. The authorities across the State were owed €20.5 million. As of 31 December 2023, there were only 30 sites on the Laois register. The levy was applied to only eight of these at a value of €48,125. Less than €16,000 was collected by Laois County Council. It is clear that local authorities have been stripped of funding and have been undermined for so long by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael that they are not in a position to collect these levies. We need a derelict sites levy with teeth because that will be transformative. Sinn Féin has called for the levy to be collected by Revenue and we would reform the CPO. We need to move towards a use it or lose it policy. In Laois I talk to grown adults who, through no fault of their own, are stuck living in their parents' back bedroom while next door is left to rot when it is boarded up. How frustrating and sickening is this for people to see?

Sinn Féin will support the Bill today because anything that will help the housing crisis needs to be done as a matter of urgency. I am really disappointed to see that it is not being allowed to go on to Committee Stage. Of course, if amendments are needed, we would all be interested in working on that. Homeless families and people waiting to get a home of their own having to wait another year while we kick the can down the road is just not acceptable.

Sarah O'Reilly (Aontú)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am happy to support this Bill today. I am disappointed it is not going any further for another 18 months. Implementing a Bill like this would be a necessary and long overdue intervention in the fight against the decay and neglect that is eating away at the heart of our towns and villages. Throughout the country more than 100,000 homes lie vacant or derelict while families queue for housing and young people are forced to emigrate. In Dublin city alone more than 14,500 properties are vacant. One fifth of these properties are left empty for more than four years. That is not just bad policy, it is a moral failure. The Bill gives local authorities the teeth they need to act. It defines dereliction more clearly, it strengthens enforcement and introduces the town centre first process to make it easier to bring disused buildings, especially above shops, back into residential use. It is great to see this Bill emphasise over-the-shop accommodation. We in Aontú have stressed the need to ease planning regulations for these properties to allow for empty commercial units to be used as accommodation.

The Government's vacant property refurbishment grant has been painfully slow and often inaccessible. While in excess of 7,700 applications were submitted, fewer than 1,500 grants were actually paid out. Funding needs to be granted incrementally as many people cannot afford to pay for the works up front. With a bit of imagination, these grants could be a good bit better and a sustainable way for people to get on the property ladder.

Seán Kyne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Before I move to the next speaker, I welcome members of the Ancient Order of Hibernians, Plymouth branch, and Professor Catherine Shannon, who are guests of Deputy Paul McAuliffe. I hope you enjoy the Deputy's hospitality for the rest of the evening. I hope you enjoy the proceedings.

Pauline Tully (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am happy to speak in support of the Dereliction and Building Regeneration Bill. We are living through a housing crisis at the moment so every opportunity must be used to ensure we bring buildings of all sorts back into use for housing. I noticed the levels of vacancy in our towns and villages when I was canvassing in 2020. We saw many vacant buildings, some of them derelict, on the main streets and along all the other streets in all the towns and villages throughout Cavan. I know it is no different from any other county. Unfortunately, since that canvassing it has not actually changed. A friend of mine was a census enumerator a number of years ago and she said that, in the rural areas, there are a high number of vacant properties. According to the last census, there are more than 160,000 vacant properties throughout the country. I recall asking a person I was canvassing with were we not canvassing a particular row of houses in a town and he said there was no one living in any one of them. Those houses were in good condition but people were not renting them out or living in them and they were not willing to sell. I believe they were just holding out to try to get a better price if the housing market improved. It seems we need more incentives for people to sell.

I welcome the vacant property tax but it is a self-declared tax and I do not know that it is being pursued and implemented enough. We need to do more about that. I engaged with one of the council's engineers whose duty it was to compile the register of derelict buildings in the county. He said that every time they went around compiling this, he would have a number of staff doing the work with him, but the next thing is the staff would be pulled away and redeployed to another section of the council and then it never got finished. He was trying to pursue this on his own and it is a very difficult job. We need to do more to try to ensure people who own derelict buildings are actually made to do something with them. Some of the buildings are in quite a dangerous condition. I have been contacted by people who are living beside derelict properties that have started to fall down. They are really concerned for their own property and for their own safety.

The vacant property refurbishment grant is welcome. We have seen a lot of houses actually brought back into use but the grant needs to be reviewed because there is a difficulty with the payments not being in stages. Perhaps that could be looked at so people do not have to get all the work done in 13 months and then pay for it all up front. It can be difficult to get that done. I have also heard recently of a number of people who had a property or house rented, and to qualify for the grant when their tenants left, they did not rent the property again. They left it lying vacant for two years so they could claim the grants. We are taking houses out of the rental market by doing that. Okay, when they do up the property it will be rented again, but I do not know how this can addressed. It is actually reducing the number of houses on the market.

Another aspect of the grant, which I also brought up with the Minister, Deputy Browne, is the number of people who bought houses to avail of the property grant and who actually qualified for it, but because they were homeless and could not afford to rent or stay in bed and breakfast accommodation, they moved into the house and then were told they no longer qualified for the vacant property grant. Is this something that could be addressed? The property was vacant for the two years or more and it qualified for the grant. They did not know they had to get the application in before they could live in the property. The property was in a poor condition, they needed the money to do it up, but suddenly they were told they did not qualify anymore. They were very upset about it and they had no option but to live in that house even though it was not in a safe condition. They needed the money to update the electrics and so forth.

I am disappointed - as other speakers are - about the Bill being pushed down the road for a year. I do not think that is necessary. Everything should be done to bring as many properties as possible back into use as residential or, if they are business properties and no longer being used as a business property, to convert them to residential.

Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Cummins, to the Chamber. Vacancy and dereliction have been a scourge in every town and village in the country. While I welcome this Bill in many of its parts, we need action on the measures that are in place at the moment. From my perspective there are a number of different issues. One is local authorities sitting on land banks without initiative, imagination or creativity about reactivating it. Good work is being done in different areas but there are also brownfield sites that are owned by local authorities and buildings that are not activated by local authorities. If they do not have a plan or imagination, they need to look for expressions of interest from the private market to create proposals for quality developments that can complement a town centre.We also need to look at incentives. The living cities initiative is a tax measure that is already in place. Can that be expanded to all towns and villages as opposed to just cities? I believe it would not require too much but it would help to unlock some private market investment and stimulate some development.

There are other good schemes such as the repair and leasing scheme, RLS, and indeed the croí cónaithe towns and villages scheme, which was initially introduced only for urban areas with a population of 600 or more. As a councillor I was vocal in campaigning and got support right across the council to extend that to all areas of the countryside. When we go canvassing in general elections we see the sites being cleared. From a point of view of the environment and the social fabric, it is heartening to see buildings reactivated that already have services available to them. There is also the carbon embodiment of those buildings. That is a no-brainer. However, not enough is being done. I see wealthy families sometimes sitting on properties. People who have money can afford to incur small penalties and they sit on properties that could easily be reactivated and brought back into use.

There are also semi-State bodies sitting on land holdings and land banks. We need to devolve authority into local authorities or at least encourage mechanisms within local authorities to bring more life and light back into vacancy and dereliction throughout the country. In every town we see instances of activation of a commercial unit on the ground floor but there are often two or three levels above that and there needs to be a use-it-or-lose-it approach to support that. However, I welcome the work on it and the continued engagement with the House here. I look forward to working to tackle this challenge.

Laura Harmon (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister of State. I am pleased to support this important Bill from Senator Noonan. I am delighted that the Cross-Party Group is bringing this forward as part of our Private Members’ time this evening. It is important that we pass this Bill without delay. There has already been too much delay in terms of addressing not only the housing crisis but also the high levels of dereliction and vacancy throughout the country.

I will speak in particular about Cork, where I am from. We see report after report but recently we saw a GeoDirectory residential buildings report which showed high levels of dereliction and vacancy in Cork and across Ireland with 10% of homes in Cork either vacant or derelict. These are shocking figures. More than 80,000 dwellings were recorded as vacant with more than 20,000 derelict units scattered nationwide in the final quarter of last year. Some 3.6% of Cork’s housing stock is estimated to be vacant and 6.4% is estimated to be derelict. This is the fourth-highest percentage in Ireland. However, this is not the full picture because we do not even have a full register of how many properties actually exist in the country in general. That does not exist. We know from the 2022 census that there were over 166,000 vacant homes identified at that point. We cannot allow the hoarding of property to continue particularly in a housing crisis. There must be stronger and more significant financial penalties in place. I am speaking for a generation that is not only locked out of the housing market but locked into spiralling rents. We absolutely cannot afford to have a whole generation of pensioners in the future who are renting. It is a poverty ticking time bomb. This Bill will form part of the solution to getting some of these properties onto the market and back in use again, so that people can live in them and make them their homes.

Dereliction has an impact. Vacancy has an impact. It has an impact on how our societies grow, on people's mental health, on physical space and physical security as well. Dereliction is a form of vandalism in our society and it is an absolute kick in the teeth to people who do not have their own homes. I refer to the more than 15,000 people who are currently homeless and do not have a roof over their head or a home to call their own. Imagine how it is for people who do not have their own homes to walk down the street every day and see these boarded-up, vacant properties. It has to stop. It is keeping properties off the market and contributing to rising house prices. Research has been done by Frank O'Connor and Jude Sherry, who set up Derelict Ireland. Within 2 km of Cork City centre, there are 700 derelict properties. This is a blight on our towns and cities and on our society. We need to pass this Bill. I thank Senator Noonan for bringing it forward today.

Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is a very welcome and important Bill. I regret that the Government seems to be looking for a timed amendment in respect of it. Frankly, this is an issue on which we have waited too long. It has dragged on for far too long. In 2017, members of the Civil Engagement Group including myself, Senator Lynn Ruane and the then Senator Grace O'Sullivan from the Green Party, and others, brought forward a derelict and vacant sites Bill. It was opposed by the Government at that time. Some of the provisions that were in that Bill I see reflected again here. They were good ideas then and they are better ideas now. There are of course many other positive components to this legislation as well. Our Bill at that time also looked to make the derelict sites register publicly available and online, to give local authorities powers regarding the acquisition of derelict sites either compulsorily or by agreement, to strengthen the application of the vacant site levy and to restrict the termination of tenancies in the context of buy-to-let planning, which was a related provision. At that time, we were told the vacant site levy could not be increased as it was already at the limit, yet, years later, it was increased finally. We were also told that this was something that needed to be thought out, as there were many unintended consequences and so forth about looking at derelict sites. That was in 2017. It is now almost a decade later and some of the buildings that were vacant or technically derelict then have been derelict for that entire decade and are now close to the point of ruin. These are buildings which at the time and over the past decade, had action been taken, could have been restored into vibrant properties and homes, spaces which could be contributing as has been said to the life of our cities and towns and the lives of those who live in them and indeed to the vibrancy of our streets.

Too much time has been lost. I regret that the Government seems willing to lose yet another year before proceeding on this. Those years of properties being allowed to descend into greater dereliction or into ruin are an indictment at a time when we have a housing crisis of such a level increasing year-on-year over the past decade. There is a lack of joined-up thinking in many areas of Government policy on this. I commend Senator Noonan and others who tried to address this in a number of different ways. The Bill being put forward today tries to join the dots in a number of constructive ways.

I am conscious of missed opportunities. When the Finance (Local Property Tax) (Amendment) Act 2021 came through, it was decided in that legislation that the information on vacancy provided there would not also have a function in relation to issues such as the vacant property tax, or link up with that issue of vacancy.There have been issues with many of these tools, including with the residential zoned land tax, which relates to the vacant site levy. With regard to the vacant site levy, the fact the money went back to the central Exchequer was a real disincentive to local authorities. This could have been a tool to fund local authorities. If the vacant site levy had been going into a fund which was to be used for compulsory purchase, we would be looking at a tool that might have incentivised a dynamic of movement with regard to these measures. Again, as I say, there are many other areas where we need to see decision-making move forward, but as I am conscious of time, I will not go into them. We need to see a strengthening of information, powers and action in these areas.

I will highlight a few of the key elements of the Bill which I welcome. As I have said, the amendment of section 8 of the Derelict Sites Act to ensure there is publicly available information online is crucial, as are the removal of the obligation on the local authority in terms of owners' representations on adding properties to the register, and addressing the issue whereby somebody who is such an absent landlord they cannot be contacted means the property is not being registered. This is addressed in the Bill and it is extremely welcome. There are many other measures, including the two-year timeline of being on the derelict register leading to a new set of actions involving the Minister. All of this is very welcome and very constructive.

I want to signal I have concerns relating to a couple of aspects of the Bill which, as it proceeds through Committee Stage, I am happy to engage on. We deal with things by engaging with them on Committee Stage rather than by delaying them. These are with regard to some of the measures on partial change of use in buildings where the height is not more than 10 m above the ground. I am concerned about some of the streamlining of some of the planning measures. It is very important we maintain key standards, particularly in areas such as fire safety and disability access. A one-stop shop component is envisaged but it is very important these crucial standards are not diluted in any way.

Perhaps we could have provisions whereby we do not see speculative investment. We do not have use for speculative investment which could lead, for example, to investment properties being created, potentially jeopardising the rental of shops at street level. Again, it is very important that this should be designed in a way that ensures these properties are there not for short-term lets or investment but for living in. Well done to the proposers of the Bill.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am grateful for the opportunity to take on behalf of the Government Second Stage of the Dereliction and Building Regeneration Bill, which has been tabled by Senator Malcolm Noonan. This is an area I am exceptionally passionate about. I have done extensive work on the issue of vacancy and dereliction in my county of Waterford, and I have seen many of the measures implemented by the Government put to very good use there.

I can confirm the Government has agreed to a timed amendment for the reading of the Bill, having regard to the well-intentioned spirit in which it has been introduced and the underlying objectives it is intended to achieve. We also note the matters raised in the Bill relate to ongoing measures and actions the Government is progressing, and that certain elements of the Bill raise concerns, which will I set out towards the end of my contribution. As a result, the Government believes it is appropriate to defer the Bill for 12 months. It is important to state this certainly does not mean we will postpone action for 12 months. That is absolutely not the case.

The Private Members' Bill proposes to provide for the identification, management, restoration and bringing back into use derelict and vacant buildings and to simplify and expedite the planning and building control approval processes in this regard. As Senators are no doubt aware, the Government already has a comprehensive package of measures in place to address vacancy and dereliction, including a town centre first policy approach, which aims to combat vacancy and dereliction and breathe new life into our town centres. We also have targeted investment underpinned by substantial funding from a number of funding streams, including the rural regeneration and development fund and a €150 million fund from the urban regeneration and development fund, which has been made available to local authorities to acquire vacant and derelict properties and sites for reuse or sale. It is certainly one of the areas on which I engage with local authorities when I go throughout the country to ensure they are drawing on the fund which has been provided by the Government.

We also have a new CPO activation programme, which was launched in April 2023. This programme provides for a proactive, planned and systemic approach to addressing vacancy and dereliction by local authorities and provides guidance and support for local authorities to actively use their legislative powers to compulsorily acquire vacant and derelict properties where engagement with owners has been unsuccessful.

A number of Senators mentioned the very successful vacant property refurbishment grant scheme which was introduced by the Government. It provides up to €50,000 towards the refurbishment of vacant properties for occupation as principal private residences and up to €70,000 for the refurbishment of derelict properties for this purpose. It is important to state that while there have been 8,000 approvals, drawdown was mentioned by some Senators. The way the scheme is structured, the payment of the grant is on completion of the project. As the 13 months roll on, there will be even more drawdown of the grant. I acknowledge some of the calls that have been made with regard to phased payments.

We also have the repair and lease scheme, which provides up to €80,000 per unit of the upfront cost of bringing vacant units back into productive use for social housing. This is clawed back as an offset against the rent over the course of the lease term. This has been used to a great extent in Waterford. A total of 50% of all repair and lease units in the State are in Waterford. If it is able to be done by Waterford City and County Council, there is absolutely no reason it cannot be replicated by every local authority in the country. This is something about which I am speaking to local authorities.

We have also had the introduction of the extension to the end of this year of planning regulations exempting certain vacant commercial premises, including vacant spaces over shops, from the requirement to obtain planning permission for a change of use to residential accommodation. To date, this has resulted in the notification of almost 3,500 housing units being brought back into use. To supplement the change of use for exempted development regulations, which I have just mentioned, in 2024, the Department published an update to the Bringing Back Homes manual. This provides property owners, members of the public, local authorities and those involved in the construction industry with clear and practical guidance on the refurbishment of existing buildings for residential use and how current regulatory requirements that apply to common existing building types can be met.

From a regulatory perspective, the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2018 provide clarity on the application of disability access certificates to works on existing buildings being brought back into use. The Building Regulations (Part B Amendment) Regulations 2024 and Technical Guidance Document B 2024 support the reuse of existing buildings by simplifying, clarifying and rationalising fire safety requirements.

Town regeneration officers and vacant homes officers are in place throughout local government, working with the wider local authority teams to address vacancy and dereliction issues and increase the use of legislative mechanisms. These include the Derelict Sites Act, in conjunction with the town centre first policy, as well as a number of other measures, including the town centre first heritage revival scheme, THRIVE, which is a co-funded scheme through the ERDF. This is regenerating important heritage buildings nationally, which I know Senator Noonan is also passionate about. I am confident these measures introduced under the Housing for All plan will have the desired effect of addressing vacancy and dereliction and making more efficient use of our existing housing stock.

Notwithstanding the progress that has been made on resourcing, policy and funding support, there is a need to make legislative amendments to update the Derelict Sites Act 1990 to improve its use as a tool in tackling dereliction, consistent with Government policy objectives on regeneration and increasing housing supply in urban areas. In this regard, it is now proposed to re-engage with the local government sector and other key stakeholders in connection with the review of the Act.The proposals set out in the proposed legislation and in the Oireachtas joint committee report on urban regeneration will be taken into account as part of this review. The Government has committed in the programme for Government to a new national housing plan to follow Housing for All. While this work is being undertaken, the measures detailed in Housing for All continue to be progressed. A suite of measures to deal with vacancy and dereliction will, of course, be an essential part of any successor plan. While the underlying objectives of the Bill are aimed at expediting the process for bringing vacant and derelict buildings back into use for residential purposes and thereby assisting in increasing housing supply and facilitating urban regeneration - which, of course, is in line with the objectives of the Government's housing policy contained in Housing for All, in addition to the objectives of the national planning framework - I must record some significant concerns in relation to how these objectives are to be achieved under this Bill. The proposals to dispense with certain requirements of the building control regulations are a key concern. The proposed exemption from obtaining a fire safety certificate, which is an important process to protect the health and safety of people in and around buildings, and the proposal to circumvent certification of the design and construction of building work by a registered construction professional and competent builder could be problematic in ensuring that development works are properly inspected and monitored to ensure compliance with building regulations. Arguably, these proposals would weaken the reforms put in place since 2014 for the control of building activity in response to widespread failures that had occurred.

In addition to building control, a number of concerns also arise in respect of the planning-related proposals in the Bill. First, it proposes several new planning exemptions. I note in the first instance that the planning and development regulations already provide for several exemptions from the need to obtain planning permissions relevant to tackling vacancy and dereliction. These include since 2018 an exemption for the change of use of certain vacant commercial buildings, including vacant above-the-ground-floor premises, to residential - such as above-the-shop living - subject to conditions and limitations. Derelict homes may also avail of exemptions from an extension of the property to the rear, the conversion of an existing garage or shed, the creation of a porch and external maintenance and improvement works to the building. The existing exempted development regulation provisions in the Planning and Development Act 2000 and the associated regulations will remain in place until the relevant provisions of the new Planning and Development Act 2024 are commenced later this year. Once the sections of the 2024 Act are commenced, they will be accompanied by new regulations that will replace the Planning and Development Regulations 2001, as amended. My Department is in the process of preparing updated regulations, including in relation to exempted development provisions. The proposed amendments can be considered as part of this current preparatory work ongoing in the Department. It is intended to launch a public consultation on exempted development regulations next month and, accordingly, it would be premature to progress proposals for exempted development provisions at this stage.

Second, the introduction of what is termed "a Town Centre First application process" for the change of use of all non-residential buildings would amount to a new alternative consenting process operating in lieu of the normal planning application determination and building control processes. While the details of how this new application process would operate are largely unspecified, it would likely have significant resourcing implications for local planning authorities, which would, in effect, have to manage two separate and independent application processes. Additionally, the proposed planning exemptions process set out in the Bill would involve an assessment of applications by a new town centre first panel under this separate process, including an assessment of relevant development plan and local area plan objectives pertaining. Such an arrangement would result in significant legal risk, noting that such a panel does not have the powers conferred on a planning authority under the Planning and Development Act 2000 to determine planning applications and there are no provisions for public participation or potential environmental assessments as part of the assessment process by the panel as proposed.

To conclude, this Private Members' Bill has certain deficiencies as I have outlined. As I mentioned, my Department is already doing significant work in this area and I am anxious to continue with the existing initiatives that seek to tackle vacancy and dereliction. Therefore, I believe a timed amendment is appropriate in this instance. I do not, however, doubt the sincerity or the intention with which the Bill has been introduced. We all agree on the need to tackle vacancy and dereliction. By working in tandem with each other, as Opposition and Government, I think we can really bring attention to this issue and address it once and for all. I agree that seeing vacant and derelict premises across this country at a time of such housing need is something that must change.

Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State. I thank all the Senators for their contributions. I will address a couple of points raised by the Minister of State in his closing contribution. From our perspective, we are disappointed that a timed amendment has been placed on this legislation. As others said, this an opportunity to bring this Bill to Committee Stage and some of the deficiencies, as the Minister of State put it, could be addressed on that Stage. We have long debated this matter and Senator Higgins has already related the previous Bills brought forward to try to address it. Regarding the Planning and Development Act 2024, I was centrally involved in bringing that legislation through the Houses. It still does not address this aspect, where there was an opportunity there to do it. What this Bill does is to gift the Government an opportunity to try to bring 10,000 houses back into productive use in our town centres. This would really be of exceptional value.

Turning to the specific query about circumventing the requirement to meet building control standards, this is certainly not the case, as we see it, in this Bill. It does place the onus on architects to submit proposals to the planning authority and the planning authority signs off. If anything, therefore, it strengthens compliance in our view. Issues were also raised around the town centre first process and town centre first planner. Staff are already in place in this regard between the vacancy officers and the town centre first officers. Certainly, when we brought the town centre first policy to the Government in 2020, it was introduced to look at the broader framework of having a one-stop shop. Unfortunately, that element did not make it over the line in 2020, so we are proposing it again. We spoke to conservation architects and they were very clear they have been looking for this approach for more than a decade. It is contained in the report from Martin Colreavy in 2012.

I think, therefore, we are missing an opportunity to move this Bill forward. I welcome the comments from the Minister of State, but I think we are missing an opportunity here to move this Bill forward, not to put a timed amendment on it, to allow it to progress, to take on board the good measures and elements in here, to bring it through and, hopefully, to have it enacted by the end of the year. I welcome that the Minister of State is going to take elements of the legislation and bring them in through the technical working group. I ask as well that the working group would specifically look at all elements of this legislation and see where we can align them. We need to bring in the professions and bring in conservation architects. We did quite a bit of work in the last Government in ensuring every local authority will have an architectural conservation officer in the context of the town centre first teams. This initiative really needs to move up in scale and out of these exemplar projects we have had through the various heritage grants. It needs to be moved to a scale where it will actually deliver results, deliver housing for people and bring vibrancy back into our town centres. We need to have a whole new approach and stop turning our backs on our Irish towns. They are beautiful and unique and something very special. We go off to European towns, look at them and think they are fabulous. We have something unique and special here. We have been knocking them, demolishing them and ignoring them for far too long and this Bill is trying to address some of that history.

I heard with interest the senior Minister on "Prime Time" yesterday saying that the Government was going to move mountains and do everything in its power and that it has written to the CEOs of local authorities to do the same thing, namely, to find every single enabling force to try to bring housing into use. We have presented a Bill here that will do just that. It is estimated that this would bring about 10,000 houses back into use. As I said in opening, it is not just the houses that face onto streets. It is the burgage plots and backfilled sites. They are in all our towns around the country and could be filled in with ten, 20 or 30 units for families to live in. It should be done at scale. While I appreciate the Government's response to this, I am extremely disappointed that the Minister has opted to instruct the Government to put a timed amendment on the Bill. I have been present in the past when timed amendments were put on Bills and sometimes I was not very happy about doing it because it was good legislation. We constantly hear the Taoiseach and Ministers say that all that needs to be done is to put down all the proposals we bring forward. We are bringing something positive forward this evening and it is disappointing that it is being met with a brick wall. I hope the measures we have proposed will be given consideration. I do not care whether it is our Bill that is introduced, but the measures in it are bloody good, especially the measure around the town centres first policy. The one-stop shop could be a real enabler, activate a huge volume of housing and bring our town centres back to life.