Housing Policy

Policy: Housing

Links to: Climate Change, Heritage, Housing, Nuclear Issues, Planning, Waste Management and Water Quality

Green Party Housing Policy

(Adopted by Green Party National Council 17 April 2004)

Executive Summary
Introduction
Private Housing
Private Rented Sector
Social Housing
Information, Research and Evaluation
Rural Housing
Homeless and Traveller Accommodation

Executive Summary
The Green Party sees housing as a social good and part of our birthright as Irish citizens, and will enshrine that principle in law.

We hold that a secure, warm and conveniently located dwelling is the minimum requirement for human happiness and that this should be available at a price affordable by every citizen. We believe that a spectrum of housing choices should be available to citizens in terms of tenure and type, which will meet their housing needs at different stages of their lives.

We recognise the benefits of widespread ownership in property and we will ensure that this aspiration is as achievable for younger generations as it was for their predecessors.

However, we do not believe that an affordable home is sufficient in itself. Rather, homes need to be conveniently located for transport, local services, job opportunities, social centres and recreational and nature spaces to provide full life satisfaction. Compact settlements with coherent public spaces and varied individual building expression, pragmatically planned for easy material recycling, local energy generation, and even local food production, is our vision for the development of housing settlements.

Ireland is in the midst of a housing crisis at present. High and unaffordable house prices in most parts of the country, and particularly in the urban centres, have combined with escalating rents for private rented housing and a poor record of provision of Local Authority or other non-profit housing for those who can neither purchase nor rent in the private market.

We believe that practices such as land speculation and the hoarding of zoned land have distorted the housing market and impeded the provision of affordable housing. Government policy has made some attempts to mitigate the effects of this basic flaw through special provisions for low income and vulnerable groups but these attempts have failed by any economic and social criteria. We believe that strategic Government intervention to alter the balance of rights between private landowners and the common good is necessary to ensure fair and equitable provision in both private and social housing.

In order to address this housing crisis, in Government the Green Party will:

· Recoup a fair share of the value that is added to urban and rural land which is zoned for development and ensure that this value is returned to the community
· Ring-fence this revenue for the development of sustainable settlements
· Begin to shift the tax burden from labour to ‘smart’ taxes on the site value of land including residential investment property and second homes
· Give pre-emption rights to local authorities to purchase property at point of sale and make more active use of existing compulsory purchase powers
· Ensure public investment in social and affordable housing through the full and consistent implementation of Part V of the Planning & Development Act 2000
· Promote Cost Rental and Community Land Trusts providing permanently affordable homes where equity can be built by renting or by purchase
· Progressively limit the amount of money that lending institutions can lend for house purchase in order to reduce the price of housing.
· Set up a Housing Authority, under the auspices of the Department of the Environment, whose objective will be to shape and influence the development of housing policy through research, market analysis and information and advice
· Commit to ensuring the provision of 10,000 social housing units per year until the waiting lists are clear.
· Reform the Land Register, direct the mapping of all property in land using the best available technology and ensure that all interests in property are registered and this information is made fully transparent and publicly accessible

We are confident that these policies will firstly halt, and then reduce house values – by stimulating private sector, financing public sector and facilitating third sector supply streams.

Introduction

Escalating house prices in recent years have created a serious problem of affordability and placed home ownership beyond the reach of a large number of people, particularly young people. Many income earners who could traditionally purchase a home are now simply unable to do so. In 1984 the average price of a new house was 4.3 times the average manufacturing wage . By 1994 the ratio had decreased slightly and average new house process for the country as a whole were 4.2 times the average manufacturing wage . (In Dublin the ratio was 4.8). By 2003, however, the ratio of house process to average manufacturing earnings had moved to 8.5 to 1 for the country as a whole and 11 to 1 in Dublin . Even couples with two average incomes are currently unable to bridge the gap between the traditional loan minimum and the house price .

Because home ownership is so embedded a tradition in Irish culture and adequate alternatives are limited, people are under huge pressure to acquire a home at these inflated prices. This usually requires both partners to work long hours, often with inadequate childcare facilities for their children. Little research has been done into the social consequences of the pressures induced by these exorbitant house prices.

The Green Party wishes to see a society in which it is possible for couples, if they so wish, to spend time with their children when they are being raised. We do not want to see a generation of latch-key children emerging, with all of the social problems this may cause in future years. We want to see a situation where is only necessary for one member of the family unit to have a full-time job, or where both parents can have part-time jobs and still raise a family. We do not want to see the current situation continue where it is necessary for both partners to have full-time jobs to service big mortgages.

The inflated house prices that have emerged in this country over the past decade carry significant economic consequences:

· They fuel the demand for higher wages
· They make it uneconomic for highly-skilled emigrants to return to Ireland to support our increasingly high-tech economy.
· They have resulted in a huge level of private indebtedness, which, if interest rates were to rise significantly, will be disastrous for many people
· They add considerably to the Government subsidy to the Private Rented Sector via the Supplementary Welfare Allowance Scheme (SWA). Last year expenditure on this scheme amounted to approximately 300,000,000. In addition, the Government spent 2,000,000 on temporary Bed & Breakfast accommodation.
· Over 5,000 people are homeless and the number continues to grow
· Inflated prices for land also make it less attractive for industry to start new enterprises. An acre of land zoned for industrial use near the M50 in Dublin can cost up to 120,000 euros.
· Inflated prices for agricultural land due to house site hope value have made farming uneconomic for new entrants.

Private Housing
House prices have escalated rapidly in this country over the last decade. New house prices have increased over three times faster than house building costs and six times faster than the consumer price index since 1994. Average site prices in Dublin rose by 200 per cent between 1995 and 1998. We believe that the causes of this sharp price escalation are as follows:

· Despite having some of the highest levels of home ownership in Europe, Ireland still has some catching up to do in relation to household formation. The European average is 450 dwellings per 1,000 of the population whereas in Ireland it is only 327 per 1,000.

· The demographic structure in the Irish population means that a lot of “twenty-somethings” have been coming into the housing market for the first time.

· The Celtic Tiger economy had a large significant impact as more young people were paid relatively high wages. Consequently, developers increased house prices as demand increased and buyers competed against each other. In this way, much of the wealth created by the labour and initiative of workers and businesses during the Celtic Tiger was transferred to landowners and developers.

· Banks and other lending institutions are key contributors to the problem of escalating house prices. The more money these institutions lend the more their profits increase, so it is in their interests that house process continue to soar. There has been a ready availability of near to 100% loans from these financial institutions at historically low interest rates. These institutions have almost certainly not adhered to the Central Bank lending criteria and this may lead to unsustainable borrowings if interest rates rise.

· EU financial institutions have exacerbated the problem because banks and other lending institutions have had more access to cheap money since the advent of EMU.

· Lending institutions are also targeting the parents of first-time house buyers by encouraging them to take out additional mortgages to fund the deposits on their children’s homes.

· Government policies have encouraged investors and home owners with large tax breaks

All of these factors have combined to create an environment that encourages speculation and even promotes it as a wise financial or investment policy. In the process, those with access to capital to speculate benefit while those less well off are forced to borrow excessively. It is worth noting that this speculation does nothing to increase the inherent value/benefit of anything but only serves to redistribute wealth increasingly into the hands of the few who are already the wealthiest (eg just because the “value” of a house doubles over a certain period doesn’t mean that the house itself is twice as good).

One would expect that when any government saw the rapid escalation in house prices and the consequent dire social and economic consequences, it would intervene. Such interventions do occur from time to time, but usually to assist people and vested interest groups who are “significant players” in our economic system

It is the view of the Green Party that effective Government intervention has not occurred because the main political parties, which have been in power for the last decade, receive substantial funding from the powerful development and construction lobby. (It must be stressed that these contributions are legal and that it is not against the law to try to influence Government Policy).

It is of note that although no “strings” are attached to these contributions, successive governments limited themselves to incentivising construction, land supply and residential investment. A “hands off” approach to development land speculation, hoarding and windfall gains has characterised the Government’s record since the early years of the ‘Celtic Tiger’. The effect of this laissez faire policy approach has been to cause social and economic harm to significant sections of the population, while a vast transfer of wealth has occurred to the tiny minority of builders and developers.

Local authorities have estimated that 42% of new households in urban areas and 33% nationally will be unable to purchase a home in the period 2001-2006. A breakdown of the cost of an average new house will help to give an understanding of the problem and hence suggest a solution to the exorbitant price of housing. Taking the example of an average new “starter home” in Dublin that currently costs about 235,000 euros, it is possible to see how costs and value are apportioned as follows (Appendix 1):

Market value of house €235,000
Cost of site €50,000
Cost of servicing site €10,000
Cost of building house €75,000
Miscellaneous fees €5,000
Landowner/Developer/Builder profit € 95,000

It is worth noting that the value of land (including ‘hope’ value) continues to increase and this increased value is divided between the original landowner and the developer. It is clear that any attempt to reduce the price of housing will also have to tackle the more fundamental issue of land value. Tinkering with the mechanisms that influence the housing market, as was done with the Bacon Commission Reports, does very little to substantially alter the status quo.

Our Policy

Our policies will be integrated with the National Spatial Plan, particularly with respect to the concentration of up to a third of the population in the Greater Dublin Area. This concentration cannot be allowed to continue, particularly as it is preventing other parts of the country from developing the critical mass of population necessary to attract investment and development.

When in Government, the Green Party will tackle the current housing crisis with a combination of supply side and demand side measures :

· We will introduce a “zoning” or site value tax set at a percentage of the value of the land with planning permission as estimated from the zoning description sufficiently high to discourage the hoarding of zoned land. This levy will become due on all land that has been zoned for more than one year. In this way developers will be incentivised to develop land as quickly as possible, to avoid hoarding zoned land and to ensure the speedy supply of housing units. The site value tax will provide a guaranteed receipt stream for local authorities to fund necessary infrastructure. However, to encourage high quality and participative urban/settlement design, the requirement to pay the site value tax will be lifted for zoned land during the development of a Framework Design (under part VIII of the 2000 Act).
· We will change the basis of Development Levies in Sections 48 and 49 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 from cost to ‘value added’ to land as reflected in the uplift in market value by the granting of planning permission and the provision of public infrastructure. We will also extend the remit of Sections 48 and 49 to cover all infrastructure and capital investment projects that add value to development lands – road, rail, sewerage, water and schools, hospitals and universities, electricity and gas grids, decentralised government offices etc.We will recoup up to 40% of the value added to the land by the granting of planning permission and the provision of public infrastructure in cases where the land has not been compulsorily purchased prior to rezoning. However, we will reduce the amount of the Development Levy to be paid by the amount of the site value tax that has already been paid.

Local authorities have experienced difficulties in agreeing and adopting their specific charges. We believe that Development Levies would be more transparent and easier to defend by the local authorities if the ‘value added’ to the land by the granting of planning permission and the provision of public infrastructure was assessed (as reflected in market value) and a reasonable proportion of that value was charged. As this value added to land is not the direct result of investment by the landowner (it comes like a lottery win) there is no negative impact on economic growth and competitiveness if the entire windfall is recouped to the public purse. This characteristic of development levies makes them quite unique compared to all other forms of taxes on income, capital and turnover.

Local authorities can reasonably levy 50% at least of the added value to the land following rezoning, and still allow the developer to enjoy a windfall gain. The city of Basel in Switzerland collects 50% of the value added by a new planning permission under its planning. Other Swiss authorities, such as Zurich City, are now copying the Basel arrangement because of its ease of use. Developers appreciate the predictability of this system as compared to unpredictable conditions and contributions that are applied too late to be factored into the land price. It is clear that value-added levies on land do not impact the total profits of housing developers but only the profit element that is directly attributable to the rise in land value from purchase to sale. The Green Party believes that in these circumstances, housing design and construction would improve as builder developers sought competitive advantage.

There is no obstacle to recouping more national capital investment under Section 49 of the 2000 Act – for instance capital funding of schools- as does local government in the USA. Furthermore, this charge would facilitate some redistribution of development levy revenue from towns which are designated as ‘Hubs’ and ‘Gateways’ under the national Spatial Strategy (NSS) and into which most major infrastructure will be directed, to villages and towns which were not. Under the current system, property owners in favoured towns will not only enjoy the efficiency and quality of life boon of the new infrastructure (better roads, new hospital etc), they will enjoy almost all of the increase in land value that the infrastructure will bring. The Green Party proposals for changing the basis for the Development Levies to ‘value added’ and extending their remit to include national capital investment, will result in lower levies for poorly serviced land in remote areas and higher levies on well serviced land in wealthy towns and cities.

However, Housing Associations and Not-For –Profit companies will be charged a reduced level of Development Levies and minor extensions to existing dwellings and agricultural buildings will be exempted. The revenue gathered from the levies will be ring-fenced to provide local authority housing and not- for- profit housing, and related infrastructure, services and amenities.

· We will explore the potential of the new County Development Board Structure at local authority level to become involved in overseeing capital investment in its county and in addressing its infrastructural deficit.

The County Development Board Structure was devised to co-ordinate the local delivery of government programmes and local government within city and county boundaries with particular reference to social exclusion and sustainable development. ‘Towards Sustainable Local Communities 2001’ specifically refers to the establishment of the city/county development board as providing ‘a clearly defined institutional framework for Agenda 21 at county/city level over the coming decade.

The Green Party believes that CDBs have not made as much impact as they might have because, although their brief is very wide, they have no remit to implement programmes directly, nor to raise and allocate money to those agencies that have, in order to drive their integrated Development Plans. We believe that the CDB board, with all relevant stakeholders fully represented, is an ideal structure to oversee capital investment and address the countrywide infrastructure deficit. This would give them much-needed relevance and credibility and would reinforce their sustainable development mandate.

This change would also respond to the demand for democratisation of the planning control system and would help to legitimise the development levy system proposed. We believe that these proposed changes can be accommodated under Article 15.2.2 of the Constitution which states “Provision may however be made by law for the creation or recognition of subordinate legislatures and for the powers and functions of these legislatures”. Furthermore, improved stakeholder participation is called for under the Aalborg Charter and a minimum level of financial independence for local government in Article 9 of the European Charter for Local Self Government.

· We will ensure that local authorities will ordinarily compulsorily purchase development land prior to rezoning, at agricultural or existing use value plus 25% for the purpose of developing housing.(Annex 2). Local authorities will either (i) service this land and sell sites directly to young couples at an affordable price for the purpose of building their own homes (ii) build affordable local authority housing on such land (iii) put social and affordable housing contracts out to tender to private development companies or not-for-profit housing associations. (iv) sell land at full rezoned market value to private developers.

· In order to encourage Housing Associations and not-for-profit companies, building land that has been Compulsorily Purchased by local authorities will be sold to them at cost. This will mean that Housing Associations will be able to purchase sites at affordable prices.

· We will ensure that local authorities are given pre-emption rights in relation to the sale of, or exercise of options on, land. Pre-emption rights are common in Europe for the acquisition of land for not-for-profit housing or for other community requirements. A pre-emption mechanism requires that all land transactions must be notified to the relevant bodies in their functional area. An advantage of a pre-emption mechanism is that the practice of developers buying ’options’ would be controlled in the public interest. These options can be seen as a form of gambling where the speculator pays for the right to buy land at a fixed price or according to an agreed formula if it is zoned, or if it gets planning permission. Such options or interests in land are not required to be registered, which can lead to situations where the local authority is misled as to the real beneficiary of land in planning negotiations. For instance, a developer with a proven track record of poorly finished estates who has been barred from further development can conceal his interest in a planning application. Pre-emption of the most advantageous of these deals by the local authority would provide an affordable source of land, at least until the practice ceased as speculators failed to realise their expected gains.

· We will investigate the introduction of a ‘Participatory Budget’ for local authorities in relation to a proportion of the Development Levy revenue to give local democratic legitimacy to the planning and levy system.

· We will empower local authorities to designate ‘brown field’ sites in need of extensive redevelopment to come under the annualised development levy system in order to spur their development and to dis-incentivise speculation and land hoarding.

· We will levy a site value tax on all second homes and holiday homes, which are not permanently occupied. This tax will represent about 1% of the value of the site under the home.
Thus a 300,000 euros home comprising of 200,000 euros building on 100,000 euros site will pay 1000 euros per annum. This will encourage the sale of many such empty dwellings often in scenic areas under high demand. The social and environmental impacts of second, mainly holiday homes, are even greater than those of full-time residents. These are invariably built in the open countryside to avail of views and access to nature. Scenic coastal areas around the country have experienced a huge increase in the number of houses, but the population continues to fall as the extra houses are often holiday homes. This measure will make it cheaper for locals to buy homes thus reducing pressure to build new houses in many sensitive areas. The ESRI calculates that over 30% of all houses built in the last 5 years are second or replacement dwellings. The Green Party believes that it is reasonable to ask owners of holiday homes to contribute to those who have no home over their head and no prospect of it in the current situation.

The abolition of rates on domestic dwellings was introduced at a time when holiday and second homes were insignificant in the housing market. The policy took account of the fact that the house-owner was already contributing to national and local services through their income taxes and direct taxes. But the second homeowner does not contribute extra tax to cover the relief of rates for the second home. Local property taxes on empty second homes are justified to compensate the local community for the loss of purchasing power and social capital of full-time residents and the higher house prices they cause for the local permanent community. This measure will have the effect of dampening demand from the holiday home buyer/builder and the investor and will stop the escalation of house prices in rural areas, thus reducing pressure for one-off rural housing. We will ensure a system of strict enforcement to document whether or not a property is being rented and for how long (eg require contracts and do spot checks with heavy fines for irregularities). This will also bring more rental properties onto the market- an instant increase in the housing supply.

· We will reduce stamp duty generally and in particular abolish Stamp Duty for those over 60 year of age ‘trading down’ to smaller homes. This will free up larger dwellings for young families who really need them

· We will introduce tax incentives to promote ‘Living Over the Shop’ schemes. There are thousands of empty and under-used upper floors over shops and businesses in our cities and towns. We will ensure that building owners are given a helping hand to bring this space back into use as living accommodation.

While some of the measures outlined above are necessary to bring the cost of housing down, in themselves they will not be sufficient. They will bring the cost of building land down, but house prices will always reflect what people are willing to pay. What people are willing to pay is to a large extent related to what they are able to borrow. As stated earlier it is our contention that the main factor that is fuelling the escalation in house prices is the ready availability of cheap money. In order to address this the Green Party will:

· Instruct the Central Bank to draw up new guidelines for the lending institutions limiting the amount of money that they can lend for house purchase. Over a number of years this will decrease gradually and will be based on a multiple of a person’s or a couple’s salary. At present, for a couple both earning the average industrial wage of 26,000 euros, it is possible to borrow 195 euros or roughly 8 times the average industrial wage. Over a period of five years we will reduce the multiple that can be borrowed to 2.5 times one salary plus 1 times any additional salary where a couple are purchasing. These multiples will be reviewed periodically by the Housing Authority to take account of any changes in building costs so as to ensure a fair return to the builder. It is essential to introduce this measure gradually so as not to cause a recession in the building industry as it employs over 189,000 people, both directly and indirectly at present. In order to prevent overseas lending institutions (who are not bound by Central Bank Guidelines or by the Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority) from breaking these guidelines, a new special rate of Stamp Duty (up to 50%) will be introduced on all mortgage deeds where the amount of the mortgage exceeds the guidelines.

The abolition of rates on domestic dwellings was introduced at a time when holiday and second homes were insignificant in the housing market. The policy took account of the fact that the house-owner was already contributing to national and local services through their income taxes and direct taxes. But the second homeowner does not contribute extra tax to cover the relief of rates for the second home. Local property taxes on empty second homes are justified to compensate the local community for the loss of purchasing power and social capital of full-time residents and the higher house prices they cause for the local permanent community. This measure will have the effect of dampening demand from the holiday home buyer/builder and the investor and will stop the escalation of house prices in rural areas, thus reducing pressure for one-off rural housing. We will ensure a system of strict enforcement to document whether or not a property is being rented and for how long (eg require contracts and do spot checks with heavy fines for irregularities). This will also bring more rental properties onto the market- an instant increase in the housing supply.

· We will reform the local rates system by introducing a split rate modelled on the ‘smart taxes’ of Philadelphia USA. Instead of a rate based on the rental value of the property land and building, the tax rate is split in two. The greater (and increasing) percentage relates to the underlying value of the site on which the building sits. The second smaller (and reducing) percentage relates to public services. The strategy is to eliminate the services proportion entirely, leaving a pure site value tax. The ‘smart tax’ on site values reduces the capital value of property and encourages the optimum development of land and investment in building (ie the tax is not increased when the property is redeveloped to a higher density or quality). Many US cities have changed to such a ‘smart tax’ and rejuvenated their central business districts. It has successfully reduced urban blight and increased local revenues for the cities that adopted it. It will encourage investment, refurbishment and maintenance of properties and prompt the efficient development and renewal of derelict and brown field sites.

· We will set up a Housing Authority under the auspices of the Department of the Environment that will have overall responsibility for co-ordinating the Housing strategy outlined in this document, and will support local authorities in their development of housing policy. Given the importance of the new Authority having the confidence of NGOs, housing providers, local authorities and academic and research institutions, the Board of the Authority will represent all of these sectors along with a wide range of professional expertise. The Housing Authority will shape and influence the development of housing policy through research, market analysis and information and advice services. It will provide vital information upon which to base future housing strategies and policies. It will also make accurate and timely information available to members of the public and elected representatives concerning housing issues. It will set standards of quality, density and thermal/energy efficiency of buildings for different regions of the country in consultation with local authorities. It will ensure, through planning regulations, that there will be sufficient infrastructure provided with new housing schemes in terms of playgrounds, schools, community centres, sufficient clean, safe water supplies and that they will be within safe walking distance of the occupants

· We will ensure that the Housing Authority promotes eco-design techniques and environmental technologies through changes in the Building Regulations concerning the construction and restoration of homes, offices and public sector buildings. Eco-building techniques can dramatically reduce the environmental impact of construction and help to promote locally-sourced products and materials. The Green Party will provide financial incentives to support pilot schemes that encourage the dissemination of sustainable urban design, such as ‘ the Village’ proposal for North Tipperary, the Freshford 20/20 proposal in Kilkenny and the Blackwater Resource initiative in Co. Cork. These are similar in many ways to the well- known Beddington Zero Energy Development in the UK, an environmentally-friendly, energy-efficient mix of housing and work space.

· We will introduce an energy rating standard for new homes to promote sustainability. We propose that all new dwellings should come with a rating system to indicate their environmental performance. We will also ensure the publication of ‘sustainability guidelines’ in relation to the building of new structures and renovation of existing structures aimed at developers, homeowners and architects. These guidelines will help them to plan for reduced environmental impact at design stage.These guidelines will form the basis of fiscal measures and grant aid to be introduced to encourage best environmental building practise and to encourage early adoption of home energy technologies such as photovoltaics and combined heat and power systems.

The level of Government intervention in the housing market that the Green Party advocates is the norm in many European countries such as Finland, Sweden, Austria and Holland. Canada also adopts a highly interventionist approach to this sector and in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) the “common good” takes precedence over individual property rights.

Private Rented Sector
The Green Party wants to see renting in the private sector come to be regarded as a legitimate and sensible housing choice, depending on individual circumstances at different life stages, and will work to the goal of enhancing the range of options available for people to house themselves. Renting provides diversity and flexibility and the ease of moving house with minimal expense and at relatively short notice. The private rented sector is a useful provider of flexible, transitional accommodation. It is not, and should not be, a housing provider for long-stay accommodation, which can better be provided by the not-for-profit sector and by home ownership.

We recognise that private landlords need to get a financial return from their properties to enable them to maintain and manage their stock in a professional manner, with the flexibility necessary to let them make commercial decisions, including deciding to enter or leave the rental market. If necessary, we will use the taxation system to deter landlords from leaving the rental market, or to encourage more supply.

We will aim to ensure that the rental market remains large enough to satisfy demand at stable rent levels. We believe it is important that working adults be able to house themselves either alone or with partners and children, and that the market should provide a range of accommodation to meet the needs of all income groups, without their being obliged to rely on state benefits such as rent allowance to subsidise their housing costs. In Government, the Green Party will use the full range of tax measures, and planning legislation to ensure that the market makes an adequate level of provision to meet the needs of those who wish to rent, and that rent levels remain stable.

However, the same basic factors that have led to high prices for house purchasers have also led to high rent levels for tenants. The private rented sector previously catered for young, single, transient people, those who did not qualify for, or who were waiting for local authority housing or were saving to buy a house. As there are now many more people in these categories, numbers renting have risen and rents have risen even higher. Rental housing stock has increased dramatically in recent years due to demand and to various government tax incentives such as Section 23 and Section 27 measures. However, supply did not meet demand as in parallel local authority stock was sold.

Other problems such as poor quality accommodation and insecurity of tenure are of growing concern. The Government’s response was to subsidise the rents of qualifying recipients via the Supplemental Welfare Allowance Scheme (SWA). Many of those recipients would have expected to be housed by the local authorities previously. There are now nearly 400,000 people renting privately in Ireland and 40% of these are in receipt of Supplementary Welfare Allowance. Next year Government expenditure on this scheme was expected to be 330 million euros before the cutbacks announced in the Estimates 2004. This level of subsidy has caused serious distortion in the private rental market – in effect the Government is fuelling rent increases at the bottom end of the market.

The private rented sector had been in decline until relatively recently. This led to the sector being characterised by the following conditions:

· Many people cannot afford the going “market rate” of house renting
· Tenants can be evicted with just four weeks notice without any reason
· Rents can be increased at frequent intervals by any amount
· Many properties are below the minimum standard required
· Only 20% of landlords are fulfilling the requirement to register as is required by law
· There is no official forum for reconciling disputes except through the courts

To address the problems outlined above, the Government introduced the
Residential Tenancies Act 2003, which had several welcome provisions including:

· The establishment of a Residential Tenancies Board to settle disputes between Landlord and Tenant
· The requirement for all Landlords to register with the Board
· Improved but still limited security of tenure
· The requirement to have minimum standards for rental property
· The requirement to keep the property to at least the same standard as when tenancy commenced

However, this Act falls far short of what is required to produce an equitable system of renting. Some of its serious shortcomings are as follows:

· The limited security of tenure provides for a series of 4 year tenancy agreements whereby a tenant will be on probation for 6 months and cannot be evicted for only a further 3 ½ years. Even this limited provision has several get-out clauses for landlords and although an improvement on the previous 4 weeks notice provision, is nowhere near adequate.
· The rents are to be set by the Board at the “open market price” of rental accommodation. The Act, in Part 2, Section 24, defines market rent as :
“the rent which a willing tenant not already in occupation would give and a willing landlord would take for the dwelling”. This clause is patently ridiculous as no tenant is willing to pay 1,200 euros for the rental of a three bedroom, semi-detached house but does so out of desperation and to avoid homelessness! In other words the Act has not addressed the single biggest issue, which is one of affordability
· There are requirements in the 2003 Act to register rental properties and for regular inspections with fines for non-compliance. But the Green Party is sceptical about the enforcement of such provisions given the fact that it was a requirement of the Housing (Registration of Rented Houses) Regulations 1996, for landlords to register both themselves and their rented dwellings with the Local Authority. Of the approximately 140,000 landlords, only 22,500 have registered. Furthermore, under the provisions of the new Act, although
Landlords will have to register with the new Board, such registration will be anonymous even (or especially) to the Revenue Commissioners.
· Unfortunately there was no requirement in the 2003 legislation, forcing developers to cater for the lower end of the rental market. The amount of rental housing stock has increased dramatically in recent years due to demand and to various Government tax incentives. This has resulted in the higher end of the market being catered for quite adequately but there have been no incentives for landlords to get involved in the lower end of the market. Most apartments for rental are for single or double occupancy and don’t cater for young families. This has resulted in rents increasing at the lower end of the market whereas at the upper end as supply has increased, rents have stabilised or even reduced.

Our Policy
The levels of rent that can be charged for a property are to a large extent dependent on the price of private housing. As a result of our policies in the Private House Sector, rents will fall quite dramatically as people in the Rented Sector leave to purchase their own housing. Rents will also fall as currently vacant second homes/holiday homes reduce their rent so that owners can avoid an injurious rates penalty for unoccupied second homes.

In Government the Green Party will do the following:

· At present landlords can claim tax back on renovating their properties over an 8 year period. We will shorten this period to 4 years thus providing an incentive for landlords to refurbish.

· We will encourage institutional investors such as pension funds, Trade Unions, Credit Unions etc. to become involved in this sector as they will tend to take a more long-term view of their investment and are not in the market for a “quick kill”. This diversity of providers will also promote competition between the private and institutional investors resulting in a dampening down of rental prices.

· Tenants will be given security of tenure of one month for every five- month’s occupation. Landlords will also benefit from this proposal as tenants would have to provide a similar notice or an alternative tenant for the same period prior to the termination of the rental agreement.

· Landlords will have to register with the Housing Authority and their properties will have to reach certain minimum standards before a licence will be issued to rent a dwelling.

· We will require a certificate that rental residential property meets Building Regulations standards before a license is issued. It will be an offence both for the tenant and the landlord to rent an unlicensed dwelling. In addition a Tax Clearance Certificate will have to be produced by the landlord before the issuing of a licence.

· Rent increases in future will be limited to a 5% increase above inflation to ensure that landlords get a reasonable return on their investment without unduly penalising those who are renting.

· The Green Party will target all new tax incentives on not-for-profit housing and cost rental with a wide remit to provide for all income groups. The European Rental Sector is dominated by not-for-profits and they provide secure, reasonably priced accommodation for all income groups. The Green Party believes that this latter model is the appropriate one to follow for Ireland and one that will as a consequence lower rents in the private sector. At present, Housing Associations are required as part of their registration process to have a charitable remit focusing on the disadvantaged in society. Additionally, public funding such as the Capital Loan and Subsidy Schemes require that the Association prioritise tenants from the local authority housing list. There is a provision for a small percentage of less needy tenants but, in practice, this rarely occurs. The result is that social housing is following the local authority housing experience and becoming housing of ‘last resort’.
The Green Party will change the focus of not-for-profit housing providers to that of delivery of equity and sustainability. We believe this policy approach will de-emphasise difference and avoid the dangers of ‘ghettoising’ social disadvantage. It will also allow the not-for-profit sector to compete with the private sector for tenants.

· We will encourage local authorities to keep land passed to them under Part V of the Planning & Development Act 2000 for not-for-profit housing providers such as Community Land Trusts. Community Land Trusts help to reduce the cost of buying a home by "splitting" the ownership of the property. Essentially, the Land Trust purchases the land beneath a home and the home- buyer must then only purchase the building itself. By splitting the cost the trust effectively reduces the cost of a home by as much as 30%.

Social Housing

Ireland is producing markedly less social housing today than in the past. In 2002 social housing accounted for only 10% of total housing output[i]. The State, in not building enough social housing and selling its existing stock, has failed to provide enough social housing to meet the needs of the population.

Ireland has a record number of people on its public housing waiting lists. Recent figures show 48,000 households on public housing waiting lists, which represents approximately 140,000 people in need of housing[ii] To cater for current needs an output of 10,000 units per annum is required but despite Government commitments not enough social housing is being developed[iii]. A recent report by a number of social and homeless agencies, “Housing Access for All” concluded that, according to the current rate of progress, it will take thirty years to eliminate the housing waiting list[iv]. The same report predicts that 33% of householders will be unable to afford to become home- owners if current trends persist, rising to 42% in urban areas.

There is clearly an acute need for social housing in this country. Of the 48,000 households on the waiting lists for social housing, 85% have incomes of less than 15,000 euros[v]. They are therefore dependent on social or rented housing as they are not in a financial position to buy property on the open market, or to benefit from affordable housing schemes. Without adequate social housing provision people are being forced into inappropriate private rented housing, and are paying market rents for accommodation that is often of a poor quality[vi]. Housing costs create a major drain on people’s incomes causing financial hardship and involving a considerable cost to the state.(Recent figures show supplementary welfare allowance costs the State approximately 330 million per annum).

Current policy does not seem to be able to take full account of the number of people on low wages or dependent on social welfare who are not in a position to buy their own homes or benefit from government schemes which support owner occupation. According to the Minimum Wage Commission in 1997 one quarter of the workforce earned less than the minimum wage[vii]

[1] £ 45,427 house price as compared to £10, 641 average manufacturing wage.

[2] £72,732 house price as compared to £17,292 average manufacturing wage.

[3] 226,440 euros house prices for country as a whole, 293,040 euros house price in Dublin as compared to 26,640 euros average manufacturing wage

[4]As an example, (using the average new house price for September 2003), even if a couple earned 30,000 euros each, the traditional maximum loan would be 105,000 euros, leaving a shortfall of 190,000 euros in Dublin, 120,000 euros in Galway, 107,000 euros in Cork, 100,000 euros in Waterford and 99,000 euros in Limerick.

For a number of years Government policy has supported owner occupation such as the provision of housing grants, mortgage tax relief, the abolition of rates on residences with no system of residential property taxation, and a focus on home ownership for lower income groups including shared ownership, local authority tenant

purchase scheme and affordable housing schemes.

Social and affordable housing offer two different but vital housing options. Ireland needs a housing system consisting of all types of tenure. Policy must ensure that housing provision is not left to the market and does not prioritise owner occupation above all other housing tenures. Policy must support a vibrant housing mix where non-profit housing agencies provide an array of social housing that meet diverse needs and ensures that the supply and price of building land is regulated to allow this sector to make a viable contribution.

In Government the Green Party will do the following :

·Increase the provision of social housing. The Green Party will support a programme of social housing development through the provision of adequate funding and will reverse any cuts in social housing spend. We will also introduce a programme of land banking to provide social housing providers with suitable sites. Local authorities and non-profit providers will be given first call on any state land to be sold.

·Support a diverse and vibrant ‘Social Housing’ sector through assisting it in overcoming problems of site acquisition, planning and approval delays, improving local authority capacity and expertise to support the sector, and allowing Housing Associations to deal directly with the Housing Finance Agency . The Green Party believes that Housing Associations have the potential, in the same way as local authorities and public/private partnerships, to increase housing provision and promote mixed housing. This sector can build or renovate housing, using rental subsidy schemes and capital assistance schemes from the Department of the Environment. In Ireland this sector provides a comparatively small percentage of social housing – the non-profit housing associations provided one in four social housing units in 2002. In the Programme for Government, the government committed to assisting the sector complete up to 4,000 units per year for the period of the National Development Plan. But to achieve this figure the sector must be provided with enough suitable sites for development

·Where the community gives a subsidy to social housing (ie if the houses are built or the land serviced by local authorities) we will endeavour ensure that the value of this investment is not “leaked” or lost to the community. This is particularly relevant to Part V of the Planning & Development Act 2000 where land given over for social and affordable housing should as far as possible be kept within the community. In other words, while tenants of social housing will be building up an equity stake during their rental, and while they will be encouraged to eventually purchase the housing if they so wish, it is the house that they will purchase while the ownership of the land will remain with the local authority or with a Community Trust. We will end discounted local authority housing sales to tenants and replace them with sale at market price or a partial sale retaining the land element and control over future sales.

·We will assist the not-for-profit sector to maximise its provision through schemes such as Private Sector Leasing whereby housing associations acquire properties from landlords for a limited period for social housing. Housing associations can renovate properties that have fallen into disrepair and in return for meeting these costs, landowners lease the property for a fixed period. Social housing is made available and properties are brought back into use.

·We will ensure that adequate service provision, amenities and social infrastructure and transport are factored into housing schemes and that best practice in design, estate management and economic development is developed.

·We will restore the original provisions of Part V of the Planning & Development Act 2000 to ensure that 20% of new housing development includes social and affordable housing, and allow for money payments in lieu of the transfer of land or property by developers only in very limited and strictly defined circumstances . Part V established the constitutionality of redistributing land-based resources from private property owners to the community to meet social objectives. The principle underpinning Part V is to redistribute some of the value of development land to those in housing need and to provide for a balanced social mix in new housing developments. The historic pattern of segregation of social housing has resulted from the limitations in public land banks and the cost of providing social housing in ‘high cost locations’. The original provisions of Part V of the Act required a transfer of land or property to the local authority. However, the 2002 Amendment to Part V of the Act permits a money payment in lieu of the transfer of land or property .The Green Party will restore the original provisions of Part V of the Planning & Development 2000 Act to ensure that social and affordable housing is provided as an integral part of any new housing development, and will ensure that the payment of money by developers in lieu of the transfer of land or property will only happen where the development of social or affordable housing is not in the interests of sustainable development.

·We will extend the provisions of Part V of the 2000 Act to cover all developments on non-zoned rural land. The fact that non-zoned areas were not covered by Part V has had the practical effect of exempting most rural areas from the provisions of the Act. Most small rural villages have no Area Plan and thus have no zoning. Local authorities can require that group housing in these settlements has to comply with Part V but, in practice, it is rarely applied. This unfairly increases the burden of social housing provision on larger settlements with Local Action or Development Plans. In addition, one-off rural houses do not make any contribution to the public provision of social housing as provided for under Part V.

·We will encourage Housing Associations to provide housing for low and middle incomes groups. We believe that social housing need not be housing of ‘last resort’ but could provide rented housing on a so-called ‘general needs basis’ (ie to people on low or middle incomes) For example, the schemes would offer health workers and auxiliary staff/nurses living in areas of high accommodation costs good quality, affordable rented housing. A housing association can build or renovate properties where some or all of the units would be made available to those on lower/middle incomes at ‘cost’. Schemes such as this have been used to provide cheap rented accommodation to ‘key workers’ in the UK and elsewhere in Europe. In the Netherlands 42% of the private rented sector is owned by pension funds and financial institutions and much of it is managed by non-profit-making housing associations and trusts.

·We will establish a Working Group to explore the possibilities of introducing a single transparent and flexible system for the provision of housing benefits for people under a certain income level, involving the payment of a benefit that represents the average of the total subsidy for each housing programme for a family unit.

We believe that reforming the housing subsidy so that the beneficiary has more choice of housing provider, and regulation of the housing provider to allow it to provide housing for a wider social range of tenants has the potential to break the stigma of social housing. Ireland’s social support for housing is differentiated by programme, sector and tenure type. It is essentially a targeted, means-tested system rather than a universal provision system. This is not to say that higher income groups are not subsidised by the State. In fact, subsidies for home ownership include 200,000 euros in mortgage interest relief alone. But each group or set of qualifying recipients is catered for by different programmes and often by different delivery agents. The newest group of recipients or category of housing provision is that of ‘affordable house purchaser’. European countries such as Denmark, which opted for universal provision of social housing, now have cheaper housing, more social equality and better quality built environments. There is evidence of a rethink of old policies, as the problems of social exclusion of local authority estates and the inflation of rents in the private rented sector caused by the Supplementary Welfare Scheme can no longer be ignored.

Recipients of social housing provision are often trapped within local authority boundaries and are bound to particular providers. In some cases it can encourage intentional homelessness in order to qualify for better provision and unemployment in order to avoid rent increases. Choice is extremely limited and penalties are often the consequence of refusing offered accommodation. It is not surprising that growing numbers prefer the relative independence of the private sector despite its lack of security. It is clear that a further, more comprehensive rethink about social support for housing must be undertaken.

The possibility of attaching a proposed housing benefit to the individual and not to any particular form of housing could be examined by the Working Group. This benefit could be paid as a voucher or/and as a tax credit and could strive to be as universal as financial circumstances permit. The potential for individuals to use the housing benefit to avail of accommodation in the social housing sector, the private rented sector or for local authority housing would also be explored. The intended effect of the introduction of such a benefit would be to do away with the barriers that currently exist between the different sectors of social and affordable housing provision, including housing associations, local authorities and joint ownership schemes.

Such a single benefit system, if introduced, would resemble the housing benefit system in the UK and benefit systems in various countries such as Denmark and Austria where housing benefits are more personally targeted. Furthermore, the recipient would be able to use the benefit to rent from the local authority, a housing association, a not-for-profit, a private landlord or use it to buy a home provided by any of the above in any county of the country. Easy labelling of dweller by housing from would end and Irish housing environments would begin to resemble the Nothern European – class indeterminate and of high quality. Thus empowered, many urban dwellers might choose to use their benefit to buy homes in low-demand, cheap rural villages rather than rent in high-demand , expensive cities.

Information, Research and Evaluation
In Government the Green Party will:

·Reform the Land Register

The development of housing policy requires up to date and accurate information of land ownership and ownership patterns. The current system of monitoring and recording land ownership is failing to provide this data and needs urgent reform. The Green Party in Government will renew and properly fund the Land Registry to create a complete Geographical Information System (GIS) –based cadastral of land and property interests in Ireland. The maps and databases will be searchable by owner and by property and open to the public. The Labour Party in the UK has recently agreed to set up a Commission to reform the Land Registry system. The register should be regularly updated, particularly focusing on land around the designated Growth Centres identified in the National Spatial Plan and developed land and land with development potential around villages, towns and cities. We will require that all interest in land, including options, should be registered also. The refusal to register or the deliberate registering of incorrect information should affect title. In addition the requirement of landlords to register rental properties will be amended to require landlords to register their details and the legislation robustly enforced.

·We will set up a Research and Evaluation Unit within the new Housing Authority to redress the serious housing data shortfall and to support local authorities in their development of housing policy. At present there is a paucity of up-to-date reliable information on land interests and on all sectors of housing developments. The Irish Planning Institute, the Royal Institute of Architects of Ireland, the Economic and Social Research Institute and the Irish Council for Social Housing have all called for this shortfall of information to be addressed. The new Research Unit will devise and implement information collection systems for local authorities, housing agencies, government departments, utilities and financial institutions. Given the necessity for this body to have the confidence

·A valuation study of all potential development land will be undertaken by local authorities, including historical local authority valuation records and recent property revaluations under the Valuations 2001 Act and local estate agents records to assert the value of all land in their jurisdiction, showing a sliding scale of zones relative to distance from major settlements and good transport routes. This will form the basis for estimating Development Levies and for reforming the current rates system.

Rural Housing
The Green Party believes that the pressure for one-off rural housing has

become more acute during the last decade because of the rapid escalation in house prices. In Government, with the introduction of our new housing policies, we anticipate that this pressure will gradually abate as housing becomes affordable again.

We believe that the best way to maintain and increase population numbers in rural areas – based on the evidence of the recent census results (Census 2002) - is to support villages, as villages have held their population better than scattered communities in the open countryside. Areas of population loss as indicated by CLAR maps match areas with poor or non-existent village and town structure. This lack of village structure, which could have been the focus for new service jobs or small industries, is the main reason these areas suffered more population loss than others. Therefore, we believe that the best way to address population loss in weak areas is to create new villages or village clusters and to actively prevent further dispersal of settlement.

We believe that whatever perceptions exist concerning the lower quality of life in villages and towns as compared to the countryside, is not because of their ‘alien’ form or higher density, but because of their growing association with decline, disadvantage and poverty. Not long ago, villages were highly valued as centres of trade and enterprise and recognised as important contributors to Irish nation building. Since the 1980s, as the percentage of social housing relative to private being built grew higher in villages and towns than the average for the county, so negative perception grew. This perception has led to the low take-up of both local authority housing and affordable services sites in many villages.

In Government the Green Party will do the following :

·We will support rural housing being concentrated in clusters around existing village settlements so as to ensure sustainability. We will ensure that shops, schools and other services will be located within walking distance of everybody so that we can cut down on car usage.

·In order to encourage sustainable development in rural areas we will encourage local authorities to buy or to Compulsorily Purchase land-banks around villages and to provide serviced sites at cost to residents of the area and to people who wish to work in the area.

·As stated elsewhere in our policy we will discourage the building of holiday homes in rural areas by the introduction of an Annual Site Value Tax on second homes.

·We will support the preparation of village framework designs or Strategic Development Zones draft planning schemes for small rural villages. The Green Party believes that many small rural villages are a very low priority for Area Development Plans because of their small size, their very specific needs and the necessity to plan larger settlements under greater development pressure. But, if small villages are to play their allotted role in the National Spatial Strategy (NSS) to provide housing with rural quality of life for locals and non-locals, action cannot wait until other priorities are met.

Most small villages in Ireland comprise one main street or a set of crossroads. With the rise in private car use, many of these approach roads are now major traffic routes and are unattractive or even dangerous roads on which to site further houses. The other development pattern seen in villages is the suburban cul-de-sac estate in a single field, unrelated and disconnected from the existing village. We believe that it is vital if we wish to provide an alternative to scattered housing in these areas, that existing small settlements, however modest, expand to provide pedestrian accessible, high quality and affordable houses while retaining and improving their distinctive rural character.

We support three-dimensional, costed Framework Designs for modestly- sized development schemes being prepared and submitted for Outline Planning Permission in the normal way. This might require an agreement to amend or vary the County Development Plan if the villages have no prior designation for development. The Framework Design should have a simple and limited brief that does not require elaborate statistical information or research- that is to lay out new access roads, public spaces and sites for services, buildings and utilities.

Alternatively, Part IX of the 2000 Act for Strategic Development Zones should be used specifying the economic, social and environmental importance of the development of small villages for rural housing provision. In that case, the Framework Design would correspond to the Draft Planning Scheme outlined in Section 168 and would be processed under the relevant sections. More rigour would be called for in the development of the Framework Design (or Draft Planning Schemes as they would become) under these circumstances as appeals to an Bord Pleanala are precluded under Part IX. Funding for the preparation of Framework Design or Draft Planning Schemes can be recouped under the development levy system. The local authority need not carry out or commission the Framework Design directly. A number of agents are capable of this task including the local Leader or Partnership Company, a good local development association or a Community Land Trust. Planning and Engineering advice should be provided by the local authority, and it should monitor the entire process closely to ensure statutory and local development requirements are met.

·We will promote a number of new sustainable settlement pilot projects in areas of weak settlement structure. We will provide a revolving development fund for this purpose, available to a range of potential development agencies including local authorities, Partnership and Leader Companies, Housing Associations or other not-for-profit Companies such as Community Land Trusts. An example of a sustainable and innovative new model of village renewal is the ‘Farm Village’ model developed by Sustainable Communities Ireland and currently being developed at Cloughjordan village in Co Tipperary (www.thevillage.ie) and also similar initiatives by Blackwater Resource Agency in North Cork, a Leader Company and Freshford 20/20, a partnership of local orgnaisation and Kilkenny Co. Co. This model includes the provision of on-site sewerage and water treatment infrastructure, on- site generation of renewable energy to provide at least 50% of the energy needs of community facilities, employment and enterprise units, community transport vehicles, community gardens and open spaces. This approach will see the model ‘farm village’ being integrated with the existing village as part of a carefully planned extension that will reinvigorate the entire area. We are completely opposed to the current trend of developing large, sprawling, surburban-style estates on the outskirts of rural villages which often do not have the level of services or infrastructure to cope with a significant increase in population.

We believe that Ireland is at a critical period of development at present and that if the wrong policies on rural housing are adopted now, major problems will arise in the future. It has been claimed that scattered rural housing is part of our heritage and should be facilitated, not restricted. Before the famine, in 1841, census figures show that about 90% of the population lived in rural areas. However, the first ordnance survey map dating from the time, shows people did not live in scattered single rural houses but in ‘farm villages’ or clachans, consisting of clusters of 15-20 houses with open countryside around them. After the famine, the Congested Districts Board, and its successor, the Land Commission, moved people out of these villages into single houses as it was felt disease spread more quickly in crowded conditions. The splitting up of the big estates under the land acts continued this pattern of scattered housing.

Irish society has changed considerably since then. We are now an industrial nation with tourism a major employer, and farming is no longer the mainstay of the local economy. We believe that any settlement strategy for the 21st century must take into account the fact that modern living requires external services including piped water, electricity, and telephones. As these services are normally provided next to the public road, that is where the majority of new one-off rural houses are sited. The result is ribbon development along rural roads, especially those leading out of towns. People also want to live where they can have a good quality of life and ready access to work, shops, schools and other services. Rural houses are in demand to a large extent because of the lower site prices but this does not take into account the higher long-term costs of commuting to work, schools etc usually requiring a second family car. There are other costs that are not so obvious. An Foras Forbartha, in a study carried out in the mid 1970’s showed that it is more expensive to provide services to rural houses but the extra cost is often borne by the community, not by the individual.

In relation to the issue of one-off houses in the countryside, we wish to see the current social imbalance of housing development in villages versus the countryside being addressed.

In Government the Green Party will:

·Ensure the provision of affordable rural housing that is rural-generated as opposed to urban-generated. Urban-generated rural housing is housing that is built in rural areas for people who are working in towns or cities many miles away. This kind of development tries to get around the unaffordable cost of housing in urban areas but pushes the price of rural housing up for everybody. In contrast, rural-generated development meets the real development needs of rural areas.

·Promote rural planning policies that give preference to those who make an economic contribution to the rural community in which they wish to live, and who will participate in, and contribute to, the life of the local community. We will actively encourage a range of alternative rural enterprise through the planning process including organic agriculture, renewable energy projects, cottage industries, local specialty food production etc. We support the right of individuals who wish to establish new rural-based enterprises or businesses to be treated favourably within the planning process, subject to sustainability criteria.

·We will ensure the inclusion of a category of individual entitlement to planning permission in the open countryside based on ‘functional’ or ‘social’ need within sections of County Development Plans dealing with settlement strategy in rural areas. ‘Functional need’ will relate to where proposed householders need to live in a rural area because their work requires proximity to it - for example in the case of guards, nurses or schoolteachers- and where there is no existing suitable accommodation available. ‘Social need’ will cover where proposed householders are caregivers of established rural residents and where there is no existing suitable accommodation available. New holiday homes will only be permitted in existing or new sustainable settlements.

·Conditions will be attached to planning permissions for a new house (subject to the criterion of functional and social need) on an existing farm so as to minimize environmental impact, that it be sited near the farmhouse and that, in as far as possible, it share one upgraded sewerage treatment system and one road access point. This measure would reduce applications from landowners purporting to need a new house for a family member but which is built at some distance from the existing family home and all too frequently sold soon afterwards. (Informal research by planners in co Meath showed that 50% of permissions granted for family members are being lived in by unrelated people 5 years later).

·We will support the widespread use of Section 47s by local authorities in relation to one-off rural housing in order to control resale within a 10-15 year period, and the use of planning conditions for local occupancy. We will introduce a form of Capital Gains Tax for houses built under ‘family/social’ need that are resold within this period, to discourage speculation or abuse of this planning opportunity.

·We will ensure that rural planning decisions focus to a much greater extent on the environmental impacts of a dwelling, rather than purely on its visual impact. We will ensure that planning conditions ensure the maximum use of the most environmentally sustainable building materials. New homes will, in as far as possible, be constructed using sustainable natural materials and will use timber frame construction and natural cellulose or wool insulation in order to ensure better standards of insulation. New houses will be encouraged, through tax incentives, to take advantage of passive or active solar energy or wind power. Measures including conserving the use of fresh water by recycling surface water run-off, that is ‘grey water’ for uses where fully treated water is not necessary. Where houses are to be located in rural areas, a landscaping planting plan based on native species will be required, rather than the typical ‘quick-fill’ screening.

·We will introduce an Annual Septic Tank levy to cover the costs of monitoring and inspecting septic tanks. Although the one-off house owner provides his/her own sewerage treatment, this does not relieve the local authority of the considerable costs in monitoring and servicing the facility. Sewerage sludge must be collected once a year and treated in licensed facilities but this is not happening at present because of a combination of lack of awareness and the lack of suitable facilities. This neglect has had a negative impact on water quality. The government is upgrading and chemically treating Group Water Schemes, which have consistently failed to meet minimum EU drinking water standards, because of agricultural and septic tank contamination in rural areas. In Government, we will require that septic tanks and percolation areas should be in accordance with the most up-to-date European and national guidelines available. Tax relief will be provided on the installation of alternative wastewater treatment systems such as reed-bed systems.

·Planning permission conditions for new homes in rural areas will require that each householder minimises and manages waste, including creating a composting facility and organising the separation and collection of individual waste streams.

·We will ensure that local authorities make schemes available such as exist in other countries whereby grants are provided for new or older converted houses to assist in making them more sustainable and minimising their resource use.

·We will address the current imbalance of investments in land and property in Ireland that is fuelling an asset price bubble in housing and in farmland. We will provide incentives for Irish people, both on an individual basis and in companies and communities, to invest in alternative productive assets. In the light of coming fossil fuel scarcity, the most productive assets are likely to be renewable energy generators. As our best renewable energy resources are in rural areas, hydro, wind, biomass, slurry and eventually tidal power, this policy will diversify investment from the larger cities and towns. The Government’s own policy framework for renewable energies, published in the Green Paper on Sustainable Energy in 1999, gave a strong endorsement for the community ownership of wind farms, but despite the establishment of a Renewable Energy Strategy Group in 2000 to develop strategies for the increased deployment of wind energy, little has been done since to increase community participation. In Government the Green Party would act to remove the barriers to the fulfilment of this policy. Other renewable energy resources, in particular biogas digestion in the midlands of the country, have great potential for community ownership and investment. We believe that Community Land Trusts as outlined earlier in this document could manage the collective investment of communities in natural renewable energy resource built up through goodwill royalties as in Scotland or through individual Credit Union savings and borrowings.

Homeless and Traveller Accommodation
·We recognise the separate culture and identity of the travelling community.

·We will place homeless action plans on a statutory basis to tackle housing, homelessness and Traveller accommodation and help integrate local housing strategies and Traveller accommodation programmes. Placing homeless action plans on a statutory basis was called for in the recent report ‘Housing Access for All’ commissioned by four national housing agencies to ensure ‘timely delivery of future plans, meaningful implementation and monitoring’.

·If local authorities continue to fail in their obligation to deliver and implement Traveller Accommodation Programmes, the Green Party will consider sanctions against those local authorities which fail to meet requirements. The travelling community numbers approximately 20,000 people. The failure to plan and to provide adequate halting sites with appropriate infrastructure for the Travelling Community is unacceptable.

APPENDIX 1

House Construction Costs

Cost of site:

Site costs vary quite widely all over the country, all over Dublin and even within small geographical areas. Agricultural land which can be valued at €10,000 per acre jumps to between €400,000 to €800,000 when planning permission for housing is granted.
In certain areas of the south side of the Dublin City building land can even fetch over €1,000,000 per acre. It is common for unzoned agricultural land to be sold at zoned prices even though planning has not been sought or obtained.

Density of housing also varies quite widely but the new recommendations for the Dublin region are 16 dwellings per acre.

So if we take an "average" cost of an acre of land with planning permission (Fingal area) of around $700,000 and if it has a gross density of 14 dwellings per acre we get a site per house cost of €50,000.

It should also be remembered that some sites were purchased many years ago and were hoarded for years by some developers. There is no such thing as an "average" site cost as virtually every development and site is different. However, the above values are based on actual sites, which were developed recently in the Fingal area.

Cost of servicing site:

This is a levy that the Local Authority imposes on developers in order to pay for the provision of water, sewerage, electricity and roads infrastructure to the dwellings. At the moment this is in the region of €10,000 per house.

Construction cost:

This is the cost to the builder of building the house and does not include the cost of the site or of servicing the site. It includes all other costs such as labour, materials, administration etc. The industry norm for most medium to small builders is between €65 and €75 per square foot.

For larger builders it may be even less. For more innovative and environmentally friendly construction methods such as timber frame designs it can be as low as €55 per square foot.

We have used the higher figure of €75 per square foot because under our proposals the Building Guidelines issued by the Department of Environment and Local Government will be policed and adhered to.

The Building Guidelines will also be upgraded to provide a much higher standard of insulation and other incentives for energy efficiency [please don’t think just in terms of insulation—e.g., high-efficiency windows, passive solar design, heat pumps, integrated geothermal energy and/or solar thermal water heating, waste water recycling, rainwater collection . . .] in order to promote energy efficiency. We will particularly promote the construction of timber-framed houses using sustainable plantation management.

The Building Guidelines will also include regulations requiring a minimum thermal efficiency rating/carbon tax incentive to ensure integration of appropriate renewable energy options (e.g., solar thermal for domestic hot water as is currently mandatory in Barcelona, etc.)
We have not included in the costing the interest charges which may be payable by the builder for the purchase of the building land as this is a charge that is only applicable when a builder is starting out or is moving up a division. Most builders who have been in the business for a number of years have amassed enough capital to finance developments themselves.

Miscellaneous Fees:

At the moment if you have a development of say 100 houses then the architect who designed the house is paid a fee on a per house basis rather than on a development basis. This can add €1,000 to the cost of a house.

The same principle is true with solicitors. Even though there is only one seller and perhaps hundreds of buyers, the same, standard fee is charged for the conveyance transaction between each buyer and the one seller. This can add at least another €1,000 to the house price unnecessarily.

The role of estate agents in the selling of houses will be looked at seriously and their function may have to be restricted to simply providing factual information about housing rather than the role they play at the moment which seems to be to hype up prices because their fee is based on a % of the selling price.

At the moment all these fees can add up to €5,000 to the cost of a house.

Builder Developer Profit

The profits which have been accruing to builders for the last number of years are obscene and are costing not only the individual house buyer dearly but also the country. In some cases the builder is making over €100,000 per house.

APPENDIX 2
COMPULSORY PURCHASE

There are a number of strategies for the state recouping the betterment value of re-zoned land. The taxing of windfall gains from the profits accruing from re-zoning is mooted in some quarters. The imposition of site taxes for developers who hoard land in the expectation of its value increasing is another policy initiative of which we would also be in favour.

We feel that these initiatives still leave too much power over such a vital area as housing in private hands. The state should have control over the supply of building land to the market and the easiest way of accomplishing this is by Compulsory Purchase.

Just think about the present ludicrous situation. An acre of land is worth about €10,000 for agricultural purposes. It is zoned by the local authority for building and its value can increase to up to €700,000 because of this decision. It is then serviced by the local authority for housing. They supply water, sewerage, roads, electricity and other infrastructure to the land. The owner of the land can then sit and wait for land prices to increase even further. The local authority has no way of forcing this land into productive use even though they have serviced it! They can therefore not plan on a certain amount of land coming onto the market in a given time so they overzone and waste money in servicing too much land.

The fact is there is enough land zoned and serviced in the state at the moment for 369,000 new homes according to the Housing Statistics Bulletin. This is enough housing for the next six or seven years but the local authorities have no control over the rate at which this land is brought to the market. With compulsory purchase the local authorities will have this control much more effectively than with the other cajoling methods mentioned above, i.e. site taxes, rates etc.

This procedure for compulsory purchase is much more streamlined than previously as appeals against it are now heard by An Bord Pleanala, not the Minister, and typically take no longer than six months.

For too long we have left this vital function in the hands of private developers and this is to a large extent the source of our current housing crisis.

There is already no problem legally or constitutionally with Compulsory Purchase. We will, however, have to amend the Acquisition of Land (Assessment of Compensation) Act 1919 so that compensation will only be payable to landowners on the basis of what they paid for the land.

If the land was purchased by a speculator for €100,000 per acre then the speculator will unfortunately have to be compensated to that amount because Compulsory Purchase cannot be seen to be "expropriatory in nature" or else it would then be open to constitutional challenge.

APPENDIX 3
Lets say the cost of a house at the moment is €300,000. The cost of the land to the builder/developer might be €50,000. Under our proposals the local authority will sell the land which it has compulsorily purchased for say €25,000 per acre for say €500,000 per acre to the builder/developer. The enormous profit will go to the local authority to provide social and affordable housing and to purchase additional land banks for future developments.

After a year or so of the new regime the cost of housing will have come down substantially because of our restrictions on the amounts that people can borrow. Say the cost of the above house falls to €250,000. It will then not be as attractive for builders/developers to build houses so as soon as there is a fall off in supply the local authorities will reduce the price of the land to €400,000/acre in order to make it attractive for the builder/developer to stay in business.

At the end of the process after say five or six years, the land will probably be sold for nearer its true worth of say €50,000/acre after it has been serviced by the local authority. At this stage the price of the above house will have fallen to about €150,000 as the full impact of the borrowing restrictions kicks in.

It would be a mistake to let the builder/developer have the land initially for €50,000/acre in the hope that they would pass the saving on to the buyer. They would just pocket the benefit as the price of housing would not have come down substantially because the impact of the lending restrictions would not be felt for a number of years and there will still be huge demand for housing. This is the reason it is a mistake to think that lowering the cost of building land will make house prices come down.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

P. Bacon and Associates: An Economic Assessment of Recent House Price
Developments and The Housing Market: An Economic Review and Assessment
P. Baldwin: Housing Policy in Europe
J. Blackwell: A Review of Housing Policy
Department of the Environment: Social Housing : The Way Ahead
P.J. Drudy et al: Report of the Housing Commission
National Economic and Social Forum: Social and Affordable Housing
Dublin Institute of Technology: Housing Supply Study 2002
Focus, Simon, Threshold & SVP: Joint Report on Homelessness
Residential Tenancies Act
Threshold: Submission to the all party Committee on the Constitution. 2003
The Housing Crisis and the Role of Land.
FOCUS Ireland : Submission on Property Rights to All Party Oireachtas
Committee 2003
The National Development Plan for 2000-2006
Focus Ireland, Simon Communities of Ireland, Society of Vincent de Paul and
Threshold: Housing Access for All 2002.
Dept. of Environment Local Govt. Analysis of 2002 Local Authority waiting
list figures.

The Society of Saint Vincent de Paul: Housing Policy Mixed Housing and Mixed Communities

Ciarán Cuffe is a TD for the Dún Laoghaire Dáil Constituency. Ciarán can be contacted at Dáil Éireann, Kildare Street, Dublin 2 or 96 Patrick Street, Dún Laoghaire Tel. 284 6060 or 618 3082, Fax 618 4341, Email Ciaran CiaranCuffe.com, or Text Ciaran on 087 265 2075.