Phil Hogan
Question:1 Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for the Environment; Heritage and Local Government his plans for consolidation of agencies and organisations under his remit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44483/10]
Priority Questions
Departmental Agencies
There are some 20 agencies under my remit, and as part of the rationalisation programme for State agencies I have an active consolidation programme in train that will reduce this number by six.
In June 2009, I established the Housing and Sustainable Communities Agency to amalgamate the national agencies that currently support our social and affordable housing programmes. These are the National Building Agency, the Affordable Homes Partnership and the Centre for Housing Research. The new agency was established on an administrative basis in May 2010 and when it is legislatively established next year, the existing three agencies will be wound up. Pending legislation, the Local Government Management Services Board and the Local Government Computer Services Board are working very closely together on an administrative basis as the local government management agency.
The administrative functions of the Rent Tribunalwere transferred to the Private Residential Tenancies Board with effect from 1 October 2009. The functions of the Fire Services Councilare being undertaken by my Department since the term of office of its members expired on 30 June 2009 and it is not intended to reappoint a council. The Limerick NorthsideandSouthside Regeneration Agencies are already serviced by a single executive. In June 2010 the Government approved the formal merging of the agencies and work is ongoing in this regard.
My Department is also working with all other agencies under my aegis to ensure that they are operating as efficiently as possible and complying with Government policy on public service finance and numbers.
Arising from his reply, does the Minister accept that in the context of the current financial climate it is essential to look at all of the agencies under his Department — just as will be done in every other Ministry — to ensure we do not deprive citizens of a service at the expense of retaining an agency or quango that should have its work carried out by the line Department? Some 85 agencies and bodies can be identified at local and national level in the Minister's Department that could be merged or abandoned and the considerable savings that would accrue could yield a significant return that could help towards the difficulties the Department will have in the Estimates for 2011. Will the Minister accept that he needs to revisit his policy and the agencies he has identified to date to ensure we have devolution of power from the central area to the local area, that we have greater accountability for the existing agencies and that we achieve greater efficiencies in line with the local government efficiency report in order to yield a better return for citizens at this time of straitened financial circumstances?
We should pursue greater efficiencies wherever we can make them. However, I would point out that we are very much in line with the McCarthy report. The Deputy mentioned the efficiency review group, which is a group I introduced and which does very good work under Mr. McLoughlin. It has identified a number of efficiencies at local government level. My Department is on course with regard to the McCarthy report and I have introduced another group to take a particular look at the Dublin area. This group is about to start examining the boundaries. However, wherever we attempt to introduce efficiencies, we always face a problem with some Fine Gael councillors.
A problem with Fine Gael councillors?
I am afraid so. Recently, I had a meeting with some Fine Gael councillors who objected to the idea of having the managers come together for various discussions.
Is the Minister not the boss? That must have been the first time he listened to the Fine Gael councillors.
I pointed out to them that this proposal was in the Fine Gael document, but I do not think they were familiar with that document.
I am glad the Minister read it. He must show leadership.
Unfortunately, that is what happens. It is all very well to be theoretical on these issues, but we must also apply some practical backbone and see whether we can carry out these recommendations.
I remind Deputy Hogan we must deal with this question within six minutes.
I will be brief. The Minister's response deserves another response. The Chair will realise that over the past three and a half years the Minister has presided over the Dublin Docklands Development Authority, DDDA. I am sure he is delighted with the work that has been carried out by the authority and that this work covers the Department in great glory. I am surprised he has not listed the authority among the organisations he wishes to abandon, in view of the fact that the work is largely completed, with the exception of one or two sites that are now effectively derelict or in NAMA. Will the Minister concede that there are several agencies like the DDDA that will yield considerable savings that could be brought back into the Department or agencies like the Temple Bar Cultural Trust that could be brought under the umbrella of the Dublin City Council? Will he agree he could be more decisive with regard to the number of agencies he could examine with a view to terminating their existence in the interest of getting better value for money, greater accountability and more streamlined delivery of services for citizens?
Efficiencies have been made, in particular with regard to the organisation to which the Deputy has just referred and the authority has reduced staff numbers considerably. The other agencies mentioned will be kept under constant review. We are very cognisant of the fact that we are going through an unprecedented economic crisis and that we must, as a result, cut our cloth accordingly. I have no difficulty in doing that. We have made significant savings over the past number of years and as a result local authorities are suffering. The local government fund has been reduced and local authorities have had to make huge savings. That will continue. I believe we can make major savings through the kind of reforms we have recommended. The amalgamation of the local authorities is not without controversy and it will take significant political will to introduce these political reforms, but I am happy to do that.
Severe Weather Events
Ciaran Lynch
Question:2 Deputy Ciarán Lynch asked the Minister for the Environment; Heritage and Local Government the position regarding the review of the severe weather events which was due to be completed by 1 November 2010; when he will attend a meeting of the Joint Committee on Environment, Heritage and Local Government to discuss the Committee’s own report and recommendations on the severe weather events; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44487/10]
The response to a severe weather event generally involves cross-departmental co-ordination and collaboration. My Department undertook the role of lead Department by chairing national level co-ordination in the case of last winter's severe weather events with local responses being undertaken by the principal response agencies in accordance with the major emergency management framework.
Following these events, the Departments and agencies involved reviewed their experiences in terms of the lessons learned and these are now being considered further having regard to their completeness under the aegis of the government task force on emergency planning. Departments and agencies represented on the task force are engaged in a range of associated work under five strands, as follows: national co-ordination; flood forecasting; road maintenance issues; humanitarian assistance; and major emergency management framework issues.
In relation to the major emergency management framework, a detailed report on preparedness for and response to the severe weather events last winter is close to finalisation by my Department and will be presented to the Government task force on emergency planning as soon as possible. This follows the earlier reviews undertaken by the principal response agencies, the results of which have been taken into account in their preparedness for future severe weather events.
I am keeping the various recommendations made by the joint committee in mind having regard to this work and will be happy to meet it at a future date to discuss the contents of my Department's report when completed.
I refer to the correspondence dated 27 October which was sent on the Minister's behalf to the joint committee. This correspondence stated that he was unavailable to meet the committee to discuss its report and recommendations because he was completing his report which was due on 1 November. The correspondence indicated that he expected to be in a position to respond to the committee's invitation once his report was completed. He has now confirmed to the House that he failed to meet his 1 November deadline and more than one year after the severe weather events of 18 and 19 November 2009, he still has not completed the report.
He indicated in the letters he sent to local authorities that some progress has been made on the issue. Can he advise the House when his report will be complete? Given that the outlines of the report have been set out, can he tell us when he will meet the joint committee to discuss its recommendations?
The Deputy is correct. I have stated unequivocally that we missed the 1 November deadline. Despite the severe work pressures my Department faces, I hope we can complete the report in the next number of weeks. Once the report is completed I will have no difficulty meeting the joint committee, which I have already met on several occasions. I have discussed the issue with individual Deputies and I am happy to discuss it further.
However, as I have previously pointed out to the joint committee, the most important aspect of the severe weather events was that the primary routes were kept clear for the most part. I am referring here to the snow and ice that affected the roads during cold snap as well as to the flooding which was the Deputy's main concern. In regard to the latter issue, I travelled to Cork almost immediately to meet the city and county managers and discuss their requirements. The money they needed was forthcoming almost immediately.
I remind Deputies that while I have a specific role in flooding matters, the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Mansergh, has primary responsibility. Subsequent to the publication of my report, we will have to decide who is the most appropriate person to deal with these matters. I am happy to deal with matters that are of concern to the joint committee and I will answer as fully as I can the questions that arise.
Given that the joint committee published its report in July, the Minister has had several months to come before it. He is putting the cart before horse in terms of its recommendations because they could inform him in completing his own review. He is following the wrong strategy by waiting until his report is completed before meeting the committee. As he has not indicated a timeline for completion of his review, it is now unlikely that he will meet the committee to deal with the issues that arise. When he appeared before the committee earlier this year, I suggested it would be unfair to ask him to make a value judgment before our report was completed. He agreed to take on board our recommendations but I suggest he is now prevaricating on them.
We need to move on.
The Minister's agenda included the Aarhus Convention, which has not been ratified, and the ban on corporate donations, which has not been introduced. He has not published the promised White Paper on local government. The number of infringements of EU law has increased since he became Minister.
The Deputy has had adequate time to ask his question.
The voting machines have not been dealt with and apparently we will now be left with major legacy issues which arose before he came into office. The report of the joint committee provides him with an opportunity to leave a positive legacy in regard to the events of 18 and 19 November 2009.
I ask the Deputy to afford the Minister an opportunity to respond. We are over time on this question.
I wish to ask the Minister about one recommendation in particular from the committee's report. Will he begin the process of establishing an independent inquiry into what led up to the events that caused €100 million worth of damage to Cork city on 18 and 19 November? Is he prepared to state this afternoon that he will take that recommendation on board?
The Deputy made a number of charges which were completely without foundation. He claimed there is no likelihood that I will come before the committee but I have not said that. He then raised extraneous matters which I will have to address. He spoke about legacy issues but he voted against important elements of the planning legislation. I assure him that the measures to which he referred will be introduced.
On one of the occasions when I appeared before the joint committee, the Deputy left us while I was still answering members' questions and came into this Chamber to ask why I was not here. That is his way of operating and I find it objectionable. Others may regard it as funny.
This is the man who introduced a €5,000 fine for detonating an atomic bomb.
Parliamentary democracy is mocked when people act in that manner. I assure the Deputy I will do my best to ensure the report is completed in a timely fashion and I have no difficulty in appearing before the committee to answer any questions he and his colleagues may have.
National Asset Management Agency
Phil Hogan
Question:3 Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for the Environment; Heritage and Local Government the impact on national planning and development policy that the National Asset Management Agency have had; if there are changes in existing planning and development policy as a result of NAMA; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44484/10]
National planning policy has undergone extensive reform through the recent enactment of the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2010. Its provisions will address many of the legacy planning issues which contributed to the property price bubble.
The Act ensures greater oversight, integration and consistency between spatial plans at national, regional and local levels. It requires that an evidence based core strategy must be included in development plans to detail how such plans are consistent with the national spatial strategy, relevant regional planning guidelines and statutory planning guidelines and provide information on the quantum, location and phasing of lands zoned for development over the period of the plan. Local authorities are required to introduce these core strategies into their development plans within one year of the adoption of the updated regional planning guidelines for the area. The Act also introduced a number of other amendments including the provision of additional grounds for extension of the duration of planning permission where there were considerations of a commercial, economic or technical nature beyond the control of the applicant which substantially militated against either the commencement of development or the carrying out of substantial works pursuant to the planning permission. A similar provision was introduced in the Act establishing the National Asset Management Agency.
My Department is in contact with NAMA on a number of issues, including in regard to the issue of unfinished estates. In this regard, NAMA is represented on the high level expert group on unfinished housing developments which was established to develop practical and policy solutions effectively to address unfinished housing developments. The Department is also in contact with NAMA to ensure that wherever its aim to secure a sound return can be aligned with the Department's need to provide accommodation for disadvantaged households, this will be achieved. The operation of NAMA is, of course, a matter for the Minister for Finance.
Arising from the Minister's reply, will he indicate to the House when the national spatial strategy review will be completed and published and if it will require a strategic environmental assessment in line with European law? Has the Department plans to instruct local authorities, perhaps directly through NAMA, on the compilation of master plans in regard to the various sites that are derelict, particularly in the commercial and residential area? Is this being considered to ensure we have proper planning and development arising from the fact there are so many sites in State ownership, with the largest property owner in the world being NAMA?
Will the Deputy repeat the second question?
Is the Minister instructing the local authorities or NAMA on the basis of good planning and development to draw up master plans in regard to the commercial and residential holdings that are in the ownership of the State with a view to ensuring, first, that we get some return on the investment which is now in the ownership of the State and, second, that we have good sustainable planning and development practice in regard to those properties?
On the question of refreshing the national spatial strategy, work on that is still under way. I hope I can give the Deputy a more specific date shortly, and I am happy to write to him to give that information.
The second question referred to an SEA, or strategic environmental assessment. We would have to seek advice on that specifically from the Attorney General to see whether an SEA is required. It is always one of the most difficult questions because we are introducing SEAs in an increasing number of cases.
The Minister knows that from the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act.
I must seek specific advice from the Attorney General on that issue.
Deputy Terence Flanagan has a question today on ghost estates and we have been in touch with the local authorities in this regard. We are establishing an inventory of the ghost estates and operating with that to find what we can do quickly, and we are co-operating with NAMA in as efficient a way as possible. As I said in my contribution, a member of NAMA is on that board to deal with that issue.
The operation of NAMA is a matter for the Minister for Finance but we are dealing with the planning issues in my Department. Particularly in the context of the new Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2010, we want to ensure we have a core strategy, that the regional planning guidelines are adhered to at all times and that we have an evidence based approach to planning matters. For those reasons, we can be assured planning will be dealt with in a much more comprehensive way in the future.
The Minister might outline to the House how exactly this planning function to which he refers in respect of NAMA properties will work. It is fine to talk of evidence based strategy, core strategy and all of that. What is the Minister doing to ensure we get proper planning and development in regard to the NAMA properties that are now in the hold of the State? How will he ensure we get a return on those investments, particularly in housing? A huge number of people are on social housing lists and we could marry demand and supply quite easily in a properly planned and sustainable way.
The Deputy knows section 42A was inserted in the planning Act by the NAMA Act 2009 to provide for planning extensions as they relate to planning permissions applicable to properties that have been taken into the ownership of NAMA. Section 42A provides that an application to extend a planning permission can be made by NAMA before or up to two years after planning permission has expired, where such planning permission has expired during the years 2009, 2010 or 2011.
Under section 42, including as amended by the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act, other applicants will not be entitled to seek an extension after planning permission has expired. The differentiation in this is justified because of the circumstance that NAMA might acquire land or property after the permission has expired and so would not be in a position to make an application for extension within the normal time limit. More important, the provision is designed to protect and limit the overall financial exposure to the taxpayer and the State by optimising the potential value of developments or sites taken in by NAMA. This is the point that has been made by the Deputy. The concept of reinstituting an expired or dead permission is not catered for within the existing general planning code for other applicants and would be an unacceptable departure from planning legislation that deals with current planning permissions.
As the Deputy knows, we have tried to integrate good planning practice into NAMA. We have to ensure the properties that have been taken into NAMA realise their value. We have done that in the best possible way by ensuring best planning practice in the process.
Motor Taxation
Phil Hogan
Question:4 Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for the Environment; Heritage and Local Government the changes to policy and requirements on taxpayers that recent circulars from his Department concerning commercial motor tax have had; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44485/10]
There has been no change to the system of motor taxation in respect of goods vehicles. My Department issued a circular letter to motor tax offices in August 2010 reminding authorised officers of existing provisions with regard to the taxation of vehicles on a goods basis. This circular reiterated the terms of a 2005 circular letter. To be taxed as a goods vehicle, a vehicle must be constructed or adapted for that purpose and used solely in the course of trade or business. If a vehicle is adapted, it must have the same characteristics as a goods vehicle in regard to space and accommodation for carrying goods and it must have limited seating capacity. In effect, this means that in order to be taxed in the goods category, the goods carrying area of the vehicle must be greater than the seating area, all seats to the rear of the driver's seat must be removed and seat bolt holes welded over and all rear seat belts must be removed and seat belt anchor points welded over.
Under Section 2 of the Finance (Excise Duties) (Vehicles) Act 1952, if a vehicle is used in a condition or manner which would attract motor tax at a higher rate, tax then becomes payable at that rate. In other words, if a goods vehicle is used in a private capacity, it must, like all other private vehicles, be taxed at the private rate of motor tax. Under Article 3 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) (Amendment) Regulations 1992, a licensing authority must be satisfied that a vehicle is correctly taxed, and it is thus open to a motor tax office to seek additional documentation supporting a claim for the goods rate of motor tax. Such documentation may include a certificate of commercial insurance or evidence of registration for VAT purposes, or, at the discretion of the licensing authority concerned, any other appropriate document. In circumstances where an RF111A goods only declaration is required, an income tax registration number is now routinely sought.
I would not expect that any person genuinely using a vehicle in the course of trade or business should have a difficulty supplying documentation to support a claim for what is, in effect, a concessionary rate of motor tax. The requirement to sign the RF111A goods declaration form is not new and constitutes a statement by the applicant that the vehicle is being used in the course of trade or business. I would not expect that this declaration should need to be sought at every renewal once particulars of the vehicle and its use have not changed since the last renewal. The form would normally be sought at the time of first taxing as a goods vehicle and on change of ownership. I reiterate that the legal provisions governing the taxation of goods vehicles have not changed.
The reason I have submitted this question is that, although the legal provision may not have changed in respect of the application of motor tax to particular vehicles, there is no consistency of application. There is genuine confusion among local authorities and citizens about the application of this provision arising from a circular sent in August. There have been some changes to the documentation. One is now required to provide more information on tax and VAT changes. The primary purpose of the vehicles in question is the carriage of goods. However, some local authorities are still seeking to interpret the provisions of the circular in a way that one cannot bring one's children to school or collect materials from the local shop without having gardaí, who may wish to employ a strict interpretation of the law, stating the vehicle should be taxed differently under the motor tax code. I ask the Minister to understand there is genuine confusion and revisit the circular in order to provide clarity. It is not good enough to say gardaí should overlook this aspect and be pragmatic. In terms of application, this is either the law or it is not. Does the Minister accept there is confusion? Will he agree that it is necessary to reissue the circular in order to provide clarity for local authorities in order that the current farcical situation will not continue where there are different interpretations of the same circular from one local authority to another?
I return to the reason my Department issued the circular letter because it is important that we understand it. It was brought to the attention of my Department by the Department of Transport that the number of vehicles being adapted to avail of the goods rate was increasing. In some cases, they were high-powered, high-specification vehicles that would not be used for commercial purposes in the normal course of events. Accordingly, my Department considered it appropriate to remind motor tax offices of the existing provisions regarding the taxation of vehicles as goods vehicles. As in the case of any tax compliance matter, this is important. Some 1.9 million motorists pay tax on their private cars, while some 340,000 goods vehicles are taxed by businesses. To be fair to these individuals and businesses, it is important, as I hope the Deputy will agree, that the correct rate of tax is paid in all cases and that the potential for abuse of the system is restricted.
The Deputy claims there is a lack of consistency in the application of the circular across motor tax offices. The legislation and procedures applicable to the taxation of goods vehicles apply equally to eveybody. However, each applicant and application is different. As I stated, under Article 3 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) (Amendment) Regulations 1992, there is an onus on the licensing authority to be satisfied that it is authorised to issue the licence applied for and, accordingly, that the said licence is the appropriate one for the vehicle. The supporting documentation that may be sought as evidence in this regard may vary from applicant to applicant. It has always been the case that discretion is required and such discretion is given to the authorised officer. I do not believe there has been a case in which an individual who is a bona fide user of a van and merely drops into a shop for a bottle of milk or drops his or her children off at school has been brought to task by the Garda. Perhaps the Deputy knows of such a case, but I have no such evidence and none has been brought to my attention. If the Deputy has such evidence, I ask him to bring it to my attention because I do not believe it to be the case.
I ask the Deputy to be brief because we need to move on.
I cannot let that go. In terms of the application of this provision, I am aware of cases in which individuals used to pay about €400 in motor tax, but when the new regulations were issued or the new interpretation by the local authority came into play, some of these individuals had to pay €1,200. I am sure Deputies on all sides of the House have been in touch with the Minister to bring such matters to his attention. I do not know anything about the Garda Síochána. I am not in charge of the Garda anymore than the Minister is and do not know what it does from day to day. All I know is that the application of this provision under the commercial motor tax code has caused genuine confusion. I would have thought the best way of dealing with the matter since August would have been to state the new regulation to be applied was a vehicle would have to be solely and wholly used for the carriage of goods. That is a reasonable suggestion. What the Minister should do — if he will indulge my suggestion — is reissue the circular and say exactly what it means because there is a misinterpretation between local authorities.
I do not know whether the Deputy has had an opportunity to read the circular, but it is crystal clear.
I have read it.
It states: "Dear authorised officer, it has come to our attention that an increasing number of vehicles have changed their tax class from private to adapted goods... Your attention is drawn to circular MT10/2005, copy attached, which deals with this issue". In simple terms, it reiterates what was contained in the circular of 2005.
And adds to it.
In other words, nothing has changed.
The Minister is wrong.
The Deputy continues to refer to "new" regulations. There are no new regulations. The regulation is available and plain for anyone to see. It mentions Article 3 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) (Amendment) Regulations 1992. We are talking, therefore, about regulations that appeared in 1992. The Deputy has been in government since that time.
I have not.
The Deputy's party was in government in 1994 and 1995.
The Minister is going back to the Dark Ages.
The Deputy's party applied the same regulations, something which has been overlooked in much of the related commentary. Successive Governments have applied them. There should be supporting documentation which can include but is not limited to certain items. This is what is stated very clearly in the circular. I refer to the circular of 2005 which mentions evidence of registration for VAT, a tax clearance certificate, a commercial insurance certificate and a copy of the applicant's notice of tax registration form. This is one of those issues that, unfortunately, took hold in the silly season in August, but there was no substance to it. The position remains exactly the same. However, it is clear that in order to save money some individuals were abusing the system. I do not believe the Deputy would agree with this. If a person is abusing the system, it means somebody else has to pay more money, which is wrong.
The Minister should answer the question he was asked.
We are moving on.
Unfinished Housing Developments
Terence Flanagan
Question:5 Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for the Environment; Heritage and Local Government the actions he will take to address the problem of ghost estates; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44486/10]
The national housing development survey database which was published on 22 October establishes an authoritative baseline analysis at a national level of unfinished housing developments to assist in fully understanding the scale and extent of the issues involved. It establishes a sound basis for assisting local authorities in identifying those developments that require priority interventions by the key stakeholders concerned such as developers, financial institutions and local authorities.
The high level expert group on unfinished housing developments, established following the publication of the survey, is actively developing practical and policy solutions to effectively address unfinished housing developments, including preparation of a guidance manual and code of practice. I expect that the guidance manual which will be issued for public consultation shortly in draft form will, inter alia, identify the type of developments and issues that need to be prioritised for action in the short term; the final manual and code of practice will be published early next year. The group is also tasked with identifying new measures that should be considered, including any matters for future legislative reform, to ensure the satisfactory resolution of issues associated with unfinished estates.
I thank the Minister for his response, but it gives very little hope to the thousands of homeowners living in unbearable conditions in many ghost developments which give rise to major health and safety issues. Clearly, the Minister's Department was not up to speed in keeping tabs on what was happening throughout the country because it underestimated tenfold the number of ghost estates. What he must do now is give a sense of hope to homeowners and ensure they will not have to continue to live on building sites. The Minister has kicked to touch a final decision as to what he will do about these housing estates. I ask him to respond with some solutions as to how he will deal with ghost estates throughout the country.
I do not understand the Deputy's point. Is he saying that we underestimated or overestimated——
He underestimated them tenfold.
That is not the case because the survey is very accurate.
No, before that.
In excess of——
The Minister had do a survey to find out how many estates there were.
That is normally the case.
Deputy Flanagan, allow the Minister to speak.
One cannot know the figures by simply looking off into the distance and saying how many ghost estates there are; one has to count them and that is what we did.
It should never have happened.
Deputy Flanagan, please stop interrupting.
In excess of 2,800 housing developments were identified where construction had commenced but had not yet been completed. It was wrong for some of the media commentators to characterise every one of the developments inspected by my Department as a so-called "ghost estate", a phrase which was constantly used. Such reporting is not just incorrect, it is sometimes irresponsible. As the detail of the survey shows, many of the developments have been completed, are fully occupied and perhaps have only minor completion issues outstanding, such as the provision of a final road surface.
Some 147 developments in the survey are fully completed but less than 10% of the completed units are occupied and 50% of the development surveyed are quite small, comprising 30 dwellings or less, with 25% comprising 10 dwellings or less. There are 1,050 developments which are potentially of concern because they are developments which are substantially incomplete but have significant occupancy. They are the ones the Deputy is most concerned about and I understand that.
Considering that there are approximately 1,000 substantially incomplete but significantly occupied developments, further analysis will reveal that the smaller proportion of these developments, probably in the region of 200 to 300, are in particular distress and are causing most concern. Distressed developments are those in which a developer or a receiver acting on behalf of the financial institution is not present and addressing outstanding completion issues. We have to ensure that the expert group, to which I referred, will actively pursue the issue and develop practical and policy solutions to ensure a satisfactory resolution of unfinished housing developments, and particularly the category to which I referred which includes people who are in particular distress.
I do not accept the Minister's response. Clearly, his Department was asleep at the wheel in a similar manner to the Financial Regulator. If he was on top of his brief he would have known what was happening on the ground. What is needed is hope for home owners. What hope will he give to home owners where developers have left and are bankrupt and NAMA is now in control of the housing estates? What provision will he include in his departmental accounts to pick up the tab and put these housing estates to right in order that people can get on with their lives and live in housing estates which do not have any health and safety risks?
As the Deputy knows, a guidance manual is being developed and I expect it to set out the roles and responsibilities of the key stakeholders in addressing unfinished housing development, identify the type of developments and issues that need to be prioritised for action in the short term, summarise the wide range of statutory powers currently at the disposal of local authorities to resolve those urgent matters, and establish organisational context leadership on this issue at local authority and national levels, building on existing best practice approaches that have been developed in Ireland and elsewhere in dealing with the issue.
We are identifying the provisions and powers which can be used to remedy those problems. For example, under the Derelict Sites Act 1990 local authorities are empowered to direct the owner or occupier of land which is or may become derelict to take measures necessary to prevent it from becoming or continuing to be a derelict site. The carrying out of any work specified in the notice is exempted development. The legal definition of "derelict sites" is broad and could be adapted to abandoned residential housing estates. Local authorities could use the Derelict Sites Act in a targeted fashion to address sites which have become derelict under the stewardship of aberrant owners or occupiers.
We are doing a lot and we can use other legislation. The Deputy should be assured that my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Cuffe, is dealing with this issue. He launched the document on ghost or unfinished estates. As we have published that report, we are ensuring that the problem will be dealt with as quickly as possible.