Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2026: Committee and Remaining Stages Seanad Éireann — 2026-07-14 ============================================================ Alice-Mary Higgins (IND), National University of Ireland I move amendment No. 1: In page 10, between lines 1 and 2, to insert the following: “(2) Where there is a demand for the payment of levy under section 15 of the Act of 2015, but that levy has not been collected before the date of the coming into operation of the repeal of section 15 of that Act by paragraph (a) of subsection (1) , the Act of 2015 shall, on and after that date, continue to apply and have effect in relation to the demand for the payment of levy under section 15 of that Act in respect of a vacant site the subject of the recovery of that levy, as if the repeal had not occurred.”. This seeks to ensure that any outstanding payment of the vacant site levy will still be paid when the provisions in this Bill move forward and when the existing vacant site levy is repealed by this Bill. I am concerned that the repeal of the provisions as set out could let landowners who are sitting on vacant sites for speculative reasons off the hook. There are over 100,000 vacant and derelict houses in this State, whereas this Bill is inserting language that suggests there is a shortage of housing. That is being inserted as if it is a permanent fact, when we also know there is a failure to act on the properties that are there and are part of the mix. This is the crucial part of tackling the ever-rising homelessness figures, but it is worrying and hard to see that the Government is serious about tackling this problem. It has been reluctant to increase penalties for landowners who sit on vacant properties. The vacant price levy started at 3% of the market value of the land. A proposal by me, the then Senator Grace O'Sullivan and others back in 2017, almost nine years ago now, to increase that levy to 7% was rejected only to finally be brought in a couple of years later, in 2019. The residential zoned land tax, RZLT, which is the new tax that is going to replace that, brings it back down to 3% of the market value of the land. By moving the entire system to the collection of RZLT and the Revenue, the Government is effectively cutting the penalties for underutilised sites that should and could be used for residential housing. There is also a difference between the purpose of the vacant site levy and that of the RZLT, and I am concerned that something is being lost in that transition. The vacant site levy applies to residential land where there is a need for housing and regeneration other than residential in an area where the majority of the site is vacant or idle and is having a negative effect on existing amenities, or reduces the amenity provided by public infrastructure, or has an adverse impact on the character of an area. The piece on the provision in the vacant site levy was not solely about providing more housing, even though that is very crucial; it was also around recognising the knock-on effects of vacancy on the civil fabric of an area. Coming from Cork, the Minister of State will be very familiar with the footage and the monitoring of dereliction in Cork city centre, for example, and the impact that has had on the city and on the town. All liable sites were required to place themselves on the vacant site register, giving a public view to the owners of sites and vacancies. It was tackling multiple issues. The problem was it was not implemented and was not applied. Rather than tackling the implementation of that, including, for example, some of the proposals, which were to ensure the moneys that would be collected by local authorities could be used in relation to housing provision by local authorities to actually tackle the wider and negative impacts of dereliction on that local basis, rather than measures such as that we are now repealing the entire thing. I want to be clear that I am not necessarily opposed to the residential zoned land tax, RZLT in itself. That is one thing. What I do not see is why we are potentially letting people off the hook who should have been liable under the vacant site tax. It is really regrettable that for nine years, nothing was done to make that very important measure be effective and deliver. The RZLT, compared to the vacant site levy, is a self-assessed tax to be applied to properties located in particular areas of RZLT maps published by local authorities that are zoned for residential use; again, not necessarily tackling the dereliction on main streets in many towns across Ireland. Exemptions are given to any residential property on the map which is subject to a local property tax. The framing here is all around tax compliance rather than tackling vacancy. There is nothing stopping a landowner avoiding the application of the RZLT if they instead chose to pay local property tax on a vacant property. There are vast swathes of the RZLT maps where it is shown that the RZLT will not apply. The aim of the vacant site levy was to tackle the adverse negative impacts on dereliction in the surrounding areas, and that is potentially being lost by the repeal of that measure. The provisions on the vacant site register also do not apply to the RZLT therefore we are losing that crucial public oversight of landowners so that we can know who is utilising sites solely for the purpose of financial gain or speculation. We will not have that information as we would have had it previously in the vacant properties register, even though the consequences of the speculative behaviour are immense. There are things being lost here in this. It is not a straightforward repeal and replace. It is not clear to me, first of all, how the gaps between the two measures are being tackled, and second, just straightforwardly in terms of when this repeal comes into effect, what the issue will be. I know there are measures in the Bill where there is an appeal under way, but what is not clear to me is if there are situations whereby an outstanding payment is due or a case has been taken, will they still be proceeding? Will the Minister of State clarify on both those issues? --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-07-14/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-08-27T06:52:15+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-07-14