Settle down
Back on topic, many brickies will look forward to the day they can get jobs in the HSE of housing. I wonder what the Flexi arrangements will be?
Now that the Shinners have embraced the racists, xenophobes and ethno-nationalists and will allow white people (local communities) to dictate who gets to live near them there won't be any immigrants coming to help build those extra houses.
Well settled thanks. Just calling it as it is.Settle down
And the gender quotas and the work from home arrangements etc.Back on topic, many brickies will look forward to the day they can get jobs in the HSE of housing. I wonder what the Flexi arrangements will be?
The Shinners want as much State owned and controlled housing as possible as at heart they are still a Marxist party. They are just better at masking it than they used to be.I haven't (and won't) read the plan in depth, but some questions immediately come to mind:-
1. Who will build these homes? Has Eoin O'Broin got a large warehouse in his back garden full of unemployed construction professionals?
Alternatively, does SF envisage a situation where thousands of construction workers will be enticed to Ireland by its exciting new construction programme? And, if so, where will they all live?
2. The State will continue to be competing with the private sector for the services of builders, plumbers, electricians, etc. Inevitably this will drive up costs for both sides. Has SF factored this into its promises?
3. How much will the promised additional planners, judges and associated support staff cost the taxpayer? Do they exist, and, if so, how quickly can they be recruited through the "State Jobs" function? (I recall reading that the average recruitment time for a public servant is between 10 and 12 months; and the higher the skill requirement the longer the lead time.)
Another thing: the promised three year rent freeze will probably just drive more landlords out of the maket, thus increasing the homelessness problem. But perhaps that's SF's intention; they see an ongoing housing problem as a vote winner.
When you say 146k, do you mean 461k?37bn / 125,000 = 296k per house
Bear in mind that 25,000 of the 125,000 are to be sold to buyers, so the 296k figure is not an exact measure of the development cost per house.
The cost to build a house in the GDA is 461k, but that includes large amount for
(1) land costs = 70k, way too high
(2) finance costs = 23k, way too high
(3) developers margin = 54k, too high
If we wanted to, as a society, we could reduce that 146k of cost.
By removing the developers margin, and de-risking development, and by using land taxes, and cheaper finance, we should be able to knock 100k off that 146k of costs.
Interest rates, more than anything else, determine house prices. The issue is supply. How do we, along with just about every other country in the OECD, increase supply.Soft costs that should be reduced
Land costs 70k + finance costs 23k + developers margin 54k = 146k approx of soft costs that we should try to reduce.
I recall Ronan Lyons saying that land taxes could help reduce land costs in Dublin to 10k per apartment.
If we could knock 100k off the soft costs, then the total cost would fall from 461k to 361k.
It's not regulation, it's incompetence.It would be great if the market provided affordable housing.
It either won't or can't, partly caused by State regulations.
What is the solution?
Is he a Good Republican?
Tom McFeely served 12 years in the Maze Prison for shooting an RUC officer in Derry and spent 53 days without food during the 1980 hunger strike. The former IRA veteran [who built Priory Hall] famously described himself as British while trying to avoid bankruptcy in the Republic, where the period of enforcement is much longer. “As a British citizen I have always objected to being forced into bankruptcy in a foreign jurisdiction purely on the basis that I have a judgment liability in that State,” he said.
Sounds like the real deal.The finest!
I agree!I'm enjoying the juxtaposition of the bike shed story with Sinn Féin's plan to give the State an even bigger role in housing.
The private sector will build that many (175,000 over 5 years) anyway. The State funds some of them but the private sector build all of them so the Shinners are going to directly build 25,000 houses a year. The State is going to build them. The same State that spent a third of a million on a bicycle shed. The same State that is alreadty significantly more expensive than the private sector in providing housing. They are going to have more of that. Yea, that'll work...
I'm enjoying the juxtaposition of the bike shed story with Sinn Féin's plan to give the State an even bigger role in housing.
With a new minister walking the halls of government buildings things would be different.
It just needs someone with a bit common sense to have a look over tenders in the evening and call out any bullshit.
Government Ministers aren't allowed to look at tenders because they haven't signed the Official Secrets Act (and can't be trusted, for very obvious reasons). Ever heard of Michael Lowry? Unfortunately, as I have signed the OSA, I can't give any examples!
(I'd love to tell you about the former public servant working in a specialist area who tried to award a contract to his missus (she had submitted a tender in her maiden name. Suffice to say, it was a bad move!)
Sounds like the OSA will have to change day 1..
(I mistakenly thought my sarcasm was obvious).
As the poster above pointed out you need to believe that ministers can have a huge impact on the short term workings of public bodies if you are to believe that a new minister from a different party can turn a €300k bike shelter into a 300k house.