Does the Taoiseach agree that the situation with the redevelopment of O'Devaney Gardens, a former council housing estate, is a fiasco? It was a fiasco from the start and it a fiasco now. It is an incredible situation given the scale of the housing and homeless emergency we face. This site, with 14 acres of prime land owned by the State and suitable for up to 800 housing units, has been left derelict for more than ten years. The original public private partnership, PPP, project collapsed when the developer realised that the €100 million in anticipated profit would not be guaranteed given the collapse in house prices after the 2008 crash.

The PPP model failed because it was based on the premise of massive profits for private developers. It is this failed model, however, that the Taoiseach's Government and the Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, are insisting on imposing not just on the city council but on the community from O'Devaney Gardens still waiting for the redevelopment of the area they want to live in as council tenants. Make no mistake, the problem here is the Minister's right-wing, neo-liberal bias against public housing.

The Minister wrote to Dublin City Council in October threatening to withdraw State funding for the project unless councillors voted for a deal with a developer, Bartra, that would give 100% of public land in return for 30% of public housing. Rather than stand their ground, councillors from Fianna Fáil, the Labour Party, the Green Party and Social Democrats have effectively caved into the Minister's blackmail and tried to repackage the deal with Bartra as something it is not. Let us be clear what this means. This is the same deal that for the developer means 14 acres of prime land, close to the city centre and a Luas line, for free. The State will pay for infrastructure, a saving of €10 million for Bartra, while the absence of development levies will mean another €5 million saved. If the State came up with the €120 million for the 30% of the developer's 70%, which is highly unlikely now having listened to the Minister's comments, the total cost to the State would then be in the region of €250 million.

The sum of €250 million is what council officials estimate it would cost to build 100% public housing on the site, with cheap loans from the European Investment Bank, EIB. There is something seriously wrong here. Is it plain stupidity? I do not think so. Is it corruption? That was certainly a feature of the past, but not today. To me, that leaves ideological bias and political cowardice. Meanwhile, 10,000 people, 4,000 of whom are children, are living in homeless accommodation and thousands upon thousands of people are waiting for housing in this country.

I thank Deputy Collins for raising this important issue. We have a housing shortage and everyone knows that. The solution to the housing shortage is to build more homes-----

Eight years.

-----of all forms. These include private houses for people to buy, because most people want to own their own home, and that is a good thing; houses for people to rent, because some people need or have to rent at various points in their lives; and social housing for people on the housing list and who need social housing. This is a perfect site for that type of housing. It is very near the city centre and places of work, so it makes sense that that site should be made available-----

Free.

-----to all of the public for a mix of housing, and that is what is planned. There is no ideology from this side of the House regarding housing. We want more housing of all forms. Those who are ideological about housing are those who vote against housing developments for one reason or another, such as there being too much of this type of housing or too little of that type of housing. They are the ones who are ideological, the people who vote against housing. On this side of the House, we want housing of all forms-----

Tell that to Senator Catherine Noone.

-----and lots of it and as soon as possible.

Worse than the Travellers now.

We are focused on delivery, while the Deputy is focused on ideology.

What is planned in the O'Devaney site has now been adopted by Dublin City Council by 38 votes to 19. Nearly 800 new homes will be built on this site, 50% of which will be homes for people to buy, 30% of which will be social housing for people on the housing list and 20% of which will be affordable purchase units. That is going ahead.

The Minister is trying to stop it.

My understanding is that in advance of the vote some councillors, representing the so-called "Dublin Agreement" group of Fianna Fáil, Labour, the Social Democrats and the Greens, entered into a side agreement with the developer to purchase 30% of the units at O'Devaney Gardens at a market price for affordable rent. However, that deal had no status and no validity. What the local authority has done is voted to go ahead with a scheme of 800 new homes involving a mix of private, affordable and social housing. I hope they go ahead with that as soon as possible because people need those houses.

Why would the Taoiseach not want more houses when he can give over to a developer public lands and have that developer potentially selling those homes in the private market for €420,000? This is public land.

It all sounds very good but the fact of the matter is the Government's policies on solving the housing crisis are simply not working. The dogs in the street know that the Government cannot solve the problem unless it engages in a major programme of public housing. We are in a housing emergency. We have debated time and again in this House the crisis that people are facing.

A young couple came to me yesterday. They have a young son of three years of age. They are living separately because they are trying to save for a mortgage. They are finding it very difficult to do that. They cannot get private rented accommodation. It costs approximately €2,000 per month for a two-bedroom house in the area. They cannot afford a mortgage. They are still separated as a family because of that.

As the Taoiseach will be aware, there needs to be a major programme of public housing to solve the problem. The Government's plan is not working. We have sufficient public land to build 100,000 public housing units. There can be mixed tenure and mixed income with traditional public housing and the European cost rental model giving people affordable rents and long-term security. That is the mix we need. From my point of view, it is not an ideological issue. We need housing that people can afford and the Government is not providing it.

I believe that public lands should be used for the benefit of the entire public, not just for social housing.

They are private developers.

It is an ideological view that public lands should only be used for one form of housing, ie, social housing. I believe that public lands should be used for the benefit of all of the public.

That is where the ideological difference is.

Yes, for social housing for people on the housing list but also private housing for people to buy because people growing up in Dublin 7 and Dublin 1 want to be able to buy a place near to where they grew up-----

That is an ideological position.

-----and also affordable housing and cost rental as well. That is our position - delivery of all forms of housing on public land.

The Government is giving away land.

The ideological position is only to build one type of housing for one group of people.

It clarifies that it is a personal issue.

To reassure the Deputy, and as I informed Deputy Micheál Martin earlier, this year between 10,000 and 11,000 homes will be added to the social housing stock in Ireland-----

How many will be built?

-----with two thirds to three quarters of those being new builds. More homes will be added to the social housing stock in Ireland than in any year this entire century. During the boom, during the bust, we did not build as many social houses as we are now. This is the biggest social housing programme in a generation.

It is not.

It is not.

It is.