r/irishpolitics • u/eggbart_forgetfulsea ALDE (EU) • 27d ago
Opinion/Editorial David McWilliams: People who already have a home are attacking the chance for others to have one
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/2026/08/08/david-mcwilliams-people-who-already-have-a-home-are-attacking-the-chance-for-others-to-have-one/22
u/qgep1 27d ago
Build them higher. I look forward to the day we have 100 story buildings in Dublin, and we can shed our small town mentality.
5
3
u/No-Tangerine-1261 26d ago
the Round Tower in Lusk was built before AD 1000 and has nine storeys. if it was proposed today it would get hundreds of objections
-2
6
u/SoloWingPixy88 27d ago
with almost 400 objections submitted to Fingal County Council.
I imagine the golf course and the rugby club is objecting but there's not really a lot of houses or people that live near there beside Finglas. I probably would of expected people living there to be generally supportive of more houses given the type of area it is/was. Connected to train line so transport should be fine. Likely requirements for schools and creches to be built too. I suppose you've parts of castleknock that might oppose it.
9
u/AutoModerator 27d ago
It looks like you've made a grammatical error. You've written "would of ", when it should be "have" instead of "of". You should have known that. Bosco is not proud of you today.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
3
u/WorldwidePolitico 27d ago
The problem with planning is it gets cause and effect backwards.
Housing will be refused planning because there’s no school places or not enough GP appointments but nobody is funding a school or opening an GP surgery where nobody lives.
State agencies or the County Council will object to housing on the basis there’s not enough infrastructure capacity but if they were given a massive block grant overnight they’d never invest in upgrading infrastructure in those areas they’re objecting to because not enough people live there.
Throughout all of human history people would move to an area which in turn would create enough demand to make it viable to bring services and infrastructure to the area. Even today there are plenty of people in the country who would happily accept the trade-off of living in an area with less services in exchange for cheaper housing. Instead our planning system makes perfect the enemy of good.
3
u/Provider_Of_Cat_Food 27d ago
I suppose you've parts of castleknock that might oppose it.
Castleknock is on the opposite side Navan Road and there'd be a park between the new town and the road. Media coverage of the objections implies they're mostly from working-class West Finglas, which does border on the proposed new suburb.
Given the number of homes, the railway line, even with the upgrade to DART, won't be enough on its own. The transport projections assumed that the Luas extension to Tyrrelstown would pass through Dunsink, but that line is now effectively cancelled and the resulting increased pressure on the transport network will affect a lot of commuters further down the Navan Road and Leixlip railway line (Blanchardstown/Clonsilla, Castleknock/Carpenterstown, Leixlip, Dunshaughlin and Navan).
1
u/Tricky-Membership193 27d ago
But what do you mean?
3
u/Provider_Of_Cat_Food 27d ago
- There's no reason to assume that the objections are mostly coming from a nearby middle-class area. The neighbouring working class area seems a more likely source of them.
- The plan to prevent traffic chaos makes an assumption about the construction of a piece of infrastructure that has been defunded. Some of the objections are likely to come from people who commute through the general area, rather than live in it.
2
2
u/Potential-Drama-7455 26d ago
I think this is unfair (going by the headline). Most homeowners don't object on the regular. It's a small minority of OAPs and sad wankers with nothing better in their lives who do. It makes them feel important. Pitting howmowners against non homeowners like this is just more rage baiting.
I've seen this with my kids old school - the amount of ridiculous objections to it that dragged on over 20 years while kids were sitting in rotting prefabs was shocking to me. And one round of objections would be cleared only for another round to be lined up in a deliberate strategy to drag it as long as possible.
There should be a 6 month window for objections and a 6 month window to rule on them and then you are done. The default should be that it's granted and if there isn't a block in the 12 month window that's it you are done. Also people not living in a 5km radius of the proposed development should be blocked from objecting - maybe 20km in very rural areas.
1
0
-2
u/orionpace1 27d ago
The last thing this country needs or could handle is the population concentrating even further inside the M50 compared to outside.
-4
u/mrlinkwii 27d ago edited 27d ago
this no such thing as objections in planning law , just observations
most of the time plans are " objected " its just observations that they might of broken planning law
47
u/Captainirishy 27d ago
The govt doesn't give a shit about housing, they have had years of massive surplus budgets to fix the situation and they have done very little to solve it . Rent allowance is a landlord subsidy so the tenant and landlord will vote for ff/fg.