Madam, - In his article "Snobbery over rural housing" (Opinion, March 8th) John Waters seems to have completely missed the point. The current controversy regarding one-off housing does not reflect a contest between rural and urban ideologies but something more prosaic: it is a contest in the marketplace between buyers and sellers.
The question to be asked is not whether the Government should be on the side of urban or rural interests, but whether it is right that the Government should consistently act in the interest of land-owners and developers, and against the interest of ordinary people trying to buy a home.
The issue of one-off housing has become a hot potato due to urban-generated demand for rural properties. This demand stems from rising house prices and a shortage of properties in urban areas. The roots of these problems lead back to wealthy property speculators who have been allowed to sit on the bulk of development land in Dublin and simply let its value appreciate (taking advantage of demographic trends which have helped to push up demand). These speculators have accumulated vast wealth without contributing anything to anyone (apart, perhaps, from the occasional brown envelope).
The cost of this wealth is paid by ordinary people who find themselves priced out of the housing market in urban areas due to the resultant shortage of suitable properties. The Government's solution to this problem is to continually rezone more areas outside urban areas. This creates a constant stream of new millionaires, but pushes ordinary people further and further away from their communities as they strive to get on the property ladder. As a result of this gradual dispersal, Ireland has become the most car-dependent society in the world.
Urban-generated demand for rural land seems to have two obvious effects on landowners in rural areas.
In some instances, it makes planning requirements more stringent as planners struggle to control the rash of development, which makes things difficult for ordinary people trying to build homes on their family farms. In most instances, though, it provides an opportunity to cash in on rising prices.
From the Government's point of view this is a perfect situation, as its decision to loosen the planning guidelines will now be extremely popular for an obvious reason: plenty of landowners all over the country will be able to make money without any hindrance from irksome planning officials.
The price we will have to pay for this will include an increasingly "atomised", "alienated" society (to borrow John Walter's words), a degraded environment, more road deaths due to increased traffic, and enforced longer commutes to work with all the adverse effects on family life, health and happiness which that entails.
It doesn't have to be like this. There are a range of policies the Government could introduce to free up land and control the cost of property, for example, increasing the level of Capital Gains Tax; introducing heavy holding fines to encourage speculators to develop their land; and capping the value of rezoned land at agricultural levels to discourage speculation. The resultant supply of housing and reduction in the growth of property values would stem the flow of urban populations into the countryside, leaving rural areas for country people to do with as they choose. - Yours, etc.,
RONAN SHALLOE, Grosvenor Lodge, Rathmines, Dublin 6.
Madam, - As a regular reader of your newspaper I never thought I would find myself agreeing with the views expressed by your columnist John Waters. But having read his article "Snobbery over Rural Housing", I feel I agree almost entirely with the sentiments expressed. It is also encouraging to note that The Irish Times is capable of publishing a view in favour of one-off rural housing. - Yours, etc.,
RAY O'SULLIVAN, Newtown, Naas, Co Kildare.