Madam, – Marian Harkin, MEP (February 26th) writes that figures from me (Home News, February 13th) do not remotely represent the true figure for one-off houses in the countryside. She said the figure I was using was for aggregate rural areas which included houses with individual septic tanks in towns with a population up to 1,500 as well as in rural areas. The Census does have a figure to measure individual houses in aggregate rural areas, but it is not the figure I used.
The one I’ve used is for one-off houses given in Table 42, Vol 6 and the Census states, “One-off houses are defined as detached houses in rural areas with an individual septic tank or other individual sewerage treatment system”. The figure I gave for the current number of one-off houses in the State was 450,000. This consists of 396,486 one-off houses given in the Census, 2006. Since that time (and given that it takes approximately a year to complete a house from the grant of planning permission) 73,000 one-off houses were granted planning permission in period 2005-2008.
Taking a conservative estimate that only about 55,000 of these were built, yields the final figure of 450,000. In any case, disputing marginal issues in statistics cannot mask the proliferation of one-off houses in the State from 156,000 in 1971 to the current amount.
Apart from the environmental and social cost of the proliferation of one-off houses, there is economic cost, in that it costs three times as much to service rural houses compared to those in villages, towns and cities, in terms of road infrastructure, electricity, telecommunications, post, water supply and school transport. These costs, embedded in the various utilities, are paid for by the whole community.
There is a serious problem with the decline of many rural areas and this needs to be addressed by a co-ordinated package of measures and a review of the Government’s White Paper on Rural Development, 1999. Certainly, allowing a proliferation of one-off houses, most of which are for those working and commuting to cities and towns, is not a sustainable policy response.
I have stated that rural housing is required for those involved in essential rural activities and those who have a very close connection with the land. I would agree with Ms Harkin that there are serious deficiencies in water and sewerage in many of our towns and villages. This needs to be addressed, along with the provision of a proportion of serviced sites in our towns and villages where people can build individual houses.
It is important that the development of our rural areas is evidence-based and plan-led. Rather than being confrontational, I would welcome discussion among the various stakeholders to achieve this. – Yours, etc,