solve the housing problem easily...some solutions?

Why should someone be rewarded for not having a job, by handing them one of the most valuable assets most of us will ever own for free?

And why should employed people be punished for having a job? Doesn't make logical sense.

You can't keep giving away something valuable for free, and expect there to be no long term consequences. We're now seeing those consequences.

Most of the ghost estates have either been knocked or completely restored. Only a relatively small number remain as ghost estates.

How much have building costs increased since the last boom?

Most houses built were a C BER rating at best, no fancy heat pumps, 5 inches of kingspan, only a a few had underfloor.

Couple that with material shortages and wage inflation due to lack of people in trades and it's easy to see where an extra 50k could land on the price of a standard house.

I don't disagree with you about mass migration - it was always going to end in disaster.

We had plenty of examples elsewhere to give us enough forewarning about the road we were going down. But certain obstinate people ignored those big flashing neon warning signs, and plowed on regardless.

I mentioned the old corporation model, just as an outline starting point.

There needs to be a social contract between the people and the government... you get cheap housing, but you get it in return for contributing to society. This model of handing out free houses to the chronically work shy, needs to be stopped. It's completely unsustainable in the long run, regardless of whether we have high migration or not.

If you don't fancy contributing to society, you should be made to live like most poor people live in most parts of the world. I would be very confident, that given this choice MOST citizens would agree to this contract and play their part.

I agree I don't want to see third world conditions either, but if we structured this system in an intelligent manner I really don't think many people would choose to live in squalor when given a viable alternative. It would not be a difficult contract to uphold. But of course you will always get a minority of people who will choose squalor over rolling their sleeves up a bit. But we already have these people anyway, regardless of how many free things we give them. Every nation has them, and to a certain degree it's unavoidable. But they would account for a very small fraction of the population.

The pace at which local authorities give zoning approval to land for residential use is ridiculously slow and needs to be reformed. I know of an area of land that was a small farm taken into the area of Cork city when it expanded its boundary three years ago and the area right next to a city bus stop and 30minutes walk from the city centre is still not zoned for development. The owners have been eager to sell it for housing for decades now but estate agents are only interested in selling it as agriculture land as this is what it is zoned as, or give it away for slightly more to allow some of their friends have it as a long term investment to make big money for them at some point in the future when it eventually gets built on. The owners approaches to the local authorities to allow them sell the land for residential use have been rejected and repeatedly fobbed off and it is only established developers seem to be able to work the system to get developments started on neighbouring sites. The local authorities should be identifying these types of sites and helping the owners get them developed.

The number of derelict and underused buildings is very high and could also do with a process to help bring them into use. All local authorities should be required to identify all of the non used buildings in their administrative area and make estimates of how much it would cost to bring these buildings up to current basic standards for residential use. While they are at it the costs of servicing all vacant sites in urban areas should be looked at. If no development for residential or commercial use seems viable then assistance should be given by the local authority so it at least has some amenity use as a park or planted up in a way to improve the surrounding urban areas environmental quality. Sites and buildings where the ownership is unclear need to be brought into use and the land registry and existing repossession laws should be used by the local authorities to clear the way for these sites and buildings to be developed. The most efficiently finished and fastest sites and buildings to get into residential use should be dealt with first and the owners told to put them on the open market as development sites or get financial assistance options to bring the property up to standard to be occupied by a tenant or tenants. The rent for the fist few years could be channeled to repay the refurbishment and development costs and when these are refunded to the state the property stays as the property of the original owners to do with what they would like. The rent from the first few occupied properties would help fund the next round of developments under the scheme.

Improvements and promotion of the apprenticeship schemes to increase the numbers qualified in building trades to get this work done more rapidly.

Some building regulations have become law in parts of the country that obstruct people building a home that simply should not be there and these regulations need to be looked at to see which ones can be removed. I'm not saying have a free for all that anyone can build a house anywhere but the locals only regulations in many rural areas are pure discrimination based on where someone is born and should not be permitted under EU regulations on the free movement of EU citizens. I know some people think one off housing would destroy the country but if someone has the money to do this well and develops a home to fit into their environment these could be a valuable asset in rural areas becoming more economically vibrant and better places to live.

Speak freely on your plan to deal with the population growth problem, be thorough. Not everyone will sweep it under the carpet, the presumption it will be stops it from becoming a real debate.

In South Central France (or anywhere in France really bar near the coast or in /very close to a major city) a new turn key 80m2 ,3bed, with a generous garden, complying with their 2020 building regulations...is..roughly ...and I'm not sugar coating this..120k.

Look at the equivalent in Ireland ...300k for somewhere in Tipperary (roughly geographically similar).

There is something amiss there.

What is it?....🤔

Can anyone guess?

Give me an immigrant who works his/her ass off every day (whether highly paid/on minimum wage) over an entitled Irish sponger who has no ambition beyond watching their ticket on the waiting, any day of the week.

They will add far more to the fabric of our society than someone who not only wants something for nothing, but feels entitled to it. Safe in the knowledge that we are a country and society who will reward them for having lots of children yet do nothing to provide.

New 80 sqm 3-bedroom apts in French towns for 120k?

Can you please name the towns, or even better, provide links to apts for sale?

I agree with the sentiment. Agree that they’re good workers, have brought fantastic skills from which we’re benefiting. And yes I’d gladly swap them for our wasters. The thing is though that we can’t do an exchange. And now, and for quite a number of years, with the best will in the world, we just don’t have room for any more. Why is it such a terrible thing to say this?

sure what has tourism ever done for us…