To tackle dereliction, the council is pushing to broaden what it includes

The Derelict Sites Act doesn't address vacancy, "which is always what we've been kind of hampered with", a Dublin City Council official told the planning committee at a meeting on Wednesday.

So, if a council cracks down on a building that's an eyesore, the owner might tidy up the front to keep from facing fines. But it could still be crumbling inside, and left unused.

The council official, Bronagh Corry, a senior executive officer who works on planning and property, was responding to a motion that the council push to broaden the law's definition of dereliction to include vacancy, to help councils tackle dereliction better.

"Many buildings across the city remain unused and neglected for many years, contributing to the housing crisis, anti-social behavior, and the decline of local communities, while not meeting the legal threshold for dereliction under the Derelict Sites Act," said the motion from Green Party Councillor Feljin Jose.

So he wanted the committee to write to Minister for Housing James Browne, of Fianna Fáil, to call on him to broaden the definition to include "long-term vacancy, prolonged neglect, and persistent underuse".

The Department of Housing is expected to shortly make changes to the law around penalties around derelict sites, switching out the Derelict Sites Levy, which has been managed by councils, with a Derelict Property Tax, to be collected by Revenue.

The tax was announced in Budget 2026. "It is intended to introduce legislation providing for the tax in Finance Bill 2026," said a department spokesperson by email.

A spokesperson for the Department of Finance said in April that it was working with Revenue and the Department of Housing “to develop a definition of dereliction under which properties will be considered liable for the new Derelict Property Tax”.

On Wednesday, council officials didn't seem too optimistic that there would be major changes to the definition.

"We don't know exactly what that is going to be," said Corry. "We are led to believe that it will be narrowed again somewhat."

Nevertheless, committee members agreed Jose's motion to ask the department to broaden it instead.

Rotten teeth

A site is "derelict", under the Derelict Sites Act, if it "detracts, or is likely to detract, to a material degree from the amenity, character or appearance of land in the neighbourhood" because of what the structures look like, or if there's loads of rubbish.

But it ignores what's going on inside the building, whether it's vacant long-term, said Jose, the Green Party councillor. So, as he sees it, it needs to change.

"I think it's too vague, it's too lenient," he said.

Indeed, said Dermot Lacey, the Labour Party councillor. "I think the definition is far too narrow."

There used to be a Vacant Sites Levy, of 7 percent of a piece of land's market value each year, to try to prompt owners to bring idle land back into use.

But that was on vacant sites, not vacant buildings, and it was phased out in 2025, in favour of a new Residential Zoned Land Tax, on land that could be used for homes but hasn't been.

Meanwhile, there's now a Vacant Homes Tax, but that doesn't apply to properties that are uninhabitable.

Jose said that members of the committee had all heard criticisms of local authorities' weak response to dereliction. There were some element of truth to those criticisms, he said.

Last year, council officials talked about several ways in which they soft-pedalled on enforcing the Derelict Sites Levy.

They hadn't added sites that had planning permission to the derelict sites register, a step toward imposing the levy, and they didn't really chase down unpaid levies – instead, just putting them as charges on the properties, to be collected at some point at a later stage.

The council has also found itself paralysed after using compulsory purchase orders (CPOs) to acquire some of the most derelict properties, citing a lack of funding streams to then do them up.

Still, at the meeting, Jose said he didn't think that transferring powers to Revenue would change much – if the definition wasn't refined.

The council's deputy chief executive, Anthony Flynn, said he and his colleagues had no issue with supporting the motion put forward by councillors.

He emphasised that the key missing piece was any consideration of vacancy, and talked about rewording the motion to stress that.

The word vacant "gives a lot more scope to allow the city council to, I suppose, look at more properties within a definition", he said.

Officials have been engaging in recent months with the Department of Housing about the Derelict Sites Tax, he said.

"We have submitted a very detailed paper" on the council's position on implementing the tax, he said. Part of that was about the definition, he said.

Dublin City Council has been told enactment is imminent, he said.

But he thinks that it's highly unlikely, if it is in the upcoming Finance Bill in the next month or so, that the central government will change the definition in the legislation, he said.

It's a bit wait and see at the moment, said Corry, to councillors. The council hasn't heard back from the department on their submission on the definition of derelict, she said.