In February, James Browne, the newly minted housing minister, did something he probably now regrets: he held himself hostage to fortune. 

Browne, parachuted into the position from relative political obscurity by Micheál Martin, told The Sunday Independent that he intended to appoint a “fixer-in-chief” tasked with apparently “kicking in doors”.

The same article stated the new individual would be a “maverick” and “an outsider”, someone, according to government sources, who would come from the current pool of civil servants. 

In the end, Browne opted for Brendan McDonagh as the new head of the Housing Activation Office. 

McDonagh has many talents, but he is certainly not an outsider or a maverick. 

As chief executive of the National Asset Management Agency (Nama), the State tasked McDonagh with fighting developers, quarrelling with local authorities, and arguing with banks. 

The long-term success or failure of Nama is a question for another day (and the agency certainly has some blame for the lack of housing development), but no one can doubt that he attacked his Nama role with gusto. 

He did what he was asked – publicly pursuing developers, publicly fighting with banks, and publicly engaging with local authorities.

But here is the rub. As a so-called housing “tsar”, you need a collegiate relationship with the developers, banks and local authorities that McDonagh has spent more than a decade battling.

His purported appointment came awry following a public backlash over him retaining his current €430,000 annual salary (the NTMA, under whose aegis Nama operates, does not operate under the general public sector salary code). McDonagh withdrew his name from consideration amid significant opposition from Fine Gael and the wider public. 

The salary issue should be secondary. If McDonagh, or someone for that matter, could fix the housing crisis, they are more than entitled to such a salary. 

The issue is something else: was he the right person for the job, and, more importantly, what even is that job?

In its 2024 report, the Housing Commission proposed the establishment of a so-called Housing Delivery Oversight Executive. It wanted the body to be established by legislation as a “decision-making body responsible for coordinating the delivery of housing. 

“This body should be time-limited. It should identify and address blockages to housing delivery and oversee and drive investment in public utilities on land zoned for housing,” it stated. 

Underpinning all of this was the concept that the body would be given executive powers backed up by legislation. 

This is not what is being proposed now.

The housing minister, Browne, issued a press release this week full of pithy quotes (“The Housing Activation Office will do what it says on the tin — it will have the ability to seek out obstacles to growth, the agility to troubleshoot and ensure smoother delivery”) but light on practicalities. 

Consider this. The same press release that announced the establishment of the Housing Activation Office – the office McDonagh was earmarked to chair – also announced the establishment of the Housing Activation Delivery Group to support the office in “developing a coordinated public infrastructure investment”. Brown will chair this group.

He will also chair another new initiative launched in the same press release — the Housing Activation Industry Group, a body apparently designed to “provide regular structured engagement between the Office and industry representative bodies”. 

According to Browne: “These aren’t committees for the sake of it — I want streamlined, on-the-ground reporting as to progress in each location and how we can scale up the housing delivery needed.”

But we do need to ask why a minister tasked with building houses has initiated three different bodies with the same aim in one day. 

The housing crisis, as I have said before, is a generational event. And the lack of progress is a damning indictment of the system. But the causes of the crisis are well known, and the solutions to it are equally well known and well documented.

A recent Central Bank report pointed to low productivity in the construction sector, delays in utility connection, delays in the planning system, and a shortage of zoned and serviced land in high-demand areas.

Recent analysis by Davy shows that the “current rent caps make development of apartments unviable given institutional investors seek a positive stable real return, and this is not possible when a property’s rent can only increase by the lower of two per cent or general inflation.” 

It added: “Other key reforms should make the waiver on development levies and the rebate for water charge connection fees permanent, reduce VAT on construction to aid viability, and further streamline the planning process to reduce uncertainty for developers of new housing.”

None of this is revolutionary. Yes, as Dan outlined this week, Ireland has experienced significant population growth, a fact that has exacerbated the crisis. 

But overall, the issue is a failure of legislation and policymaking. A government can fix this. It does not need an activation office, certainly one lacking a legislative framework. 

Elsewhere last week…

I caught up with Sam Murray Hinde, a leading employment lawyer, as part of our Sports Matters podcast series. She has navigated some of the toughest legal challenges in British sport, from racism scandals to governance reform. She talked about culture, ethics, and governance in sport.

London-based private equity firm Queen’s Park Equity has just raised a £305 million fund. Investors Mark Crowley and Alison Price spoke to Michael about their plans to start investing in Ireland.

Mimergy, a tyre recycling business using alternative processes to incineration, has appointed a process advisor under Scarp to build a rescue plan for the company. Jonathan had the story. 

After years in fintech in Asia, James Lloyd is now back in Ireland, leading Juspay’s Irish office and international expansion. He spoke to Tom.