Key Takeaways
| Topic | Main Point |
|---|---|
| Back-garden modular homes | Could help some families quickly, but unlikely to solve the housing crisis |
| Government proposal | Reduces planning barriers but does not address the deeper problem of affordability |
| Main concern | Policy places too much responsibility on homeowners instead of direct State action |
| Structural issue | Ireland still lacks large-scale affordable housing delivery |
| Apple tax windfall | Could fund direct State housing projects with longer-term impact |
| Best long-term solution? | Combination of vacant home refurbishment and State-led modular/social housing |
The Irish Government’s proposal to exempt certain back-garden modular homes from planning permission has generated strong debate across Ireland’s housing sector. The Irish Times.
Now, while supporters believe the move could create faster housing supply and support multigenerational living, some skeptics (like myself) argue that it risks becoming just another small-scale measure in the middle of a very large housing crisis.
However, I do believe that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
There is genuine merit in allowing families to build high-quality modular homes for adult children, ageing parents, or temporary accommodation without having to deal with long planning delays. Ireland’s planning system is always under pressure, and anything that can safely reduce administrative bottlenecks deserves to be considered.
But at the same time, it is difficult for me to ignore the wider reality.
Ireland’s housing crisis has reached a point where many full-time workers cannot afford rent, young adults are staying at home longer than ever before, and supply continues to be far lower than demand. With that in mind, I feel that these smaller policy changes are being presented as major solutions – when in fact, they are really only partial fixes.
That is where much of my frustration around this proposal comes from.
Why I think The Proposal Has its Benefits.
To be fair to the Government, this proposal to exempt qualifying back-garden modular homes from planning permission is not without value.
- Allowing planning-exempt modular homes could help:
- Families looking after elderly relatives
- Adult children struggling to rent
- People seeking more independent living arrangements
- Homeowners needing additional space, and even
- Some renters looking for cheaper accommodation
2. Compared to traditional housing developments, modular homes can also be delivered much faster.
3. Construction timelines are also shorter, factory-built methods reduce delays (even faster on small projects), and the homes can often be installed on existing serviced land.
In theory, this creates small pockets of new housing supply without needing large-scale infrastructure works, which take a long time to move.
Also, the proposal also reflects what I believe to be a growing, but important social reality in Irish Culture.
Ireland is becoming a country where multigenerational living is returning – out of necessity rather than by choice. Many younger adults simply cannot afford to move out, especially in cities such as Dublin where rents continue to rise faster than incomes.
In that sense, the Government may be trying to create more flexibility for families that are already improvising housing solutions themselves.
However, the Proposal Still Does Not Tackle the Core Problem.
The biggest issue with the proposal in my humble opinion is SCALE.
Even the most qualified industry experts and strongest supporters of the plan admit that it is unlikely to make a major dent in the housing crisis, i.e, Keith Lowe – Chief Executive of DNG.
A few thousand modular homes spread across private gardens will not fundamentally change:
- National supply shortages
- High costs of land
- Rising rents
- Issues of Home prices
- Investor-driven pricing pressures
The policy may help at the edges, but it does not alter the structure of the housing market itself.
I believe that this distinction is very important, because Ireland’s housing system depends very heavily on the private market to deliver supply. That is such a fundamental problem to me it almost feels immoral.
As far as housing is concerned in Ireland, The State mainly acts as:
- A regulator
- A provider of subsidies and
- A planning authority
But not a builder of houses.
If we have learned anything in the last 5 years alone, it is that the private market alone cannot deliver affordable housing at the scale needed to stabilise house prices.
Recent research from the European Trade Union Institute showed that minimum-wage workers in Ireland face the 2nd highest rental costs in Europe. In Dublin, average rents for one- and two-bedroom homes were found to exceed the monthly income of many minimum-wage workers entirely.
That is not a normal affordability issue anymore.
It is a structural imbalance, and needs to be dealt with from the roots.
The Burden of Absorbing the Cost of the Housing Crisis is Being Shifted to Ordinary Homeowners.
Here is how all this debate seems to me.
On the surface, it looks like this policy of back garden exemption is being discussed to help homeowners, but it seems to me that the State is simply shifting accountability, responsibility and costs onto homeowners and citizens and dressing it up as policy.
Instead of the State trying to discuss how to directly increase affordable housing supply at scale, this proposal effectively says:
- Homeowners should provide extra accommodation (while at the same time, the State keeps creating new laws that specifically push landlords out of the market. See HERE),
- Families should absorb housing pressure through imposed multigenerational living
- Individuals should invest their own money into solving part of the crisis.
That may help some people, but it also raises an uncomfortable question:
Should solving a national housing crisis rely so heavily on ordinary homeowners?
After all, many people most affected by the crisis cannot benefit from this proposal anyway.
To build a modular home in your garden, you generally need:
- To already own property
- To have enough outdoor space
- To have access to financing
- To manage additional insurance and tax costs
That already excludes large portions of the population, especially renters and younger workers.
The €14 Billion Apple Tax Windfall from the National Development Plan Could Have a Bigger Impact.
Anyone who has read my posts before must be rolling their eyes by now, because you know where this is going.
The €14bn Apple tax windfall, which was finally collected in full by the Irish Government in July 2025, is a once-off, non-recurring amount of money.
- It is money that was owed to the Irish State since 2016 by a multinational corporation, Apple Inc.
- This tax was not paid or borne by the common taxpayer; so this fund could be used as an incredible PR tool to help Irish politicians score much-needed political points with the Irish Public while helping them at the same time.
- The Apple Tax is not a foreign loan, so there are no state obligations or strings attached to a foreign lender.
The above reasons are precisely why the Apple Tax should be allocated specifically as a major catalyst, on the path to resolving the Irish housing crisis, rather than being stored away in the well-intentioned but non-urgent National Development Plan (NDP), where the money now sits.
Rather than relying mostly on private delivery, the State should get into serious conversations to use part of the fund to:
- Directly Acquire suitable vacant and derelict buildings, refurbish them and add them to public housing stock
- Launch or extend large-scale cost-rental developments
- Invest directly in modular and MMC public housing projects
- Improve supporting infrastructure such as water, electricity and transport needed to support housing
This alone will not resolve the housing crisis. But it would allow the State to become more than just a facilitator, but a direct builder and supplier of housing.
That matters because direct State supply can help stabilise prices over time, and reduce Ireland’s over-reliance on the private market.
If thousands of genuinely affordable homes enter the system, pressure on the private rental market begins to reduce. Competition for limited housing stock eases, and rents become less disconnected from wages.
This is easier said than done, but is this not more practical than any half-measure the State has tried since 2020?
I may not be an expert on housing politics and issues, but please tell me if this is not worth considering.
Yes. I admit I do understand that large-scale intervention still comes with major challenges. For example:
- Procurement
- Staffing
- Infrastructure delivery
- Local opposition
- Long-term management etc
But the difference in my opnion, is that these are structural responses to a structural problem.
Modular Housing Could Play a Major Role
Ironically, the Government’s modular proposal does highlight something important: Modern modular construction itself is not the problem.
In fact, modular and MMC methods could become one of the State’s strongest tools for delivering public housing faster and at lower cost.
The main difference is scale and coordination.
Scattered back-garden cabins are one thing. But oh, purpose-built, State-led modular communities with proper infrastructure, transport links, public amenities and long-term planning are something else entirely.
Countries around the EU (France, Germany, Austria, etc.) are increasingly using modern construction methods to speed up delivery during housing shortages. Ireland, within reason, can emulate these pioneers.
Of course, Ireland cannot simply copy another country directly because it needs to consider its own unique set of complex political, economic, geographical, cultural, technological, legal and social factors.
But my point remains the same – Modular and MMC work best when they are supported by direct State housing delivery targets, long-term State coordination and infrastructure investment – not as a once-off quick fix.
For decades, Ireland’s housing model has leaned heavily toward private sector delivery.
That approach may have worked more effectively when land was cheaper, population growth was slower and construction costs were lower. Today unfortunately, the situation is very different.
When a full-time worker tells you he or she cannot afford rent, and when a 35 year old cannot afford to leave home, it only becomes reasonable to ask whether the balance between market delivery and State delivery needs to change.
That does not mean abandoning the private sector entirely. Not at all. All I’m saying is that the State needs to take a more active role in directly shaping housing supply, and long-term housing stability.
Final Thoughts
The proposal to exempt certain modular homes from planning permission is not meaningless. As I have gladly mentioned above, it could genuinely help some families and create useful flexibility in a difficult housing market.
But it is unlikely to become the breakthrough solution Ireland needs.
At best, it is a helpful supporting measure inside a much larger crisis. But it still does very little to address the deeper issue – Ireland does not have enough affordable housing at scale.
That is why I am a firm advocate in a more balanced housing market. For that to happen, more active State intervention is vital – including the use of the State’s Apple tax windfall for direct public housing investment.
The housing crisis cannot simply be managed around the edges anymore, it needs to be confronted at its core.
