Developers must remember people, not just profit

Want a dream home and a dream life? You can have it in New Lucan. Or so the developers say. I moved there 18 months ago. It's a new, sprawling urban parish with thousands of first-time buyers and lots of new people to meet.

Their interest in the church varies greatly. Many are enthusiastic, a few are hostile, most are welcoming. But all are concerned about the new community growing up. There is great hope, much enthusiasm for the future.

But there have been disappointments too. Having been formed as a priest in a theological and philosophical world, I feel a little cold when I see the word "development" lurking on billboards advertising new housing, and I think of the reality.

The marketing and provision of these goods have at times been a cynical and dishonest exercise. In New Lucan, and plenty of other places like it, the maps that depict new housing schemes are deliberate in the way they delete whole areas.

The maps are elastic and are stretched to include facilities and assets that may increase the value of a home. The maps ought to be the Ordnance Survey maps of the area in question so that no one can be deceived.

The locations of schools and churches are misleading in these maps. Clearly some developers, estate agents and solicitors are appealing to a human motivation based on economic self-advancement. It's very understandable.

Young couples are idealistic. They want the dream house to go with the dream life together. They welcome the message of success. "Put your money down quick." "Your house will rise in value." "I'm buying a house here myself."

But they suffer disappointment. Amenities don't materialise. Poor workmanship is often evident. And first item on the snags list is getting hold of the foreman.

The Canadian writer Robert Theobald argues: "Ordinary people are not interested in maximum growth. They want to be able to have a decent life and ensure one for their children and grandchildren."

In my own experience I have seen people get very angry when they find that the reality and the dreams are at odds.

At a residents' meeting which I attended recently I saw people move through the stages of bereavement - denial, anger, bargaining and acceptance - as they realised how they had been misled about the finishing of their houses and the situation of new roads.

It is no surprise that some recent political scandals are related to developers, because commercial interests don't just pull hidden strings. They also take advantage of people in broad daylight at the point of sale.

A number of estates in the area had titles like "proposed" and "community facility" on sites alongside houses. But a term like community facility is a licence for a developer to decide what is best for the community without reference to that community.

Before coming to New Lucan I had a different idea of development. It meant the building up of people so that their lives had meaning and their relationships had depth and quality.

And community development is about providing an environment where people can benefit from their work, find rest and ease, come to decisions about their future together, and where the weaker members also find a footfall. This is the development that the developers seem to have forgotten.

But the residents have fought back successfully in some cases. One residents' association objected to the developer's idea of a community facility. They initiated a dialogue and, with the assistance of different agencies, they succeeded in building a community centre that will serve the growth and development of the people in those homes for many years to come.

Our policy for housing needs a lot more care and attention, well beyond the accountability which tribunals can deliver. The aim must be to respect the needs and aspirations of new families and to prevent commercial interests from taking advantage of the vulnerability and idealism of new home-buyers.

Policymakers must address the cynicism caused by such catch-cries as "buyer beware". Too much responsibility lies with the purchaser, not the vendor. Misinformation should be outlawed. Those selling property should be obliged to supply accurate information regarding amenities, hazards and future plans, regardless of whether the information is requested.

The writer and guru Charles Handy argues that "markets work because they provide customers with a price and a choice". Leave either of these out and you end up serving commercial interests rather than the needs of the customer. The provision of choice is important but real choice is impossible when there is misleading information in the advertising of new properties and developments.

The present scandal surrounding politicians and property developers is not just an opportunity for political point-scoring, to be exploited by political parties. Society is faced with deeper questions. How can we preserve integrity, equality and fairness in business, particularly where homes are being purchased?

Is the economy, and the rising panic to succeed which it generates, really an ethical enterprise? While we are being constantly congratulated for the immense quantity of goods we are producing and consuming, are we forgetting that quality of life is a more important consideration?

The houses which we market as goods serve the most important resource in our economy - our people. Since people are the primary and ultimate source of any wealth, care for them should not be incompatible with a progress where even the developers will benefit.

This problem doesn't arise in the context of new housing estates. Developments like the towers in Ballymun took no account of people's real needs. Others have fought the battle for social housing in the docklands area. Areas of Dublin were left to rack and ruin until community groups fought back and demanded that their environment be improved.

When this eventually happened the esteem of the communities and, more particularly, the esteem of the people who lived in them, improved greatly. In effect, inner-city communities have insisted that development must take account of people's needs, not just the financial and commercial success that is measured and celebrated by policymakers.

The churches have played their part in providing good models for community development. Personnel are put in place before a community can support them. Schools are built, which, apart from meeting the educational needs, also provide a facility where people can meet and relax.

This approach stems from the view that our environment, where we live and move, must nurture and support what is best in us. "We build our buildings and then our buildings build us."

Father Alan Hilliard is a priest of the Dublin archdiocese who serves in the Lucan South parish.