Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

This probably is one of those areas on which one probably could spend the afternoon, particularly in respect of the housing element. There is an uneven geographical spread nationally in respect of the 100,000 people on the waiting list. From responses to parliamentary questions from a range of sources, albeit mainly from the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, I have put together my own table with regard to what are the worst and least worst local authority areas. Anyone who is waiting for a house and who has been accepted onto a waiting list will have a need and six local authorities account for 43% of all the people on the waiting list, namely, Dublin and Cork city councils and South Dublin, Cork, Kildare and Fingal county councils. How does the Minister of State treat the spread of the housing allocation? While it is all very well to have a national figure of 5,000 units, is that targeted in any way or is this the intention? At the bottom end of the housing waiting list, there are six counties that account for 3%, which tend to be local authority areas such as Leitrim, Roscommon and Donegal county councils. There is a vastly different experience, depending on where one is located in the country, and I wish to hear what the Minister of State has to say with regard to a targeted approach.

This spills over into the rental market because one will tend to find the areas that are most under pressure in respect of housing waiting lists also will be those areas in which there will be a profile of high rents. Moreover, even with the welcome increase in rent caps that recently has been made by the Department of Social Protection, it still is well below market rents in some areas. However, the Department is finding it almost impossible in some of these locations to get landlords to engage with the RAS scheme or with lending leasing schemes. Consequently, is there a profile within the Department of the variety of situations and of the situations that are under most pressure? Is there targeting in this regard or is it simply due to one local authority being better than another at putting in the pitch for the new builds or purchases or whatever? Moreover, while one would like to see the construction sector back at work, has an evaluation been carried out on the value for money in purchasing as opposed to building? There is some very good value to be had and this is certainly a buyers' market.

On the subject of grants, the Minister of State referred to independent living and I am aware the Department undertook a reconfiguration last year in which some areas gained and others lost out. While I am sure the Minister of State went through it in a methodical way on the basis of need, some local authorities simply do not provide some elements of the grants. For example, the adaptation grants for people with disabilities are offered in my local authority area but grants are not provided for repairing homes. For example, I recently encountered a person aged 90-something who required a few thousand euro worth of work for the roof on that person's house. The likelihood is that a saving to the State will be made on one side because clearly, money will not be provided. However, a cost will be incurred on the other side, in that the person in question is highly likely to end up out of that house and for someone in his or her 90s, that means one is highly likely to be in a more dependent and a more cost-inefficient environment and certainly not what that person needs. In the review, is the Department examining inequity by insisting there is a certain element of provision, even if it is at the emergency end? It is not good enough that it depends on a postcode lottery as to whether one receives such grants.

As for the RAS and the leasing schemes, it appears to me that in some places, the local authorities have shut up shop. It would be useful to hear back from the Minister of State as to where RAS or the leasing scheme are or are not working.

I would be very surprised if the non-working end did not sit more or less beside the profile suggestive of a higher number of people on the waiting list.

Homelessness was mentioned. Is there a small reduction in the number of homeless or is the number growing? I would have expected the budget to tackle homelessness to have been protected absolutely because it pertains to an area where people are most under stress.

On the value for money of the leasing scheme, somebody who was speaking to me recently and who was leaving the country on a long-term basis leased his apartment, which is worth €150,000, to the local authority. He was very grateful that the local authority took it off his hands. Over the course of 15 years, he will end up with €150,000 because of the sum accruing every year over 15 years. The property is worth €150,000 now and will be returned to him in pristine condition. The man said it was great that the local authority is taking the apartment but said it did not seem to stack up for him. While I acknowledge that the general Government debt has to be kept at a certain level, I believe some of the measures that apply over the longer term do not seem to stack up economically. I would welcome the delegates' comments on that.