Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I apologise for being late. I welcome all of our guests here today. I am sorry to have missed their presentations but I have read them.

I am a chairperson of a small housing body that has never been invited here or anywhere else. Deputy Casey mentioned the creation of housing bodies. I can assure him that many of the new housing bodies may be small but they have done a tremendous amount of work. My housing body has only 17 units but they are full and the tenants are happy. We built houses that were good value for money and we maintain them.

I wish to thank the person who originally set up Respond! The organisation has done wonderful work over the years.

I am very interested in learning more about the funding model used by the Irish League of Credit Unions. How does the Central Bank view the practice? The Central Bank and the Minister for Finance viewed this matter in a different light, including that other forms of funding were taboo for credit unions.

I was a member of the Irish Council for Social Housing for a decade or more. One of the reasons I left the organisation was because of the incremental way the bigger groups took it over and knocked out the smaller volunteer groups. I mean no disrespect but the ICSH was influenced by the boom generated by the Celtic tiger. It went mad buying up property and could not buy enough land in places. Expectations were raised and this country was left with a savage housing crisis. The organisation got too big for its boots in many ways. I do not mean anything personal by that, but I saw this situation occur before my eyes. The ICSH was taken over. The smaller groups could never progress or become a member of boards because the larger ones held power. It became a symptom of the problem rather than a solution. The movement did great work over the years, especially Respond!, and before we ever heard of Clúid, Oaklee Housing and many of the other housing organisations. The organisation had managing directors, boards of directors and whatever. Different people dealt with communities and the organisation had elected members throughout the country on sites. Unfortunately, the organisation is part of the problem now that is bureaucracy. One cannot build the blooming houses.

I want to ask the same question that Deputy O'Dowd asked about the NAMA offer. My own local authority refused NAMA. The NAMA complement of property was not taken up for a plethora of reasons and the vacant properties as well.

The ideals of the organisation were perfect but it got caught up in big business rather than look after the needs of customers or clients. Some clients of housing associations must endure awful issues. In some cases, public representatives cannot act on their behalf, which is anathema to what I stand for. I have a foot in both camps because I chair a very successful voluntary housing group. It has a small number of houses but we stuck to what we wanted to do. All the other smaller groups, and Deputy Casey might have mentioned some of them, have done great work but remained small. The organisation has gone into big housing like the big developers and is left with huge platters of land and maybe lots of houses that are not properly maintained or finished. It acted like NAMA.

The county councils have completely lost their way. I do not know whether they will hand over their housing provision to the AHBs or anyone else. I do not know who is expected to deliver all of the houses that the county councils have aspired to provide. No houses have been built in Tipperary and the same applies up and down the country. There is just talk. What about the unfortunate people who must sleep rough or live in unsuitable houses? The number of houses that are locked up is a disgrace. Any time one turns on the radio one can hear Fr. Peter McVerry and others talk about houses that are boarded up. I do not know why the organisation present cannot tackle the problem. Leaving houses boarded up attracts anti-social behaviour. I suggest that the organisation thinks about where it came from and originally set out to do. I suggest that it remain small and good at what it does because being all powerful has not proved successful in the building industry or in the voluntary association. I urge the organisation to show more respect for the voluntary associations. One or two of the voluntary associations may have grown too large, but volunteers took hold of them, which was necessary. Voluntary associations need a code of conduct but not because they are high and mighty. We can see why they have not been the answer because the houses have not been delivered. We need more volunteer groups but they need to be shown respect and given fair play.