Darragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

We had priority questions this morning and I covered some elements of this so I will focus on some of the things I did not get to go through. I was interested in the Minister's comment on the local authorities and improving transparency. We would all agree with his comments but I think what we also want is an end to the buck-passing between his Department and the local authorities and vice versa. If we continue to blame one another, we will not get anywhere. I have a major concern, which I share with Deputy Ó Broin, about reaching the figure of 4,000 on social housing by the end of the year. I hear what the Minister is saying, that he made a personal commitment to attaining this. Is his Department looking, or will he look, at raising the cap on local authorities? There is an average bill of about €210,000. This is the Minister's figure, which I got from responses to parliamentary questions. Basically, therefore, anything over €2 million goes to his Department for approval. We have county architects drawing up very good schemes that are being sent into the Department to be looked at by people who are their juniors and who are checking them and sending things back and forth. If there is a local authority cap of €2 million in, let us say, Fingal, my area, any scheme of eight or nine houses or more will probably go into the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government. It would be the same in the four Dublin local authorities and, I imagine, Cork and Galway. I really do not think we will get the supply of social and public housing up unless we do something with that cap. I take the Minister's point that he does not want to rush. His Department could never be accused of rushing things, based on output. This needs to be looked at and tried. He could raise the cap. If he went to €10 million on the cap, he could probably allow estates of up to 40 or 45 houses be built and let the local authorities get on with it. If they are not doing so and he has given them the autonomy to do so, then he can beat them up about it. We will not get anywhere near our targets if we continue with the same processes and procedures. Has the Minister - his officials may have a different view - given consideration to looking at the criteria as to what needs to be checked?

I ask the Minister sincerely to do this, if he has not done so.

I would like to speak about affordable loans. The Minister has made an interesting point about credit committees. I would agree with much of what he has said. Two thirds of applications have been refused under the Rebuilding Ireland affordable loans scheme. As of June, approximately 134 loans had actually been drawn down. It is much slower than any of us would have wanted it to be. I have been in contact with people who have applied under this initiative. It is seen as a good initiative. When two thirds of applications are refused, often for technical reasons, there is a problem. Can the Minister confirm that common underwriting criteria are being used across our local authorities when these mortgages are being underwritten? I do not believe common underwriting criteria are being used. I have seen one local authority deal with overtime and bonuses differently from another local authority. It generally always seems to be at the expense of the applicant. If their overtime payments or bonuses put them over the limit to apply for the affordable loan scheme, they are out. If the reverse is the case, it is deemed that they are not getting enough for a mortgage. There is a job of work to be done here. There should be uniformity in mortgage underwriting, particularly around basic criteria with regard to matters like salary. That needs to be done, but it is not being done. We are way off our target and some of that has to do with what I have said. I agree with what the Minister said about committee delays. Does each affordable loan application, regardless of whether it relates to south Dublin, Galway or Fingal, go back to his Department for a check or a validation, rather than for a decision?

I agree with the Minister that there is a need for HAP, as we have discussed previously, but we are over-reliant on it. Some €152 million was spent on payments under the scheme in 2017. That figure will increase to €301 million this year. Does he have a projection for next year? The amount we are spending on HAP has doubled in the past year. If we compare the amount spent on payments under the HAP scheme with the figure for capital expenditure, we will see that if the rates keep increasing as they are, we will spend almost €1 billion a year within four years. We are creating a monster, out of necessity in many instances. If we do not increase supply to move people out of HAP and into public housing and permanent housing, we will have a big problem. If new mechanisms are not found, the HAP budget will keep eating into our capital budget. The figures are astounding. Has the Minister a view on how we can put more money into capital rather than current expenditure? Payments under the HAP scheme are putting phenomenal pressure on the Department and on the Exchequer. I disagree with the fundamental plank of Rebuilding Ireland, which is that someone's housing need can be met under HAP. Perhaps things are different in the case of long-term secure leases, but we have a problem in cases of 12-month leases. We should not remove people who get HAP tenancies from the main housing list and put them on a transfer list.

The LDA-----