Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My apologies - the Minister of State is right. The figure is not 150,000 houses. That was a slip of the tongue. It is 50,000 houses. That is based on the figures provided to me by the HSE. There are approximately 14,000 people in long-term nursing home care at any time who have an asset, of whom 4,000 have a spouse who would normally be resident in the home. Some of those spouses may in long-term nursing home care and there may be other people residing in those homes. The HSE conducted a survey of these properties in 2016. I know getting the figures arising out of that survey is like finding out the third secret of Fatima. The Minister of State has them and might publish and furnish them to the committee, which would be helpful. Based on the figures available to me, up to 9,000 homes at any one time fall into this category. This is 4,500 homes per year based on average nursing home stay of two years. We are arguing about whether it is 50,000 or 25,000 homes. The reality is that we are still talking about a large number of homes, particularly if it will take another six years to address this anomaly in the same way as it has taken a long time to deal with the current capital issue.

These homes are in established communities. They are family homes in the main that are beside schools. Infrastructure is already in place. There is a clear commitment in the programme for Government to address the issue of vacant properties. Here is the first litmus test for the Government with regard to this. What we are talking about here is a treble tax. I accept that this is a complex area. I do not dispute that and I know the Minister of State may need time to bring forward a detailed amendment regarding how to deal with it. All I am asking is that she does not discriminate against people. She is saying it would be inequitable not to take the value of the home and income into account. The Department of Social Protection makes payments to people based on a means assessment and what they need to meet their day-to-day income needs. The Department is a social income support body and it is saying that it is wrong to take the capital and income into account and that only one should be taken into account. Not only is the Minister of State taking both into account here, she is also charging for the money being lodged into the bank account. A treble tax is being charged on people if they rent out. I accept that this is a complex area and there is a need to bring forward detailed amendments but what I am asking for that the Minister of State clearly reflect in this legislation what is the law in the Department of Social Protection regarding means assessment, apply equity across the board and not raise a false and unjust barrier to people renting out their homes.

I welcome the fact that the Minister of State is bringing forward an amendment relating to selling the family home but she is undermining her own argument about people being forced into nursing home care. In respect of an option for older people in long-term nursing home care who will not return home to either sell or rent out their home, I know it is a psychological issue but they do not want to give up their home. What the Minister of State is doing is providing an incentive to sell the family home and a disincentive to rent it out. This in itself will cause duress for older people and is an inequitable approach in terms of the forced sale versus the renting out of the family home. I urge the Minister of State to reconsider the means assessment before Report Stage and come back with a further amendment. She should at least ensure she does not put in place a barrier to the renting out of these properties.