Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)

Ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabháil leis an Teachta Gilmore, urlabhraí Pháirtí an Lucht Oibre ar chúrsaí comhshaoil, oidhreachta agus rialtais aitiúil, as ucht an rún tábhachtach, tráthúil agus praiticiúil seo a thabhairt os comhair na Dála. Tá tithíocht phoiblí ina praiseach sa tír seo. Tá athruithe móra ag teastáil, agus léiríonn an rún seo go bunúsach conas tabhairt faoin rud seo.

The issue at stake here in terms of people on rent allowance was brought home to me today with a figure I obtained from Waterford City Council. Although an estimated 1,300 people are on rent allowance in Waterford, between 1,100 and 1,200 people are on the housing list. There are background issues. For instance, Waterford City Council receives between 600 and 700 new housing applicants every year and loses between 500 and 600. The fact that this number of people are on rent allowance in a city the size of Waterford is a commentary on how the Minister has failed to look after the public housing needs of the area. I see it throughout the county too. There are 573 applicants on the county council housing list and 260 on the Dungarvan housing list, approximately 50% of whom are on rent subsidy.

We have a category of people to whom Deputy Gilmore referred who are caught in that trap. While their income is too high to obtain a house from a local authority, they have no hope of buying a house in the private sector so they must pay high rents, cannot save up a deposit and have no hope of escaping that bind. To some extent affordable housing would have helped these people but the number of affordable houses that has been produced is pitiful. That group often comprises couples where both partners work to pay rent to a private landlord.

There are issues about local authority housing that must be addressed. A number of local authority houses are idle and being vandalised and people will not take them. People walk out of local authority houses because they can no longer tolerate the conditions. They do this at a substantial loss to themselves as they need to rent in the private sector. Issues include coming to terms with people who intimidate tenants, indulge in anti-social behaviour and make life hell. I dealt with two cases earlier this week. It appears that certain characters in society are untouchables. While it is clear who they are and what they are doing, they continue to get away with it.

The area of marital break-up is serious. If a couple who break up have a mortgage, it tends to be a large one. When the house is disposed of, the proceeds to be shared between the partners are of little value. As a result, female partners who tend to have custody of the children have no hope of being able to purchase a house, with all the attendant difficulties this creates, particularly if child care is needed. These women are caught in traps.

In tabling this motion Deputy Gilmore has raised important issues. There must be no discrimination between people in receipt of social welfare and those in employment. Income must be the deciding factor in determining who should receive rent subsidy. When someone begins work he or she should not immediately lose his or her rent subsidy. As Deputy Gilmore suggested, rent subsidy should be reduced incrementally rather than suddenly withdrawn as income increases. I support this important, practical and timely motion given the major crisis in public housing.

See this speech in context