Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

We are dealing with section 1 before moving on. The Minister has indicated that this will provide for local services, giving the impression that there is additional money. Those who follow spokespersons on finance know this is not additional money for local authorities, and a new stream of funding will replace a line of money they already had.

The Minister mentioned that everybody must pay their fair share with local authority housing, arguing it would be unfair if somebody in a local authority house were not to pay a fair share. The Minister should know that the Bill does not put a charge on a local authority housing tenant but rather on the local authority. The Minister's assumption is that the charge will be passed to local authority tenants, despite the fact that they do not own the home but rather pay rent for the home in which they live.

The Minister may be aware that a number of local authorities have passed resolutions relating to what is called a "section 140". The issuing of rents is a function of the management but this takes the power from the manager.

A number of local authorities have passed section 140 motions that compel the manager legally not to pass on the charge. I understand those motions have been supported by the parties in government at local authority level. I want the Minister to deal with that because he has made the assumption that the money is additional money for local authorities. I expect many local authorities will be passing the same motions in the forthcoming weeks and months. In Monaghan, for example, Councillor Matt Carthy proposed a motion and it has been accepted by the council. Management says its hands have been legally tied such that it cannot now pass on the charge to tenants. Therefore, the charge will be a charge on the local authority that will take the money from them. On the one hand, some of the money will go to the local authorities but, on the other, it will be taken by the Government as there will be reduced funding. With regard to local authority housing stock, where management cannot pass on the charge to the local authority tenants - it should not be passed on in any case - money will actually have to be given back to the State. They will be at a net loss. Could the Minister explain the position on this?

While the Minister is partially correct that the adaptation of a house could devalue it, particularly if kitchens, for example, are lowered for a wheelchair user, I know from experience of cases where adaptation was required for severely disabled or paralysed people. I refer not only to adaptation but also to extensions. An additional room, such as a bathroom, might have to be built on, or slopes or ramps may have to be created. This costs money. If we had time to tick-tack on this issue I believe the Minister would amend the legislation. I do not believe it is his intention to have an impact on the people I describe.

I tabled my amendment to the original legislation. I welcome the fact that the amended Bill goes a certain distance but if the Minister considers what he has done he will note that people who got grants to adapt their houses will have the value of the grant subtracted from the value of their property. It will be of benefit. However, people who did not get grants will be in different circumstances. Let us consider the example of Joe and Mary. Joe, who was unemployed and got a grant of €10,000 to adapt his house under the housing adaptation grant scheme, will be able to subtract €10,000 from the value of his house when calculating its value and pay the charge on the remainder. Mary, who was working and did not get the adaptation grant because she was means tested, thus forcing her to pay the €10,000 from her own pocket, will not have this sum subtracted from the value of her house. Joe, who got the money from the State to carry out the adaptation, will have €10,000 subtracted from the value of his house, whereas Mary, who did not get a cent from the State because she was means-tested, will not get anything. It does not make sense. This is a mistake either by the Minister's officials or himself and it should be corrected. While I realise he will not address this now, I ask him to address it in the Seanad.

See this speech in context