Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I wish to share time with Deputy Troy.

I endorse much of what Deputy Catherine Byrne stated in finishing. It is not only in Inchicore where that problem arises. We experience it as well, where persons from outside an area decide that an area of social housing, a social housing estate or a local authority estate will be their area of operation. They have no difficulty in coming in there and causing holy hell and havoc, and giving that area a bad name while slinking back like animals to their own area where they will not do any of that, and there is no way for local residents' associations or the local authority to take any action, even though we might know who these persons are. Some consideration should be given that anybody in a social housing contract and his or her family have a responsibility to their entire community, not only to the specific area from where they come.

I welcome the detail that the Minister of State has put into this Bill in relation to tenancy warnings and tenancy issues. It struck me in past years as I got more involved with some of the voluntary housing associations, such as Clúid and Respond, that they have set rules which they implement in relation to behaviour if one lives in a voluntary housing estate run by them. If, however, one lives in the estate next door which was run by a town council and now by a local authority, one is not subject to those rules and there is much leniency given on consistent breaches of the tenancy agreement, in particular, anti-social behaviour. It is incredibly frustrating for residents who might even live in the same estate, except that there might be different batches of houses, to see the different ways of doing that. I welcome this Bill, but there is no sense in us passing it unless the local authorities implement it. There seems to be a situation in some local authorities around the country where we have all these rules but they are not implemented for whatever reason. There seems to be a fear to engage with troublemakers in large estates. There seems to a practice of keeping it on the long finger and it might go away if one does not do anything about it, and that does not happen.

What Deputy Catherine Byrne stated is also true. Local authorities need to reassess their relationship with local authority tenants, not on the current basis in many cases that the local authority is doing somebody a favour by giving him or her a house, but on the basis of respect that this tenant is paying rent and is entitled to a service. That means that the maintenance budget is not the first budget to be cut when there are cuts to be made in the local authority - it is always the local authority estates maintenance budget that gets cut - that these rules are implemented, and that those who cause trouble and breach tenancy agreements are taken out of the estate. One must make examples of such persons. If one does not, an area will go from bad to worse. The majority of residents in any local authority estate who are there to get on with living, to rear their families and to make a contribution to their community, then will be able to do that without being intimidated. They will be encouraged in that because they will feel that their efforts and their commitment to their estate are being rewarded by the back-up of the local authority.

I welcome the tenant purchase scheme. It has been successful and there is a good track record. However, I have some difficult with it. We have come to a situation over the past number of years where the original tenant purchase scheme has moved on and where there are landlords buying, and in many cases bulk-buying, former local authority houses in estates, and then the old rent supplement payment is paid out and tenants are moved in who are not suitable to the estate or who do not pass any social housing criteria, and therein lies many problems. There needs to be restrictions on this new tenant purchase scheme to prevent that from happening in future. I would support any scheme where somebody, who is paying rent and has a good record in an area, is allowed to make the ultimate investment. If, however, that person decides to sell on, there needs to be a restriction on to whom he or she can sell. I do not know how one gets around this constitutionally. It cannot be sold on as an investment property.

It needs to be sold on to somebody who is going to make a commitment to live in the area. In many older local authority estates, the anti-social difficulties are coming from tenants who are in and out of houses that fall under the rent purchase scheme. This flaw in the tenant purchase scheme was probably not envisaged in 1987, but we know about it now. I would like to think the Minister of State might take some action in this regard.

I note that Deputy Kyne welcomed the proposed new mortgage scheme for first-time house buyers. Frankly, the announcement of this scheme, which will not be ready until the Finance Bill is passed six months from now, is typical of the kind of thing this Government does during election campaigns. It is cynical and flawed for the Government to take such an approach to trying to tell the people it is doing something about this problem. That it was done ten days before polling day shows it is nothing more than an election stunt. It is not going to do anything to ease the problems of people on social housing lists who are concerned about getting accommodation. It will do nothing for the supply of housing, which is the biggest issue at the moment. The demand that exists is generally being supported by mortgage approvals, but the supply of family houses, in particular, is inadequate. Many people who live in start-up houses have had families and need to move up to the next stage. That particular supply area is not there. The Minister of State needs to focus her efforts on those who are amassing land banks. They need to be taxed. They should be told to move those land banks on to facilitate the development of family-friendly properties. All the experience of the last ten years should be taken into account when that is being done. We need to make sure facilities are put in place when such properties are being developed.

I welcome the Minister of State's announcement last week that a scheme will be put in place to refurbish the local authority housing stock. I encourage the Minister for Finance to give the Minister of State more money for the scheme because many more properties could be refurbished. This ready-made solution to some of our housing problems could provide employment to many of the 80,000 people on the live register who have construction skills. If this scheme is rolled out in an imaginative manner, it might give some people a skill. If tenants in local authority estates where the existing housing stock needs to be improved are allowed to get involved in refurbishing houses in their own communities, they might be able to get skills in areas like carpentry and enjoy a stake in the development of their communities. Eventually, they might be able to use their new skills to assist their communities. Perhaps the Minister of State could sit down with SOLAS officials to consider an apprenticeship scheme that would allow the tenants of local authority housing estates to get involved in refurbishing those estates. That is the best buy-in we could get. These people would get skills and there would be community buy-in. I would appreciate it if the Minister of State could examine that.

I am willing to give the new housing assistance payment, which will come from the housing authority, a chance. The market has proved that the rent supplement caps are a hindrance. They are certainly not effective in Dublin. Many landlords are abusing the rent supplement caps by using them to deny tenants their tenancy rights. It is wrong that they are using these caps to move tenants on. I hope there will be safeguards in the new housing assistance payment to ensure tenants are respected. It should not be possible for a rogue landlord to use changes in the housing assistance payment to move a tenant on, for example by deliberately increasing the rent to a level above the payment threshold.

I welcome the provision that will allow deductions to be made from social welfare payments in cases of rent arrears. I do not have an exact figure for the amount of outstanding arrears in local authorities. Perhaps the Minister of State has that figure. As I said earlier, local authorities need to respect their tenants. It is also important for tenants to respect the ability of local authorities to provide services on the basis of the rent that is paid. Months or years of arrears cannot be allowed to build up on properties without some sort of early engagement on why there is an arrears problem, why there is a difficulty in paying and whether a new payment plan can be put in place before the arrears get too big.

I welcome many of the provisions of this legislation, particularly those relating to tenancy agreements. There is no sense in talking about this today if such agreements are not implemented on the ground. Organisations like Clúid and Respond deal with tenancy issues and anti-social behaviour issues in many of their estates in a very proactive manner. I suggest that local authorities should follow that model. It is worth putting that investment into staff. Perhaps some local authority staff can be moved into this area. Anti-social behaviour should be stamped out as soon as it breaks out in a local authority area. I believe that 99% of the people who live in these estates are decent. We should give them a chance to have pride in their communities. We owe it to tenants to take that kind of proactive approach.

See this speech in context