Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Deputy Coppinger. On Second Stage, when she was not a Member of the House, we had many contributions relating to people's absolute frustration at seeing houses they could be living in lying empty for years and seeing kitchens being thrown out when they were on the housing waiting list. It is something that everybody in this House feels very strongly about, regardless of our political persuasions.

I allocated that funding, which will bring over 1,700 vacant units back into use. As Deputy Broughan noted, the first tranche was for 952 units. There is a further €20 million. We have specifically allocated the first tranche and we know exactly how many units it is to cover in each local authority estate. They must report back to me when they have done it. It is for individual houses and apartments. It is not just a lump of money that they can do whatever they like with. It is for specific houses and we must see that it is done within a specific timeframe.

The second tranche has not yet been allocated because we want another report from the councils telling us exactly what units they will refurbish with this money so that we can track it and make sure it is properly spent. There was a problem identified by Deputy Ó Fearghaíl relating to the previous scheme, which finished at the end of 2012. In 2013, the money for retrofitting was for occupied houses, but up to then, the houses had to be vacant for six months before they got the funding. Local authorities were leaving houses empty for six months so that they would get the funding. We are trying to be as clever as we can be in ensuring that the money is actually spent on bringing units back into use and then allocating them.

I understand where Deputy Ellis is coming from in terms of the amendments. One of the reasons I cannot accept them relates to the point raised by Deputy Catherine Murphy about tendering. This amendment states that any refurbishment works required will be tendered for within one month of the repossession date. What is happening with regard to procurement is that most local authorities have a framework in place so they do not have to go through the normal tendering process. There are still some local authorities that do not have this framework in place. I can probably find out which ones do not have it, but most of them do have it, so they can move relatively quickly with the companies they have on their books to carry out, for example, small retrofitting jobs. In this way, they do not have to go through the normal tendering process and can move more quickly.

Most of them are using this process under the retrofitting and vacant properties schemes.

The amendment is prescriptive in defining timelines for housing authorities in respect of a number of actions, with some of which it might be impossible for them to comply. The extent of refurbishment works required to a property should be the measure that determines the timeline as to when it might be available for reallocation to a new tenant and while this is reflected somewhat in the Deputy's text, it does not account for the availability or lack thereof of resources to finance the works involved. In some cases, where the works are extensive, funding may be required from my Department. An example is the funding I announced recently.

It is more difficult to be as prescriptive as the Deputy, but I understand from where he is coming and I am determined to speed up the process. We are examining whether we can adopt a mandatory process as part of a carrot and stick approach. We may need a stick, given that the funding we have allocated is the carrot. I have also sought legal advice on the issues raised by local authorities. They state, for example, that they cannot let the house if the previous tenant has installed a particular appliance, cupboard and so on in case somebody is hurt by them. They are worried about the legal implications in this regard; therefore, I am seeking advice to ensure I can be specific about what they can and cannot do in the context of their legal obligations.

See this speech in context