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

If we do not reach the targets, there will be all sorts of consequences.

Others raised the general issue so I wanted to refer to it. With regard to the specific amendments, there are some different points in the third of the three amendments. With regard to the first two, I said on Committee Stage that they duplicate an existing enactment in the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009. Section 13 of the Act provides that capital moneys accruing to the housing authority from a number of sources, including the sale of a dwelling under the old tenant purchase schemes provided by the 1966 Act or the two incremental purchase schemes provided for in the 2009 Act, will be ring-fenced in a separate account and, subject to the Minister's prior approval, used for the provision of housing or for the refurbishment or maintenance of existing houses or related purposes. Such provisions refer to the local authorities' internal capital receipts. Furthermore, section 32(a) amends section 13 of the 2009 Act to provide that moneys accruing from the sale of the dwelling under Part 3 of the Bill will be subject to the provisions of section 13. It is there already.

Since 2007, local authorities have had delegated sanction to use their internal capital receipts for housing purposes, subject to certain terms and conditions. Under these procedures, authorities are required to submit an annual programme of works to be funded by the internal capital receipts, primarily consisting of planned maintenance and improvement of their existing housing stock, for approval by my Department. It has also been agreed that local authorities can use their internal receipts to augment the funding used to finance the authorities' funding from its own resources of the suite of grants for older persons and people with disabilities.

Regarding amendment No. 18 and approved housing bodies, I take the points being made but, whether we like it or not, approved housing bodies are the approved de factoowners of the properties and they are required to make them available for social renting for the duration of the mortgage or, as the case may be, the availability agreement. My Department cannot unilaterally make legal provision for their sale to tenants. Any such decision must involve the approved housing body and have regard to the mortgage on the property. I cannot do it legally because the State does not own the property; it is owned by the approved housing body. Whether that can be examined in the future, in terms of money being allocated, is another point, but under the current circumstances I cannot do it.

Deputy Catherine Murphy asked me about the new tenant purchase scheme and what is likely to be in it. In order to qualify for purchase under the scheme, a tenant must be in receipt of social housing support for a minimum prescribed period of not less than one year and have a prescribed minimum gross annual income. The purchase price of the house will be based on its market value and its existing condition and state of repair, although it will be subject to a minimum price that takes account of the cost to the housing authority of replacing the house being sold. The detail will be by way of regulation and I have not yet taken a final decision on it. The likely model will be the existing incremental purchase schemes, which provide for discounts of 60%, 50% or 40% of the purchase price depending on tenant income. That is the current state of play.

See this speech in context