Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome this proposal, but I am always a little wary and suspicious of measures that are introduced to counteract negative publicity. Therefore, while I welcome this measure, I feel it has been introduced to counteract the negative publicity in regard to the Central Bank's proposed new lending guidelines. The same is true in regard to the measures introduced in the budget today to deal with the water charge crisis, once again a response to negative publicity. This is not a significant measure and just tips the cap to the housing issue. Deputy Kelleher mentioned the yearly cost of €2.4 million over the next few years. Will the Minister outline how the costs were calculated?

I would like to make a point regarding the windfall tax of 80%, which was introduced originally in a knee-jerk reaction. I understand that measure has not brought in even one cent since it was introduced. It was a crazy populist measure which was passed by this House.

I have mixed views in regard to rent supplement. In some areas of the country rents are disproportionately high because, under the old health boards, the rent supplement in those areas was greater than in adjoining areas although under the natural scheme of things rents in those areas would have been lower. That said, I believe rent supplement should be almost town specific. It is difficult to go about reducing rent supplement on a broad basis due to the number of factors to be considered, such as housing supply, the numbers on the waiting lists and the demographics of an area. There should be no carte blanche to reduce rent supplement across the board. Traditionally, in some areas rents have been disproportionately and inequitably higher than in adjoining areas, due to the fact they were in a health board area where rent supplement was higher. It is important the Exchequer gets value for money in regard to the rent supplement.

The issue of lists was mentioned. I believe that if we are to address problems, we must know the situation. I represent a mixed rural and urban constituency where there is a housing crisis and a severe shortage of houses. That said, I am deeply suspicious in regard to how lists are formulated. An attempt made to deal with lists in regard to medical cards was hamfisted and caused problems, but we must try to draw up lists that can distinguish between housing need and housing desire. Different counties take different approaches. Our lists are large and have increased significantly, but we must be able to establish the true extent of need. I do not have confidence that the lists we have currently are accurate, but this does not take away from the fact that housing is required.

In regard to the proposal before us and the Central Bank regulations, I believe the 20% deposit requirement for first-time buyers is too high. I believe the problem lies at the other end, the value of the house. The property difficulties we have had over the past decade were not because of a property bubble, but a money supply bubble. There was too much money available. We must try to address the difficulty in that context. I and my colleagues in the Reform Alliance produced a policy document entitled Fair Value, which we submitted to the Central Bank and the Minister for Finance. We will resubmit it to the Central Bank.

This document proposes we should establish a historical relationship between the average house price and the average income. In a stable economy, the average house price should be a certain multiple of the average income, whether four times, five times or six times that income and that this price should be used to calculate the loan. We want to stop banks giving out moneys indiscriminately, moneys taxpayers have had to pick up the tab for over the past decade. Some will argue that this gives cash buyers a significant advantage over people who must borrow. Unfortunately, such a situation is a sad fact of life. If I go to a garage to buy a car, I am in a better position with cash in my pocket than someone who needs to borrow money. If I have cash in my pocket it is easier for me to go on holiday than someone who needs to borrow.

The same is true in regard to housing. However, I believe housing is a right. It is difficult to address inequality, but we must try to address inequality of opportunity. We can do this in two main ways, through education and through the provision of housing. The new Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government has not outlined his new housing policy in detail, but I believe policy is moving in the right direction, based on the headings outlined. I have, however, a concern regarding an issue mentioned by another Member, namely, the number of houses built in the mid 1970s. By and large, the standard of social housing built in this country throughout the 1970s and 1980s is a disgrace. We are all familiar with this housing in our constituencies. We must look again at our model of social housing.

My concern is there will be a rush by the Government in order that it can come along in 18 months and say it built 2,000 or 3,000 units of housing. That will not solve the problem. Many of our social problems have been created by the type of housing ghettos we have. We are all familiar with the terraces of ten or 20 houses, with the last three or four having upstairs apartments or flats, which elderly people or lone parents are often pushed into but which cannot be let out to a new tenant. The Government must seek to revamp such houses and move elderly people into single storey accommodation near the centre of towns.

We have to examine the model of social housing because the model we have produced to date has not been the correct one. That model has given rise to a hypocritical approach by many politicians and members of the public, who want social housing but, when it is proposed for an area, mount widespread opposition to it. The reason for this opposition, in some cases though not all, is not because people do not want to see others housed but because they do not have any confidence in the authorities to deliver housing that is adequate and sufficient, with the necessary facilities, green space and community facilities that should be a basic requirement.

When looking at these schemes, we have to cater for all needs. We cannot go along with the traditional concept with respect to these housing areas. The budget refers to €1.5 billion, to public private partnerships and to off-balance sheet schedules. That is playing with words and I am not sure it is going to work. However, if we only build one housing scheme in the coming years, I would like to see it done in a proper manner.

To conclude, I would like to see everyone encouraged to buy their own home and we must have a mechanism in place to achieve this. New regulations are being drawn up. These must be user-friendly and must enable people, no matter what income they have and particularly those who have been in social housing for 20 or 30 years, to purchase their own homes. Where there is home ownership, there is greater cohesion in society.

See this speech in context