Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for his response to amendments Nos. 41 and 42. He referred to the description I outlined of the housing for the elderly, which is integrated housing where medical services and care would be provided, as open to interpretation. Many sections of the Bill are very much open to interpretation, but there is not much left open about describing somebody as 70 years old and over.

We are talking about housing for the elderly and keeping elderly people in their communities for as long as possible. The alternative is to put them into a nursing home or some other type of home at huge cost to the State. This is an opportunity to keep them in the community. It is provided by builders. I heard colleagues on the opposite side of the House say that they would expect it of Fine Gael to do away with the 10% under Part V, but this is a situation where Fine Gael is insisting on it. I can only come to the conclusion that it is the undue heavy influence of the Labour Party Minister, the Minister of State's boss, that is forcing this on him and on the officials. The interpretation is quite clear, and it is something we should be doing. We should use every opportunity to house people in their community. As I said earlier, those people are moving from houses and moving in from the country, so it opens up housing for other, younger people who will be in a better position to live in those conditions. I very much regret that the Minister of State is not accepting the amendments.

I reiterate the point I made earlier. The terminology being used is unfortunate. We are describing people's homes as "affordable" or "social", and we are labelling and classifying various sections of the community. We should move away from that. Everybody's home is their castle and that is how we should refer to housing. It is not right to put people somewhere and to label their homes as social or affordable.

The Minister of State is insisting on 10% of this development for older people and that the authorities would have to put younger people or families into it. It just does not work. I accept the Minister of State's reply but I do not agree with it.

See this speech in context