Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I will start with some of the comments made by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government last night. If he is not listening the Minister of State, Deputy Coffey, can bring them back to him.

I wish to examine some of the solutions he claims to have brought forward. First, he has stated he has sent a directive to local authorities that they are to have a 50% allocation rate to those who are homeless or vulnerable and for Dublin and Cork, a rate of 30% has been set for those who are classed as being homeless or vulnerable. I am unsure whether the Minister of State is aware of this, but I suggest 90% of the people on the housing list are at risk and classed as vulnerable. As they either have mental health issues or may be at risk of poverty, to try to put out this proposal that the Government has introduced a directive to which local authorities must adhere is nonsense because every local authority with which I am familiar and definitely Cork City Council has been exceeding the 30% rate for many years. Consequently, this is no new departure by the Government.

Another solution the Government has been lauding for the past 12 months is the provision of 75,000 houses in the private sector which will alleviate the housing problem. However, what it fails to tell people is that all it is doing in respect of these 75,000 Houses is moving people from rent supplement to the housing assistance payment, HAP, scheme. No additional housing is being provided. People currently are in receipt of rent supplement are moving to the HAP scheme and being taken off a housing list. Not one single additional family will be housed as a result of the much heralded 75,000 houses promised last year by the Minister.

Another issue is rent certainty. No matter what the Minister of State might say, there is no rent certainty because when this legislation is passed, if one has not had a rent increase in the preceding 12 months, one will be eligible for one. It is true that one cannot have one's rent increased for another two years, but the problem with it is the Government has specified the rent increase can only be in line with the market rate. It is again leaving housing policy to the market rather than bringing forward a proposal that any rent increase would be index-linked with the rate of inflation. That would have been the most prudent way to deal with this issue. Last night, the Minister stated that when he went on his foreign travels, he was the envy of every other European Minister because of the proactivity of the Government in dealing with the homelessness problem. It is a pity that he does not take on board the European model when it comes to rent certainty because that model, used by nearly every European Union member state, is to link rent increases or decreases with the rate of inflation. Consequently, this constitutes another failing on the part of the Government.

In the context of another issue I wish to discuss, I refer to some of the solutions proposed by Deputy Catherine Byrne, whereby the solution for anyone living in a hotel this Christmas with her kids and stuck in one room is that her family should take them home. The solution proposed by Deputy Eric Byrne to people who have family members who are homeless is to take them home. Again, this is an example of the State completely negating its responsibility and stating one's family should look after the problem. This is not possible in all cases and I will provide the Minister of State with some examples. In the case of somebody who is homeless and whose only living relative is his or her mother or father who is in receipt of a disability payment, were that parent to take in the family member who may be homeless, the parent would lose some supports that are vital to him or her. If a family member who earns a good wage takes in a family member who is homeless, the individual who is homeless will lose any right to social welfare payments or a medical card because the family member who has brought that person into his or her own home is earning too much and the household income is taken into account, rather than that of the individual who has just been taken off the streets. Were I to take my own brother off the streets and bring him into my home, he would lose his medical card and social welfare payments. However, without a medical card, he cannot access the necessary and vital supports he needs as a recovering drug addict. This is not a position into which any family member should be put, but these are the policies of the Government, which is putting family members into such a position.

See this speech in context