Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Renua Ireland) | Oireachtas source

-----but he will be familiar with it. A couple of weeks ago, I met a local community group in Arklow that is dealing with the issue of homelessness in that town. There are ten or 12 rough sleepers there. In the past year or two, this problem has developed in many places where it was not an issue previously. We need a dedicated unit that can co-ordinate and regulate the various non-governmental organisations that are involved with this issue and place a requirement on the statutory bodies. In some cases, the statutory bodies have taken a back seat and basically handed responsibility to the non-governmental organisations. As a result, no one is really responsible.

I hear much talk about increasing the rent cap. I am not an advocate of such a measure simply because rents would increase accordingly. We are all aware of what is currently happening in practice. The rent is going up after the individual makes contact with the rents section, which makes an adjustment accordingly. Rent supplement levels have been increased on an individual case-by-case basis in order not to add to the number of people who are homeless. That policy is fine - I do not disagree with it - but the downside of it is that landlords are informing their tenants that they are going to increase rents and advising them to ask their local representatives to contact the rents section so the relevant rent supplement level can be increased. That is why I think the rent cap should not be increased. The manner in which landlords are proactively taking advantage of the Government's compassionate and humanitarian response is having a negative impact on everybody. Ultimately, we are going to be back to square one.

I read an article in the last week or so about the number of people who are turning down public sector housing. My understanding is that local authorities provide updated housing lists every three years after carrying out assessments. Perhaps that system has changed, although I do not think it has. It is very difficult for the Government to ascertain the correct number. I suggest that the assessment in question should be done after a 12-month period. One cannot deal with a problem if one does not know what are the statistics relating to it. If we start in the first year with a certain number of people on the housing list and we add 10% or 20% to the list each year, at the end of the third year the list will have increased by 60% or whatever, even though many of the people who were originally on it may be in a position to move off it. Another problem is that when some local authorities are making their assessments, they differentiate between housing need and housing desire. A few years ago, the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government issued a directive that this distinction should be made but some local authorities are not complying with it. Housing need applies when there is a definite need for physical accommodation due to personal circumstances. There may be no room at home or no access to accommodation.

Housing desire applies when somebody has accommodation but does not like where it is or the people with whom they are living so they want to move out. There is merit in both cases but housing need is much more important than housing desire. It is important in dealing with the problem to make that differentiation and it is not satisfactory for a local authority to completely exclude those with housing desire, as happens in some cases. Equally, it is not satisfactory that housing need and housing desire are pitched together in the one list. We need to break the list down into one for housing desire and one for housing need.

In my time in the Army, I spent many a night in modular homes and I have seen the current models, which are excellent. One could not argue about their comfort but I have a deep reservation about the concept of groups of modular homes in certain areas. I do not like using the term "ghetto" but I feel these homes will be looked at negatively where there are 20, 30 or 40 of them together. We will get people into them initially but they will be categorised as houses for the homeless and such estates will not be a positive environment. We could speed up the planning process under the legislation and if the Minister had a direct input into the provision of social housing I would agree with it, but I would not be a strong advocate of the modular home concept. Perhaps time will prove me wrong but I am not sure.

On the face of it the legislation is fine and nice to have but Deputy Alan Kelly is the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government today and there seems to be a conflict between him and the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Alex White, on wind turbines. What if the Minister, Deputy Alex White, ends up as Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government? I do not mean to do him an injustice but he has a more positive view of wind turbines and he might decide to give a direction, based on his philosophy or policy, that An Bord Pleanála shall act on his advice to put wind turbines in a certain place. When wind turbine applications are turned down by An Bord Pleanála, people are quite happy to accept the decision but when they are granted, they are not so happy. I have grave reservations. I was initially an advocate of wind turbines but when I saw them going up in north Wexford, I saw the impact they had on communities. While we may welcome them in a certain climate and in a certain environment, when we reflect on such things and look at best international practice, we sometimes decide to go back to the drawing board and wind energy might be one of those cases. It goes back to the flaw in the section 2 amendment. People, including Members of this House, have no idea about what is actually happening but it is a very serious change of power and direction. There will probably be no vote on this legislation and it will go through anyway but this should not go unquestioned.

See this speech in context