Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Sinn Féin supports the principle of tenant purchase. We do so because it keeps families in local authority estates, in particular as their income increases and their ability to purchase homes increases. As the Minister indicated very clearly, that contributes to more sustainable communities with a greater income mix, which is good housing policy. However, a badly designed tenant purchase scheme can do far more damage than good. While I accept the good intentions behind the introduction of the Bill, it is important to understand the negative aspects of what is being suggested. In order to meet the housing need at any one time, the State needs a minimum of 200,000 social houses. That is not my view; it is the view of the National Economic and Social Council, NESC. What happens when one’s social housing stock falls below that is that it restricts the ability of individual local authorities to meet housing need on an ongoing basis. Waiting times grow and the ability to respond to emergency needs reduces. Currently, we have a social housing stock of just under 140,000 units and that includes the 23,000 from the approved housing bodies, so we are already well below the critical threshold of what is needed simply to meet the current need. It is simply not the case to say that once families are allocated a house, they will remain there for the duration. When one studies local authorities, it is evident that there is an ongoing level of churn as people move in and out and stock becomes available for allocation. Therefore, if one sells off houses in the wrong way or too fast and one does not replenish the stock, that creates real difficulties for those with acute housing needs.

The tenant purchase scheme that was introduced early this year is badly designed. The discounts are far too generous. It is not the case that by selling those houses, we will generate sufficient income to replenish stock. In fact, in many instances, the discount is so great that the return to the local authority would be €60,000. On average, it costs €180,000 to provide council housing in this State. Therefore, for every three tenant purchases, the stock would only be replenished by one and that is if the local authority recycles the money but given the pressure on roads and other crucial aspects of local authority expenditure, it is doubtful that the money would even be returned to housing.

It is also important to emphasise that there are other exclusions. Local authorities exclude in many cases one-bedroom and four-bedroom accommodation and adapted units for people with special needs. They do that because it is good housing policy to manage the stock appropriately. None of that is an argument against the legitimate position put forward by Fianna Fáil that people have a desire to own their own home but one must balance that against the overall management of the stock.

The other crucial point to make relates to another misunderstanding in the Bill, namely, that allowing families in large mono-tenure local authority estates to buy their homes creates an income mix. Not allowing families in private housing estates to purchase Part V units also allows one to maintain an income mix, so while they appear to be opposite policies, they produce the same objective which is a sustainable level of income mix. In Sinn Féin’s view, the 10% social housing requirement that was introduced by the previous Government is far too low. Sinn Féin introduced a Bill two weeks ago to increase it to 25% and that is not just to provide more houses but to ensure private housing estates have a greater level of mix. Sinn Féin does not support the effect of the Bill. While we support the idea of people having a right to buy their home, there are simply too many downsides.

At the Committee on Housing and Homelessness, we were part of the minority that wanted the current scheme suspended until the overall stock of social housing is brought up to the right level and then one could start a sensibly designed tenant purchase scheme, as long as the stock is replenished according as it is sold. However, having said that, we understand it is an important issue. We think it is appropriate that it is considered in the context of the Government’s review and on that basis, we will support the Government's amendments. I say very genuinely to the Deputies across the Chamber that I accept the sincerity of the proposition they have put before the House but before they rush into trying to convince the rest of us of the merits of their proposition, they should look at the impact on overall social housing stock management and the negative impact of selling off too much stock on the ability to meet the needs of those who have no home or inadequate housing because they are very real issues with which we all need to grapple.

See this speech in context