Michael Harty (Clare, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The topic is "housing solutions". I have spoken about a housing solution in the House on a number of occasions, that is, a rural or regional relocation scheme whereby families in areas of high pressure are offered the opportunity to relocate to an area of lower pressure. In rural Ireland in particular, there are many towns and villages that have a large amount of vacant property which could be brought back into use and brought to a level that would allow families to relocate and to revitalise those towns and villages throughout Ireland. What we are missing in rural Ireland is people. There is a flight from the land. Many people on housing lists in high pressure areas would have a connection with a rural area, regional area or town and could be offered, voluntarily of course, the opportunity to relocate to such towns and villages.

This would be a far less expensive way of accommodating them. When we consider the rents that are demanded in high pressure areas and the rents available in low pressure areas, there would be a huge saving to the State. It would require an inter-agency approach between the Department and the local authorities but, surely, there is a mechanism whereby people could be offered the opportunity to relocate from housing lists or emergency accommodation into accommodation which is available in rural towns and villages.

In Newmarket-on-Fergus, there is a proposal to build 52 private houses and 18 council houses in a village which has 48 vacant properties. It makes no sense to go through the planning process, and all the hoops and hurdles that have to be overcome, to build housing estates like that and to put in the infrastructure to support those estates, when there is a village that has the capacity to provide 48 houses, apartments or other dwellings for people who wish to be housed within a village, county or region like that.

This is replicated right across the country. I am sure there are villages in the Minister of State's constituency, as there are in every Deputy's constituency, where there is a substantial amount of vacant property. These towns and villages are losing their vitality and sustainability and their shops, services, post offices and Garda stations. The whole fabric of rural communities is beginning to unravel, yet there is a huge amount of vacant property in these towns and villages which could be offered to people - on a voluntary basis, of course - if they wished to relocate within the county or region or nationally. The Peter McVerry Trust is now extending out beyond Dublin. It is looking into areas such as Ennis, where it is acquiring property and can provide accommodation for people who wish to relocate. It would provide the wraparound services to help support people relocating. There was a rural resettlement scheme in the west over the past 20 years but it did not have wraparound facilities and supports to accommodate people who were relocating. They were generally left to their own devices. Some remained but many did not, purely because they were put out in the middle of the countryside without supports. What I am talking about is revitalising towns and villages and introducing a relocation scheme. It might only solve 2% or 3% of the housing crisis, but when people move into rural towns and villages they become a major asset in their revitalisation. It makes no sense to build council houses or private houses in a village or town which has many vacant properties. A relocation scheme should be used to the maximum.

Pillar 5 of the Action Plan for Housing and Homelessness reads: "Ensure that existing housing stock is used to the maximum degree possible". Pillar 1 relates to emergency accommodation and reads: "Provide early solutions to address the unacceptable level of families in emergency accommodation". The first pages of the Government's plan refer to how it will deal with this. The plan states that by mid-2017 emergency hotel and bed and breakfast-type accommodation for families will only be used in limited circumstances and will have been largely replaced by suitable permanent family accommodation through the delivery of additional housing solutions, including an expanded rapid-build housing programme. Will the Minister of State tell us in his reply, if he is to reply, where that rapid-build housing programme is? Has it come to an end? Is it no longer being pursued? The same pillar states that targets for tenancies to be provided by Housing First teams in Dublin will be tripled and that the housing-led approach will be extended to other urban areas. Where is this action? Has the Government delivered on it? Finally, under the same pillar, the plan states that additional supports will be provided to tackle the complex needs of homeless people, including those with dual diagnosis, in other words, those with mental illness and drug addiction. That is a major problem, which has also been addressed by Peter McVerry, but where are the Government's solutions to it?

I will repeat what I said in the debate on Tuesday night. Public lands should be used for the public good. In the health committee and in the Sláintecare report we have said public money should be spent for the public good in respect of our hospital and health services. This also applies to housing solutions. Public land should be used for the public good because the private market will not solve the public housing crisis. It is slowing down the provision of social housing. It will most likely be a more expensive way of providing social housing and is unlikely to solve the problem.

See this speech in context