Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Regional Group for tabling this motion. It is an important debate and I am glad that we are having it. All of us, especially those who served on local authorities, are intimately familiar with the programme and the special housing adaptation grant scheme. It is a good, effective scheme. It was far-sighted of the Minister and local authorities that first introduced it. It is clear that issues face the scheme and its utility with the limits provided for. A sum of €30,000 will not get anyone far these days. The Minister will be able to acknowledge that. There is a strong argument in the motion that the level of the grant should reflect a percentage of the cost rather than being a set cash amount. I hope the Minister will reflect on that and consider the views that previous speakers have no doubt articulated about the cost. As I said, €30,000 will not get much these days, in a period of ever-rising and escalating inflation in construction costs. The Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland reported in April that construction cost inflation was at 38%, which is very significant. We know the prices of building materials are going up and that there are labour shortages in the construction sector.

The Minister will be only too familiar with the challenges that we have in meeting his targets in Housing for All and the retrofitting targets, given the limited throughput of apprentices in the construction sector. We need to focus on it. It should be acknowledged, and I have no doubt that it has been acknowledged, by both Government representatives and Opposition Members that the amount the Department has allocated to this grant scheme has increased each year since 2014, which is very welcome. It is €81.25 million for this year, which is an 8% increase on last year, which is welcome. A contribution has to be made by local authorities, which are cash-strapped at the moment.

There is a strong argument for the HSE to make a contribution, especially for those who have health issues. There are underspends in the HSE capital budget. The Minister might tap his colleague, the Minister, Deputy Stephen Donnelly, on the shoulder, and ask if he will make a contribution to the more effective running of this scheme. We know, as public representatives, that hardly a week passes where we do not make a representation for somebody who is seeking to have works done under the housing adaptation grant scheme. The local authorities in my constituency, Louth County Council and Meath County Council, prioritise applications into categories 1, 2 and 3, as local authorities have to. Given the nature of these things, it is sometimes the case that by the time a grant is approved and prices have been obtained, people may be in difficult circumstances or may have passed on. That is no reflection on local authorities. The process then has to start all over again and somebody else will benefit from that resource. There is a strong argument for the HSE to consider contributing to the scheme, given the challenges that the scheme faces. It can never properly meet the full demand.

The ultimate aim of the scheme is to keep people in their homes for as long as possible in a comfortable way and dignified fashion. We know the expense for families and the State and the lack of independence that people have when they go into a nursing home or full-time residential care. It is important that we resource people to stay in the comfort of their own home, where everybody wants to be for as long as they can, with access to the kinds of services that they require. We have a perfect storm at the moment. There are big backlogs in local authorities with the housing adaptation grant scheme. We also have the HSE signing off on care packages when it cannot get the personnel to fulfil those packages. We have real problems. This requires a multi-departmental and cross-Government approach.

I thank the Regional Group for tabling this motion. It is an important debate that goes under the radar far too often. The principle of the scheme is good and it works effectively, but like all schemes of this nature, it needs to be kept under constant review, and I argue again for more of a cross-Government approach to how these schemes are resourced to meet their full potential and all of the needs.

See this speech in context